U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

88–389PDF 2014

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND CRIMES AGAINST

HUMANITY IN NORTH KOREA

MEETING AND HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, 

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND 

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JUNE 18, 2014

Serial No. 113–197

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

PAUL COOK, California 

GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

DOUG COLLINS, Georgia 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

SEAN DUFFY, Wisconsin 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

KAREN BASS, California 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

AMI BERA, California 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

BRIEFER 

The Honorable Lee Jong Hoon, Ambassador-at-Large for Human Rights, Republic of Korea ..................................................................................................... 4

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Andrew Natsios, co-chair, The Committee for Human Rights 

in North Korea ..................................................................................................... 29

Shin Chang Hoon, Ph.D, director, Center for Global Governance, Asan Institute for Policy Studies ......................................................................................... 43

Mr. Shin Dong Hyuk, survivor of North Korean prison camp ............................. 56

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Lee Jong Hoon: Prepared statement ............................................ 7

The Honorable Andrew Natsios: Prepared statement .......................................... 33

Shin Chang Hoon, Ph.D: Prepared statement ....................................................... 45

Mr. Shin Dong Hyuk: Prepared statement ............................................................ 59

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 74

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 75

The Honorable Lee Jong Hoon: Crimes against humanity report ....................... 76

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey, and chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global 

Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations: Statement 

from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom ..................... 80

(1)

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND CRIMES 

AGAINST HUMANITY IN NORTH KOREA 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 2014

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o’clock p.m., in 

room 2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. 

Smith (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. Good afternoon. 

Today’s briefing, which will then become a hearing and it is just 

due to technical regulations proscribed by the committee and by 

the House, hearing from an Ambassador cannot be done in a hearing setting but it is a briefing. It is really a distinction without a 

difference. 

So today’s hearing and briefing deserve to turn the world’s attention to the systematic abuse of human rights in North Korea, 

which amount to crimes against humanity by perhaps the world’s 

most repressive totalitarian regime. 

And so very correctly, as stated in the United Nations Commission on Inquiry report on North Korea, such a regime is a state 

that does not content itself with ensuring the authoritarian rule of 

a small group of people but seeks to dominate every aspect of its 

citizens’ lives and terrorizes them from within. So by definition this 

is not an authoritarian regime, it is an absolute dictatorship and 

totalitarian regime. For in the Democratic People’s Republic of 

Korea we see a state that seeks to control all aspects of the lives 

of its citizens, not only their political lives but also that innermost 

sanctuary that we call conscience as well. 

The term ‘‘hermit kingdom’’ is applied to any nation that wilfully 

cuts itself off from the rest of the world either metaphorically or 

physically. This term was applied to Korea as long ago as the late 

19th century, but it continues to be applicable to North Korea 

today. 

This is why the terrible human rights violations in North Korea 

are little noticed outside of foreign policy circles. We must see that 

the crimes of the North Korean regime are far more widely known, 

combated, and raised, and pushed against than they currently are 

now. 

The first step toward that, one, is what we are trying to do here 

today, to call in experts to present testimony on the horrific situaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
2

tion in North Korea where political prisoners serve as virtual 

slaves, where starvation is used as a political weapon, and where 

religious believers, Christians in particular, are imprisoned, tortured and killed with such ferocity that some say it amounts to 

genocide. 

In the past, and this is probably I think the sixth or seventh 

hearing that I have had on human rights in North Korea or the 

lack of them, we have heard from people, especially women who 

have been trafficked, who had made their way into China and then 

were sent back, involuntarily repatriated by the Chinese Government, only to be sent to a gulag where they were tortured and in 

many cases executed for leaving the country. 

So seeking to gain some liberty they ended up first being sex 

trafficked and then secondly exterminated and killed by a barbaric 

regime. Unfortunately, today’s world’s attention is distracted by 

manifold crises which seem almost to overwhelm us, and we will 

enumerate just a few. 

The breathtaking collapse in progress of the Maliki regime in 

Iraq, which we had supported at the cost of so much American 

blood and treasure, various humanitarian catastrophes in Africa, 

most notably the Central African Republic and South Sudan, which 

was the subject of a resolution passed just a few minutes ago, but 

also the presence of violent Islamist movements such as Boko 

Haram. I was just in Nigeria and saw the devastating impacts 

again of what that terrorist organization does to innocent people. 

And, of course, al-Shabaab in the major nation of Kenya where 

they have been hitting most recently. 

The ongoing tensions in Ukraine, as a restive Russia seeks to reassert the imperial hegemony over neighboring states and clashes 

in the South China Sea as an increasingly bellicose China makes 

a gambit to become a maritime power and fill a perceived vacuum. 

We have always lived in a wounded world, but today the tourniquets required to stop all the bleeding the world over would tax 

even the most compassionate of souls. 

Yet it is precisely this exhaustion of compassion that we must 

fight against. Compassion fatigue is not a luxury that we can afford and we must summon the necessary conviction to address the 

sufferings of the beleaguered people of North Korea. 

We will have testifying today an eyewitness to the barbarity of 

North Korea’s cruel regime, a defector from North Korea who was 

born in a total control zone—political prison camp and he will give 

us an unsettling firsthand account of exactly what he experienced. 

The torture he endured and not simply physical torture, as horrific as that was, but was a psychological barbarity and such ruthlessness that once you have heard what he underwent your imaginations will forever be affected. 

Members of this subcommittee are no strangers to the brutality 

of starvation in many parts of the world, particularly in Africa. But 

today they will hear stories of starvation by design, how the denial 

of food is used as an instrument of wide scale torture. 

We will also hear about a North Korean nuclear program that 

goes beyond the headlines. Yet we do know that North Korea, in 

its quest for nuclear weapons, threatens to destabilize the world. 

But what many of us did not know and what we will hear today 

3

is the extent to which the North Korea nuclear program is built 

upon the cadavers of its own people. 

The United Nations Commission of Inquiry report, as important 

as it was, never explored the full extent to which workers in uranium mines are exposed to high levels of radiation and how even 

the most basic concern for the safety needs of workers are routinely 

ignored. 

Finally, I want to call attention to H.R. 1771, the North Korea 

Sanctions Enforcement Act. It is my hope that Congress, both 

House and Senate, will take to heart the testimony that is presented today and with a renewed focus on North Korea’s human 

rights record pass this important legislation which takes a step for 

holding this rogue regime accountable for the sins committed 

against its own people. 

I, finally, just note parenthetically that we did invite Special 

Envoy Bob King. He is traveling. We will have him here as our 

Special Envoy for North Korean Human Rights Issues. 

His position was created as part of the North Korean Human 

Rights Act and we look forward to his testimony because he has 

worked very, very hard and I will just also remind my colleagues 

who were here he used to be the staff director for the Democratic 

side of the aisle for the Foreign Affairs Committee under Tom Lantos. 

So I yield to Ms. Bass. 

Ms. BASS. Okay. Chairman Smith, thank you for holding this 

hearing today. I would also like to thank our distinguished witnesses and I look forward to hearing your perspectives on the ongoing challenges to human rights in North Korea. 

I am also interested in hearing your perspective on what is ultimately at stake if efforts to address North Korea’s human rights 

abuses are not sufficiently managed. 

As we prepare to hear from today’s witnesses, I hope we can 

learn critical lessons from their experiences and use them to increase awareness and support for the improved protection of 

human rights in North Korea and across the globe. 

I am committed to working toward this end and look forward to 

working with my colleagues to find the most effective and sustainable solutions. 

Thank you very much and I yield back my time. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. Mr. Marino. 

Mr. MARINO. I have no——

Mr. SMITH. I would like to now welcome to the table Ambassador-at-Large for Human Rights of the Republic of Korea, Ambassador Lee. Lee Jong Hoon is the Republic of Korea’s Ambassadorat-Large for Human Rights. 

He is also a member of the faculty of at Yonsei University where 

he directs its Centers on Korean and American studies. Ambassador Lee hosted a weekly television program on current affairs for 

5 years and his writings and commentaries appear frequently in 

Korean and international media. 

He has written widely on East Asian affairs with special reference to foreign policy and security issues. In the last Korean 

Presidential election he advised President Park on foreign and security affairs. 

4

He also serves as co-chair of Save NK, a nongovernmental organization dealing primarily with North Korean human rights issues. 

Mr. Ambassador, welcome to the committee and please provide 

us with your statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE LEE JONG HOON, AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, REPUBLIC OF 

KOREA 

Ambassador LEE. Good afternoon and thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

Ranking Member Bass and members of the subcommittee for giving me this opportunity to address you today. Before I begin I 

would ask that my written remarks be made part of the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, so ordered. 

Ambassador LEE. Thank you. I would also like to thank your 

staff as well as the staff and volunteers at Human Liberty, without 

whose hard work and dedication today’s briefing and hearing would 

not have taken place. 

In 1945, the sense of revulsion at what had taken place at 

Auschwitz, Treblinka, and other concentration camps was manifest 

not only in the Nuremberg trials but also in the adoption of the 

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

Together, these two events ushered in a sea of change in thinking about human rights. Subsequently, the community of nations 

has drafted and adopted a number of additional human rights instruments. 

Whether through sanctions or armed interventions, steps were 

taken against regimes that have blatantly violated the Universal 

Declaration’s ideals. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, apartheid in 

South Africa, and the genocide in Rwanda are cases in point. 

One country that has largely escaped the world’s notice, however, 

is North Korea, a country that is arguably the world’s worst violator of human rights. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, we are all gathered here today because we share a common goal as well as a concern. The concern, of course, is the unrelenting deprivation of fundamental human rights in North Korea. 

Our shared goal is to raise international awareness, to extend 

hope for those languishing under the near 7-decade-long tyranny of 

the Kim Dynasty. We wonder how long must this suffering go on. 

What will it take for the international community finally to say 

no more to the North Korean regime? Why can’t there be a red line 

for human rights as there is for weapons of mass destruction? In 

a normal state, national security is pursued to ensure human security. 

In North Korea, however, national security ensures only regime 

security. The state takes no responsibility to protect its own people. 

It is no wonder why North Koreans en masse resort to taking refuge across the border. 

Why? Because there is no hope in a country ruled by political 

prisons, torture, hunger, and public execution, completely void of 

the fundamental rights to an adequate standard of living, not to 

mention life. The question remains how to get at the main sole 

source of all problems—the Pyongyang regime itself. 

5

In March this year, the Commission of Inquiry on North Korea 

unveiled its final report at the UNHRC. The report represents a 

significant milestone in how the world views and deals with the 

human rights crisis in North Korea. 

The COI report characterizes North Korea as a totalitarian state 

that has committed serious human rights violations amounting to 

crimes against humanity. Since the release of the report, the international community has come together as never before on this 

issue. 

One outcome worth noting is the work of Human Liberty that actively seeks to create a coalition of partners and volunteers to sustain this momentum. 

Of particular significance is the commissioning of Hogan Lovells, 

an international law firm based in London, to conduct an independent evaluation of COI’s work pro bono. 

I would ask, Mr. Chairman, that the full crimes against humanity report be made part of the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, your request will be honored. Yes. 

Ambassador LEE. Thank you. I am here to make public for the 

very first time the commissioned work by Hogan Lovells, which unequivocally endorses the findings and recommendations of the COI. 

But Hogan Lovells goes a step further to charge that the North Korean regime may be guilty of the crime of genocide. 

How so? Because the North Korean regime has, with full intent, 

been involved in the extermination, at least in part, first, of the socalled hostile class; second, those who are adherents of religion, 

Christians in particular; and third, those who are not ethnically 

North Korean. 

With respect to the hostile class, North Korea has imposed what 

it calls the Songbun system—essentially, a caste system where the 

hostile class with suspect state loyalty is placed at the very bottom 

of the society. 

As such, a legitimate argument can be made that North Korea 

has effectively created a group with a separate cultural identity 

within the society and as such it constitutes a distinct ethnicity. 

On that basis, the extreme discrimination to which this class is 

subjected, especially the deprivation of food, constitutes a form of 

genocide. In this case, it will be genocide by attrition or starvation. 

Now, on religion, Christians are viewed by the North Korean regime as a political threat because the state does not allow any belief system other than its official state ideology called Juche, or 

self-reliance. 

Just recently, the regime arrested an American tourist by name 

of Jeffrey Fowle, who reportedly left his Bible in a hotel room. Last 

September, there were reports that 33 North Koreans associated 

with South Korean Baptist missionary Kim Jeung Uk were sentenced to death for helping to establish underground churches in 

North Korea. 

They were executed by firing squad on November 3rd of last year 

when coordinated public executions reportedly took place in seven 

cities across the country in front of thousands of spectators including children, who were forced to watch. If that is not genocide, I 

don’t know what is. 

6

The third category that are victims of genocide in North Korea 

are the non-Koreans. To the regime, any interracial marriage corrupts the purity of the society. 

As a result, the government brutally enforces a policy of forced 

abortion and even infanticide against mixed-race children, especially those with Chinese fathers. 

The Human Liberty report contends that an argument for genocide could be made on the basis that these mixed-race children who 

are victims of infanticide will qualify as a protected group under 

international law on racial and ethnic grounds. 

Considering the strict and narrow defines of the term genocide, 

the COI report was hesitant in charging the North Korean regime 

of genocide, suggesting instead that perhaps the term political 

genocide might be more applicable. 

The Human Liberty report prepared by Hogan Lovells, however, 

finds enough evidences to conclude that in North Korea genocide 

is taking place. 

During his presentation of the COI report, Chairman Michael 

Kirby said, ‘‘These are the ongoing crimes against humanity happening in the DPRK which our generation must tackle urgently 

and collectively. The rest of the world has ignored the evidence for 

too long. Now there is no excuse because now we know.’’

So the question remains, Mr. Chairman, now that we know what 

do we do? How can we provide the beacon of hope for those North 

Koreans desperately yearning for freedom? 

To bring about a real change, it takes courage and the political 

will to confront the Pyongyang regime. What is required is worldwide mobilization. 

Ending the human rights abuses in North Korea will require a 

global campaign reminiscent of the international anti-apartheid 

movement. U.S. House subcommittee hearings such as today’s can 

only boost such a global campaign. 

It matters, and I am deeply grateful, and that is why I flew 

12,000 kilometers today just to give this briefing, however short it 

may be. It is my way of thanking you and also letting you know 

that we are in this together. 

Thank you and God bless, and with that, Mr. Chairman and subcommittee, I will be pleased to answer any questions that you 

might have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Lee follows:]

7


88389d-1.eps
8


88389d-2.eps
9


88389d-3.eps
10


88389d-4.eps
11


88389d-5.eps
12


88389d-6.eps
13

Mr. SMITH. Ambassador Lee, thank you so very much for your 

extraordinary statement, your call for a global mobilization. You 

are absolutely right. I mean, this committee would concur with you. 

If this isn’t genocide, what is? 

You know, whole or in part this is almost whole, because of the 

numbers of people who are systematically exterminated. I regret 

that we have one vote on the floor of the House so we are going 

to have to take a very brief recess and then we will come back and 

I know we all have a number of questions that we would like. 

But thank you again for making your way here from the Republic of Korea, flying all night, and but above all thank you for your 

commitment to the people who are suffering unbearable and unspeakable agony in North Korea. We will stand in brief recess. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. SMITH. We will resume and Ambassador Lee, thank you 

again for your testimony. Just a few opening questions, if I could. 

First of all, on a note that is very near and dear to my heart I 

want to thank you for the work that you have done in your country 

on combating human trafficking. 

You know, as the author of the Trafficking Victims Protection 

Act, and I have worked with many of your lawmakers and have 

been to Seoul on trafficking missions, your laws are extraordinarily 

effective and, frankly, I think we are working side by side, not only 

there and here, but also around the world, to combat that modernday slavery. So thank you for that leadership because it is very 

real. 

Now, on the issue of North Korea, I wonder if you could just answer a couple of questions. You know, you have called for a mobilization. I wonder if you can suggest to us what you think might be 

the best leverage. 

I know the U.N. General Assembly frequently takes up the case 

as does the Human Rights Council. I don’t think that United Nations Genocide Convention’s panel of experts has done it. 

It seems to me, as you pointed out, this is genocide. That would 

be a very appropriate place to at least take this up whether or not 

they are signatories or not but certainly the Human Rights Council 

needs to do something more than what it does, which is like an 

obligatory denunciation and it doesn’t seem to go further than that. 

Everyone says okay, North Korea is bad, doing horrible things to 

its people, slaughtering. But I think your idea of a mobilization 

where more people, parliamentarians, congresses, the European 

Union, everyone starts really focusing. 

It has been frustrating for me and members of our panel that 

even in the Six-Party Talks human rights always get thrown to the 

back, if they are there at all, and it seems to me, and I have said 

this so many times, there needs to be integration of the human 

rights issue with the nuclear issue so that every time one is spoken 

about the other is raised equally because if you can’t treat your 

own people with dignity and respect how can we trust and verify, 

particularly since on-site inspections are very difficult to accomplish in a nuclear agreement. 

Human rights are integral to everything, in my opinion, so your 

point about the mobilization, the red line, thank you for that, that 

is a very important statement that you made. 

14

Let me just ask you as well just to explain maybe for all of us 

about Juche. I read a book on Juche years ago and it was written 

by a Christian who said you Westerners really don’t understand 

that whole principle and how it is integrated with this morphed 

communist ideology of the Kims. 

Could you maybe elaborate for us more on the genocide, what leverage we might have and what haven’t we done, what else can be 

done. I think integration into the Six-Party Talks when they do 

occur ought to be a part of this. But Juche, if you could also speak 

to that as well. 

Ambassador LEE. Well, thank you for those questions, Mr. Chairman. I really think the COI report really opened up a new chapter 

in dealing with the North Korean human rights crisis situation. 

Maybe 3 or 4 years ago we would not have imagined putting in a 

single sentence Kim Jong Il, well, now, of course, his son, Kim Jong 

Un, the leader of North Korea, the International Criminal Court, 

or prosecution. 

I mean, and yet we are liberally and more often than not, talking 

about these things. So that is a huge leap forward, I believe. Of 

course, with the prosecutory mechanisms at the U.N., it is not 

going to happen overnight. 

It is a long drawn-out process. It is complicated. It is costly. I understand that. But just the fact that we are now talking about 

these things is a very positive development in dealing with North 

Korean human rights issues. 

Now, with regards to the genocide that you are asking about, of 

course, Chairman Kirby in the COI report, as I mentioned in my 

briefing, felt that, well, crimes against humanity is sufficient for 

their mandated purpose. 

There is probably evidence for political genocide but as you know 

genocide in international law has a very narrow scope, definition 

that you just have to fit things into. 

But as I was explaining, Hogan Lovells, a major law firm in London, these are lawyers and they have given it a very careful study 

and felt that there is enough evidence to warrant genocide. 

Now, that is crimes against humanity plus genocide. These are 

the two worst possible crimes in international law that there can 

be. 

So I think it is significant that we start to delve into this issue 

of genocide as well, on top of crimes against humanity, because we 

are just only beginning, and when I speak of an international campaign and movement it is about the international public opinion. 

In order for there to be international public opinion there has to 

be a much more increased awareness of what is going on so that 

the United Nations, particularly the Security Council, understands 

that there is this demand in the international public opinion that 

something needs to be done in North Korea. Let there be pressure 

on China and Russia. Let them think twice before they veto anything down. 

Mr. SMITH. Is it a referral to the ICC that you contemplate as 

well or have you thought about maybe a specialized court like we 

had for Sierra Leone, Rwanda and the court in Yugoslavia? 

Ambassador LEE. Well, I mean, yes. I mean, these are all things 

that is, of course, recommended by the COI, by Justice Kirby and 

15

his team, that it should be referred because, of course, as you 

know, North Korea is not a party to the Rome Statute. 

It should be the Security Council that is making the referral. If 

not, the ad hoc tribunal as we know of the former Yugoslavia. It 

could be a joint tribunal, as in the case of Cambodia. 

But that is probably highly unlikely because the North Korean 

regime will not agree to such a thing. But, you know, as I said, it 

is going to be difficult journey but we are now talking about it. Let 

us increase the awareness. 

Let us increase the education of the young people so that more 

people go to SMS, Twitter and talk about these issues, maybe even 

in China. 

I think there are a growing number of netizens in China who are 

saying what is our government doing with this rogue state? Why 

are we doing this at the embarrassment of our people? Why are we 

being patron to this country that is an embarrassment to the 

world? 

So I think the international awareness for education, publicity is 

very, very important. So that is what I am basically talking about 

when I am saying that we should increase the campaign and mobilize the international campaign. 

Juche is the is about, well, literally self-reliance. They don’t need 

anyone; they are self-sufficient, that this is a paradise that they 

have created. Far from it, of course. North Korea basically has two 

tools for regime survival and make no mistake, their only interest 

is regime survival. 

To deal with the outside world, weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons. They need to hold on to this and make it because 

with the nuclear weapons basically they are saying nobody touch 

us and we can do whatever we want and we are not going to have 

the United States or, you know, United Kingdom or whoever, South 

Korea or even the United Nations, telling us what to do or what 

not to do. Internally, it is the human rights violations. 

That is their tool to subdue any sort of anti-government thoughts 

or any movement to challenge the regime. So these are two most 

useful tools for the regime: Nuclear weapons and human rights violations. 

One for external, one for internal, and it is not going to change 

and therefore the pressure has to be very, very firm. We can’t just 

pat them on the back and hope that things will change. It will 

never change. 

It hasn’t changed for nearly seven decades and therefore this sort 

of hearing and while we talk about putting it into action is so important and in Korea, I might just add, the fact that the U.N.’s 

field office structure will be established in Korea is another very 

significant development in my country’s dealings with the North 

Korean human rights issue. 

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Bass. 

Ms. BASS. Well, first of all, let me thank you again for traveling 

all the way from Korea to provide your testimony today. I wanted 

to understand because I am aware of the man that is in prison now 

because he left a Bible in his hotel room and I just wanted to know 

if you could talk to me a little bit about tourism. I don’t quite understand tourism in North Korea. Who goes? 

16

What do they do when they are there? I mean, what kind of tourism is there? Because you hear about it. I mean, I think the last 

person that was in prison had been there. Wasn’t he getting ready 

to leave and they pulled him off a bus or something? 

Ambassador LEE. Yes. Yes. 

Ms. BASS. That was the one with the Bible. So who is going and 

what are they doing there? 

Ambassador LEE. I don’t think there are a whole lot of tourists. 

I don’t have the statistics but the most active tourist activity was 

the tourism of Kun-Dong Mountain, which was part of South Korea’s effort to enhance inter-Korean relations hoping that things 

like that, Kun-Dong Mountain tourism as well as building the 

Kaesong Industrial Park would somehow——

Ms. BASS. Right. That is right on the border, right? 

Ambassador LEE. That is right. But, of course, you know that one 

of the South Korean tourists, a woman in her 50s, was taking a 

stroll early in the morning and she was shot down——

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Ambassador LEE [continuing]. Because apparently they are 

claiming that she actually crossed beyond the beachfront where she 

wasn’t supposed to be. I mean, this is a tourist and thereafter it 

shut down. So——

Ms. BASS. Okay. 

Ambassador LEE [continuing]. I mean, if you are asking a question as to, you know, who goes there I wouldn’t, that is for sure. 

Ms. BASS. No, I mean, but, you know, you hear about that and 

that is when you hear about these folks being stopped. I have been 

there to the—right to the border, you know, to the DMZ and so 

that was a few years ago, maybe 3 years ago, and I know it was 

shut down then. Are you saying that it still hasn’t been opened up? 

Ambassador LEE. No. 

Ms. BASS. The industrial area has not been opened up? 

Ambassador LEE. No. No. Kaesong Industrial Park, of course, 

continues but Kun-Dong Mountain tourism has not reopened. 

Ms. BASS. I see. I see. And then the ideology that you described 

I just want to make sure that I—the self-reliance. I don’t know how 

it is said in Korean. Could you elaborate a little more on that? 

I understand the basic premise. It is, you know, the Korean people are supposed to be independent and not rely on anybody else, 

how the regime survives when folks are starving and are obviously 

not self-reliant and then—so I wanted to know if you could expand 

a little bit more on that ideology and how it plays out. 

And then also are there any internal underground struggles that 

are happening? You hear of people escaping but I don’t know if 

there is any underground movements that are happening within 

North Korea. 

Ambassador LEE. Yes. I mean, you know, it is the most closed 

society in the world so information, intelligence, is very hard to 

come by. 

We do time to time hear about explosions where the Kim family 

train might have passed through. But I think the frequency is very, 

very small and North Korea is one of the highly monitored societies. 

17

Even those North Koreans—I mean, you go out abroad, you go 

to New York, the U.N., or other parts where North Korean diplomats are that you will able to meet or restaurants that they run, 

they are never alone. 

They are always in twosomes or threesomes because everyone is 

watching over his or her shoulders and therefore even within North 

Korea the monitoring mechanism is so severe and intense that it 

is probably very, very difficult to anticipate the kind of Jasmine 

Revolution that we have seen in other parts of the world. 

But nothing is impossible. I am sure that deep inside the people 

of North Korea have this desire and that is why, you know, what 

I am saying is let us find ways. Let us find ways to somehow help 

these people to expand on their desire whether it is by sending 

USBs. I don’t know——

Ms. BASS. US what? 

Ambassador LEE. USBs about the outside world—the information. Chairman Kirby was recently in Korea to visit and he was 

asking the Korean Government people about how to get the translated version of the COI report so that North Koreans can read it, 

how we get it to North Korea. 

So sending information to North Korea I think will be a very, 

very important task going forward so that people know that more 

people understand what their situation is in light of the outside 

world. 

Ms. BASS. Yes. It is just hard to see how the regime falls considering it has been seven decades. You know what I mean? Short of 

a massive invasion somewhere because they are blocked off from 

the rest of the world. 

We know starvation is going on but yet they continue. What is 

your guesstimate as to the number of people that are in labor 

camps? 

Ambassador LEE. I think, you know, anywhere between 120,000 

to as many as 200,000. But, again, you know, when we are talking 

about these political prison camps it is not like prisons where you 

might have 200 or 500 people. 

I am sure you will get a much better testimony from Mr. Shin. 

But we are talking about, like, 50,000 people—people who are born 

into these prison camps and dying. These are towns. It is a different world that they have created—a world of hell. 

Now, and it is important that you mentioned this point about 

when it falls. It has been there despite all the talks about economic 

difficulties that it has been—the regime has survived for seven decades. 

Well, I believe that in particular China’s role is very, very important. North Korea, despite its resilience in a bad way, is very much 

dependent on China in terms of energy, in terms of food. So if, I 

believe, China made the decision to, for example, really cut off all 

financial transactions, if it really used its energy and food leverage 

on North Korea, it will change. 

I am not saying that it will collapse. It could. But certainly it will 

change because the regime cannot survive. So I think that is where 

the focus ought to be. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Bass. Mr. Marino. 

18

Mr. MARINO. Thank you, Chairman. Good afternoon, Ambassador. 

Ambassador LEE. Good afternoon. 

Mr. MARINO. I want to talk to you for a moment about the 

United States’ role in the world and particularly in the United Nations. 

Everybody comes to the—when there is an issue, even if they are 

not favorable to the United States, they call on the United States 

for assistance whether it is natural disasters or manmade, and that 

is what we do in the United States. We help people around the 

world and we try to resolve problems. 

But I am not seeing very much or hearing very much out of the 

United Nations, particularly the Secretary-General who, by the 

way, is Korean, and he assumed the Secretary-General position I 

think it was about 2007. He was reelected in 2011 until 2016. 

He was Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade for and other highranking positions for almost 37 years. His wife, Madam Yoo, is devoted to women’s and children’s health issues, autism, violence 

against women, et cetera. 

But yet when I hear the Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon, speak, 

the last issue I heard concerning Korea was in April 2013 and he 

was on a CNN interview and he had a couple of sentences where 

he scolded the leader of North Korea. 

In August 2013, he had a press conference and most of it was 

on Syria, nothing about North Korea, and if you look on his bio and 

his major initiatives and any other statements that he makes pursuant to speaking to the media he starts out with things like climate change. They are calling it climate change now. 

It used to be global warming and then since we had a couple of 

harsh winters they figured that global warming thing isn’t working 

so now we will go to climate change. 

Next week who knows what it will be. Economic upheaval, food, 

energy, water and strengthening the U.N. Give me your assessment of what the Secretary-General is doing or, more importantly, 

what he is not doing concerning North Korea. 

Ambassador LEE. Well, that is a tough question. 

Mr. MARINO. You are darn right it is. 

Ambassador LEE. Yes. It really is a tough question and I think 

he really has to walk a fine line because if you—if he in fact focus 

too much on the Korean Peninsula issues he may get criticism from 

the outside world that he is putting the national identity above and 

beyond his sort of U.N. status. 

So there is sort of a trap, if you will. Now, having said that, on 

the other side of the spectrum, as you have pointed out, maybe he 

is not doing enough. 

I cannot pass judgment on that issue but he does have to—it is 

a world government, in a way. I mean, he does have to handle so 

many different issues so—yes. 

Mr. MARINO. I understand and I appreciate your position. But I 

can pass judgment, given the fact that United States is the largest 

financial contributor to the U.N. 

The Secretary-General rarely comes to an agreement with the 

United States and I don’t think it shows favoritism. When people 

ask me why did I make a particular vote here in Congress that was 

19

a hard vote, that is why I came here, to make the hard votes and 

to try and improve the quality of life for all Americans. 

I think the Secretary-General falls in that category as well and 

I can’t think of anyplace else on Earth other than in one or two 

countries on the continent of Africa where such travesties are taking place and I think that he should be speaking out more about 

this. 

I think he should put together a task force. They are always putting together some kind of a committee or task force at the U.N. 

I don’t know what they do but they have task forces. We never 

hear from them once the committee is put together, and I think it 

is due time that South Korea and other countries put the pressure 

on the Secretary-General to address what it taking place in North 

Korea. 

I do it all the time. My chairman does it all the time. Many 

members of the House and the Senate do it all the time. 

But we don’t seem to get the support and the cooperation from 

the U.N. and I think that is a place where we can have a tremendous impact on what is taking place in North Korea. 

China is an entirely different issue. They are funding North 

Korea. There is no question about that. Without the funds coming 

from China, North Korea would collapse. 

I think that is a political move that the Chinese decided to take 

because they know that North Korea is a thorn not only in the side 

of the United States but around the world and to keep controversy 

going. 

But it is about time that more world leaders step up to the plate 

with the United States and I think the U.N. should lead that concerning North Korea as well, particularly given the fact that the 

Secretary-General is Korean. 

Ambassador LEE. I will take that as a comment, not a question. 

Mr. MARINO. I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. I yield to the chairman of the 

Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice on the Judiciary Committee but also the chairman of the International Religious 

Freedom Caucus here in the House, Trent Franks from Arizona. 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 

Ambassador, for being here with us. You know those of us that 

have a deep concern about religious freedom often try to, I think, 

accurately build a construct of where there is no religious freedom 

then totalitarianism and a lot of human rights violations soon follow. 

Where you have religious freedom it seems like there is much 

greater embrace of human rights in general as well. I guess the 

first thing that I would ask you if you would just comment on that 

general concept—do you find that to be a general pattern that 

where you have religious freedom you often times also have other 

human rights protections? 

Ambassador LEE. I am not quite sure if I understand your question. In North Korea? 

Mr. FRANKS. In North Korea or anywhere else in the world. I 

mean, you don’t have religious freedom in North Korea, do you? 

Ambassador LEE. No, of course not. 

20

Mr. FRANKS. But and you don’t have human rights. North Korea 

fits the matrix I am talking about. But generally is it not your belief that where religious freedom is restricted then oftentimes other 

human rights abuses follow? 

Ambassador LEE. Absolutely. The causal linkage is quite manifest. 

Mr. FRANKS. Yes. I didn’t mean to ask the obvious question but 

it always seems to be important to get that on the record because 

religious freedom seems to portend almost all other freedoms. It 

seems to be the cornerstone of freedom in general, certainly here 

in America and I think across the world. 

I serve on the Armed Services Committee as well and one of the 

great concerns that some of us on that committee have, of course, 

is North Korea’s nuclear weapons capability and you are, in my 

judgment, correct that they find themselves almost impervious to 

diplomatic pressure because of this checkmate capability that they 

have. 

But we have sanctioned them for 50 years to starvation and they 

have tested three times and I think that calls into question the efficacy of sanctioning countries to reduce their nuclear weapons pursuit in the first place. That is another hearing. 

But do you believe that there is anything that you would suggest 

that we could do to somehow take this terrible capability they have 

out of their hands so that there wouldn’t be this impossible effort 

to try to convince them to restore human rights and other fundamental freedoms? 

Ambassador LEE. The nuclear capability of North Korea is obviously a serious, serious challenge not only to the peninsula but 

Northeast Asian security environment and also to the nonproliferation regime. 

But the simple answer to your question really comes back down 

to China—the role of China. Yes, you are right. We do now have 

four U.N. Security Council resolutions with sanctions—economic 

sanctions on North Korea—three for the nuclear tests and one for 

the long-range missile. 

I have no doubt that North Korea is probably, with its nuclear 

weapons and the delivery capability, is probably targeting some of 

your forward bases in Guam, maybe in Japan, and elsewhere. 

Mr. FRANKS. And they are moving toward missile capability to 

put in their range the entire United States so I think that for us 

to suggest that North Korea represents no national security threat 

to the United States is ludicrous, at least within the short term 

and I know that is not what you are suggesting. 

Ambassador LEE. Yes. Well, I don’t know about the mainland but 

certainly, as I said, you know, your forward bases in the Asia Pacific anyways. But yes, for the past 50 years, as you were saying, 

North Korea, irrespective of the sanctions, it has continued with 

the development. 

But one has to ask the question of if those sanctions really been 

effective, meaning have we had everyone on board in effectively applying those sanctions and the answer, of course, is no. 

And even my government has, I think, to be taking blame for 

some of that as well because as we tried to improve the inter-KoVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
21

rean relations there is cash going into North Korea at some junctures. 

China even today, despite its seeming commitment to the new 

sanctions, I believe the economic activities continue to go on. So if 

we really, as I said, have the political will to make a change I cannot say for sure that we can actually convince North Korea to give 

up its nuclear. 

That is going to be really tough. But in order to at least get to 

that stage where they might contemplate it seriously, I think one 

has to, particularly your government, has to find a way to deal 

with the Beijing government as to what will it take for Beijing to 

really not just going to the extent of oh, we will hold these SixParty Talks and resume the Six-Party Talks and try to resolve this 

peacefully. 

Well, what have we had over the years? The first nuclear test, 

second, third. This year it seemed in the spring that North Korea 

as poised for the fourth nuclear test. 

I think we will have that. I have no doubt. It is just a question 

of timing. So unless China comes on board and somebody convinces 

China to do so, it is going to be a really, really difficult task. So 

I think the focus has to be China. 

Mr. FRANKS. And, you know, given the fact that China probably 

is not broken-hearted over the fact that North Korea represents 

sort of a stumbling block to the United States and to the world, it 

is probably unlikely that they are going to have some major epiphany in that regard. 

If you had one other factor besides China that the United States 

should pursue, and incidentally I am convinced that, you know, 

when we were in a position to have prevented North Korea from 

gaining nuclear weapons capabilities, we paid the ransom but we 

didn’t secure the hostage under the Clinton years, and consequently now that they have the nuclear weapons capabilities 

very, very difficult to get them to give it up. 

And I think that we should consider that in the instance of Iran 

because we may have another rogue state in the world. Well, we 

do now, but another nuclear-armed rogue state which really puts 

a different pall on it completely. 

But if we had one other factor besides China, and I agree with 

you completely that China is the key, but I am not sure that we 

should hold our breath until they change their mind. 

If we had one other area of pursuit which do you think would 

be our most efficacious line of either diplomacy or pressure to bring 

North Korea in line with human rights considerations and maybe 

someday hopefully see them disinvited from the nuclear arms community? 

Ambassador LEE. Well, I remember back in the 1980s the antiapartheid campaigns very strong throughout the world on campuses of your country. On U.S. American college campuses there 

were movements to boycott some of the businesses, companies like, 

I believe, like Nestle not to buy their products—those companies 

that is doing business or have invested in South Africa. Now, of 

course, North Korea is no South Africa. 

There is not a whole lot of businesses that they have invested in. 

But still there are, I believe, some commercial entities, probably 

22

Chinese and elsewhere, who do business with North Korea could 

be targeted, I believe. 

So that is not a, you know, government to government thing but 

I am talking about commercial activities—banking activities, financial areas. I think there has to be greater focus on these activities 

because, I mean, there is no other way. We have tried engagement. 

I mean, I am not here trying to be overly firm in dealing with 

North Korea. If we hadn’t tried before to engage North Korea and 

to provide goodwill and provide all sorts of financial and economic 

packages we have done that. We called that the Sunshine Policy 

back in the ’90s. 

It hasn’t worked. Despite all that, despite billions of dollars going 

into North Korea, they put on the front as if they are going to 

maybe give up nuclear weapons. 

Mr. FRANKS. Yes. 

Ambassador LEE. They go through the motion of Six-Party Talks 

and all that. But behind the back, of course, what they are doing 

is building it up. So it doesn’t work. So unfortunately this is the 

only way to really, really focus on where it hurts the most on North 

Korea and we have to find that. 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, I think it says a great deal about South Korea 

the way you have had a sense of stability in the region, and I have 

been to South Korea and the DMZ and observed your growing capacity and it is really—it has been an honor to see you here and 

I echo your thoughts just here finally that, you know, whenever we 

appease despotism it almost always backfires. 

I mean, what the little verse says—what is it, no one gains when 

freedom fails, the best of men rot in filthy jails and those who cried 

‘‘Appease, appease’’ are shot by those they tried to please. It always 

seems to work out that way, doesn’t it? 

So thank you, Mr. Ambassador, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me just ask you a few final questions and then 

yield to my friend, Mr. Marino, for some additional questions. Has 

it gotten worse since Kim Jong Il’s death and Kim Jong Un has 

come in? Has it deteriorated in North Korea? 

Secondly, as Andrew Natsios points out in his testimony, April 

17th was the first discussion of the DPRK’s human rights issues 

among Security Council members, informal as it was the first. 

Is that a result of the COI? Is it a reaction to it and do you see 

that as, you know, the beginning of an embrace there and, again, 

the hope would be that some referral would be made to the ICC. 

Ambassador LEE. April 17? Which one are we talking about? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes. That would be the Security Council. When Security Council members spoke——

Ambassador LEE. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH [continuing]. And discussed——

Ambassador LEE. The Arria? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, the Arria. Third would be on refugees. I have 

met with Antonio Gutierrez many times on the rapprochement 

issue of forcing North Koreans back from China, and as a signatory 

to the refugee convention China has serious obligations that they 

are breaching with impunity by forcibly sending people back. 

As you know, if a woman is pregnant and I—we heard from a 

German physician here—I held a hearing a number of years ago—

23

who was honored first by Pyongyang and then went and came out 

and told the world what was going on. He told stories and brought 

pictures. 

They were—they were representations of what they do to women 

in prisons including putting boards on their abdomen, on pregnant 

women, and guards standing, jumping up and down to kill their 

unborn children, another hideous form of forced abortion and, of 

course, it very often kills the woman as well—a horrible torture. 

And yet he said these kinds of things go on as well as other abject cruelty that the world needs to know about. Your thoughts on 

the forced repatriation issue? Why doesn’t China, why doesn’t 

UNHCR? 

There are actionable mechanisms that they have that they could 

employ to try to ensure that they live up to their obligations, they 

being the People’s Republic of China. 

On the issue of South Korean media, on one trip to Seoul I was 

told by a number of parliamentarians that the South Korean media 

does not focus the way we would have thought they would on the 

atrocities committed by Pyongyang. 

Is that changing? Does the COI change that at all in terms of 

a new and fresh look, that a lot of the young people don’t even have 

a clue in the Republic of Korea about what is going on north? 

And let me also just ask you about freedom broadcasting. Free 

North Korea Radio, VOA Korean Service, Radio Free Asia are 

broadcasting. Is it getting through? Is it heavily jammed or 

jammed at all? If you might speak to that and that would be it. 

Ambassador LEE. Those are a lot of questions to——

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Ambassador LEE. Yes. The April 17th Arria meeting I think is 

very significant, and Justice Kirby was there, and of the 15 Security Council members, 13 were present. 

Of course, the two obvious absences were from Russia and China, 

and of the 13, nine voted favorably to the Security Council referral 

to the ICC. That doesn’t mean the remaining four were against. 

They just didn’t vote in favor. So I think the mood is changing, 

and this is something that Mr. Marino was earlier talking about, 

the role of the U.N., the U.N. is very slow to move but at the same 

time it is moving and after all COI is a U.N. endeavor and finding. 

So slowly but surely it is moving toward a direction that we 

would like. The forced repatriation is a very, very serious issue and 

this is something that, again, COI points out. 

I think it is very bold that the COI—and I was there in Geneva 

on March 17th when Chairman Kirby was addressing the U.N. 

Human Rights Council and the Chinese delegation was just there 

and he made it very clear. 

I mean, at the U.N. it seems that, you know, that China is of 

such a stature—has such a stature—enjoys such a stature that 

they are very diplomatic, I believe overly diplomatic. And yet, Justice Kirby was very direct in pointing to the Chinese that, as you 

know, that the—repatriating North Korean defectors back to North 

Korea, knowing fully well that they will be subjected to some kind 

of penalty—political prison camp, torture, maybe even execution—

is aiding and abetting crimes against humanity and that is a very 

serious charge. 

24

You were earlier mentioning human trafficking and as you know 

a significant number of the North Korean defectors are women and 

children, and one of the women that we have interviewed is of the 

opinion that maybe as many as eight out of 10 are subjected to—

I mean, they are vulnerable—they are subjected to rape and all 

sorts of unthinkable doings—damages to them. 

So why is China doing that? Probably it feels that if it were more 

lenient on this matter that there will be a mass exodus that they 

could not possibly handle, number one. 

Maybe it will lead to a situation like East Germany just before 

the unification, that this will really be a politically damaging thing 

for the North Korean regime. 

What that means—what that suggests is that for some reason 

Beijing still holds firm to the political calculus that propping up 

North Korea is still more advantageous to China than not. So that 

balance has to tip at some point and I believe that it will, but it 

hasn’t as of yet. 

So unfortunately China may be still captured in this, you know, 

Cold War calculus of how North Korea may still play this buffer 

role—buffer zone and that it serves a useful purpose and that is 

why it is turning a blind eye to this issue of human rights violations. 

But I think increasingly with time this is going to be a huge burden on China because China is a G2. It wants to play, you know, 

a global leadership role. 

It wants to compete with the United States. How can you have 

that moral leadership in the global context being a patron to a 

country that commits crimes against humanity, genocide? It cannot 

sustain. So I think we are getting to the point where balance might 

tip. 

So I think we have to keep pushing so that that balance could 

be tipped. I don’t know what else. Freedom broadcasts—yes, there 

are jams. There are restrictions on. The Far East—it is a Christian 

broadcast—Far East Broadcasting does get into North Korea but I 

think that is another area that we really have to look into to open 

more. 

Mr. SMITH. If I could just add one thing. If you would consider 

this in your calculus. The Chinese Government is missing as many 

as 100 million girls—women because of their forced abortion policy, 

the one-child-per-couple policy and the emphasis on sex-selection 

abortion. 

I have been arguing with our own TIP office for 10 years and 

they finally did it last year, and matter of fact they did it in their 

narrative in the Trafficking in Persons Report about China, that 

the magnet as to why so many bride sellers ‘‘traffickers’’—sex traffickers are bringing women across the border or when they make 

it across the border on their own volition seeking relative freedom, 

relative with a capital R, they are trafficked because of the dearth 

of girls. 

They simply have been exterminated one by one so the one-childper-couple policy is the largest magnet ever on the face of the earth 

and that goes equally for those areas that are adjacent to North 

Korea. And I have had three hearings where we have had women 

who have been trafficked who told that story. 

25

These were the lucky ones, obviously, who made their way to 

safety and out of China as well and, you know, they were sold as 

brides, each and every one of them that testified. I think your other 

calculus is right on point as well. But I think that needs to be in 

there as well. Mr. Marino. 

Mr. MARINO. I thank the chairman. 

Ambassador, the U.S.’ relationship with the Republic of Korea is 

very important to us. You are a very true ally, a very good friend 

and I can only see that relationship between the United States and 

the Republic of Korea becoming even more strong and we look forward to that. 

But what do you think that together the United States and the 

Republic of Korea can do concerning China? You know, China has 

quite a few human rights violations. Just look when they build the 

Three Gorges Dam they displaced at least 11⁄2 million people. 

It is probably—you know, it is about 10 percent of their population. The environmental effects, the ecological impacts of the dam 

that the built has to be tested yet, it is not trending well. 

As my chairman spoke about, what is taking place with unborn 

females. There is a great deal here concerning human rights and 

the environment but what do we do together, the U.S. and the Republic of Korea, to have a positive impact on China concerning 

North Korea? 

Ambassador LEE. Well, first of all, I believe the ROK–U.S. relations today are very healthy. Your President visited, very recently, 

Korea. Although it was a very short visit, it was a very successful 

visit. 

The press conference that President Obama and President Park 

Geun Hye had together was extremely constructive and visionary. 

They for the first time actually in the press conference talked about 

human rights in North Korea, which is a positive. 

They also decided to renegotiate the timetable for the transfer of 

operational control, thereby delaying the abolition of the Combined 

Forces Command which is also a very positive development because 

why would you want to, you know, do away with a system that has 

been very effective as a deterrent at a time of maximum threat, 

which is now. So that is a big developments. 

They have also talked about the possibility of somehow making 

the missile defense system interoperable. So a lot of things were 

discussed which were very, very positive so those are good developments. 

Now, with China I don’t think that South Korea and the United 

States have any interest in somehow ganging up on China. China 

is a very important partner for both the United States and South 

Korea. 

Our trade with China is larger than our trade with Japan and 

the United States put together. We have huge foreign direct investments in China. It is a very important partner. 

So I think what we can do together is somehow continue to try 

to convince Beijing that, and this is something that President Park 

Guen Hye has very often referred to the importance of reunification. She talks about the reunification bonanza. 

She talks about reunification in Dresden. So reunification is 

very, very important and I think it falls on South Korea in parVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
26

ticular. But if we can do that with the United States so much the 

better. 

Trying to convince China that reunification—peaceful and free 

reunification is beneficial to China—that with reunification China’s 

long-held hope for the successful economic development of the 

northeast region for three provinces is possible with the reunification of Korea and that, you know, it really—China stands to gain 

by a reunified Korea under South Korea’s leadership, economically, 

and if that is something that we can convince China together 

with—between these two countries I think that is where our focus 

ought to lie. 

Mr. MARINO. I visited the Republic of Korea about a year ago for 

several days. Had a wonderful time. The Korean people treated us 

like royalty. 

But I think also together with what you said concerning what we 

need to do with China I think the Republic of Korea and the 

United States need to put some type of pressure on the United Nations to become more vocal and more involved in this. So thank 

you, sir. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so much. Mr. Meadows. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

coming to testify. I think, you know, I am going to be brief with 

my questions. My apologies for just getting in. We had another 

hearing on the Taliban release and so I just came from there. 

But from a human rights perspective, how do we—as Members 

of Congress how to we best at times put forth the carrot to address 

those issues and at times maybe the stick on addressing those 

issues? And hearings like this—do they really matter? 

I guess the question is the chairman has been very deliberate 

and tenacious in his willingness to address this issue. I have supported him wholeheartedly, continue to do so, and yet there are 

times where we wonder, you know, are people listening—are we 

really making the efforts or where are we missing the boat and 

should we use more carrot or more stick? 

And I don’t know if that makes sense or not but I would like you 

to comment on that. 

Ambassador LEE. Well, earlier I have made a comment on the 

carrot part and how we have actually tried a very large carrot in 

dealing with North Korea. Unfortunately, it has not worked. 

All it has led to was more nuclear tests and continuing violations 

of human rights, and things stand at that. 

Mr. MEADOWS. And why do you think—and why do you think 

that is? I mean, is it that they don’t know how good the carrot 

tastes or they just don’t see? I mean, is it hard to get the hope or 

where they realize how wonderful the potential benefit could be, 

that there is a lack of believability? I mean, what is your perspective on that? 

Ambassador LEE. Well, under the normal case——

Mr. MEADOWS. I don’t think that is the case but I do——

Ambassador LEE [continuing]. Under normal circumstances, 

under normal leadership what you suggest might apply but this is 

not a normal state. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

27

Ambassador LEE. This is not normal leadership. Their goal is not 

to see to the welfare of the people. Otherwise, it would not have 

lasted nearly seven decades as such. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

Ambassador LEE. Right. Their interest, their single sole purpose 

is national policies for regime survival and they have done that and 

they are happy with that and they are not going to change and 

they are going to use the two most effective tools, as I was mentioning earlier, to continue to sustain this. One, of course, is the 

nuclear weapons to deal with the outside world, your country in 

particular. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

Ambassador LEE. Two, internally, I mean, North Koreans are 

tough people, right, so for decades to suppress them as such they 

have to rely on a very, very harsh suppressive and oppressive policy and violation of human rights starts with that and it ends with 

that. 

So unfortunately, you know, what we think conventionally this 

is what is best for North Korea. I mean, wouldn’t they want to 

really improve the society so that people won’t starve to death and 

all that. Well, that is what we think. That is not the way of thinking of the North Korean regime. 

They are quite happy with the way things are as long as the regime is intact. In the mid-1990s as many as a staggering 2 million 

to 3 million people died from starvation and they were okay with 

that as long as the regime survives. 

So that is why we have to take into account. They understand 

what is at stake in terms of carrots and sticks and we have tried, 

you know, billions of dollars of, you know, support and supply and 

assistance to North Korea from South Korea. Unfortunately, it 

hasn’t worked. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So, Mr. Ambassador, would you—would you say 

then, I guess, as we start to look at this dynamic that their belief 

is that a more prosperous citizenship in North Korea is a real 

threat to their regime and if so why do they think that? 

Because generally if you look throughout all the other uprisings 

it is—it is the lack of funds or the lack of jobs that is creating the 

threat to regimes and yet what you are saying here is it is exactly 

the opposite. They want to keep it suppressed both human rightswise, economically, et cetera, to keep the regime in place. And so 

do they see that prosperity would be a threat to their rule? 

Ambassador LEE. Well, theories on revolution and how revolutions occur suggest that it is not when people are in abject poverty 

that revolutions occur. 

Revolutions are more likely to be caused when people get a taste 

of better life and then they want more. That is when revolutions 

occur. I think North Korean regime understands that very well and 

therefore doesn’t want the society to get to that level. 

So I think it is direct intentional policy to keep the people in abject poverty and despair because if they wanted to improve the situation they certainly can. We have South Korea. 

We have the whole world, international organizations, willing to 

help out, if only. But it is not bending because it doesn’t want that 

world. That is what we are dealing with here. 

28

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. Ambassador Lee, thank you 

for your very, very keen insights. I would associate myself with the 

remarks of my distinguished colleagues and Mr. Marino has talked 

about Ban Ki Moon stepping up and doing more we would all hope 

that he will; that is a position of strategic leverage and power and 

I think he would be highly applauded and regarded for that because he knows the situation, as we all know, given, you know, his 

prior work in the Republic of Korea. 

So I would hope that that would be taken seriously by him. But 

thank you so much. 

Ambassador LEE. Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Your words very insightful for us——

Ambassador LEE. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH [continuing]. And for those who will read this record 

and that will be many. 

The briefing now comes to an end I call pursuant to notice the 

hearing on North Korea human rights and crimes against humanity in North Korea, and we welcome to the witness table our three 

very distinguished witnesses beginning with Ambassador Andrew 

Natsios, who is the co-chair of the Committee for Human Rights in 

North Korea. 

He is also executive professor and director of the Scowcroft Institute of International Affairs at Texas A&M University. Ambassador Natsios was most recently a distinguished professor in the 

practice of diplomacy at Georgetown University and before that 

former Administrator of USAID. 

As USAID administrator from 2001 to 2006, Ambassador Natsios 

managed a huge portfolio of humanitarian and democracy assistance programs. He also oversaw reconstruction programs in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Sudan. He served as the U.S. Special Envoy 

to Sudan from 2006 to 2007. 

He is a veteran of the Gulf War, from 1993 to 1998, was vice 

president of World Vision U.S., the largest faith-based nongovernmental organization in the world. He is the author of three books 

including ‘‘The Great North Korean Famine‘‘ and he also was director of the Office of Disaster Assistance. So every hat imaginable of 

helping people, that is Ambassador Andrew Natsios. 

We will then hear from Mr. Shin Chang Hoon, who is a research 

fellow and director of the Center for Global Governance at the Asan 

Institute of Policy Studies. Previously he taught public international law, international space law, and the Law of the Sea at 

the School of Law and International Organizations and the graduate school of international studies at Seoul National University. 

His research focuses on international dispute settlement mechanisms, the Law of the Sea, international environmental law, humanitarian law and the study of WMD nonproliferation regimes. 

And then we will hear from Mr. Shin Dong Hyuk, who is a North 

Korean defector and human rights activist who is the only person 

known to have successfully escaped from a total control zone political prison camp in North Korea. 

He is agreed to be the only person who has been born into a 

North Korean political prison camp to escape from North Korea. He 

is the subject of a best selling biography published in 2012, ‘‘Escape 

29

from Camp 14: One Man’s Remarkable Odyssey from North Korea 

to Freedom in the West.’’

He has given talks to audiences around the world about his life 

in Camp 14 and has been described as the world’s single strongest 

voice on the atrocities inside North Korean camps. 

Ambassador Natsios, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ANDREW NATSIOS, COCHAIR, THE COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN NORTH 

KOREA 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for inviting me. It is good to be back in the Congress. I have formal 

remarks which are much lengthier that I would like to submit for 

the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, so ordered. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. I would also like to say, while I am cochairman of the Committee on Human Rights in North Korea, we 

didn’t take my 10-page testimony and get it approved by the board 

so I don’t want you to take everything I say as the voted position 

of the committee. 

I usually say some egregious indiscretion in all of these hearings, 

Congressman, as you are aware of, over the years. So I don’t want 

to blame the committee for that—I am not representing Texas 

A&M or the Bush School of Government where I teach. 

While the committee asked me to focus my remarks on U.S. Government policy on human rights in North Korea, I would like to 

begin with a description of the cause of those abuses. 

The fundamentally totalitarian nature of the North Korean state, 

its economy, and political culture is the reason that there is no protection for virtually any human right even at the most minimal 

level. 

North Korea has no rule of law, no independent court system, no 

civil society, no private institutionalized religion. It has no independent news media, no independent political parties other than 

the Workers Party—the Communist Party—no freedom of expression in any way, no choice of competing candidates on the ballot 

for any public or party office, and without these checks and balances we know that means there is no constraint on the power of 

the state to abuse their own citizens. 

The North Korean state—and I have been to more than 100 

countries in the world—I have seen—I was in the Rwandan genocide, I saw the atrocities in Bosnia, in Darfur unfold as I was Special Envoy. 

I have seen terrible things over the years. But the North Korean 

state remains the most oppressive, the most brutal and most severe 

violator institutionally of human rights in the world. 

While most observers and scholars understand the totalitarian 

nature of the North Korean state, detailed evidence of these abuses 

remain very limited in the past because of the insular nature of the 

country. 

That changed over the last decade and a half and now we have 

abundant evidence of those crimes. The cataloguing of this evidence 

has been made possible by the most cataclysmic event in North Korean history, which I wrote a book about, since the Korean War 

30

and that was the Great North Korean Famine between 1993 and 

1998 which I estimate killed 2.5 million people. 

And by the way, the third ranking member of the politburo estimated that actually it was 3.5 million when he defected to South 

Korea. The system of control which insulated the country from the 

outside world collapsed during the chaos of the famine and has 

opened up to researchers new sources of information about conditions inside the country. 

I myself travelled to the North Korean border to write my book 

and I interviewed dozens of refugees escaping North Korea. I did 

it under cover with a Buddhist NGO from South Korea that I am 

associated with. 

One of the most credible sources of details of this abuse is the 

Committee on Human Rights in North Korea, which I serve as cochairman of with Roberta Cohen, which undertakes in-depth research conducted by recognized experts and publishes carefully documented reports on human rights in North Korea. 

The committee is a nonpartisan human rights research center 

which has produced 20 research reports since we were founded in 

October 2001. I might add the first institution I am aware of in the 

world that proposed that this issue be brought before the Security 

Council was our committee and I believe that the first institution 

advocating for the Commission of Inquiry was the Committee on 

Human Rights in North Korea. 

U.S. Government policy on North Korean human rights has 

evolved over the past two decades. The policy focus of the past 

three Presidential administrations has been to use diplomatic negotiations to prevent the North Korean Government from developing 

nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. 

This policy has been an abject failure. It has been repeated several times. We have had three nuclear tests. The fourth one is 

being prepared now and they are developing missiles to deliver 

those weapons. All of this is about regime survival. Several people 

before us said that. That is absolutely correct. 

We can talk about precisely how their behavior is connected to 

this obsession with regime survival. I researched this for the book 

that I wrote and came up with some interesting conclusions. 

The willingness of the U.S. Government to raise the North Korean human rights issue has increased as the failure of U.S. policy 

in the nuclear issue has been more apparent even to its strongest 

advocates, and my view right now is the main reason that we are—

the U.S. Government is pursuing this is because we don’t have any 

nuclear negotiations. 

If we start doing that again you watch, the nuclear issue will 

overshadow the human rights issue very quickly. The nuclear talks 

have been effectively abandoned but the Chinese Government is attempting to revive them. 

Despite this reluctance to engage in the human rights issues, 

both the Obama and the Bush administrations have made public 

statements about human rights abuses in North Korea. Both President Bush on April 30, 2008, and President Obama in March 26, 

2012, made very strong statements on the human rights issue in 

North Korea. 

31

The U.S. Government has consistently voted for every U.N. General Assembly resolution on human rights in North Korea since 

2005. Without going into depth of what the resolutions say, they 

are moderately worded but as the Commission of Inquiry moved 

through the process, more and more countries are becoming more 

aggressive in the language they use. 

I have to say when I did the research on the North Korean famine for my book, I found one report on human rights done by the 

Minnesota Lawyers International Human Rights Committee. I 

could not find any copies of the report. 

Finally, I found one in the Widener Library at Harvard and basically what happened is the committee went around—they deny 

doing this but the committee went around that wrote the report 

and they destroyed all the copies because they were convinced by 

some pro-North Korean expatriates that the report was engineered—all the information in the report—by South Korean intelligence. 

It was all fictional. It was complete nonsense. If you read the report it goes back. It is 20 years old. Everything in that report has 

now been proven. It is in the Commission of Inquiry but they successfully suppressed that report. 

Even the people that wrote it became convinced or at least had 

enough questions that they suppressed the report 20 years ago. 

How long—how far they have gone attempting to stop this from 

getting out and now it is out and the North Koreans can’t stop it. 

I would also add that Ambassador King has endorsed the U.N. 

Commission of Inquiry in a statement March 17, 2014. He testified 

before the or spoke before the Human Rights Council on the matter. 

The Commission of Inquiry accused the North Korean Government of crimes against humanity, a very strong term, which has 

not been used in any of the U.S. Government documents to this 

date. In fact, the Commission of Inquiry report, from my experience 

with the U.N. over the last 25 years is a historic document and it 

uses stark uncompromising and undiplomatic language unlike most 

other U.N. documents. 

The U.S. Congress has been at the forefront of pressing the case 

for a more aggressive U.S. policy. There was an act passed 2004—

H.R. 4011, the North Korea Human Rights Act. It was reauthorized in 2008, signed into law by President Bush in 2008, and now 

there is a bill before the Congress on—I think it is H.R. 1771, the 

North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act, which adds human rights 

into the existing sanctions law. The existing sanctions law focuses 

exclusively on the nuclear issue and other national security issues. 

The act outlines specific measures to impose critical sanctions on 

the DPRK because of its violations of human rights against its own 

people. It has been reported, I believe, out of committee. 

The act will for the first time add some teeth to these public 

statements because until now it has only been rhetoric. Not that 

rhetoric isn’t important but we need to take some action as well. 

Let me conclude by saying that the North Korean—and I have 

more evidence in my testimony—that the North Korean totalitarian edifice is eroding because of the long-term consequences of 

the famine, the collapse of the Soviet economic system of subsidies 

32

to its satellite states which North Korea was certainly one, and 

Pyongyang’s absolute refusal to initiate any serious economic or political reform. 

The spread of information technology has opened a window to 

the outside world which is changing public attitudes, increasing 

public hostility within North Korea toward the government. 

U.S. policy ought to be to encourage these changes now at work 

in North Korea and certainly do nothing to impede the acceleration 

of these trends and to press North Korea to end its crimes against 

its own people. 

The U.S. Government should continue to press China to stop repatriating people who escape from North Korea into China. This is 

a clear violation of international humanitarian law because we 

know what happens to them when they go back. They either are 

executed or they are sent to the prison camps, which Mr. Shin is 

going to talk about very shortly. 

We need to raise the human rights abuse issue with the regime 

in every forum available and any direct talks with North Korea. 

We should support all Security Council efforts to take action 

against the North Korean Government based on the Commission of 

Inquiry report. 

We should press for a shutdown of the political prison camps and 

the release of prisoners, and failing that, regular inspections of the 

camps by the International Committee of the Red Cross or other 

international bodies. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Natsios follows:]

33


88389a-1.eps
34


88389a-2.eps
35


88389a-3.eps
36


88389a-4.eps
37


88389a-5.eps
38


88389a-6.eps
39


88389a-7.eps
40


88389a-8.eps
41


88389a-9.eps
42


88389a-10.eps
43

Mr. SMITH. Ambassador, thank you very much for your testimony 

and for your leadership. 

Dr. Shin. 

STATEMENT OF SHIN CHANG HOON, PH.D, DIRECTOR, CENTER 

FOR GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, ASAN INSTITUTE FOR POLICY 

STUDIES 

Mr. C. SHIN. Chairman Smith and the distinguished members of 

this subcommittee, first of all, on behalf of the Asan Institute for 

Policy Studies based in Seoul, Republic of Korea, I would like to 

thank you for inviting me to testify about human rights aspects in 

North Korea’s nuclear program. 

I already submitted a 10-page written statement. Am I allowed 

to summarize the statement? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, and, you know, while there are limitations 

please be extensive. 

Mr. C. SHIN. Okay. Thank you very much. The story I am going 

to tell you is about human rights abuses which occurred at two nuclear facilities in North Korea. 

One is Pyongsan uranium mine, a resource for the front end fuel 

cycle in North Korea’s nuclear program, and the other is the radio 

chemical laboratory reprocessing facility located at Yongbyon, a significant resource for the back end fuel cycle. 

In the Pyongsan uranium mine, the workers were placed under 

miserable and inhumane work conditions comparable to those in 

the conventional mines where the political prisoners and the ordinary prisoners in the prison camps worked, as detailed in the 

United Nations Commission of Inquiry report. 

High-quality food was well distributed to the workers of the uranium mine, unlike the workers in the mines of the ordinary prison 

camps because the nuclear program was always placed as the top 

priority in North Korea. 

However, like the workers in the mines of ordinary prison camps 

they were also forced to work for 7 hours almost every day of the 

week and have only 1 day off in a month. They were subject to inhumane treatments including beatings. 

They were conducted mainly inside underground mines with the 

supervisors’ intentional oversight and they were beaten by metallic 

tools inside the mine, which horrendously terrified the workers 

much more than outside the mine. 

Moreover, I heard clear statements from the interviewed defector 

that little consideration was given to work safety. For instance, the 

interviewee recalled that he never witnessed any ventilation system that diluted the concentration of radon and radio nuclides from 

the uranium ore and he also said that the quality of the anti-dust 

masks distributed to the workers was so bad and it was so hard 

to breathe with a mask that the workers inside the underground 

mine did not even carry them. 

Since the inhalation of uranium ore dust, which consists of 

radon, is known as a major cause of lung cancer, no anti-dust mask 

during working hours means that they were directly exposed to occupational diseases. 

Working for 7 hours a day may be considered not so bad but the 

work was extremely stressful and intense because of the increase 

44

in number of sick workers, particularly with the skin diseases in 

his unit. 

During certain periods of time he witnessed that only half of the 

unit members were available for work. The lack of available workers created a heavier and more intense workload because of the onerous allocation of daily work quotas. 

We interviewed another defector who worked at the Yongbyon 

radio chemical laboratory that was concluded during inspections by 

the international agency IAEA to be a reprocessing facility. He was 

an analyst of the concentration of high levels of radioactive chemicals. 

As he and his colleagues dealt with high levels of radiological 

substances and waste, they carried film badges, which are called 

dosimeters, which gauged the radiation doses in the workplace. 

However, the badges were monitored only once every 3 months 

and the workers were never informed of the results of these monitoring tests unless severe symptoms of radiation sickness were 

present and visibly apparent. 

Interestingly, he had a group of colleagues whose work duties included helping other workers shake off their fatigue and sleepiness 

during working hours. In addition, according to his testimony, the 

fertility of women laborers was very low. For instance, in his department 60 percent out of a total of 50 workers were women but 

most of the women who got married could not conceive children 

while working at the factory. 

The interviewee witnessed many workers who suffered from nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and fevers at the workplaces, even a sloughing of skins. To make matters worse, North Korea, as a rigid totalitarian regime, controlled the flow of any sensitive information, especially between the workers in the nuclear facilities. 

This hampers the voluntary and bottom-up development of safety 

and security culture among the workers in the nuclear facilities. In 

addition, since North Korea left the NPT regime and the IAEA in 

the early 1990s, the workers could not update internationally-accepted safety standards and work conditions for over the past 20 

years. 

Human factors really matter in ultra hazardous activities like 

nuclear program. North Korea’s nuclear program is known as having developed with the sacrifice of the North Korean population. 

However, we should not ignore the sacrifice of workers in North 

Korea’s nuclear facilities as well. If Six-Party Talks resume, this 

kind of human rights violations in nuclear facilities must be negotiated. 

I hope that you find this testimony to be useful to further discussions on North Korea’s human rights abuses and crimes against 

humanity at this committee. 

Thank you very much for your attention. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. C. Shin follows:]

45


88389b-1.eps
46


88389b-2.eps
47


88389b-3.eps
48


88389b-4.eps
49


88389b-5.eps
50


88389b-6.eps
51


88389b-7.eps
52


88389b-8.eps
53


88389b-9.eps
54


88389b-10.eps
55


88389b-11.eps
56

Mr. SMITH. Dr. Shin, thank you very much. It is more than useful. Thank you. 

Mr. Shin. 

STATEMENT OF MR. SHIN DONG HYUK, SURVIVOR OF NORTH 

KOREAN PRISON CAMP 

[The following testimony was delivered through an interpreter.] 

Mr. D. SHIN. Thank you for making this time available in the 

midst of your busy schedule for allowing me to speak before you 

regarding the human rights situation in North Korea. 

And before I begin my testimony, I want to share something that 

causes me to feel a bit sad and disappointed before I begin my testimony. I escaped North Korea in 2005 and came to South Korea 

in 2006 so it has been almost 8 years since I have come out of 

North Korea. 

And the sad thing that I want to share is that during those 8 

years I have never once shared or given testimony in the South Korean National Assembly in South Korea. 

The fact is that the United States and EU and other countries 

have passed legislation regarding North Korean human rights yet 

South Korea has yet to pass a single legislation regarding the 

human rights of North Korea in South Korean National Assembly. 

And I know that when I say this the South Korean media that 

is present will perhaps edit and not fully carry what I said here 

just now—my statement—and this could be my first—this is my 

first or maybe my last opportunity to share and speak at such a 

place like this. 

So I want to again express my gratitude for giving an opportunity to speak about the reality of what is going on in North 

Korea right now. 

I am from North Korea. My hometown is North Korea. However, 

my situation is one where I cannot go back to my hometown, and 

the place where I was born is the political prison camp in North 

Korea. 

I was born in the prison camp and my existence in the political 

prison camp as well as the ones who are still remaining there is 

an existence not fit for human beings and even worse than those 

of animals. 

And the first thing I remember seeing with my eyes were of the 

prison guards carrying rifles and of political prisoners wearing prison uniforms. These were the only things that I remember seeing 

for the first time the world of the North Korean political prison 

camp. 

And my father and mother who gave birth to me were political 

prisoners also and the moment I was born I too became a political 

prisoner as well and everyone else around me except for the guards 

and prison officials who carried out punishments and made our 

lives miserable and made us suffer we were all political prisoners 

as well. 

And the prison guards who carried rifles drove into the heads of 

us young children inmates, the young and immature and ones who 

really didn’t know anything, the following. They said to us, you are 

all prisoners and your parents are prisoners as well. In order to 

repay the fact that you are alive you must all work hard. 

57

You must work hard until you literally die and only then can you 

pay for your crimes. We were all young but somehow we knew and 

understood what the prison guards were telling us. 

And even though I was so young I understood what the prison 

guards were telling me. For us in the political prison camp, there 

was nothing the prisoners could do. We could only eat the food 

given to us, we could only wear the clothes given to us and we 

could only do the work given to us by the prison officials. 

And when I was 14 years old, just like I learned from the rules 

and regulations of the prison camp, I overheard my mother and 

older brother talking about escaping. When I overhead this I then 

reported this to the prison officials. 

And I, who had reported my mother and older brother for talking 

about escaping, I was rewarded with terrible indescribably cruel 

and painful torture, and the prison guards tied my feet in metal 

shackles and hung me upside down and also tortured me over—I 

don’t know if you would understand this but they would torture me 

through the fire torture over a burning fire pit. 

And finally my mother and my older brother were publicly executed in front of all the prisoners in the camp, and this scene of 

my mother and brother being executed I had to see this with my 

own eyes. 

And I did not cry when I saw my mother and brother being executed. I believed this was so because in my opinion in the prison 

camp, looking back now, we did not learn growing up being in the 

prison camp that if our mother or brother were killed or executed 

that we were supposed to feel sadness or shed tears. This was not 

something that I learned or had come to experience in the prison 

camp. 

And the torture I went through at that time, the scars from that 

terrible time, are ones I still bear clearly on my body—the scars 

from the metal shackles on my ankles, the burn scars on my back 

from the torture of being burned alive over a fire pit, the scars that 

formed all over my body from the beatings I endured. 

These vestiges of my suffering will never go away until the day 

I die. The prison guards in the prison camps think of the human 

prisoners inmates as worth less than that of animals. 

The cruelest and most excruciating method of treating the prisoners, punishing the prisoners, is by denying them food and starving them. And if a prisoner does not work well or fails to meet a 

work quota they are punished by the prison guards. 

However, before the punishment is carried out the prisoners are 

given a choice by the prison guards either by getting beaten or having our meal or food taken away, denied from us. 

And in my case, going hungry and being denied food was a suffering and pain beyond my imagination so thus I chose the punishment of getting beaten. And the reason why I say this today is that 

even now as I speak before you in this chamber there are still babies being born like I was born in the prison camp. 

There are still people who are getting killed by public executions 

in the camp and are dying from starvation and beatings in the 

prison camps right this moment. 

58

I am not here in the U.S. right now to go on sightseeing tours 

or to visit tourist spots and I am not here to visit or take a tour 

of the U.S. Capitol either. 

I am here today to testify and to tell all of you, the distinguished 

and esteemed members of the U.S. Congress sitting here before me, 

to help and safe the political prisoners in the North Korean political prison camps who are dying and suffering right now. 

I am here to exhort all of you to save my brothers and sisters 

who are suffering and dying, to save them so that they might live, 

that they will not die but survive and live and come out of the prison camps, that they too can see and enjoy the bright and beautiful 

world that all of us take for granted and accept as normal and commonplace. 

And if this issue of the political prison camp of North Korea is 

not solved through our concerted efforts and actions and that of the 

U.S. Congress or even international organizations such as the 

U.N., then all the inmates in the prison camps created by the 

North Korean dictatorship they will all die. And furthermore, also 

the citizens of North Korea who are suffering under this dictatorship will die as well. 

In closing, I want to share now for me the word that I love and 

the word that I cherish and that word to me is the word freedom. 

I believe that if the North Korean dictator himself enjoys freedom so should the people of North Korea enjoy and live in freedom 

as well. 

No one has the right to deny or take away freedom, which is the 

DNA of humanity, from anyone else and I am powerless, and therefore I plead and exhort all of you here today with your power and 

influence you can save my helpless brothers and sisters who are 

waiting for death in North Korea and you have the choice to save 

the people in the prison camps in North Korea. 

Once again, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak before you today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. D. Shin follows:]

59


88389c-1.eps
60


88389c-2.eps
61


88389c-3.eps
62

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Shin, thank you for your powerful testimony, 

which has to not only mobilize but shock us into further action. 

You know, Ambassador Natsios talked about the abject failure with 

regard to the nuclear issue and I would say even though we have 

tried we have failed. 

The proof is in the lack of positive consequences, the inability so 

far to get countries that might have influence including Russia and 

China, and I think Ambassador Lee’s point earlier about a global 

mobilization there needs to be a pivot point. 

The COI plays at least part of that role to say enough is enough. 

We need to do far more and that means a sustained effort. While 

we don’t have the leverage we had with South Africa, and I was 

one of those who supported sanctions during the early 1980s and 

did so strongly, there was economic leverage there. But there are 

other points of contact that have not been utilized. So I, again, all 

of you I thank you for your very strong testimonies. 

Dr. Shin, you mentioned, and you footnote, how the U.N. COI report points out that many workers have been enslaved and died 

from accidents and disease from the mines caused by the dust. Is 

there any estimation as to how many workers have died? 

And you also pointed out the paradox of giving healthy food to 

increase productivity while simultaneously exposing them to occupational hazards that almost ensure cancer and early death. Could 

you elaborate on that and perhaps and then how many we are talking about? 

Mr. C. SHIN. Mr. Chairman, the numbers of the interviewees 

were really limited in numbers so——

Mr. SMITH. You talked about the numbers of potential workers 

that were sick or died. 

Mr. C. SHIN. I didn’t talk about the specific numbers. But in case 

of the counts on uranium ore they didn’t notice any death of the 

workers. This is because the witness was not involved in the mining itself this kind of—I mean, digging underground mines. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask you, you know, the referral to the ICC 

if it does indeed occur the International Criminal Court, as we all 

know, while it has some very positive aspects to it has had only 

one conviction of a person of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 

people like Bashir from Sudan, as Ambassador Natsios knows so 

well, have been indicted but still remains at large and ruling a 

country. 

The real convictions have happened at another level, regional 

courts. I have been pushing for a court for Syria since at least September and we had David Crane, who ran the Sierra Leone court 

and did so as the chief prosecutor, talked about the efficacy of those 

regional courts and I am wondering if any consideration is being 

given to a regional court, perhaps based in the Republic of Korea, 

that would begin gathering testimonies and information for the 

purpose of prosecution. 

You know, evil doesn’t have to be forever and there will come a 

time when the Kims, including the current Kim, will be held to account and all those who were complicit. 

Has there been any thought given to a regional court that might 

be housed, like I said, with sanction from the international commuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
63

nity? It might be hard to get acquiescence by China and Russia but 

even if it doesn’t, I think the effort should be made. 

What are your thoughts on that? Because, again, the ICC has 

gone on that parallel track but they have not been effective. They 

have had 18 indictments in a dozen years, one conviction and, you 

know, but a regional court could begin really gathering in a very 

effective way, I think, testimony. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. This is a very odd situation but South Korean politics is unusual. The conservatives in South Korea are the 

ones that press the human rights issue. 

The Korean left, left of center, do not. They believe it compromises the ability of the South Korean Government to negotiate 

with the North Korean Government. So they don’t raise those 

issues. 

Human rights in North Korea is a highly political issue in South 

Korean politics. Here, you have bipartisan support among Republicans and Democrats on many human rights issues. That is not 

the case in South Korea with respect to North Korea. It is changing 

among younger people. 

There is a shift of opinion I noticed when I was there a couple 

of years ago. But right now there is not going to be any court, I 

have to tell you. There is a reason Mr. Shin just told us that the 

South Korean Parliament has not had any hearings on this issue. 

There is no legislation that has gone through. The Ministry of 

Reunification does have a small unit that deals with North Korea 

human rights issues. However, because of the divisiveness of this 

issue in South Korean politics it is not at the forefront. President 

Park did make a very strong statement but, again, that is not 

usual. 

Am I—is it unfair to say that? 

Mr. C. SHIN. I don’t know. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. I don’t want to embarrass you because—

and I know this is a sensitive issue. 

Mr. C. SHIN. Well, I would like to go back to your questions on 

the regional—I mean the possibility of regional international criminal tribunals. Actually, in order to establish a certain jurisdiction—

criminal jurisdiction in terms of individual criminal accountability 

there must be collection of the data—I mean, perpetrators and the 

activities, the atrocities committed by the perpetrators. 

In that sense, I mean, field work, field structure, which will be 

established in South Korea, will be conducive to this kind of collection of the data. 

However, well, as I already said criminal jurisdiction of the international tribunals can be established by the consent of the states 

concerned. So if there is no consent from the North Korea—from 

North Korea it is very unfortunate. It will be really difficult to establish regional international criminal tribunals. 

Mr. SMITH. I would just respectfully and I understand, Ambassador Natsios, because I have had those conversations in Seoul myself, but it seems to me that when Mr. Shin says that his story is 

largely unknown and certainly how much of the media does pick 

up on the human rights situation from a day to day basis in the 

Republic of Korea and, again, that you have not testified before the 

Assembly—I hope that they would invite you—I mean, there is alVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
64

ways a game changer and it seems to me that when people hear 

truth left or right they should be moved with compassion and empathy to embrace those who are suffering abuse the likes of which 

I can’t even imagine. 

I wrote the Torture Victims Relief Act, Mr. Shin, to deal with 

post-traumatic stress and other problems and when I heard from 

witnesses what they go through, and it is a law that provides 

PTSD—post-traumatic stress disorder assistance and we heard 

from people with nightmares—I am sure you have dealt with nightmares and flashbacks that none of us could imagine, an agony. 

You sit there absolutely poised and strong and determined but 

there has to be—how can anyone go through what you go through 

without carrying agonizing scars, and I think the people of the Republic of Korea left and right need to hear that more now than 

ever, especially since the COI is now finally embracing and, as you 

said, Ambassador Natsios, with the nuclear in—you know, the paradox and human rights concerns rising this is an opportune moment. 

And, again, getting back to Ambassador Lee, the red line idea 

and I think that is a really strong—you know, a real red line on 

human rights coupled with, again, this global mobilization so that, 

you know, the information will be so compelling that the left will 

not be able to resist any longer and stop, perhaps unwittingly, but 

to stop the enabling. 

You know, when we have an NBA player, Dennis Rodman, going 

over there woefully uninformed about these abuses, we are going 

to send him a copy and the other NBA players who went to 

Pyongyang to read what you have said in the hopes that they will 

raise it in some way now or in the future if they ever have further 

contact with Mr. Kim. 

So this is a defining moment and I think your testimonies and 

Ambassador Lee’s statement are extremely important in that process. So thank you. If you would like to respond and then I will yield 

to my friend. 

Mr. D. SHIN. I have come to realize and I have seen with my own 

eyes the international society and many international organizations 

coming together and dealing with this issue of human rights in 

North Korea. 

Earlier this year in March in Geneva when I spoke at the U.N. 

Human Rights Council, in the table or seat before me in front of 

me there were diplomats from the DPRK, North Korean diplomats 

who were watching me and monitoring me as I spoke and as I was 

participating in the meeting, and I also had the opportunity to 

speak in New York on April 17 for the Arria function for the meeting at the U.N. in New York. 

And I have also come to know that many scholars and many organizations and groups they have stated that many North Koreans 

have come into contact with South Korean media, South Korean 

drama, South Korean movies through USB sticks, through access 

to computers, through the exchange of information on the black 

markets in North Korea, and it is true that the people in North 

Korea through viewing South Korean dramas and watching South 

Korean movies and being active in the black market and listening 

to foreign broadcasts through radio all these things, they are hapVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
65

pening in North Korea right now and I believe that these things 

are needed by the North Korean people. 

However, what I want to say is that these things are things that 

happened many decades ago as well and I tend to have somewhat 

of a negative outlook regarding how many more decades, how many 

more years it will take of North Korean people watching South Korean dramas or South Korean movies for change or for things to 

happen in the country. 

And there is a reason why I have to say things like this in this 

manner and what I want to say is that a person dying is not something that happens over many years or many decades. 

A person can end his life in a second or a couple of seconds. More 

than 60 years ago when 6 million Jews were murdered by the 

Nazis, it took less than 4 or 5 years for that genocide to happen, 

for that large number of people to be killed, and almost 40 years 

ago when almost 2 million people were killed in the killing fields 

of Cambodia that took about 5 or 6 years as well. 

And all of you know that 20 years ago when the Rwanda genocide happened 800,000 people getting killed, that took only about 

90 days. And I say this because for North Korea the same thing 

and the same future can happen in North Korea as well. 

And what I want to say is that the dictatorship in North Korea 

is without comparison compared to the other dictatorships throughout history more evil, more terrible than any other dictatorships in 

history is what we see in North Korea right now. 

And my thought is that yes, radios, DVDs and exposure to foreign media those are good and those are needed for the North Korean people. But what I want to say is that the international community coming together and forcefully warning and talking and 

telling the North Korean regime, the dictatorship, of what is going 

on, that is what is needed is what I want to tell all of you here 

today. 

Mr. SMITH. I would like to yield to the former U.S. attorney from 

Pennsylvania, a prosecutor of great distinction, Mr. Marino. 

Mr. MARINO. Thank you, Chairman. Ambassador and Doctor, I 

don’t know if you recall—please acknowledge if you do, if not I will 

repeat it—my questions to our—to the Ambassador concerning 

what role the U.N. can play in this. Would you—either of you or 

both of you care to respond to my question/statement, Ambassador? 

Ambassador NATSIOS. I know there are Americans who are critical of the United Nations. I have worked with the United Nations 

for 25 years now. They can play a very useful role but we should 

not exaggerate their effectiveness. 

There were 32 resolutions on the atrocities in Darfur. It didn’t 

restrain Omar al-Bashir’s government in terms of just the resolutions. But that combined with media coverage, human rights reports, U.S. sanctions, it is part of a larger picture. 

So you create a wave that gets bigger and bigger and eventually 

it does affect behavior and even in a totalitarian regime like North 

Korea. No dictatorship likes having their crimes put out there in 

public in front of everyone else. 

So the U.N. can be very useful. I think the COI report, frankly, 

is going to be one of the most powerful instruments we have because when people say they don’t like the United States and that 

66

this is an American obsession, there is no truth to any of that, I 

mean, there was no Americans on the commission. 

It was the Chief Justice of the Australian Supreme Court and 

the Attorney General of Indonesia and a leader of civil society in 

Serbia who were on that commission. No Americans. So when you 

have that kind of a body making these statements in great detail 

and then using the term crimes against humanity it can be used 

as an instrument to constantly repeat. 

There is a lot of anti-Americanism in Europe now. I get upset 

with it but it is there. That is the reality. So but Shin’s book is 

being read all over Europe now. I mean, his book has sold hundreds of thousands of copies and it is a bestseller. There is no other 

way of putting it. 

Who is reading it? It is not just Americans. So I think the more 

international this effort becomes, we have Latin American and African countries voting with us on this on the U.N. Security Council—it is a very powerful thing. It is a very powerful thing. 

So I think we should simply be unrelenting in keeping the pressure up on the prison camp but also these larger issues as well. I 

mean, people don’t even go to the camps. They just get executed 

in the villages. 

The people I interviewed, I think it was 30, I don’t remember 

exact number of people, but I did 2- or 3-hour interviews and they 

saw people executed in their own villages summarily. There were 

no courts. 

One of them was caught killing an oxen during the famine. It 

was a capital offense. Ripping up a photograph of Kim Jong Il or 

graffiti attacking the royal family. When that happens you can be 

executed on the spot. They don’t even bother sending you to the 

camps. 

Mr. C. SHIN. Okay. Yes. Thank you very much. Human rights is 

a universal value, which needs. Multilateral approaches and crimes 

against humanity is also an international matter, not a domestic 

matter in which the concept of responsibility to protect can be involved in. 

You mentioned the role of the United Nations. The United Nations is the right forum to deal with those kinds of multilateral 

issues. When it comes to the role of the Secretary-General in the 

United Nations, well, actually the Secretary-General is an international servant who does not represent any national identity. 

But it is really difficult to handle the issues which he cares 

about—and the states related to his nationality. So when considering the conflict of interest, for instance, well, the former United 

Nations Secretary-General, Boutros Boutros-Ghali and other 

former United Nations Secretary-Generals, have dealt with their 

regional issues not directly but by other representatives and other 

Under-Secretary-Generals of the United Nations. 

So we can apply this kind of role of the Under-Secretary-Generals of the United Nations with regard to the human rights issues 

in North Korea as well. 

Mr. MARINO. We also need to get countries on the continent of 

Africa voting more with the United States on issues like this. Mr. 

Shin, I just have to ask how did you escape? 

67

Mr. D. SHIN. I had no specific plan or thoughts of escaping when 

I did escape. 

Mr. MARINO. Let me stop you there. I just thought of something. 

I don’t want you to reveal something that would let the North Koreans know how people could escape. Okay. That is fine. Go ahead, 

sir. 

Mr. D. SHIN. So for the first 24 years of my life, I did not know 

anything about the outside world but through meeting somebody 

who had been in the outside world who had been sent to the prison 

camp and meeting this person and knowing and hearing about the 

outside world and the food that people outside the camps ate I 

began to have curiosity and interest regarding the food and what 

people ate outside the prison camp. 

And simply put, my plan when I decided to escape was that I 

would escape and just for one meal—at least for one meal and I 

would eat until I was very full and if I was caught and publicly 

executed then I would die satisfied, having eaten a full meal. 

So the person that told me about the outside world who had been 

sent to the prison camp he and I attempted to escape together from 

the prison camp by crossing the electrified fence. And, of course, 

the prison camp system in North Korea is not one that is easy for 

the prisoners to escape from. 

So my colleague—the inmate who was escaping with me, he was 

caught in the electrified fence and he unfortunately did not make 

it out and I myself—my legs were caught in the electrified fence 

and I was injured on my way out from the prison camp crossing 

through the electrified fence. 

So many inmates in the prison camps in North Korea do not 

know about what is going on in the outside world. They cannot access information from the outside world. 

So for me when I heard about what was going on in the world 

outside the prison camp for me the biggest interest that I had was 

in the food, the meals that the people ate in the world outside the 

prison camp. 

Mr. MARINO. Thank you. I am going to have to read the book. 

The chairman pushed my button when he raised Dennis Rodman’s 

name and I am going to make it perfectly clear that Dennis Rodman does not represent the United States, any part of it, when it 

comes to North Korea. 

He is an embarrassment to the United States and the only way 

that he can redeem himself is to publicly, here in the United 

States, condemn Kim Jong Un and his criminal thugs and not visit 

North Korea again until he persuades his sidekick over there to 

step down and stop killing people. 

But we know that that is probably not going to happen. I am a 

little bit of a history buff and a very amateur presidential historian, and Ambassador or Dr. Shin, can you answer this question 

for me? If Truman would have listened to MacArthur, would we be 

where we are at today and would China have entered into the war 

to cause a full-fledged third world war? 

Ambassador NATSIOS. That is a very good question. I understand 

why President acted as he did—and I am a fan of President Truman. I think he is one of our great Presidents. He created the postVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:12 Oct 08, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\061814\88389 SHIRL
68

World War II international order and I think MacArthur is one of 

our greatest military leaders in the 20th century. 

But he was insubordinate and that is unacceptable, in my view, 

for any military commander to be insubordinate to the President 

of the United States. However, on the matter of whether his plan 

was right, I think he was right and I don’t think we would be dealing with this horror that the North Korean people have had to endure all these years if President Truman had taken a—but a lot 

of Americans had already died, a lot of Koreans had already died. 

I understand why he did it but I think he was wrong. 

Mr. MARINO. China had already crossed into North Korea. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. They drove us back and then we drove 

them back. 

Mr. MARINO. Do you have a theory as to how much more China 

would have been involved in expanding their troops into North 

Korea? 

Ambassador NATSIOS. I think we now know from histories that 

have been written what Mao’s motivation was and it was Stalin actually who precipitated this whole thing because he wanted to take 

pressure off him in Europe. 

He wanted us to move troops from the European theater to 

Korea and that is what he succeeded in doing. The Soviet archives 

were open. They are not open anymore. But in the 1990s we knew 

a lot more. 

Mr. MARINO. So much for democracy, huh? 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Pardon me? 

Mr. MARINO. So much for democracy. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. So much for democracy. We know, for example—this is the most embarrassing thing that has happened to 

the North Korean Government—is the Russian archives show that 

Kim Il Sung was simply a tool of Stalin. He was put in power by 

Stalin. 

He was ordered by Stalin to do what he did and the notion that 

he was some independent guerilla is a complete fabrication of 

North Korean propaganda. He was a puppet of the Soviet leadership for their own purposes. 

Mr. MARINO. I agree. Doctor. 

Mr. C. SHIN. Well, I would like to say it like this. The Korean 

War is kind of the unsung victory of the alliance between the Republic of Korea and the United States. It is a total contrast when 

we compare the current situation of human rights in both Koreas. 

This would be an answer to your questions. 

Mr. MARINO. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. SMITH. Just one final concluding question, if I could. I have 

lots but the hour is late. What is next for this U.N. Security Council, in your view? 

As you, Dr. Shin, point out and as we all know the U.N. COI recommends that the U.N. Security Council refer the human rights 

situation in North Korea to the ICC as well as enact and implement targeted sanctions against those who appear to be responsible 

for carrying out crimes against humanity, and as you point out in 

your testimony it is not the people of North Korea that are targeted. 

69

It is individuals and that has been the move increasingly in legislation here as well, whether it be the Belarus Democracy Act or 

the Magnitsky Act or any of these others, targeting the people who 

are doing their horrific crimes. 

But when do you think the U.N. Security Council will take any 

of this up? You know, are we talking about weeks? Months? God 

forbid, years? Not years. Okay. When do you think? 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Do you have any sense? 

Mr. C. SHIN. No. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Trying to predict what the United Nations 

is going to do is a difficult thing. I think it is a matter of months. 

Mr. SMITH. There is a Human Rights Council coming up in——

Ambassador NATSIOS. Yes, there is. 

Mr. SMITH. The ICC. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. So there are many forums in which these 

issues can be raised and I am hoping the United States will continue to raise them with other countries and I actually think the 

more books are sold—Mr. Shin’s—actually the more pressure that 

there will be for other countries, not only in the Council but in 

other forums within the United Nations to press for action, and I 

think this relentless pressure on every front is what is going to 

change things. 

They don’t want to be isolated. They are already isolated. But 

there is another factor I just want to say that is going on that we 

are not getting at this hearing, that is not understanding in the 

United States and there are many people in South Korea in denial. 

The Chinese are taking over the North Korean economy. They 

believe that they are a huge security risk. They don’t want them 

to have nuclear weapons or the missiles because it is threatening 

the stability of the peninsula and South Korea is a major trading 

partner, as you said, with China. 

They don’t want threats to South Korea either and the Chinese 

are upset with the North Korean leadership. So what they have 

done are two things that are fascinating. Since 2011 there has been 

a massive increase in trade, billions of dollars. It is in extractive 

industry, it is coal, it is minerals, some rare earth metals, gold, and 

the Chinese are bringing technology in and there is not many—

they are not manufacturing anything in North Korea that they 

want but North Korean—the Chinese industrial output needs these 

metals and coal. 

And it is in the billions of dollars and that money is flowing into 

North Korea now. The second thing the Chinese are doing——

Mr. SMITH. And at fair value? Because what they are doing in 

Africa is that——

Ambassador NATSIOS. It is not fair value. 

Mr. SMITH [continuing]. Pennies on the dollar. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Because they are the only trading partner—serious trading partner of North Korea——

Mr. SMITH. So they are fleecing North Korea. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Yes, and Chinese merchants are the only 

ones doing business with North Korea now. The other thing that 

is happening in the North is that the Chinese are building a massive industrial complex in China along the border with the Tumen 

River and the reason they are doing that is the way the Chinese 

70

economy—I don’t know if you know this—but because of what has 

happened in Hong Kong under the British when they went to a 

free market economy there was this massive economic growth. 

Chinese workers from China were going every day to work in the 

factories in Hong Kong. They were coming back with their money, 

buying TV sets. They were better fed than anyone else in China 

was, and some Beijing party bureaucrats went down saying how 

come everybody is better fed—how come people are better 

dressed—how come they have television sets in their houses and no 

one else in China does, and they told the story. 

These workers are all in Hong Kong. So they went and looked 

at what Hong Kong had done and they made a policy decision to 

experiment. This was under Deng Xiaoping. And they decided to do 

what Hong Kong did in the provinces around Hong Kong. It 

worked. They extended it to the rest of the country. 

I believe what the Chinese are doing now with this massive industrial—there are some articles that have been written on it in 

some depth. They are building an industrial infrastructure and investing billions of dollars in China hoping the North Koreans will 

go across the border, work there, bring the money back and that 

will begin to change the North Korean economy the same way that 

the Chinese economy was changed through Hong Kong. 

I believe that is what their plan is. Whether it will work is a different matter. But the North Koreans privately are very nervous 

that the Chinese in fact are economically taking over their country, 

and they are. You know the currency that is used other than dollars and the South Korean currency in the markets? They don’t use 

North Korean currency. They are useless. They use Chinese currency. So they don’t even have control over their own monetary policy. 

Mr. MARINO. Chairman, if I may—if I may. I am a student of 

China and you bring up a good topic and, you know, China—people 

think China wants to rule the world militarily. That is not true. 

They are doing—they are trying to do it financially and they will 

do it financially. Look at the investments China is making on the 

east coast of the continent of Africa—their refineries, the oil, the 

gas. 

Look at the investments that they are making in Afghanistan for 

precious metals, rare earths because of the technology age that we 

need these materials to run our iPads and our phones and who 

knows what is coming up in the near future. 

They are very smart when it comes to that and the fact that they 

undervalue their currency, the yuan, and overvalue our currency, 

U.S. dollar, we better watch out because it is going to come to a 

point where China is going to step forward. 

If we are downgraded again in this country financially China will 

step forward and say to the world, take a look at us. They will let 

their yuan rise to its real level of value, our dollar will plummet, 

inflation will skyrocket. 

China is buying gold by the boatloads and they are going to say 

look, we have virtually no debt. We have most of the outside debt 

from the United States and we can back it with gold. 

71

So we better get our act together here and in Europe and around 

the rest of the rest of the world when it comes to finances concerning China. 

Mr. SMITH. Dr. Shin, did you want to speak to——

Mr. C. SHIN. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH [continuing]. What’s next in the U.N. Security Council? 

Mr. C. SHIN. When it comes to the Chinese position on international criminal justice I think we are not talking about the normal violation of human rights. 

We are talking about widespread, systematic and gross violations 

of human rights which amount to crimes against humanity that 

the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction over. 

So we have to persuade China not to exercise, I mean, political 

power such as veto powers in the United Nations Security Council 

when it comes to—when dealing with these kinds of crimes against 

humanity—I mean, jus cogens peremptory norms that deal with 

prevention of crimes against humanity and genocide. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. Let me make one last statement about the 

food issue with respect to China. China has been giving food to 

North Korea for some time but they just give it to them. We know 

what the North Koreans do with it. They give it to the military. 

They give it to the capital city, to the Communist Party, to the 

Secret Police who get even a higher ration than military officers do. 

The Secret Police are critically important to the regime’s survival. 

I have tried to tell the Chinese it is not in their interest to simply turn the food over. Who is escaping into China? The elites? Of 

course not. It is poor people who are hungry. That is the principal 

reason they leave. 

That is why Mr. Shin tried to escape from prison. It wasn’t because of freedom—he didn’t know what freedom meant. He said it 

in his book. He said it today. He was hungry, okay. If the Chinese 

Government wants to stop, create a positive incentive for stopping 

the mass population movements across the border, which they have 

cut down anyway—there has been a 50-percent drop in defections 

in the last couple of years and I put that in my testimony—what 

the Chinese need to do is to work with the United Nations and the 

United States. 

If they are going to do a food program, insist on international 

conventions that can prevent the food from being diverted by the 

elite. Why? 

If you feed the poor there is going to be less motivation for crossing the border. It is in the Chinese interest, frankly, to follow international conventions on these issues because if you create the positive incentive the incentive won’t be there for them to leave. 

Mr. SMITH. Are there any plans afoot for the World Food Programme or USAID? Because that—the diversion issue was always 

big, I know. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. There was a time——

Mr. SMITH. So the Chinese would be the ones we need to have 

that conversation——

Ambassador NATSIOS. There was talk about a food aid program 

but after they did the last nuclear test that shut down everything. 

72

Even I, and you know how strong I have been on this issue, I said 

I am fed up with them. 

Mr. SMITH. The thought of the International Committee of the 

Red Cross—are any monitors getting into the prisons? Is that——

Ambassador NATSIOS. We have raised it. 

Mr. SMITH. I know you have and you raised it again in your testimony. 

Ambassador NATSIOS. I don’t think they are going to let them in 

there. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay. 

Mr. D. SHIN. There is one last thing that I would like to say to 

you, and what I would say is that when we see the young dictator, 

Kim Jong Un of North Korea, living in luxury, drinking expensive 

wine and smoking expensive cigars and Dennis Rodman going over 

there and spending time in luxury with Kim Jong Un, the American people saw this and saw that Dennis Rodman was helping 

Kim Jong Un in this sort of lifestyle that he was leading. 

And also that almost more than half of the tourists that go to 

North Korea are U.S. citizens. Americans are going to North Korea 

and that despite the economic sanctions and the decrees from the 

State Department telling American citizens not to travel to North 

Korea, American citizens on their free will are travelling to North 

Korea and they are spending money on their own and the money 

that they spend is allowing Kim Jong Un to continue to live in luxury, to drink the fine wine and to smoke the fancy cigars and footing the luxurious lifestyle of Kim Jong Un. 

And as a victim of the North Korean dictatorship, when I see 

American citizens going to North Korea as tourists, spending 

money, that is something that I oppose and something that breaks 

my heart when I see that. And it is very unfortunate for me to see 

American citizens going there as tourists and spending their money 

that is supporting the dictatorship. 

When I see that happening, that is very disappointing for me to 

realize what is going on. 

Mr. SMITH. Ambassador Natsios, Dr. Shin, Mr. Shin, thank you 

so very much for your powerful testimony and I can assure you we 

will widely disseminate this and will help not only me but members of this committee to be more informed and absolutely more 

motivated. 

And Ambassador Lee, thank you for your statement and your call 

for a global mobilization and that red line. I think that is something we really need to stress. 

Without objection, a testimony submitted by the United States 

Commission on International Religious Freedom will be made part 

of the record. Anything further? 

Mr. MARINO. I agree with Mr. Shin concerning travel. That is another failure on the part of the Obama administration and that he 

could very easily put a stop to that. 

Mr. SMITH. The hearing is adjourned and thank you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 4:51 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(73)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

74

f


88389n.eps
75

f


88389m.eps
76

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE LEE JONG HOON, 

AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, REPUBLIC OF KOREA


88389e-1.eps
77


88389e-2.eps
78


88389e-3.eps
79

f


88389e-4.eps
80

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND CHAIRMAN, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS


88389f-1.eps
81


88389f-2.eps
82

Æ


88389f-3.eps