The Role of Korean Red Cross and Democratic People's

THE ROLE OF KOREAN RED CROSS AND DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA RED CROSS SOCIETY IN CONDUCTING FAMILY REUNION AGENDA IN KOREAN PENINSULA 2011-2013

An Undergraduate Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in International Relations

By: Nuansa Deanabila 1110114000020

DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS FACULTY OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2015

ABSTRACT This research analyzes the role of Korean Red Cross (South Korea) and DPRK Red Cross Society (North Korea) in conducting family reunion agenda in Korean peninsula during the period of 2011 until 2013. The objective of this thesis is to find why both Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society could not hold the humanitarian agenda as part of humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This thesis is done through secondary sources. The author finds that because during those periods, despite the existence of both Red Cross in Korean peninsula can be considered as significant for the continuation of the agenda, the verdict from South and North Korean governments could not be changed or bothered by them as the governments are the officials. Moreover, as part of the National Societies of the Red Cross and Red Cresent Movement, both Red Cross have to obey the principles of the Movement. The most prominent one is the neutrality principle which adds the Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society stance where they cannot interfere or take part in the political matter within their countries. The theoretical framework used in this thesis are track two diplomacy and the concept of non-state actors. The analysis outcome through these theories is while using the track two process, both Red Cross have limitation and lack of power when it comes to influencing the officials’ decision that affected the family reunion agenda in Korean peninsula. Key Words: family reunion, Korean Red Cross, DPRK Red Cross Society, track two diplomacy, the Movement, South Korea, North Korea, ICRC

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank Allah Subhnahanu Wata’ala, who gave me numerous tests during the process of this thesis and I could not be more thankful for that, and I came out stronger than ever after the thesis ends. I would like to thank my parents who always provide and support me. My sister Laras Adinda Nabila, who can be the person I can talk about anything with despite our nine-year age gap. My friends Dijifortyel (Yunda, Sabrina (Nenek), Rani, Niken), DAS (Amel, Dyna, Dara, Dini Dewi, Sofwa, Devi), Anak Soleh Solehah aka my high school buddies (Yurika, Imam, Wahid, Angger, Ahadi) who are considerate enough to never make fun of me as of why I have not yet graduated (with an exclusion of Imam, damn you Mam). Furthermore, my classmates in HI Inter 2010 led by Takdir, our eternal leader who I find that their passions are very inspiring and also the laughs that we shared in class. Mr. Teguh Santosa as my thesis adviser who gave his precious time to help me write this thesis. Resti, who I became very close with during our time writing our theses, always remember that time we were so afraid on APTB. Last but not least, my two closest best friends during my college years, Defi and Mentari. I am so grateful that I have found such nice, loyal, and kind friends in my early 20s. Oh, I almost forgot, Bang Ramin my ojeg driver who is always willing to drive me to campus, I hope you will not be intimidated by those ojeg-online drivers. Music, movies, and TV series that accompanied me when I was stuck and stressed out doing this thesis, such as Hannibal, The Walking Dead, The Big Bang Theory, and 2 Days 1 Night, thank you for keeping me away from reality for awhile otherwise I would end up depressed. I would especially thank Andrew Mcmahon and Jack’s Mannequin because his music continues to inspire and sometimes heal me. Thank you for being there from my adolescent to my adult life. I will watch your show one day, one way or another. Surya and Molan, the two crazy announcers who never fail to make me laugh or at least smile with your cheap yet effective jokes met with my low sense of humor. Keep doing what you guys are doing and I always will be here listening. Lastly, I would like to dedicate this thesis to the late Mr. Budi Satari, although I had not had the opportunity to know you better, but from what I have seen and heard and the little advice that you gave me, I truly knew that you were an incredible human being. May you rest in peace, Sir.

Jakarta, December 15, 2015

Nuansa Deanabila

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... vi TABLE OF CONTENT ...... vii LIST OF TABLE ...... xi LIST OF FIGURE ...... x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background ...... 1 B. Research Question...... 3 C. Research Objectives and Benefits ...... 3 D. Literature Review ...... 4 E. Theoretical Framework ...... 6 1. Track Two Diplomacy ...... 6 2. Non-State Actors ...... 9 F. Research Method ...... 10 G. Outline ...... 11

CHAPTER II THE BEGINNING AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FAMILY REUNION AGENDA

A. ICRC’s Attempt of Restoring Family Ties ...... 13 B. Family Reunion Agenda as the Outcome of Korean War ...... 15 1. Korean War ...... 15

2. Ideological and Political History ...... 19

vii

CHAPTER III THE INVOLVEMENT OF KOREAN RED CROSS AND

DPRK RED CROSS SOCIETY IN KOREAN FAMILY

REUNION AGENDA

A. The Role of Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society ...... 24 B. Family Reunion Agenda from 1985 to 2010 ...... 27

CHAPTER IV THE EFFORT FROM KOREAN RED CROSS AND

DPRK RED CROSS SOCIETY TO HOLD FAMILY

REUNION AGENDA

A. Red Cross Talks ...... 35

B. Relevant Matters that Affected the Continuation of

Family Reunion Agenda ...... 39

1. The Role Portion of the Government and Red Cross in Both Koreas ...... 39

2. Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society as National Society ...... 45

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION ...... 49

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... xiii

APPENDIX ...... xxi

viii

LIST OF TABLE

Table III.A.1. Programs Concerning Family Reunions ...... 27

Table III.B.1. Family Reunions from 1985-2010 ...... 31

Table IV.A.1. List of South and North Korean Delegates Red Cross Working- Level Talks 2013 ...... 36

Table IV.A.2. List of South and North Korean Delegates Red Cross Working- Level Talks 2010 ...... 37

LIST OF FIGURE

Figure II.B.1. Map of Korean Peninsula and Surrounding Countries ...... 16

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CSIS Center for Strategic International Studies

CPRF Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland

DMZ Demilitarized Zone

DPRK Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

KNP Korean National Police

NDC National Defense Commission

NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations

POWs Prisoners of War

ROK The Republic of Korea

UN United Nations

UNC United Nations’ Command

UNTCOK United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea

US United States

USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Family Reunions Event...... xxi

Appendix 2 Emblem of Korean Red Cross...... xxii

Appendix 3 Geneva Conventions Article 26...... xxii

Appendix 4 Red Cross Talks Agreement...... xxvii

Appendix 5 South North Joint Declaration...... xxix

xii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

Family reunion is a means to draw together families who are separated with the same line of descent. It is usually conducted annually and occurred outdoor.1

While separated families mean families who are divided, missing, and scattered due to several reasons such as immigration, armed conflict, and war.2 And to reunite those families, family reunion is one of the most effective ways.

If separated families as the outcome of conflict between two parties, according to the Geneva Convention:

“Each Party to the conflict shall facilitate inquiries made by members of families dispersed owing to the war, with the object of renewing contact with one another and of meeting, if possible. It shall encourage, in particular, the work of organizations engaged on this task provided they are acceptable to it and conform to its security regulations.”3

In addition, reuniting and gathering with blood relatives is part of human rights as stated in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

1Millicent R. Ayoub, “The Family Reunion,” Ethnology 5 (October 1966): 415. 2Daniel Boo Duck Lee, “Divided Korean Families: Why Does It Take So Long to Remedy the Unhealed Wounds?,” Korea Journal of Population and Development 21 (December 1992): 147 3United States Institute of Peace, “Peace Agreement Digital Collection: South-North Joint- Declaration,” available at: www.usip.org; downloaded on December 25 2015.

“men and women of full age have the right to marry and to find a family, and the family is entitled to protection by the society and the State.”4

In the case of separated families in Korean Peninsula, it happened because of the Korean War in 1950s. For the family reunion itself, it has been discussed and conducted since the 1970s by both Red Cross in both South (Korean Red Cross) and North Korea (Democratic People‟s Republic of North Korea (DPRK) Red

Cross Society) who became two divided nations after the end Korean War and the armistice agreement in July 1953.5

With the assistance of Red Cross as humanitarian non-governmental organization (NGO) in both Koreas, since 1985, family reunion only successfully held a total of 20 government-level family reunions.6 Resulting in almost 16.000 people meeting directly and 3.748 encounters through video chat.7

From the side of officials themselves, in the year 2000, South Korea‟s president at that time, Kim Dae Jung and the late North Korea‟s leader Kim Jong

Il signed a joint declaration. It called South-North Joint Declaration, one of which underlines the agreement to conduct regular family reunion.8

4See Art. 16, Para. 3 of UDHR; Art. 17 and 23 of ICCPR; Art. 5 (d)(iv) of ICERD (racial discrimination); Art. 12 of ECPHRFF (European Convention); and Art. 17, Para. 2 of ACHR (American Convention) as quoted from Korea Institute for National Unification, White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea 2013 (Seoul: Korea Institute for National Unification, 2013), 512 5Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 8 6“Inter-Korean” Korean Red Cross see http://www.redcross.or.kr/eng/eng_activity/activity_interkorean.do accessed on December 25 2015 7Ministry of Unification, “Data and Statistics”, See http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1822. accessed on September 3 2014. 8South-North Joint Declaration on June 15 2000.

With the status of family reunion as a humanitarian matter and also the help from humanitarian NGO which in this matter is Red Cross, located in both states in Korean peninsula as well as the agreement conducted by two governments to hold regular family reunion event, there should be no obstacles in holding it.

But the fact is, during the year of 2011 until 2013 there were no reunions conducted. This period is chosen because this is the second longest year gap when family reunions did not occur. The longest year gap was when the first family reunions held in 1985 and the next ones were in 2000 after the signing of South-

North Joint Declaration, almost fifteen years later.9

B. Research Question

Why Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society could not hold family reunion agenda from the year of 2011 until 2013?

C. Research Objectives and Benefits

There are several objectives of this research, which are:

1. To analyze the absence of reunions between separated Korean families during

2011 until 2013.

2. To show the role of Red Cross in both Koreas to continue the family reunion

event.

9Tae-Hwan Kwak and Seung-Ho Joo, “North Korea‟s Changes and the Future of Inter-Korean Relations” The Korean Peace Process and the Four Powers: 50.

3. To explain the involvement of International Committee of Red Cross in the

family reunion agenda.

4. To find the negative matters that hinder the continuation of the agenda.

5. To achieve some valid data regarding the family reunion program.

6. To reveal the suffering of citizens of both countries due to the Korean War

and how this agenda helps them.

The benefits of this research can be used for the development in the field of

International Relations, to widen the knowledge, especially in the study of Korean politics, and as a material and comparison for upcoming research.

D. Literature Review

There are several studies regarding the condition of families in Korean states, from the people to the effort of the government. Daniel Boo Duck Lee from the University of Chicago (1992) examines on his article about the psychosocial impact of separated families between North and South Korean people due to the

Korean War from the perspectives of both older and younger generations. There are 12 cases to illustrate the family disjunction and reunification, and the psychosocial results are vary from grieve, not having a proper support system for families, mixed emotional feelings of guilt and reciprocation. The first case is about a man who fled without his wife and child. Second, A wife who lost her husband due to kidnapping. Third, the encounter between a father and daughter during special occasion. Fourth, siblings who called each other through telephone

4 call. Fifth, the observation conducted by a man about ceremonial burnt offerings for personal interview the deceased parents during the holiday of Chuseok. Sixth, a husband whose memories are are starting to dissapear. Seventh, Brothers who are separated in South Korea and North Korea contact each other through telephone call. Eight, people who died during visit to their separated families in the North. Ninth, a man who came to North Korea to meet with his deceased father‟s separated families. Tenth, married couple who meet their divided relatives in North Korea. Eleventh, a man who just celebrates his 60th birthday but he still feels that he has unresolved problem because all of his families are in North

Korea. The last case is a man who promised that he would come back three days after leaving his families but instead he comes back to the North after 33 years.

These cases are the problems from the older generations, while younger generations feel that they have lost their identity, emotional ups and downs if they are the children of those victims who are having post-traumatic stress disorders

(PTSD), and experiencing family duties which they are not supposed to go through. The author also suggests because of the psychological impact that divided families feel, the government of both states, Red Cross, international community, and related organization to tackle this issue by proposing ideas to enhance economic cooperation and communication between Korean peninsula states as well as instituting the principal of United Nation‟s Declaration of Human

Rights.

Anne Staver‟s paper from University of Oxford (2008) focuses on family reunion as a right for forced migrants and refugees. She analyzed the difficulties

5 to reunite the refugees‟ families using the example from the three siblings who are refugees in Canada and they cannot bring their mother from Angola to Canada.

She explains the international law that covers the matter of migrants and refugee such as in Refugee Convention and The Human Right Committee. But she also found that these laws are fragile when it comes to the right for reuniting families.

This paper analyzes that the right of family reunion is very restricted and must follow the regulations from sovereign states that accept these refugees and forced migrants. At last, the author of this paper provides suggestion for reuniting families by stating that this is part of the duty of the countries and allowing those people to meet and gather with their relatives.

The studies above indicate several points. The first journal discusses the citizens of both Koreas who are affected by the Korean War and the author‟s suggestions on improving family reunion event. On the other hand, Anne Staver study talks about the right of refugees and forced migrants to meet with their families on a broader scale although using three refugees from Angola to Canada as a study case. While this paper will discuss the effort from Red Cross in both

Koreas to conduct family reunions in Korean peninsula

E. Theoretical Framework

To analyze this research, theories that will be used are track two diplomacy and the concept of non-state actors.

1. Track Two Diplomacy

Louise Diamond and John McDonald stated that track two diplomacy is any relations amongst non-formal entities within or between states,10 the entities could be individual, groups, or NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) that communicate outside the formal states‟ gates.11 This kind of diplomacy is not a replacement fo track one diplomacy which involves officials only, rather it complements the restricted process in track one diplomacy.12

Most of track two diplomacy activities are provided by third party official.

Yet, the discussion and meeting are arranged by unofficial entities. For instance, research institutions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and universities.

The government involved in track two diplomacy activites often act in an informal manner which does not portray any decision from their part.13

Track two diplomacy has several objectives, but it comes down to reducing tensions or facilitating the resolution of a conflict. At least, track two diplomacy talks are aimed at an exchange of views, perceptions, and information between the parties to improve each side‟s understanding of the other‟s positions and policies.14

10Diamond, Louise and John McDonald, Multi-Track Diplomacy: A Systems Guide and Analysis, Occasional Paper No. 3, Grinnell, Ia.: Iowa Peace Institute, June 1991 as quoted from Dalia Dassa Kaye, Talking to The Enemy: Track Two Diplomacy in the Middle East and South Asia (California: RAND Corporation, 2007), 5. 11Tobias Bohmelt, The Effectiveness of Tracks of Diplomacy Strategies in Third-Party Interventions (United Kingdom: Journal of Peace Research, 2010), 3. 12Jeffrey Mapendere, “Track One and a Half Diplomacy and the Complementarity of Tracks,” Culture of Peace Online Journal 2: 68. 13MIT Press, “What Are Track-II Talks?” [on-line journal] available at http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262511803_sch_0001.pdf accessed on January 3 2016. 14Ibid.

Because track two diplomacy is not restricted with the desires from official parties or states, the actors are liberated to distribute ideas and concerns in order to sort out disagreements. These matters could occur due to the nature of track two diplomacy which are flexible and non-binding.15 The flexibility and non- binding nature of track two diplomacy also mean that official governments could involve into the unofficial activities, and the non-formal actors could have some roles in the making of states‟ policies.16

According to the workshop by Woodrow Wilson School of Public and

International Affairs, there are three functions of track two diplomacy as the source of ideas: first, the dialogues in track two diplomacy are enabling the participants to propose plans that would resolve conflicts and give foundation for pre-negotiation. Since the dialogues can be done privately, they could brainstorm and at the same time build understanding with each other to solve the conflict without having to create commitment that binds. Second, it can be the place where sensitive matters in formal interaction are possible to be discussed without flashpoints. Third, track two diplomacy could be used to experiment some proposals and to complete existing endeavors, meaning that the people from government could cooperate with non-official entities to create proposals for conflict resolutions and see the reaction from official parties. Although the formal entities cannot directly involve in the dialogues, they could use their relationship

15Tobias Bohmelt, The Effectiveness of Tracks of Diplomacy Strategies in Third-Party Interventions (United Kingdom: Journal of Peace Research, 2010), 5. 16Dalia Dassa Kaye, Talking to The Enemy: Track Two Diplomacy in the Middle East and South Asia (California: RAND Corporation, 2007), 7-8.

8 with unofficial entities to present ideas for track two dialogues and hear the reports from the informal participants. 17

2. Non-State Actors

Non-state actors are non-sovereign forms that perform the essential power of economic, political, or social, and in several cases on international stage.

Consensus covers trade community organizations, unions, religious institutions, ethnic groupings, and universities.18

the non-state characters alter the international relations. Whether in the field of conflict, technology or powerful civilians. Non-state entities are taking part in some of the official's role constituted by financial, political and technical resources, widely available in these global times. New technology is also enabling the non-state actors to act internationally and creating joint actions. These players even level up their self-reliance and emphasizing on new rules and serving more practically than states in the case of humanitarian issue.19

Meaning that, non-state actors gain „political authority‟ from their successful ability to set new regulations and agenda of political institutions.

17Nate Allen, Rashad Badr, Chris Brown, Thomas Burns, Lindsey Einhaus, Kathleen Merkl, Mayank Misra, Travis Sharp, Seth Smith Alexandra Utsey, William Wagner, Bridging Divides: Track II Diplomacy in The Middle East Policy Workshop (Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, 2013), 6-8. 18United States National Intelligence Council, “Nonstate Actors: Impact on International Relations and Implications for the United States,” 2. 19Teresa La Porte, “The Legitimacy and Effectiveness of Non‐State Actors and the Public Diplomacy Concept,” ISA Annual Convention (April 2012):4.

NGOs, transnational companies, religious groups, think tanks, social movements or university experts involve in international issue. These actors often perform together with the government by proposing their skills and knowledge which allow them to act by passing through the states.20

While NGOs or non-governmental organizations are part of non-state actors in the international community. They are organizations that are private, self-governing, voluntary, nonprofit, and task- or interest-oriented advocacy organizations. Within those broad parameters there is a huge degree of diversity in terms of unifying principles; independence from government, big-business, and other outside influences; operating procedures; sources of funding; international reach; and size. They can implement projects, provide services, defend or promote specific causes, or seek to influence policy.21

F. Research Method

The research method of this study is qualitative. The are several key variables of qualitative research: the worthiness of methods and theories, entrants‟ point of view and their variety, the elasticity of the researcher, the subject of the research itself, and the diversity of oncomings and procedures.22 This method is suitable because there are various aspects that surround the family reunion program. Data collection technique is using library research, from the library of

UIN Jakarta, University of Indonesia, Center for Strategic International Studies

20Ibid. 21National Intelligence Council, “Nonstate Actors”, 2. 22Uwe Flick, An Introduction to Qualitative Research (London: SAGE Publications Ltd., 2009).

(CSIS) and Online National Library. The secondary data sources are from documents, archival records, and internet;23 with subjects from individuals, groups, institutions, official and non-official organizations.

Data processing is manually done. Microsoft Word will be used to produce the overall thesis. Documents and the other sources are analyzed using descriptive-qualitative approach to generate detailed description of certain situation.24

G. Outline

Chapter I consists of problem statement, hypothesis, objectives and benefits, theoretical framework, research method, and outline. This chapter introduces the definition of family reunion event, the role of Red Cross in both Koreas in conducting family reunion, and separated families in Korean peninsula

Chapter II talks about the brief origin of International Committee of the Red

Cross (ICRC) and its effort in reuniting divided families. Korean war as well as the political background that eventually divided Korean peninsula into two separate states will be explained. Furthermore, this chapter clarifies how Korean war affected the establishment of family reunion agenda.

23Susan K. Soy, “The case study as a reasearch method,” Universitas Texas at Austin, December 12 2006, [on-line article]; available at https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~ssoy/usesusers/l391d1b.htm; downloaded on November 6 2013. 24SERVE Center “Types of Research Method”, The SERVE Center at the University of North Carolina, 2008, [on-line article]; available at: www.serve.org; downloaded on October 27 2013.

Chapter III consists of the role of Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross

Society in running the family reunion event as well as the family reunion events from the first year until the year of 2009

Chapter IV contains the effort from both Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red

Cross Society to conduct family reunions which include the meeting process, the role portion from the government of South Korea and North Korea as well as Red

Cross in both Koreas as part of the Red Cross and Red Cresent Movement‟s

National Society.

Chapter V is a closing chapter which contains the conclusion and suggestion of this paper.

CHAPTER II

THE BEGINNING AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FAMILY REUNION

AGENDA

This chapter will state about the beginning of family reunion dated back to the 1800s as well as short history of ICRC. Next, the establishment of family reunion in Korean peninsula due to the Korean War and the war itself will be explained.

A. ICRC’s Attempt of Restoring Family Ties

The effort to reunite separated families by ICRC has been existed since

1870. At that time, a war broke between German and France from July 1870 until

May 1871 called Franco-German or Franco Prussian War.25 Fortunately, France and Prussia had agreed to the Geneva Convention in 1864, thus ICRC could take part in helping the humanitarian side of the war.26

ICRC itself is a humanitarian non-governmental organization set up in

1863 under the Geneva Conventions. With Henry Dunant as one of its founding members, ICRC aims to protect and support the victims of armed conflict and other violent actions without supersedes the role of government.27

25The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, “Franco-German War”, Encyclopædia Britannica, [on- line web]; available at http://www.britannica.com/event/Franco-German-War; accessed on January 1 2016. 26“The Franco-Prussian war (1870)”, Online Resource ICRC, April 6 1998, [on-line web]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jnvw.htm; accessed on January 1 2016. 27“History of the ICRC” ICRC Website, See https://www.icrc.org/en/history accessed on January 1 2016.

ICRC is also part of The Red Cross and Red Cresent Movement or The

Movement for short. As the largest humanitarian network world-wide, not only

ICRC, The Movement consists of International Federation of Red Cross and Red

Crescent Societies (IFRC) and 189 national societies. IFRC which established in

1919 is a coalition that facilitates, encourages, helps, and monitors humanitarian actions done by the national societies. While national societies are represented by independent states that manage humanitarian matters within their authorities

(disaster victims, health assistance, etc.).28

Going back to Franco-Prussian War, besides setting up base for injured soldiers, ICRC also assisted them to locate their families. The base itself established in Basel, a border city in Switzerland. Initially, the base‟s purpose was to treat the wounded soldiers physically, but the doctors realized that they were suffering because of the sense of not knowing how their relatives were doing and vice versa. Other than that, ICRC found out that prisoners of war (POWs) must be dealing with the same issue. The representatives from ICRC then created list of prisoners so that their families could be informed whether they were alive or deceased.29

The condition in Franco-Prussian War was only the beginning, ICRC continued to improve its ability to reunite or at the very least reconnect families during several wars by sending money or just confirming the relatives condition.

28“The Movement” ICRC Website, see https://www.icrc.org/en/movement accessed on January 1 2016 29“ History of the Central Tracing Agency of the ICRC”, Online Resource ICRC, July 15 2002, [on-line web]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jqrj.htm; accessed on January 2 2016

From the opening an International Prisoners of War Agency during World War I to the official establishment of The Central Prisoners of War Agency in

September 1939. Relating to the opening of The Central Prisoners of War

Agency, ICRC underlined that hostile parties must create insitution to gather information for divided families as stated in Geneva Conventions.30

Today, ICRC has a new way in dealing with dispersed families. It created a website specifically to search for missing families where the citizens can easily fill out information to find their relatives.31

B. Family Reunion Agenda as the Outcome of Korean War

1. Korean War

The family reunion is held to reunite separated families because of the

Korean war. Thus, the history of Korean war and the separation of Korean peninsula cannot be left out from the agenda. The geography of the peninsula itself made the external power wanted to use it as a stepping stone to extent its power in the mainland Asia.32

30Ibid. 31See http://familylinks.icrc.org/en/Pages/home.aspx 32Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 3.

Figure II.B.1. Map of Korean Peninsula and Surrounding Countries

Source: ETH Zurich, http://www.korea-cbms.ethz.ch/Maps/

The separation of Korea into two regions by a border was also the creation of external power. In the 16th century, Japan tried to conquer the peninsula but fought back by Korea‟s Admiral Yi Sun Sin. Centuries later, in 1902, Japan started to move to Korea with the supports from the British. But, Japan did not know that the Soviet Union was heading the same way, and they came face to face. In order to elude conflict, Japan made a proposal to divide Korea and establish influential zone by making a line in the 38th parallel. But the Soviet

Union refused to accept the proposal and it eventually led to the war between the two countries in 1904, which won by Japan.33

33Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 3.

During the Japanese occupation, many Koreans fled overseas, to China,

United States, Manchuria, and Soviet Union. Syngman Rhee, who later be the first

South Korean president came to the United States and attended Harvard,

Princeton, and George Washington University. He also became close to the leaders in the US.34 While the first North Korean leader, Kim Il Sung was closer to the communists.35 Because of the relation that the Soviet Union had with

Koreans exile, they decided to invade Korea which was under Japan on August 9,

1945. The Japanese force in the northern part of Korea, this time, surrendered to

Soviet Union on August 15, 1945. The United States who dropped the lethal bomb on August 6 and 9 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, had heard the news that

Japan wanted to yield on August 10,36 and decided to come to Korea. Before they even arrived, the US made an agreement to Soviet Union to create a border zone in 38th parallel on 15-16 August. But, because of the lack of information that the

US had regarding Korea and also the fear of Soviet Union might have the military impact on East Asia and Japan,37 the United States finally arrive in southern

Korea on September 8 and accepted the surrender of Japan. Thus, with the arrival of these two countries, Korean peninsula became divided even more.38

After the Soviet Union and the US had arrived, both states immediately positioned themselves in the peninsula. The Soviets tried to prevent the

34William Stueck, The Korean War in World History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 16. 35Stueck, The Korean War, 15. 36Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 5. 37Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 4. 38William Stueck, The Korean War in World History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 21-28.

17 emergence of rebellions and take over the the industrial sites, railroads, and hydroelectric power plants left by Japan. On the other side, the United States formed Korean National Police (KNP) and Korean Constabulary in effort to restore order in the region as well as facing against guerillas and protests.39 But apparently, the communist interference and rebellions inside KNP in southern

Korea, made the US turned to United Nations for help and established the United

Nations Temporary Commission on Korea (UNTCOK).

Under UNTCOK also, the south region prepared for elections.40 Despite the sabotage from Soviet Union, the general elections kept going on May 1948.41

Syngman Rhee was elected as the 1st President on 20 July 1948.42 Not long after that, South Korea was formed on 15 August 1948. North Korea also held its first election on 25 August 1948, using parliamentary as its method. The election generated Kim Il Sung as the first leader of North Korea, and the country was officially born on 9 September 1948.43

By the middle of 1949, Soviet Union dan the US both had left the peninsula, but North Korea and the Soviets kept a close relation with each other. Kim Il Sung even asked Joseph Stalin, which was a leader of Soviet Union at that time to give assistance in the form of economy and military to North Korea. Moreover, Kim Il

39Ibid. 40William Stueck, The Korean War in World History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 34. 41James L Stokesbury, A Short History of the Korean War (New York: Harper Perennial, 1990), 26. 42William Stueck, The Korean War in World History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 38. 43Ohn Chang-Il, “The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953,” International Journal of Korean Studies 2, (Fall 2010): 29-30.

Sung also discussed the possibility to occupy South Korea with Stalin throughout

1948 until 1950.44

After Kim Il Sung received Joseph Stalin‟s approval, North Korea attacked

South Korea on June 25 1950 with the support from Soviet Union and China.45

South Korea was helped by the United States and United Nations (UN) troops that consist of 15 different nationalities.46 After three years of war, according to

Armistice Agreement, both states withdrew their territories two kilometers from the borderline which established a demilitarized zone. As the result of the war, the casualties from this war were 520,000 troops from North Korea, 900,000 Chinese soldiers, 400,000 UN troops, and 36,000 people from the US.47

2. Ideological and Political History

The aftermath of the Korean war was the political and ideological difference between Korean peninsula states. North Korea with its close relation with Soviet Union and China, developed an anti-capitalist ideology. While South

Korea‟s relation with the US created a hatred towards the communist state.48

44Ibid. 45Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 7. 46The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, “Teaching With Documents: The United States Enters the Korean Conflict”, [on-line web]; available at http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/korean-conflict/ accessed on July 3 2014. 47Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 8. 48Chun, “The Korean War”, available at http://stillpresentpasts.org/history-english accessed on July 5 2014.

There were two significant leaders from the early era of both North and

South Korea. Kim Il Sung who was a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) troop and from South Korean side was Syngman Rhee, a United States scholar.49

After the Korean War, Kim Il Sung focused on keeping his power and influence within North Korea by eliminating his rivals during 3-year reconstruction period. By the year of 1956, Korea‟s Workers Party managed to gather 1,164,945 members, 60.5 percent of them were peasants.50

Kim Il Sung created an ideology called “Juche”. This ideology means

“self-reliance” inspired from USSR and China, and became the foundation of

North Korean governmental system as part of the country‟s domestic and foreign politics.51 Due to this ideology and North Korean socialist nature, the government controls all aspect of the citizens. From organizations, economy, media, and travel journeys, all must be strictly supervised so that the regime could get full obedience from the citizens. Through this ideology, Kim Il Sung made sure that the citizens of North Korea did not get influence from the outside and pledge their lives to North Korea.52

On the other hand, United States was the primary influence in South Korea during and after the Korean war. It had a major impact on the country‟s political

49Hye Jin Park, “Origins of the Korean War: Influence of Foreign Intervention or Civil Conflicts of North and South Koreans”, December 21 2010, [on-line article]; available at https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~park25h/classweb/worldpolitics/koreabefore.html; accessed on July 9 2014. 50Scott Snyder and Joyce Lee, “The The Impact of the Korean War on the Political-Economic System of North Korea,” International Journal of Korean Studies 2, (Fall 2010): 164-165. 51Snyder and Lee, “The The Impact of the Korean War”, 166-167. 52Liberty in North Korea, “History of North Korea”, see http://www.libertyinnorthkorea.org/learn- north-korea-history/ accessed on Juy 3 2014.

20 character and built anti-communist idea inside the nation and armed forces.53 The

US was also using its cultural influences by spreading American films, books, and television programs. Thus, deepen its ideology in the heart of South Koreans.

Syngman Rhee, South Korea‟s first President was elected because of his close relationship with the US in 1952, chosen by the National Assembly. He introduced the system of democracy and market economy in South Korea.

Furthermore, Syngman Rhee was part of South Korea‟s Liberal Party which nominated him to be the president in several terms. Unfortunately, his days of ruling the country came to an end in April 1960 when citizens and students marched to the streets demanding that Syngman Rhee had to step down from the presidency.

Because of those political and ideological differences in South and North

Korea, the idea to the reunification of Korea could not occur. The reason besides the differences was also because they were two new countries seeking for identity and balance within their governmental systems.

C. Separated Families in Korea

Before the Korean War broke out, the creation of the 38th parallel is the turning point of division in Korean Peninsula. It cut 75 streams, 12 rivers, 181

53Miongsei Kang, “The Impact of the Korean War on the Political-Economic System of South Korea: Economic Growth and Democracy,” International Journal of Korean Studies 1, (Spring 2011): 137-138.

21 small cart roads, 104 country roads, 15 provincial all-weather roads, 8 good highways, and 6 north-south rail lines. 54

In economic terms, both south and north region complement each other.

The northern part of Korea was filled with industrial sites, and southern part made a living depending on agriculture.55

Soviet Union that claimed the northern part of Korea, tried their best to cut any relations with the southern region. They stopped the flow of information via mails, and even halted the electrical supply to the south by interrupting transmission from hydroelectrical plants located in the northern area. Apparently, the Soviet was trying to fulfill the supply of goods for their own forces in Korean peninsula. Not only that, many labors were forced to leave their homes in south to work in northern industrial zone.56

In addition, Soviet Union also isolated northern part of Korea when United

Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution to hold general elections in Korea under the supervision of United Nations Korean Commission. But Soviet Union did not agree with that resolution and ended up interrupting the process when UN

Korean Commission was about to enter the north region. After that happened, UN

Assembly decided to demand an election where the UN Korean Commission was

54Ohn Chang-Il, “The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953,” International Journal of Korean Studies 2, (Fall 2010): 21-23. 55Ibid. 56Kathryn Weathersby, “Soviet Aims in Korea and The Origins of The Korean War, 1945-1950: New Evidence from Russian Archives,” Cold War International History Project Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (November 1993): 12-13.

22 not prohibited from entering the area. Eventually, the first general election was carried out on May 10, 1948 in areas near the 38th parallel.57

The result of Korean war was the destruction of infrastructures in both

Koreas, mostly in North. Some say the bombs that were dropped more than the ones in World War II in Europe. Korean War also created victims who lost their homes and families. Many of them tried to flee, from south to north or vice versa.

The refugees looked for ways to escape, whether by sea or land.

Furthermore, another outcome of the war was the missing of 60.000 civilians from South Korea only three months after the war, and the destroyed buildings were more than a half million. But the most heartbreaking casualties were the children. International child welfare agency stated in 1954 that two million children, not older than 18 years old were separated from their initial homes.58

Moreover, estimated 3 million people from both Koreas were killed, missing, and injured. 5 million became refugees, 100,000 people were orphans.

The damage of property in South Korea adds up to $2 billion.59 60

57Kebudayaan Korea Kementerian Budaya, Olahraga dan Pariwisata , Korea: Dulu dan Sekarang (Seoul: Layanan Informasi dan Kebudayaan Korea Kementerian Budaya, Olahraga dan Pariwisata, 2012), 205. 58Chun, “The Korean War”, available at http://stillpresentpasts.org/history-english accessed on July 5 2014. 59The Institute for Unification Education, Understanding North Korea (Korea: Ministry of Unification, 2012), 146. 60Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 8.

CHAPTER III

THE INVOLVEMENT OF KOREAN RED CROSS AND DPRK RED

CROSS SOCIETY IN KOREAN FAMILY REUNION AGENDA

A. The Role of Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society

Korean Red Cross or in full, Republic of Korea National Red Cross and

DPRK Red Cross Society are both part of National Red Cross and Red Cresent

Societies along with other 189 countries. To be recognized by the ICRC national society must abide by ten provisions, they contain the obligation to use official emblem and follow fundamental principles.6162

The history of Korean Red Cross originated in 1903. On that year, Korean peninsula comprised as one nation, led by Emperor Gojong. He was the one who signed the Geneva Conventions. Two years later he also one of the founding members of Korean Red Cross in 1905. Korean Red Cross‟s first major task was to assist the injured ones during the Korean War.63 For the DPRK Red Cross

Society, it was established in 1948. But not until the year of 1995 where the government decided to be more active in the field of disasters relief and cooperation with other international Red Cross states.64

61The principles are humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity and universality. 62“The Movement: Overview”, ICRC Website, August 24 2013, [on-line document]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/who-we-are/movement/overview-the-movement.htm; downloaded on January 2 2016. 63“History”, Korean Red Cross, [on-line web]; available at http://www.redcross.or.kr/eng/eng_introduce/introduce_krc_history.do; accessed on January 2 2016. 64“North Korea: Access to the vulnerable through law”, IFRC Website, [on-line web]; available at http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/humanitarian-diplomacy/north-korea-access-to-the-vulnerable- through-law/ accessed on January 2 2016.

For the famiy reunion event in Korean peninsula, these two Red Cross national societies are essential. Their role started in 1971 when both sides had preliminary meetings to discuss humanitarian matters within Korean peninsula.65

The effort to hold family reunion did not occur until it was proposed by DPRK

Red Cross Society in 1985.66 In addition to that, as the branch of the Movement in

Korean peninsula, both Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society are responsible for handling humanitarian issues such as treating the victims of armed conflict and be on guard when disasters (man-made or natural) strike.67

Moreover, since the condition in Korean peninsula is not possible for separated families to contact their relatives in both states directly, Korean Red

Cross and DPRK Red Cross Societies are the legal places for them reach their families.

Besides conducting talks between South and North Korea or giving proposals to each other pertaining the family reunions, Red Cross is responsible for the process of gathering the citizens until the actual reunion itself. First, the people apply to Red Cross offices regarding their families who are supposedly still in South Korea or North Korea. Then, Red Cross offices in both states will exchange the list of the relatives. After that the staff will search and confirm the

65“Diplomatic Bluebook 1972,” Public Information Bureau Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan, No. 3 – 73, December 1973 [on-line journal]; available at http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/other/bluebook/1972/1972-1-6.htm; accessed on September 3 2014. 66Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 115 67International Committee of Red Cross, Discover the ICRC (Geneva: ICRC, 2005), 45.

25 family addresses or whether the relatives are still alive or not. Lastly, the final lists are being exchanged and announced.68

Family members in South Korea who are on the waiting list to attend the reunion usually selected randomly by computers, while for North Korean citizens, they are chosen through applications and lottery.69 For South Korea itself, they have Integrated Information System for Separated Families, which is an institution to gather information and survey for separated families, as well as to prepare if there would be frequent reunions in the future.70

Another step that must be done is the representative from Korean Red

Cross or DPRK Red Cross Society sends a proposal in regard to holding Red

Cross talks. If both sides agree to have the talk, they will hold Red Cross meeting.

During that meeting and talk, both sides could discuss matters regarding the family reunion.

There are other programs run by Korean Red Cross that still related to family reunion. One of the program is giving psychological support for divided families (consolation visit and event)71, and also financial assistance for divided

68Korean Red Cross, “Inter-Korean,” [on-line web]; available at https://www.redcross.or.kr/eng/eng_activity/activity_interkorean.do; downloaded on October 27 2014. 69Associated Press in Seoul, “North and South Koreans in poignant reunions after decades of separation”, The Guardian, February 20 2014, [on-line web]; available at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/north-south-koreans-relatives-separated-decades- reunions; accessed on January 19 2015. 70Ministry of Unification, “The Ministry of Unification and Red Cross Embark on Survey of Separated Families”, see http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1834&mode=view&page=8&cid=31423http://eng.uni korea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1834&mode=view&page=8&cid=31423 accessed on December 24 2015. 71Korean Red Cross, “Red Cross Annual Report,” (2013): 60-63.

26 families who are living below the standard. These programs are mostly funded by

South Korean government.72

Table III.A.1 Programs Concerning Separated Families

Reunions in the Third Exchange of Video Period Countries/Private-Level Letters Reunions Reunions 1990- 39 - 616 2000 2001- 5,319 557 1,128 2013 Total 5,358 557 1,744 Source: Ministry of Unification, Republic of Korea. Retreived from http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=3103

Because most of the separated families are elder citizens, even though they have applied to join family reunion, some of them cannot travel far due to health or other conditions. To solve that, Korean Red Cross provide various ways for them to stay connected such as video call, exchange of letter, and even reunions in the third countries.73

B. Family Reunion Agenda from 1985-2010

The first reunion did not occur until 1985, the reason is because of numerous talks that did not run smoothly due to several issues inside both North

Korea and South Korea. Korean Red Cross had started a campaign to reunite

72Department Global Communication and Contents Division “History”, See http://www.korea.net/AboutKorea/Korea-at-a-Glance/History accessed on October 27 2014. 73Ibid.

27 families that had been separated by the Korean War in 1971,74 and on August

1971 delegations from North and South Korean Red Cross met for the first time.75

During the period of 1973-1984, the relationship between two Koreas has encountered some turmoils which affected the progression of family reunions.

The first one is the abduction of President‟s Park Chung Hee‟s rival, Kim Dae

Jung on August 1973, which eventually led North Korea to postpone talks with

South Korea and Red Cross. Secondly, the attempt to murder President Park which ultimately killed his wife in 1974. The third one is in 1976, the attack led by Lieutenant Pak Chul (commander of Korean People‟s Army) on the demilitarized zone over a huge tree that killed two US citizens and wound people from US and South Korea entourage. The fourth matter is the assassination of

President Park in 1979 by his own colleague, the director of Korean Central

Intelligence Agency, Kim Jae Kyu. Next is the protest started by students in

Kwangju that insisted the government to held an election, also known as the

Kwangju Uprising in 1980. The last major issue is in 1983 when President Chun

Doo Hwan paid a visit to Rangoon, Burma, a bomb exploded and killed 7 South

Korean representatives. Later known that Kang Min Chul, a North Korean agent, admitted that he was one of the people who planned the bombing.76

Those issues above show that during the year of 1973-1984, the circumstances were not conducive to hold any sort of talks between the two

74“Diplomatic Bluebook 1972,” Public Information Bureau Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan, No. 3 – 73, December 1973 [on-line journal]; available at http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/other/bluebook/1972/1972-1-6.htm; accessed on September 3 2014. 75Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 22. 76Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 35-111.

Koreas. Whether it was something that North Korea created to tensed its relation with the South, such as the killing in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and terrorism act in Burma, or other domestic issues in South Korea itself (abduction, protest, and assassination).

In 1984, the devastating natural disaster struck South Korea that killed almost 200 people and leaving 200,000 citizens with no place to live. North Korea made a generous offer and proposed to send aid in the form of rice, cement, clothes, and medicines. South Korea received them gladly. The North Korea Red

Coss Society‟s chairman saw this unfortunate event and the nice gesture from

North Korea as an opportunity to resume Red Cross talks that had been delayed over the years.77

The three parties finally agreed to hold the first reunion in 1985. Since then until 2010, there is a total of 20 reunions on the governmental level:

 1985: on the very first official family reunion after three meetings between

two countries, Red Cross guided 158 citizens to Seoul and Pyongyang. The

event was scheduled to last from 20 to 23 September.78

 2000: the reunion that occurred on this particular year was the first time in

fifteen years. The historical summit between Kim Jong Il and Kim Dae Jung

also played an important role for the program, because it was the first time

that they met for inter-Korean talks. There were two rounds of family

reunion that took place in Seoul and Pyongyang. The first was on 15 to 18

77Oberdorfer and Carlin, The Two Koreas, 115. 78KBS World, “Menguatnya Sistem Kekuasaan Tunggal (dictator) Kim Il-sung”, see http://world.kbs.co.kr/indonesian/event/nkorea_nuclear/general_02c.htm accessed on September 1 2014.

August, and the second one was on 30 November to 2 December. The total

of participating family members was 2,934 people.79

79Tae-Hwan Kwak and Seung-Ho Joo, “North Korea‟s Changes and the Future of Inter-Korean Relations” The Korean Peace Process and the Four Powers: 50.

Table III.B.1 Family Reunions from 1985-2010 Family Reunion Participants from Rounds Location Year South and North Korea

1985 158 September 20-23 Seoul and Pyongyang

August 15-18 2000 2,394 November 30- Seoul and Pyongyang December 2

2001 1,242 February 16-18 Seoul and Pyongyang

2002 1,724 April 28-May 3 Mt. Geumgang

June 27-July 2 2003 2,691 September 13-18 Mt. Geumgang September 20-25 April 29-May 3 2004 1,926 Mt. Geumgang July 11-16

August and 2005 1,811 Mt. Geumgang December

2006 2,683 March and June Mt. Geumgang

2007 1,741 May and October Mt. Geumgang

September 26-28 2009 889 September 29- Mt. Geumgang October 1 October 30- 2010 533 November 2 Mt. Geumgang November 3- 5 Total 20 rounds Source: Ministry of Unification Website, available at: http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=3103

 2001: this family reunion also took place in both Seoul and Pyongyang, and

only lasted for two days from 16 to 18 February. This third reunion brought

together 1,242 people.

 2002: this fourth reunion took a quite historical turn, for the first time the

reunion was held in North Korea‟s Mt. Geumgang. The venue became the

regular place for holding family reunions. This reunion took place on April

28 until May 3, involving 1,724 citizens

 2003: this reunion involved 2,691 people. There were three rounds of

events. September 13-18, June 27-July 2, and the last one was on Sep 20-25,

2003.80

 2004: the 9th and 10th reunions happen on this year, which was on March

29-April 3, and from July 11 to 16. The total of family members who

converged was 1,926. On this reunion, there were only small amount of

children and parents, mostly relatives and siblings since probably many of

the parents had passed away.

 2005: the 11th family reunion happened on August and December (2

reunions) with 1,811 citizens involved.

 2006: the 13th family reunion happened on March and June (2 reunions)

with 2,683 citizens involved.

 2007 the 14th family reunion happened on May and October (2 reunions)

with 1,741 citizens involved.

80Ibid.

 2009: after one year hiatus, there was a total of 889 people who met their

lost relatives from September 26 to 28 and from September 29 to October 1

in Mt. Geumgang Resort.81

 2010: despite the military tension between South and North Korean

government due to the sinking of South Korean boat Cheonan that killed the

46 sailors on board and the attack of Yeonpyeong island which created four

casualties, this reunion still occured. There were two rounds of family

reunion, the first one was on October 30-November 2 and the second round

was on November 3 until 5. They involved 533 people from both sides.82

From the table shown above, family reunions did not occur on several years.

Clearly the first reunion happened in 1985, but there is a huge gap until the second reunion in 2000. The reason is because on that period South Korea was facing a changing political condition into a democratic country and North Korea was developing and testing numerous nuclear weapons.83 Ultimately on June 2000, the

South-North summit decided that family reunions are part of humanitarian act.84

In 2008, the family reunion events were also absent. The reason was because Mt. Kumgang resort was closed due to an incident where North Korean

81Ministry of Unification, “Data and Statistics, See http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1822. accessed on September 3 2014. 82Andrew Salmon, “Divided families from North, South Korea meet after six decades”, CNN, October 31 2010, [on-line article]; available at http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/10/30/nkorea.skorea.reunions/; accessed on January 6 2016. 83Don Oberdorfer and Robert Carlin, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (New York: Basic Books, 2014), 126 and 194. 84Tae-Hwan Kwak and Seung-Ho Joo, “North Korea‟s Changes and the Future of Inter-Korean Relations” The Korean Peace Process and the Four Powers: 46-47.

33 authority shot and killed a South Korean tourist for supposedly went to the restricted area. and because of that there was no reunion on that year.

CHAPTER IV

THE EFFORT FROM KOREAN RED CROSS AND DPRK RED CROSS

SOCIETY TO HOLD FAMILY REUNION AGENDA

As the non-governmental institution that has significant role in dealing with family reunion event in Korean peninsula, Red Cross in both Koreas have major responsibility in the procurement of the event. Thus, all of the process from registering the separated families who want to participate until the actual family reunion event itself are arranged by Red Cross in both states.

A. Red Cross Talks

The realization of family reunions cannot be separated from Red Cross.

This non-governmental organization is essential in the continuation of the official event. Therefore, the dialogue and meeting activities are important in order to prepare for complete family reunions.

The things that usually being done in Red Cross working-level meeting are discussing some matters and provide proposals related to the family reunion. Such as the place and the date for the event, the number of separated families who are participating, and the confirmation of the existence of separated families who apply for the reunion. Although Red Cross meeting was meant to have state-level family reunions, discussion or diplomacy in it does not count as first track diplomacy category. It is because the actors in the discussion of family reunion are from a non-governmental organization which on this case is Red Cross.

In track two diplomacy, the formal body can cooperate with non-officials in order to assist the existing effort. For example, the proposal that is sent can be from the government. In 2013, President Park sent a letter asking the North to hold a meeting to discuss family reunion event.85 Although, the president is sending the proposal first, the dialogue is attended by Red Cross‟ representatives, not from the government. Besides, the dialogues are also perceived as the way to assist existing endeavor that President Park‟s made in her North Korea policy which is to resolve separated families issue.

Table IV.A.1. List of South and North Korean Delegates Red Cross Working-Level Talks 2013 Type South Korean Delegation North Korean Delegation

Head of Lee Deok-haeng Park Yong-il Delegation (Committee executive member, Korean (Vice Chairman of the Central Red Cross) Committee, DPRK Red Cross Society) Delegates Kim Seong-geun Kim Yeong-cheol (Director of the Korean Red Cross) (Member of the Central Committee, DPRK Red Cross Society) Song Hye-jin (Committee executive member, Korean Cho Jeong-cheol Red Cross) (Deputy Manager of the Central Committee, DPRK Red Cross Society) Source: Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 76 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter-Korean Dialogue, 2013), 76.

As mentioned earlier that the amount of people who are participating and the dates for family reunions are crucial, so those are always on the agenda of the

Red Cross dialogues. Because of the nature of track two diplomacy is flexible and

85Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 76 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter- Korean Dialogue, 2013), 75.

36 non-binding, the period of family reunions and participating families are not the same. Second, the amount of family members that participate is also different.86

This means that the agreements in Red Cross working-level talks are not obliged to certain points, whether it is a time period or the total of family reunion participants. They all depend on the circumstance and desire from each side, as well as the result of dialogue.

Table IV.A.2 List of South and North Korean Delegates Red Cross Working-Level Talks 2010 Type South Korean Delegation North Korean Delegation

Head of Kim Eui-do Pak Yong-il (Member, Central Delegation (Executive Member, Korean Red Committee, DPRK Red Cross) Cross)

Delegates Kim Sung-keun (Director, Korean Pak Hyong-chol (Senior Member, Red Cross) Secretariat, Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland) Source: Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 75 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter-Korean Dialogue, 2013), 65.

Moreover on October 26 until 27 2010, South Korea suggested several matters which were: monthly reunions set to work on March 11, there are other chances for families who reunited with their relatives to meet them again, finding

5,000 families from each side starting from December 2010, a pilot project concerning the citizens who are 80 years old and over by doing hometown visit.

86See Chapter III page 31.

After the South presented its proposal, North Korea responded by wanting humanitarian aid in the form of 500,000 tons of rice and 300,000 tons of fertilizer, and talk about Mt. Geumgang87 tourism. South Korea reacted by saying that it was not its place to give decision pertaining to the aid and Mt. Geumgang issue was a separate issue from family reunions.88 The same thing occurred in 2013, in

Red Cross working-level meeting which happened on August 23. On the meeting,

South Korean side presented some matters that could improve family reunion events: add a number of participants, holding the event more often, and the verification of the existence of 1000 people from both Koreas. For the family reunion in 2013, South Korea advised the total participants were 40 families, the reunions would be held after Chuseok, and the citizens from both Koreas could visit Seoul and Pyongyang. Nevertheless, North Korea responded South‟s wishes that it was inappropriate to discuss the repercussion of separated families and family reunions on working-level meeting instead on Red Cross talks. For this year‟s family reunions, they would be held at the end of September and the total participants were 200 people. Moreover, the matters to improve the family reunion events would be done similarly as in the past. Finally, North and South

Korea agreed to have family reunions on September 25 until 30 for 100 people from each side on Mt. Geumgang.89

87Mt. Geumgang facility is a tourist facility run by both North and South Korea, but the South seized it following the shooting incident in 2008 when a South Korean tourist was shot to death by North Korean personnels for alleged trespassing 88Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 75 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter- Korean Dialogue, 2013), 67-78. 89Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 76 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter- Korean Dialogue, 2013), 78.

From the explanation above, the proposal to create an improvement for family reunions can be presented. The effort to resolve conflict on this case is how to hold the best family reunion events. Thus, as in track two diplomacy where proposal can be utilized to resolve conflicts, in Red Cross‟ dialogues, they are being used to hold a better family reunion events than the last ones although in the end both sides had some disagreement regarding the proposal and ended up conducting the event the same way as the prior family reunion.

Furthermore, track two diplomacy can be used to discuss sensitive matters that usually generate tension or even conflict in official meeting. That is why on

September 24 2010, the South proposed the venue for the next family reunions were going to be held on Mt. Geumgang reunion center as in the past, North

Korea responded by stating the South Korean assets were frozen on the facility.

But finally on October 1, the North agreed to have the reunions on Mt. Geumgang after South Korea gave the notion that family reunions are humanitarian matter and should not be interrelated with other inter-Korean issues.90

B. Relevant Matters that Affected the Continuation of Family Reunion

Agenda

1. The Role Portion of the Government and Red Cross in Both Koreas

90Ministry of Unification, South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 75 (Seoul: Special Office for Inter- Korean Dialogue, 2013), 71-76.

In conducting family reunion event, the issue of separated families in

Korean peninsula has been a prolonged humanitarian matter between South Korea and North Korea. Although this analysis is using track two diplomacy, the involvement of the official party cannot be ruled out.

In holding the family reunion event, the most essential matter that the government of both Koreas have done was the South-North Joint Declaration where the two sides agreed to hold regular family reunions in 2000 which eventually brought back the long-awaited second family reunions in fifteen years.91 However, during 2011 until 2013 the agenda to discuss the issue of family reunion only occurred once in 2013 when South and North Korea agreed to hold inter-Korean authorities talks which were canceled due to the problem of delegations.92

Due to the nature of family reunion event that leans toward the realm of humanitarian subject and also it is not quite a threat for the security of both

Koreas, the officials choose Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society as the main organizations that arrange the event. Nevertheless, the official can assist in a more subtle way such as conducting talks or even speech that underlines the importance to re-unite separated families. As what South Korea‟s president Park

Geun Hye conveyed during Korea National Liberation Day on August 15 2013:

91Tae-Hwan Kwak and Seung-Ho Joo, “North Korea‟s Changes and the Future of Inter-Korean Relations” The Korean Peace Process and the Four Powers: 50. 92North Korea decided to postpone the talks and accused the South of provocative step towards its country because dispatching Kim Nam Shik, the Vice Minister of Unification for South Korea‟s delegation instead of the Minister.

“I wish I can reduce the pain of separated families...I hope North Korea can open their mind and allow family reunions.”93

Furthermore, in the case of family reunion event in Korean peninsula, the officials from South Korea put the issue of separated families in their North

Korean policy objective. Despite the differences in their approach, President Lee

Myung Bak (2008-2013) with his Mutual Benefits and Common Prosperity policy which focuses on the denuclearization of North Korea and President Park Geun

Hye (2013-present) with Trust-Building Process in the Korean Peninsula that uses trust as the foundation, both of them include the problem of separated families as one of the humanitarian matter that needs to be resolved in inter-Korean relation.94 95

In track two diplomacy, its entities could help in the existing official endeavor. Meaning that, Korean Red Cross is assisting the South Korean government objective to hold family reunion so that it can resolve the separated families issue. But, according to Jeffrey Mapendere on his journal Track One and a Half Diplomacy and the Complementarity of Tracks, the weakness of track two diplomacy is the result from the process of this kind of diplomacy is not instant.

Referring to Korean Red Cross, in order to hold family reunion, DPRK Red Cross

Society must be willing to be on the same page regarding this matter. If DPRK

Red Cross Society did not want to accept the proposal sent from Korean Red

93Wi Tack-whan and Yoon Sojung, “President proposes family reunions, peace park in DMZ”, Korea.net, August 16 2013, [on-line article]; available at http://www.korea.net/NewsFocus/Policies/view?articleId=111432; accessed on Janaccessed on January 4 2016. 94Ministry of Unification, “Establishing Principled Inter-Korean Relations” White Paper on Korean Unification (2010): 18 95Ministry of Unification, “The Trust Building Process on The Korean Peninsula,” (July 2013): 16

Cross, then it cannot do anything in term of holding the event, because it requires the consent from both sides.

Besides that, because track two diplomacy mostly involves unofficial parties, Mapendere also stated this diplomacy has restricted boundaries and not enough power to influence the officials. The first example is in 2011 when inter-

Korean relation was agitated because of several political matters that take place a year prior in 2010, which were the sinking of Cheonan and the attack of

Yeonpyeong island.96 During that period, Red Cross in both states could not push the government to hold family reunion agenda due to the seriousness of those political issues that need to be addressed immediately, thus the family reunion had to wait.

The second example was in 2012 when Korean Red Cross sent the proposals to hold family reunion event on February and August, but both rejected by DPRK Red Cross Society. The first proposal was turned down referring to

South‟s government decision to prohibit its citizens to visit North Korea to mourn the death of Kim Jong Il on December 2011 and also joint-military exercise between South Korea and the United States called Key Resolve and Foal Eagle.

Meanwhile, for the August proposal, North Korea wanted to accept it if South

Korea resumed the Mt. Geumgang facility and remove May 24 Measures, 97 98 all

96The Cheonan sinking on March 2010 killed 46 sailors on board and the attack of Yeonpyeong island on November generated four casualities. For Cheonan sinking, the North denied its involvement but the evidence proved otherwise. While the the attack was conducted by the North. According to North Korea, the reason for that attack was because South Korea had turned the island into provocational source. 97May 24 Measures are policies adopted by South Korean president Lee Myung Bak as the result of Cheonan sinking. The measure covers numerous restricted matters related to inter-Korean relations. First, the North Korean ships are banned from passing through South Korea‟s waters.

42 of this had to be under the order of North Korean government to possibly gain its objective. Again, because of the restriction of Red Cross as the track two diplomacy actor in official decision, Korean Red Cross could not coerce South

Korean government to fulfill the demand of North Korea in order to accept the

August proposal, because of the lack of significe in official realm compared to other issues stated earlier. If South Korea agreed to remove the measure and resume the facility, this decision would sacrifice many sides, possibly jeopardize the security in Korean peninsula just to reunite separated families.

The most defining matter when it comes to the role of Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society to hold family reunion event is in the last example that occurred in 2013. On this year, following the speech from President Park, she sent the proposal to hold family reunion event to DPRK Red Cross Society on

August, and accepted by the North‟s representative. Both Korean Red Cross and

DPRK Red Cross Society had meetings to hold the event on August 23 when they discussed the venue, date, and participant for the event. Both sides eventually agreed on holding family reunion on September 25 until 30.99

However, North Korea stated the cancelation of family reunions on

September 21, whereas the actual event would occur on September 25 until 30.

The North gave its statement saying that the situation in Korean peninsula was not

Second, the activity of trade between two Koreas is halted. The third one is no visitation to North Korea for South Korean citizens (except for necessary visits such as work-related matter). Fourth, investments in North Korea are not allowed. Lastly, humanitarian assistance will not be given with the exclusion of aid for infants and children 98Ministry of Unification, White Paper on Korean Unification 2013, (Seoul: Ministry of Unification, 2013): 159-160 99Ministry of Unification, White Paper on Korean Unification 2014, (Seoul: Ministry of Unification, 2014): 180-182.

43 appropriate to hold reunions due to the capture of the South Korean lawmaker who supported the North and saying that it was part of a witch-hunt campaign.100

The example above shows that although Korean Red Cross and DPRK

Red Cross Society have done meetings beforehand until setting a date for family reunion, their existence as track two diplomacy actors, make them impossible to be fully in charge to conduct the event. For this matter, the official remains to be in full grasp of holding the decision which cannot be disrupted. Moreover, since the continuation the event must require cooperation from both Korean Red Cross dan DPRK Red Cross Society, if one of the parties decided to cancel the family reunion event, automatically it cannot proceed. It also describes that this type of matter that slows down the process in track two diplomacy. In this case is family reunion event which is absent for three consecutive years.

In addition to the government support of the continuation of family reunion, the South Korean government provides funding for private-level family reunion.101 Regrettably, neither Korean Red Cross nor DPRK Red Cross Society supports this kind of reunion, it is usually conducted by companies or local

NGOs. This matter makes private-level family reunion to be an unpopular option.

Aside from the decrease of this kind of reunion each year, the demand from the citizens themselves lessen. The reason is because many separated families passed

100Madison Park, “North Korea blames South, cancels family reunions,” CNN, September 21 2013, [on-line web]; available at http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/21/world/asia/korea-family-reunions- cancel/; downloaded on September 26 2014. 101Ministry of Unification, White Paper on Korean Unification 2014, (Seoul: Ministry of Unification, 2014): 123

44 away102 or even the difficulty of the procedure.103 Whereas if Korean Red Cross or DPRK Red Cross Society take part in private-level family reunion, it can be one of the alternatives on how to resolve separated families issue. Because usually it is organized in a third country, the most often one is China.104 If so, when

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society contributed, they can use their international network to assist those separated families when both Koreas are in the state of hostile so that the state-level which is the most preferred way of conducting family reunion, is not the only option.

2. Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society as National Society

As previously explained on chapter three, Red Cross in both Koreas are national societies under IFRC and part of the Movement. Because of that, they have to obey the regulations and principles under the Movement. The principles are humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity and universality.105

The most significant one in the case of family reunion event is the principle of neutrality. According to the Movement:

102Ministry of Unification, White Paper on Korean Unification 2013, (Seoul: Ministry of Unification, 2013): 131 103The difficulty of this kind of reunion is due to the high risk that the organizations have to encounter. Such as getting the people out of North Korea and holding the reunion near China border. It usually requires bribing with high number of cost to pay the guards. Mostly, the people in North Korea who want to participate do not possess such money. 104Lim Chang-Won, “Dying network for reuniting Korea's divided families”, Yahoo News, November 30 2015, [on-line article]; available at http://news.yahoo.com/dying-network-reuniting- koreas-divided-families-053701640.html; accessed on January 5 2016 105The Movement: Overview”, ICRC Website, August 24 2013, [on-line document]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/who-we-are/movement/overview-the-movement.htm; downloaded on January 2 2016.

In order to continue to enjoy the confidence of all, the Movement may not take sides in hostilities or engage at any time in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature.106

The Movement stated that neutrality consists of two matters, military and ideological neutrality. In military, if, for example there is a state of conflict, the neutrality that the Movement has does not interfere or hamper in the situation.

Because neutrality can be used as a needed partner that can assist the adversary's medical workers. For the ideological neutrality, it does not take part when there is a political or religious contention. For the National Society, if one of the subsidiaries engages in any or all contentions, the members could resign from their participation.107

When it comes to ICRC, it has its own specific neutrality. It has to be independent and must not take part in political and economic or other matters that will jeopardize its integrity from the view of the governments all over the world.

For National Society, as the humanitarian representative in their respective authorities, they have to be prepared to perform under the condition of conflict.

Even in peacetime they have to abide the principle of neutrality. Anything that they do must not harm the action of the Movement and other elements. Basically,

106ICRC, “The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent”, 1996, 7. 107Ibid.

the principle of neutrality must be brought anywhere in the mind of the

Movement‟s elements108

The neutrality principle that Korean Red Cros and DPRK Red Cross

Society have to obey, if they violate the principle, they could lose their status as part of the Movement109 which will not only interrupt the handling of humanitarian issues in their countries, the continuation of family reunion event will also be gone or probably more difficult to organize.

Aside from the lack of power that track two diplomacy possesses compare to track one diplomacy, binding neutrality principle from the Movement is one of the arguments as of why Korean Red Cros and DPRK Red Cross Society could not hold the event. Since they cannot influence or involve in the official affairs that affected to the continuation of the event.

In addition, as National Society, Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross

Society are the ones that deal with their regional humanitarian problems. The issue of separated families and family reunion event are unique matter where the problem is experienced by citizens in both South Korea and North Korea and required cooperation from both Red Cross. Thus, ICRC cannot interfere in the issue of separated families unless asked by authorities concerned. It can only provide suggestion and underline the matter, for instance like what happened on

August 20 2013, when ICRC President, Mr. Peter Maurer came to South and

North Korea to discuss this problem and other humanitarian issues in the peninsula. He expressed:

108ICRC, “The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent”, 1996, 8. 109ICRC, “The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent”, 1996, 18.

“The recently agreed resumption of family visits is a very positive step. However, time is running out for these people. Given the number of families involved, we urge both governments to do all they can to step up the pace and scale of these visits so that over a reasonable length of time all families can have contact... The ICRC would be willing to play a role in facilitating this process if requested.”110

Moreover, the ICRC is responsible in dealing with victims of armed conflict and violence.111 Although technically, separated families are part of the armed conflict victims because of the Korean War, the conflict itself occurred more than sixty years ago. Hence, they do not meet the requirement of ICRC immediate assistance. Nevertheless, ICRC does have work program to bring back lost family relation called „restoring family links‟.112 The program even has its own website that contains information as well as a searching feature to search for lost relatives. Unfortunately, because this program covers internationally, not all states available in the website, including South Korea and North Korea. Until today, both countries are in the working progress to be put in the restoring family links program. Once they are on the program, it possibly can ease the effort of

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society to conduct the family reunion event between separated families in Korean peninsula.

110“Korean Peninsula: ICRC president emphasises plight of families separated for 60 years”, ICRC Website, August 27 2013, [on-line article]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/news-release/2013/08-27-korea-peninsula-icrc- president-maurer-visit.htm; accessed on January 5 2016. 111The Movement: Overview”, ICRC Website, August 24 2013, [on-line document]; available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/who-we-are/movement/overview-the-movement.htm; downloaded on January 2 2016 112 Go to http://familylinks.icrc.org/en/Pages/home.aspx

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross society could not hold family reunion event during 2011 until 2013 caused by several matters. Their status as humanitarian NGO that use track two process, generated in their limitation and lack of power when it comes to the effort of holding family reunion events.

Moreover, the track two diplomacy usually takes longer time in order to gain result.

The first example is in 2011 when there was a military tension between the government of South Korea and North Korea. Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red

Cross Society could not force their will to conduct the event when there is no approval from the officials. Other than that, this military problem between two countries is urgent matter that needed to be put first. Thus, the event did not occur on this year. Second, in 2012 when Korean Red Cross sent the proposals twice to

DPRK Red Cross Society and they were rejected due to the demand of the North,

South Korean Red Cross could not push and coerce the South Korean government to fulfill those demands that will possibly jeopardize the security of the government as well as the matter of priority. Lastly, the year 2013 marked the power of official compared to non-state actors when North Korean government canceled the family reunion event just four days until the actual event. Both

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross society had already had meetings to prepare the reunions on August 2013 that were absent in 2011 and 2012.

Those three explanations above stated that on the year 2011 and 2012,

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society could not put the family reunion agenda above official problems with their limitation using track two actions.

Meanwhile, in 2013 indicated both Red Cross were not fully in control of holding the event due to their status of humanitarian NGO so that they possess lack of power toward the decision of the government.

Another matter which caused the absence of family reunion event was the position of Red Cross in Korean peninsula as National Society as part of The Red

Cross and Red Cresent Movement. The Movement has its own regulations and principles that must be obeyed by all National Societies worldwide, including

Korean Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society. The most significant principles in the case of family reunion event is the principle of neutrality. It does not allow all the Movement entities to involve in the political, economic, religious, ethnic or other conflicts that might consider as bias. When they are violated, the Korean

Red Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society could lose their status as part of the

Movement which would interrupt the process of resolving humanitarian problems within their countries. It would also hinder the continuation of family reunion event that originally initiated by DPRK Red Cross Society during the 1980s.

Because these two Red Cross are the ones that assist the government-level family reunion.

Therefore, aside from the limitation and lack of power that Korean Red

Cross and DPRK Red Cross Society have toward the official matters that affected the continuation of family reunion event, the principle of neutrality that they must abide added the difficulties in holding the event during that period.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Book(s)

Flick, Uwe. 2009 An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

International Committee of Red Cross. 2005 Discover the ICRC. Geneva: ICRC.

Kaye, Dalia Dassa. 2007. Talking to The Enemy: Track Two

Diplomacy in the Middle East and South Asia. California: RAND

Corporation.

Kebudayaan Korea Kementerian Budaya, Olahraga dan Pariwisata. 2012. Korea:

Dulu dan Sekarang. Seoul: Layanan Informasi dan Kebudayaan Korea

Kementerian Budaya, Olahraga dan Pariwisata.

Ministry of Unification. 2010. “Establishing Principled Inter-Korean Relations”

White Paper on Korean Unification.

Ministry of Unification. 2013. South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 75. Seoul:

Special Office for Inter-Korean Dialogue.

Ministry of Unification. 2013. South-North Dialogue in Korea No. 76. Seoul:

Special Office for Inter-Korean Dialogue.

Ministry of Unification. 2013. The Trust Building Process on the Korean

Peninsula. Seoul: RH Korea.

Ministry of Unification. 2013. White Paper on Korean Unification. Seoul:

Ministry of Unification.

xiii

Ministry of Unification. 2014. White Paper on Korean Unification. Seoul:

Ministry of Unification.

Oberdorfer, Don and Robert Carlin. 2014. The Two Koreas: A Contemporary

History. New York: Basic Books.

Stueck, William. 2004 The Korean War in World History. Lexington: University

Press of Kentucky.

Stokesbury, James L. 1990. A Short History of the Korean War. New York:

Harper Perennial.

The Institute for Unification Education. 2012. Understanding North Korea.

Korea: Ministry of Unification.

Journal(s)

Ayoub, Millicent R. 1966. “The Family Reunion,” Ethnology. University of

Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education.

Bohmelt, Tobias. 2010. “The Effectiveness of Tracks of Diplomacy Strategies in

Third-Party Interventions.” United Kingdom: Journal of Peace

Research.

Center , SERVE. 2008. “Types of Research Method”, The SERVE Center at the

University of North Carolina. downloaded on October 27 2013

(www.serve.org).

ICRC, “The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent”, 1996.

xiv

Il, Ohn Chang. 2010. “The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953.” International

Journal of Korean Studies 2.

Joo, Seung-Ho and Tae-Hwan Kwak. “North Korea’s Changes and the Future of

Inter-Korean Relations” The Korean Peace Process and the Four

Powers (2003)

Kang, Miongsei. 2011. “The Impact of the Korean War on the Political-Economic

System of South Korea: Economic Growth and Democracy.”

International Journal of Korean Studies 1.

La Porte, Teresa. 2012. “The Legitimacy and Effectiveness of Non‐State Actors

and the Public Diplomacy Concept,” ISA Annual Convention.

Lee, Daniel Boo Duck. 1992. “Divided Korean Families: Why Does It Take So

Long to Remedy the Unhealed Wounds?,” Korea Journal of Population

and Development 21.

Mapendere, Jeffrey. “Track One and a Half Diplomacy and the Complementarity

of Tracks,” Culture of Peace Online Journal 2.

MIT Press, “What Are Track-II Talks?” [on-line journal] available at

http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262511803_

sch_0001.pdf accessed on January 3 2016.

Snyder, Scott and Joyce Lee. 2010. “The The Impact of the Korean War on the

Political-Economic System of North Korea.” International Journal of

Korean Studies 2.

United States National Intelligence Council, “Nonstate Actors: Impact on

International Relations and Implications for the United States”.

Weathersby, Kathryn. 1993. “Soviet Aims in Korea and The Origins of The

Korean War, 1945-1950: New Evidence from Russian Archives.”

Washington, D.C.: Cold War International History Project Woodrow

Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Online Articles(s)

“Diplomatic Bluebook 1972,” 1973. Public Information Bureau Ministry of

Foreign Affairs Japan, No. 3 – 73. accessed on September 3 2014

(http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/other/bluebook/1972/1972-1-6.htm).

Chun. “The Korean War,” Still Present Past. accessed on July 5 2014

(http://stillpresentpasts.org/history-english).

ICRC Website. 2013. “Korean Peninsula: ICRC president emphasises plight of

families separated for 60 years”, accessed on January 5 2016

(https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/news-release/2013/08-27-korea-

peninsula-icrc-president-maurer-visit.htm;)

KBS World, “Menguatnya Sistem Kekuasaan Tunggal (dictator) Kim Il-sung,”

accessed on September 1 2014

(http://world.kbs.co.kr/indonesian/event/nkorea_nuclear/general_02c.htm

Ministry of Unification, “The Ministry of Unification and Red Cross Embark on

Survey of Separated Families”, see

http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1834&mode=view&page=

xvi

8&cid=31423http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1834&mode=

view&page=8&cid=31423 accessed on December 24 2015

Park, Hye Jin “Origins of the Korean War: Influence of Foreign Intervention or

Civil Conflicts of North and South Koreans”, 21 December 2010,

accessed on July 9 2014

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~park25h/classweb/worldpolitics/koreabefor

e.html

Park, Madison. 2014. “North Korea blames South, cancels family reunions,”

CNN. downloaded on September 26 2013

(http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/21/world/asia/korea-family-reunions-

cancel/index.html-).

Salmon, Andrew. 2010. “Divided families from North, South Korea meet after

six decades”, CNN, accessed on January 6 2016

(http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/10/30/nkorea.skorea.reuni

ons/)

Whan, Wi Tack and Yoon Sojung. 2013. “President proposes family reunions,

peace park in DMZ”, Korea.net. accessed on January 4 2016

(http://www.korea.net/NewsFocus/Policies/view?articleId=111432)

Won, Lim Chang. 2015. “Dying network for reuniting Korea's divided families”,

Yahoo News. accessed on January 5 2016 (http://news.yahoo.com/dying-

network-reuniting-koreas-divided-families-053701640.html).

Report(s)

xvii

Korean Red Cross. 2013. “Red Cross Annual Report”.

Website(s)

“History,” Department Global Communication and Contents Division. accessed

on October 27 2014 (http://www.korea.net/AboutKorea/Korea-at-a-

Glance/History).

“Inter-Korean,” Korean Red Cross. downloaded on October 27 2014

(https://www.redcross.or.kr/eng/eng_activity/activity_interkorean.do).

Associated Press in Seoul. 2014 “North and South Koreans in poignant reunions

after decades of separation”, The Guardian, accessed on January 19

2015 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/north-south-

koreans-relatives-separated-decades-reunions).

ETH Zurich, http://www.korea-cbms.ethz.ch/Maps/

Encyclopædia Britannica, “Franco-German War”, accessed on January 1 2016

(http://www.britannica.com/event/Franco-German-War).

ICRC Website, “ History of the ICRC”, accessed on January 1 2016

(https://www.icrc.org/en/history)

ICRC Website, “The Movement”, accessed on January 1 2016

(https://www.icrc.org/en/movement).

ICRC Website. 2013. “The Movement: Overview”, downloaded on January 2

2016 (https://www.icrc.org/eng/who-we-are/movement/overview-the-

movement.htm)

xviii

IFRC Website. “North Korea: Access to the vulnerable through law”, accessed on

January 2 2016 (http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/humanitarian-

diplomacy/north-korea-access-to-the-vulnerable-through-law/).

Korean Red Cross “History”, accessed on January 2 2016

(http://www.redcross.or.kr/eng/eng_introduce/introduce_krc_history.do)

Liberty in North Korea, “History of North Korea”, accessed on Juy 3 2014

(http://www.libertyinnorthkorea.org/learn-north-korea-history/).

Ministry of Unification, “Data and Statistics”, See

http://eng.unikorea.go.kr/content.do?cmsid=1822. accessed on

September 3 2014.

Online Resource ICRC. 1998. “The Franco-Prussian war (1870)”, accessed on January 1

2016 (https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jnvw.htm)

Online Resource ICRC. 2002. “History of the Central Tracing Agency of the ICRC”,

accessed on January 2 2016

(https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jqrj.htm)

The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, “Teaching With

Documents: The United States Enters the Korean Conflict”, accessed on

July 3 2014 (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/korean-

conflict/).

United States Institute of Peace, “Peace Agreement Digital Collection: South-

North Joint-Declaration,” available at: www.usip.org; downloaded on

December 25 2015.

xix

Workshop

Allen, Nate, Rashad Badr, Chris Brown, Thomas Burns, Lindsey Einhaus,

Kathleen Merkl, Mayank Misra, Travis Sharp, Seth Smith Alexandra

Utsey, William Wagner. 2013. “Bridging Divides: Track II Diplomacy

in The Middle East Policy Workshop." Woodrow Wilson School of

Public & International Affairs.

APPENDIX

Appendix I

Family Reunion Events

A father from North Korea and his two children from South Korea looking at old family photos during family reunion in 2010

Korean Red Cross helps the citizens for family reunion event

xxi

Appendix 2

Emblem of Korean Red Cross

Appendix 3

Geneva Conventions Article 26

ARTICLE 26. -DISPERSED FAMILIES

Each Party to the conflict shall facilitate enquiries made by members of families dispersed owing to the war, with the object of renewing contact with one another and of meeting, if possible. It shall encourage, in particular, the work of organizations engaged on this task povided they are acceptable to it and conform to its security regzclations.

GENERAL BACKGROUND

xxii

A feature of the Second World War was that large numbers of people were forced to leave their homes ;some fled before the advanc- ing enemy forces ; the destruction caused by the war, especially by bombing, led to mass evacuations ; transfers and deportations for political, economic and racial reasons affected in some cases the whole population of a region, in others isolated individuals. During the war the International Committee of the Red Cross asked the Central Prisoners of War Agency to draw up a standard enquiry card2, on which people separated from their families through the war could give their new address and the name of members of their family with whom they wished to be reunited. With the assistance of the National Red Cross Societies and the administrative authorities in the countries concerned, the cards were made available to the public in post offices, in special centres for the distribution and forwarding of Red Cross " Civilian message forms ", and in the premises of branches of National Red Cross Societies and other relief organizations.

In Geneva the Dispersed Families Section, set up in 1943 in the Central Prisoners of War Agency, was made responsible for receiving the cards, classifying them and using them for their purpose by means of the so-called tally method (the concordance of two cards classified alphabetically under the name of the person sought, providing the information required). In 1945 these tasks were taken over by UNRRA. The Central Prisoners of War Agency thus worked to put several million civilians in all parts of the world in touch with their families again. In future Article 26 will provide a basis in international law for work, which has been carried out on the initiative of the International Committee of the Red Cross. The text was proposed by the International Committee and adopted in 1949 by the Geneva Diplomatic Conference ; it lays down that each Party to the conflict is to encourage the searches and activities of organizations specializing in this work. The International Red Cross Societies will clearly be among the first to benefit by those facilities.

xxiii

1. Obligation to facilitate enquiries

It should be emphasized that in accordance with the usual practice of the International Committee of the Red Cross during the Second World War, Article 26 is concerned only with the re-establishing of family ties and therefore applies solely to members of dispersed families, not to all " displaced persons ". The Article is intended to safeguard the family unit, to re-establish contacts between members of a family group. The Parties to the conflict must not only allow members of dispersed families to make enquiries ; they must facilitate such enquiries. The Convention does not go into detail but among the examples which could be quoted are the organization of official information bureaux and centres ; notification by postal authorities of changes of address and possible places of evacuation :the arranging of broadcasts ; the granting of facilities for forwarding requests for information and the replies ; and, as a precautionary measure, the provision of identity discs for children under twelve years of age, as provided in Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Convention ;this would be of considerable help in reuniting dispersed families. It should be noted that the Convention makes express provision for setting up information bureaux, and lays down detailed regulations concerning them. Each belligerent should set up an official Information Bureau to receive and transmit information about protected persons in its hands ;the information shouid mention the measures adopted concerning them and should include any particulars which will enable a protected person to be identified, and his family notified. It must be realized, however, that these information bureaux are only competent to deal with protected persons within the meaning of Article 4 of the Convention, in the first place enemy nationals ; they are not responsible for information concerning the belligerent powers' own nationals unless, of course, the Parties to the conflict have decided otherwise. One measure likely to facilitate this work would be free postage for correspondence dealing with family enquiries. During the Second World War the International Committee of the Red Cross arranged with the Universal Post Union

xxiv

for the standard enquiry cards mentioned above to be carried post free. This was of great assistance to the senders.

2. Assistance from humanitarian organizations

Article 26 requires belligerents to encourage the work of organizations engaged in the task of renewing contact between members of dispersed families and reuniting them. The assistance given by such organizations within their own country is extremely valuable ; it is of the very first importance in the case of enquiries by families whose members are in different belligerent countries, especially when such countries are enemies. Without the help of such organizations international enquiries would usually meet with very great difficulties. The organizations must fulfil a certain number of conditions: they must be acceptable to the Parties to the conflict, and they must comply with the security regulations of the belligerent in whose temtory they are working. This condition was not mentioned in the draft Article submitted to the XVIIth International Red Cross Conference ; it was introduced at Geneva in 1949. Any organization which satisfies these two conditions must, as a rule, be allowed to carry on its work in connection with the reuniting of dispersed families. The National Red Cross Societies and their local branches have a most important role to play ; they are mentioned expressly in the previous Article. Now the exchange of famiIy news, with which Article 26 deals, is often a preliminary to the reunion of the family concerned ; National Red Cross Societies, which have given such valuable service in this connection during past wars, are called upon to play a very . important part in this work in the future, as they have done in the past. The same will be true of the Central Information Agency, which the International Committee of the Red Cross may suggest setting up. It may be set up as part of the Central Prisoners of War Agency, whose Dispersed Families Section will have the task of collating in a central card index all information and enquiries received concerning members of dispersed families, the information being put to use by means of the so-called " tally " method. This system proved its value

xxv

during the Second World War and is worthy of attention. In the same way standard enquiry cards seem a simple and practical means of facilitating the renewal of contact between members of families. The Convention, rightly, does not go into details of the methods which could be used, since they cannot be set out in advance, but must depend on circumstances, which wiIl vary. The Convention merely states that belligerents are under an obligation to encourage the work of competent organizations, thus showing clearly that it is not merely a matter of tolerating their activities, but above all, of supporting and actively furthering their efforts, or even, as the English text has it, of encouraging them.

xxvi

Appendix 4

Red Cross Talks Agreement

Agreement from Inter-Korean Red Cross Working-Level Meetings

South and North Korea held Red Cross working-level meetings in Panmunjeom on August 23, 2013, and agreed to the following.

1. South and North Korea agreed to conduct the reunions of separated families at Mt. Geumgang on September 25-30, 2013. ① 100 individuals will meet their separated families in the reunion for each side in turn. ② The South and North will exchange written requests for the confirmation of the life and death of separated family members (200-250 individuals from each side) on August 29, with written replies sent on September 13, and final lists on September 16. ③ The form and method of the reunions will follow custom. ④ Each side will dispatch an advance party to Mt. Geumgang five days ahead of the reunions. 2. South and North Korea will conduct video reunions on October 22-23, 2013, and 40 families from each side will participate in these. 3. South and North Korea will hold another family reunion in November, and hold Red Cross working-level meetings immediately after the Chuseok reunions to discuss this matter. 4. The South and North will make continuous efforts to fundamentally resolve the issue of separated families, including the holding of regular family reunions, the confirmation of life and death, and the exchange of correspondence.

xxvii

August 23, 2013 Lee Deok-haeng Park Yong-il Head of Head of the South Korean Delegation the North Korean Delegation to the Inter-Korean Red Cross to the Inter-Korean Red Cross Working-Level Meetings Working-Level Meetings

xxviii

Appendix 5

South North Joint Declaration

In accordance with the noble will of the entire people who yearn for the peaceful reunification of the nation, President Kim Dae-jung of the Republic of Korea and National Defense Commission Chairman Kim Jong-il of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea held a historic meeting and summit talks in Pyongyang from June 13 to June 15, 2000. The leaders of the South and the North, recognizing that the meeting and the summit talks were of great significance in promoting mutual understanding, developing South-North relations and realizing peaceful reunification, declared as follows: 1. The South and the North have agreed to resolve the question of reunification independently and through the joint efforts of the Korean people, who are the masters of the country. 2. For the achievement of reunification, we have agreed that there is a common element in the South's concept of a confederation and the North's formula for a loose form of federation. The South and the North agreed to promote reunification in that direction. 3. The South and the North have agreed to promptly resolve humanitarian issues such as exchange visits by separated family members and relatives on the occasion of the August 15 National Liberation Day and the question of unswerving Communists serving prison sentences in the South. 4. The South and the North have agreed to consolidate mutual trust by promoting balanced development of the national economy through economic cooperation and by stimulating cooperation and exchanges in civic, cultural, sports, health, environmental and all other fields. 5. The South and the North have agreed to hold a dialogue between relevant authorities in the near future to implement the above agreements expeditiously.

President Kim Dae-jung cordially invited National Defense Commission Chairman Kim Jong-il to visit Seoul, and Chairman Kim Jong-il will visit Seoul at an appropriate time.

Kim Dae-jung President The Republic of Korea

Kim Jong-il Chairman National Defense Commission The Democratic People's Republic of Korea

xxix

(Signed)

June 15, 2000

xxx