By Tessa Aguilar, HRNK Research Intern
Edited by Diletta De Luca, HRNK Research Associate

Introduction
               The phenomenon of globalization has generated critical transformations in the international landscape, reshaping the dynamics between states and redefining their global images. This is observed in the rising wave of the ‘Asian Ascendancy,’ most commonly known as increasingly popular Asian cultural exchanges, creating a surge in the hybridity of Western and Asian trends in the contemporary period. This globalized effort is defined by a plethora of Asian countries, the most notable drivers within the twenty-first century including China, Japan, South Korea, and India. More specifically, Asian Ascendancy is the mother concept of the increasingly popular Hallyu, also called the Korean Wave. This cultural boom has allowed increasing mass media exposure of South Korean entertainment, principles, and traditions, redefining current definitions and influence of Westernization. Yet, despite a growing global preference for Asian media, this does not imply that all Asian states are positively featured in the media: What are the dynamics of Asian states that have yet to fully embrace this Ascendancy? How do these states further shift their application relative to a personal socio-cultural agenda?

               In this context, North Korea, an autocratic regime notorious for its isolation and infamous socialist-dynastic political agenda, is the leading actor to apply the Asian Ascendancy to publicizing current propaganda, reinforcing its ideology in the geopolitical environment, and attempting to shift its global perception into a better light. This article presents an analysis of the Korean Wave impact on globalization as part of the broader Asian Ascendancy movement and explores how North Korea has leveraged the cultural exports of the Korean Wave to reconstruct its own global perception.

Asian Ascendancy: The Emergence of Hallyu and its Influence in North Korea

               Asian Ascendancy first emerged in the later twentieth century. Following the end of the Cold War, an increased demand for interconnectedness among societies sparked the Asian Ascendancy through the usage of media distribution amidst the age of technological innovation. Originally intended to combat the “unjust control by the Western developed nations,” Asian Ascendancy continues to reshape the narrative and global dominance of Asian culture and lifestyle.[1] Through this phenomenon, globalization has improved through increased communications fueled by multilateral dialogues and cultural expansion. In turn, globalization has been promoting increasing tolerance of international diversity while discouraging aggression and ultimately fueling interconnectedness and more robust diplomatic relations between nations.[2] Currently, China is notably spearheading this Ascendancy movement, as it expresses the highest development in cultural expansion, facilitating the exchange of multilateral dialogues, and income generation.[3] For instance, the 2008 Beijing Olympics aided in the triumph of Asian perceptions. Entrusting China to host the Games helped “undermine the perception of Western economic prowess,”[4] prompting the reevaluation of Asia’s efficiency and ability to express political disputes and historical resentments.

               One of the leading representatives of Asian Ascendancy has been Hallyu, a term coined in the late 1990s, and translated as the “[South] Korean Wave,” which emerged as a significant influence in recent entertainment and communications development. Essentially, Hallyu is an innovative hybridization of “Westernized modernity” and “Asian sentimentality” in South Korean television, music, and art.[5] As most are aware, younger audiences—from teenagers to thirty-year-old adults and even older—indulge in South Korean media, such as Korean dramas and K-Pop, due to the unique freedom of expression it signifies. The mass popularity of Hallyu is also utilized by the South Korean government, characterized as a form of soft power intended to fulfill the political agenda of “complex interdependence,” boosting the state’s global image and popularity across multiple regions.[6] However, this does not constitute a wholehearted embrace of South Korean culture, as states driven by authoritarianism and one-man dictatorships view this ascendancy as a threat to regime legitimacy and sovereignty.

               The rise of Hallyu has prompted a clash of ideology and support in North Korea. Interestingly, South Korean media was prominent in North Korea even before the Korean Wave.[7] Given the exponential increase of Hallyu and South Korean media consumption, North Korea has demonstrated a multifaceted approach to combating and embracing this dynamic. Therefore, North Korea’s utilization of Hallyu and the broader Asian Ascendancy movement offers insight into its operationalization to navigate the complexities of globalization, further reshaping its global perception. It also highlights the interplay between soft power, cultural exports, and global influence within Asian Ascendancy. North Korea’s response to Hallyu demonstrates significant strategizing around the threat posed by South Korean culture to its authoritarian regime. While the regime may seek to manage perceptions of modernity through tightly curated content, it cannot replicate or co-opt Hallyu, which is fundamentally South Korean—rooted in artistic freedom, internet culture, and Western influences such as hip-hop and global capitalism.
​
                Even so, this strategic mimicry must not be mistaken for cultural openness. In reality, the Kim regime has declared Hallyu a grave ideological threat—so severe that mere possession of South Korean media can lead to imprisonment or execution. The regime’s efforts to control this “cultural contagion” reflect not an interest in integration, but fear of exposure to the freedoms symbolized by the other Korea.

The People’s Embrace and North Korea’s Strategic Response

               Hallyu has been accepted and consumed by North Korea’s people but rejected by its regime and official propaganda. The burgeoning interest in South Korean media among North Korean people derives from a shared ethnic and cultural affiliation.[8] This kinship has cultivated a favorable response among North Korean citizens, partly responsible for a notable increase in defection rates since 1998. A discernible pattern emerges: the greater the consumption of South Korean media by North Korean citizens, the higher the propensity for individuals to defect, demonstrating the impact of cultural liberty and freedom of expression within these media sources.[9] Due to Hallyu, North Koreans receive a sense of hope and empowerment despite being confined to the constraints of an authoritarian, patriarchal society driven by the Juche self-reliance ideology.[10]

               Surprisingly, at times, the DPRK has responded to Hallyu’s components. In 2018, Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un formally invited K-Pop musicians—such as Red Velvet, Seohyun from Girls’ Generation, and even Cho Yong-pil—to perform a combination of selected South Korean and traditional North Korean songs at Pyongyang’s “Spring is Coming” concert.[11] This concert would be the last performance by South Korean singers for the coming years due to escalating inter-Korean tensions. While this was truly a shocking invitation, this event should not be misinterpreted as an embrace of Hallyu by the North Korean regime. Instead, it functioned as a temporary, performative gesture aligned with inter-Korean diplomacy at the time—a diplomatic exception rather than a rule. The regime’s cultural policy remains deeply hostile to Hallyu, evidenced by the enactment of the Anti-Reactionary Thought Law in 2020, which punishes Hallyu consumption with prison or even execution.

               The “Sally Parks [송아 SongA Channel]” YouTube channel is particularly significant to North Korea’s intriguing media platforms, not as an extension of Hallyu, but rather as a strategic counter-narrative aimed at offsetting its global influence and soft power reach. Presented through the lens of an eleven-year-old girl named Song-A, this channel showcases her lifestyle in Pyongyang. Song-A provides English-spoken vlogs that offer glimpses into her educational pursuits, ardent basketball practices, and occasional immersion in the arts and English language learning. She has additionally highlighted major North Korean attractions, such as the Munsu Water Park and the 75th-anniversary celebration of the Children’s Union.[12]

                Nevertheless, discerning minds raise pertinent questions about the legitimacy of these vlogs. While these videos serve as an extended form of North Korean propaganda, leveraging the presence of a young girl to elicit sentiment among a global audience raises concerns regarding the authenticity of daily life depicted in North Korea. For instance, Song-A resides in Pyongyang, North Korea’s most developed and wealthiest city, masking the reality of the underdeveloped infrastructure among rural regions. In addition, Song-A’s contrived and rehearsed speech patterns, coupled with the perfection of the environments portrayed, posits doubts about the authenticity of this content. Rather than promoting cultural openness, the channel appears to appropriate the visual language and tone of youth-driven content associated with Hallyu, despite lacking the essential freedoms and influences—especially those from Western genres like hip-hop—that define Hallyu’s authenticity and global reach. Most significantly, these videos have minimal enforcement of North Korean principles. This is likely North Korea’s attempt to engage with the global society through falsely curated content, operating under the presumption that mimicking accessible and globally appealing formats will increase international tolerance or sympathy for the regime’s political endeavors.

Unyielding Walls and Suppressed Waves

               Despite the increasing global visibility of Hallyu and its influence across borders, North Korea’s domestic response has remained aggressively oppositional, characterized by forced ideological compliance, severe punishments for cultural subversion, and a persistent media blackout. Rather than demonstrating growth in the realm of cultural exchange, the regime has intensified efforts to insulate its population from the influence of foreign media, particularly the subversive allure of South Korean entertainment. This is evident in North Korea’s rigid censorship, demolition of cultural diplomacy infrastructure, and the establishment of laws targeting “reactionary” content.

               The straggled opportunities for North Korean tourism operations with South Korea are at an all-time low, even suffering demolition. Specifically, the early 2000s Mount Gumgang tourism project, constructed through the Sunshine Policy by the Hyundai Corporation, is being dismantled.[13] Initially meant to foster inter-Korean engagement, the project was terminated in 2008 due to the shooting death of 53-year-old South Korean tourist Park Wang-ja on a North Korean beach. Years later, North Korea began to take down South Korean facilities at Mount Gumgang.[14]

               Additionally, the North Korean regime has adopted a draconian stance toward its citizens’ consumption of South Korean media. In 2020, the regime introduced the Rejection of Reactionary Thought and Culture Act, a doctrine that rigorously enforced punishments for individuals found to be engaging with South Korean media.[15] These penalties range from arduous labor sentences and even the death penalty, depending on whether one is just a consumer or a distributor of South Korean media. For instance, individuals of any age who use “capitalist” terminology—such as referring to one’s spouse as “wife” instead of “dongji” (comrade)—face up to fifteen years of arduous labor at a labor camp.[16] Meanwhile, the death penalty is strictly enforced for those caught distributing South Korean media. Even teenagers have been executed for possessing or sharing K-Dramas, reflecting the regime’s zero-tolerance policy toward cultural infiltration.[17]

               As of 2023, North Korea continues to impose stringent ideological mandates. The intensity of this mandate is exemplified by the directive for citizens to read a minimum of 10,000 pages of propaganda for the year. This requirement urges citizens to read nearly thirty pages of propaganda each day. North Korean citizens are required to diligently journal their daily readings, as this will be presented to the party organization at the end of the year.[18] Despite acknowledging the lackluster nature of propaganda when faced with the allure of South Korean media, compliance with such measures is non-negotiable, as the consequences of nonconformity are severe and even fatal.

               Hallyu’s suppression is not merely cultural—it is a pillar of North Korea’s domestic security policy. By strictly controlling its citizens’ exposure to external influences, North Korea seeks to safeguard its grip on power and negate potential challenges to its authoritarian regime. This implies that the DPRK is adamantly attempting to impose a domestic media and information monopoly. Somehow, similar attempts target international audiences as well, but with a very limited, if any, degree of success.

Contrasting Paths: North and South Korea’s Ideological Implications on Hallyu

               The rise of Hallyu as part of the Asian Ascendancy movement delves into key values that provide a comparative analysis of North and South Korean values. Both states contain a Korean ethnic nexus yet take separate approaches to their responses to Asian Ascendancy through principles of nationalism, secularism, and the role of religion in education.

               North and South Korea exhibit strong nationalist sentiments—albeit with distinct manifestations. Firmly grounded in ethnic nationalism, South Korean nationalism is augmented by a sense of modernity and success achieved within a globalizing world. It is additionally fueled by desires for economic growth and international recognition, making it particularly receptive to the usage of cultural exports for diplomacy and global branding. Therefore, the rise of  Hallyu was embraced by South Korea as both a cultural movement and an instrument of soft power, aiding the country to assert itself across international dimensions. After all, which state would refuse the opportunity to further establish itself politically, economically, and socio-culturally through soft power mitigation?

               In contrast, North Korea fits the narrative that not all states are enthusiastic about cultural influence in global media. The regime’s nationalism is deeply intertwined with its Juche ideology and the personalist regime encompassing the state. This has resulted in a more cautious and restrictive response to Hallyu, as North Korea prefers to reinforce its own narrative established after the formation of the state following the Korean War. For example, this dynamic is observed in the enforcement of North Korea’s Chondoism in the later twentieth century. Chondoism, comprised of traditional Korean shamanism and Confucianism, was employed during Kim Il-Sung’s reign as a political scheme to bolster extreme patriotism in North Korea. It was additionally used as a bridge to reduce tensions with South Korea. However, South Korean officials declined this opportunity, as they recognized the regime’s ulterior motive to establish espionage in South Korean provinces.[19] The prominence of Chondoism in North Korea has recently diminished, due to strict pandemic policies implemented to limit the religious practice.

               Consequently, the role of secularism in North Korea has significantly diverged from the coexistence of religion with the cultural sphere, to cultist personalities. North Korea prohibits religious adherence upon any citizen and hails the Kim dynasty as the ‘saviors’ of the domestic population’s quality of life. It establishes a form of “hard secularism” through the worship of the Kim dynasty, manipulating the traditional secularist dynamic for states to protect religion from extremist distortion while enabling critical thought and information.[20] This repressive structure of secularism stands in contrast to the pluralistic religious tolerance observed in South Korea, where Christian, Buddhist, and other spiritual influences have helped shape the moral themes and creative choices found in some K-dramas and music.[21]While Hallyu does not explicitly promote religion, the cultural values embedded in its narratives—such as community, family, personal redemption, and moral responsibility—often connect with South Korea’s faith-informed social fabric. This newfound role of secularism in North Korea in the twenty-first century is vastly different compared to the promotion of South Korea’s faith-based religious principles in Hallyu.

               North Korea’s current approach to media censorship and suppression presents significant implications for the ideological framework of Hallyu and the Asian Ascendancy in contemporary globalization. It redefines the national and global perspective of state sovereignty and individualism in an ever-evolving society. Unfortunately, amidst a booming era of vibrant Asian culture and philosophy, North Korea is far too concerned with ensuring its own national legitimacy. It is not ready to embrace Hallyu and the broader Asian Ascendancy movement for the benefit of its people and society. Fundamentally, the Kim regime understands that Hallyu cannot be ideologically sanitized or replicated. It is precisely the fusion of liberal modernity, digital connectivity, and Western cultural expressions that renders it irreconcilable with North Korea’s closed, patriarchal state.

Concluding Remarks            

               As the currents of globalization once swept across the international sphere, the phenomenon of Asian Ascendancy and Hallyu stood as a powerful geopolitical force that forged new dynamics and statecraft between Western nations and the global perceptions of Asian cultures. This article discussed North Korea’s strategic employment of Hallyu to reshape its global image, as the regime weaves a carefully curated facade, blurring reality with fiction. Yet, beneath this spectacle lies the narrative of suppression and censorship. While South Korea cemented its role as the creator, distributor, and motivator of Hallyu, North Korea has remained entrenched in the institutionalization of Juche, strictly guarding its populace from the alluring charms of Hallyu, ultimately exemplifying the persistence of regressive forces in contempt of the new wave of globalized cultural exchanges. In an era increasingly marked by nationalist and protectionist currents, North Korea’s refusal to engage with cultural pluralism sinks it to even deeper isolationism. 

Tessa Aguilar is a distinguished graduate of the University of California, Los Angeles, where she earned her Bachelor’s degree in Political Science with a concentration in International Relations, complemented by minors in Global Studies and East Asian Studies. Her academic research is centered on inter-Korean political dynamics, with an emphasis on alleviating interstate animosities through the recognition and reconciliation of historical narratives. She also investigates the strategic deployment of soft power initiatives through modern entertainment and media, with a focus on the international ramifications of state-driven censorship and narrative control.

[1] Osman, Amber, Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani, and Syed Akif Hasan, “Asian Ascendancy: Media in the Age of Globalization.” SpringerPlus 2, no. 1 (2013): 2.
[2] Ibid., 3.
[3] Ibid., 5
[4] J.A. Mangan, “The New Asia: Global Transformation, Regional Ascendancy, and Metaphorical Modernity.” The Triple Asian Olympics - Asia Rising, 2018: 2234.
[5] Gunjoo Jang and Won K. Paik, “Korean Wave as Tool for Korea’s New Cultural Diplomacy,” Advances in Applied Sociology 2, no. 3 (2012): 201.
[6] Ibid., 197.
[7] Ka Young Chung, “Media as Soft Power: The Role of the South Korean Media in North Korea,” The Journal of International Communication 25, no. 1 (2018): 140.
[8] Ibid., 149
[9] Bianca Milanowitsch, “Mapping the Presence of the Korean Wave in North Korea,” International Quarterly for Asian Studies 48, no. 3–4 (2017): 280.
[10] Ibid., 279.
[11] The Guardian, “South Korean K-Pop Stars Perform for Kim Jong-Un in Pyongyang,” Guardian News and Media, April 1, 2018.
[12] YouTube, “Song A’s Life ‘Munsu Water Park Part 2’ |송아|,” YouTube, July 30, 2022.
[13] Samuel Seongseop Kim and Bruce Prideaux, “An Investigation of the Relationship between South Korean Domestic Public Opinion, Tourism Development in North Korea and a Role for Tourism in Promoting Peace on the Korean Peninsula,” Tourism Management 27, no. 1 (2006): 125.
[14] Soo-yeon Kim, “Seoul Voices Regret over NK’s Removal of S. Korean-Built Facilities at Mount Geumgang Resort,” Yonhap News Agency, October 18, 2022.
[15] Seulkee Jang, “Daily NK Acquires Full Text of the Anti-Reactionary Thought Law,” Daily NK, March 21, 2023.
[16] Jieun Kim, “Talking like ‘Capitalist’ South Koreans Can Lead to Prison or Death in North Korea,” Radio Free Asia, March 22, 2023.
[17] Hyemin Son, “North Korean Parents Will Be Punished If Their Children Watch Foreign Media Even Once,” Radio Free Asia, February 23, 2023.
[18] Hyemin Son, “North Korea Orders Citizens to Read 10,000 Pages of Propaganda This Year,” Radio Free Asia, April 28, 2023.
[19] Nicolas Levi, “How North Korea Embraced an Obscure Religion as a Tool for Korean Unification,” NK News - North Korea News, June 22, 2023.
[20] Lynn Davies, “One Size Does Not Fit All: Complexity, Religion, Secularism and Education,” Asia Pacific Journal of Education 34, no. 2 (2014): 191.
[21] Ali, Ghada Mohamed,“2 Composers of K-Drama’s OST Explain Their Approaches.” Korea.net, June 30, 2023.

Bibliography

Ali, Ghada Mohamed. 2023. “2 Composers of K-Drama’s OST Explain Their Approaches.” Korea.net. June 30, 2023. https://www.korea.net/NewsFocus/HonoraryReporters/view?articleId=234751. 

Chung, Ka Young. 2018. “Media as Soft Power: The Role of the South Korean Media in North Korea.” The Journal of International Communication 25 (1): 137–57. doi:10.1080/13216597.2018.1533878.

Davies, Lynn. 2014. “One Size Does Not Fit All: Complexity, Religion, Secularism and Education.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education 34 (2): 184–99. doi:10.1080/02188791.2013.875647.

Jang, Gunjoo, and Won K. Paik. 2012. “Korean Wave as Tool for Korea’s New Cultural Diplomacy.” Advances in Applied Sociology 02 (03): 196–202. doi:10.4236/aasoci.2012.23026.

Jang, Seulkee. 2023. “Daily NK Acquires Full Text of the Anti-Reactionary Thought Law.” Daily NK, March 21. https://www.dailynk.com/english/daily-nk-acquires-full-text-of-the-anti-reactionary-thought-law. 

Kim, Jieun. 2023. “Talking like ‘capitalist’ South Koreans Can Lead to Prison or Death in North Korea.” Radio Free Asia. March 22. https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/seoul-mal-03222023114700.html.  

Kim, Samuel Seongseop, and Bruce Prideaux. 2006. “An Investigation of the Relationship between South Korean Domestic Public Opinion, Tourism Development in North Korea and a Role for Tourism in Promoting Peace on the Korean Peninsula.” Tourism Management 27 (1): 124–37, doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2004.08.001. 

Levi, Nicolas. 2023. “How North Korea Embraced an Obscure Religion as a Tool for Korean Unification: NK News.” NK News - North Korea News. June 22. https://www.nknews.org/2023/06/how-north-korea-embraced-an-obscure-religion-as-a-tool-for-korean-unification/. 

Milanowitsch, Bianca. 2017. “Mapping the Presence of the Korean Wave in North Korea.” International Quarterly for Asian Studies (IQAS), 48(3-4), 273-284. https://doi.org/10.11588/iqas.2017.3-4.7444. 

Osman, Amber, Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani, and Syed Akif Hasan. 2013. “Asian Ascendancy: Media in the Age of Globalization.” SpringerPlus 2 (1). doi:10.1186/2193-1801-2-646.

Mangan, J.A. 2018. “The New Asia: Global Transformation, Regional Ascendancy, and Metaphorical Modernity.” The Triple Asian Olympics - Asia Rising, 23–33. doi:10.4324/9780203720431-9.

Son, Hyemin. 2023. “North Korea Orders Citizens to Read 10,000 Pages of Propaganda This Year.” Radio Free Asia. April 28. https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/10000_pages-04282023093517.html.   

Son, Hyemin. 2023. “North Korean Parents Will Be Punished If Their Children Watch Foreign Media Even Once.” Radio Free Asia. February 23. https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/parents-02232023162227.html. 

The Guardian. 2018. “South Korean K-Pop Stars Perform for Kim Jong-Un in Pyongyang.” Guardian News and Media, April 1. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/01/south-korean-k-pop-stars-perform-for-kim-jong-un-in-pyongyang. 

Kim, Soo-yeon. 2022. “Seoul Voices Regret over NK’s Removal of S. Korean-Built Facilities at Mount Geumgang Resort.” Yonhap News Agency, October 18. https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20221018004000325. 

YouTube. “Sally Parks [송아 Songa Channel].” YouTube, https://youtube.com/@sallyparkssongachannel7794.   

YouTube. 2023. “Song A’s Life ‘I Am Famous!!’|송아|.” YouTube, June 13. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5LqqgvcgYo. 

YouTube. 2022. “Song A’s Life ‘Munsu Water Park Part 2’ |송아|.” YouTube, July 30. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNhoAhUaAAU.

By Ryan Rohrbach, HRNK Research Intern
Edited by Diletta De Luca, HRNK Research Associate

Introduction
          North Korea’s unpredictable responses to the international community’s efforts to curb human rights violations and maintain peace in East Asia stem from the Korean Peninsula’s unique historical context. The influence of North Korea’s 19th-20th century history has just seldom been isolated and analyzed to explain why North Korea commits its current transgressions. North Korea’s most concerning and recent actions include the pursuit of nuclear weapons, the manufacturing and selling of arms to Russia for use in the invasion of Ukraine, and the dispatch of North Korean troops to the Russian military for use in the conflict in Ukraine. At the heart of North Korea’s aggression stands the North Korean people who are unjustly imprisoned and exploited for labor and scientific advancement with disregard for the state’s human rights and economic obligations. Policymakers, advocacy organizations, and academics must fully understand the domestic motivations of the Kim regime to effectively combat North Korea’s aggression and human rights violations. However, in recent years, with the exception of reports authored by Robert Collins and other HRNK authors, analyses of North Korea’s domestic politics have slowed and policymakers have become discouraged as many view North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile development as seemingly “unstoppable.”[1]

            Often responding unpredictably and abnormally to coercive policy initiative from U.S.-aligned nations, the durability of the Kim regime has posed several questions to the international community. First, why do North Korea and South Korea have such different political systems? Second, why has the Kim regime proved to be stable despite North Korea’s history of economic woes and natural disasters? Lastly, what policies can the U.S. and its allies take to stop and reverse the long-term effects of the Kim regime’s systemic human rights violations on North Korea’s future sociopolitical and economic development?

          The sociopolitical history of North Korea and South Korea undoubtedly affects the form that the current North Korean and South Korean polity take. Naturally, answers to these questions should be approached through analyses of North Korea’s divergent sociopolitical development from the human rights-respecting polity that comprised the whole Korean Peninsula to the current authoritarian polity occupying the Korean Peninsula north of the 38th parallel. To reinvigorate efforts to understand North Korea, I suggest a new avenue for analysis of the development of the North Korean polity and society: post-colonial theory. Post-colonial theory is a group of theories that describe the general political, economic, and social development of states that are former colonies of the previous world’s empires. The field of post-colonial studies offers many relatively uncontested theories. Compared to states that were never subjected to the rule of a metropole, former colonies are significantly more vulnerable to authoritarianism, experience lower GDP growth rates, are more likely to develop socialist economies, and are less socioeconomically developed.[2] Post-colonial governments are also more likely to pursue predatory policies while legislative initiatives are inhibited by high degrees of social factionalism.[3] The predisposition of former colonies to these general patterns of political development caused by its identity as a former colony is known as the former colony’s “colonial legacy.”[4] With the history of having been colonized by the Empire of Japan, post-colonial theory largely explains the development of North Korea into its current state.

The Problem: A Lack of Information and Decreasing Motivation

          The goals of explaining why the North Korean polity developed so into today’s state and finding solutions to rectify the Kim regime’s human rights violations motivate many organizations, academics, and policymakers. However, progress on the search for answers to these questions is stalling for many reasons. Since the beginning of the Coronavirus Pandemic, there has been a dearth of breakthroughs in academic research on variables that are associated with increasing or decreasing levels of democracy and sociopolitical development. Academics’ primary research foci have recently shifted from democracy and development to public opinion, political psychology, predictive legislative politics, and election politics.[5] Subsequently, conflicts in the Middle East and Europe have largely taken the attention of the international community from the Kim regime’s human rights violations. Increasing numbers of international issues requiring the attention of analysts and policymakers decreases the focus with which analysts and policymakers can approach North Korea-related problems. Coupled with the ever present lack of new information on domestic North Korean politics and the slowing pace of North Korean politics that began in the late 2010s, many policymakers have become discouraged from confronting remaining questions about North Korea.

            Advocacy organizations and academics must remain empathetic to the discouragement of policymakers and the public. However, policymakers, academics, and advocacy organizations must reevaluate, respecify, and redouble their efforts to understand North Korea’s sociopolitical development. To find an answer to these questions, governments must articulate clear objectives and continue to pursue policies that are unequivocally effective in promoting a state’s respect for human rights and good governance. The international community’s lack of effective policymaking and political coordination towards promoting respect for human rights by the Kim regime and good governance by the North Korean polity has allowed North Korea to commit more brazen and contentious acts such as sending troops to aid Russia in its conflict with Ukraine. Nebulous policy objectives have discouraged US administrations from pursuing well defined, comprehensive, long-term, and unequivocally effective policy.

Comparative Analyses of Both Koreas through Post-Colonial Theory

          The decline of communism and the end of the Cold War in Europe, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East reduced the intensity of academic studies on the impact of a state’s historical identity on that state’s modern government. However, I believe that comparing the post-colonial sociopolitical and economic development of South Korea and North Korea will provide novel answers to policymakers’ questions. Through facile consideration of South Korea and North Korea in post-colonial theory, South Korea’s development into a bureaucratic democracy with a strong capitalist economy was less likely than South Korea’s theoretical development into an authoritarian socialist state like contemporary North Korea. The discontinuity of South Korea and North Korea’s development raises the question about why South Korea and North Korea developed into states with very different modern identities.

          In post-colonial theory, the identity of the colonial power and the length of the colonization are the variables with the largest impact on the size of the autocracy-promoting effect of a state’s colonial legacy on the state’s post-colonial government. North Korea and South Korea were unified and subjugated to the same colonial administration for the same length of time. Given the inexplicability of South Korea’s current political and economy strength through post-colonial theory, it is incredibly important to compare South Korea’s rejection of its colonial legacy and consequent development into a bureaucratic capitalist democracy with North Korea’s development of a socialist and authoritarian polity. Transparent access to records of the South Korean government’s development enables comparisons of North Korea’s development in the context of North Korea and South Korea’s shared identity as a former colony of the Empire of Japan.

            Many post-colonial theory case studies have been conducted on African and Latin American countries that were previous colonies of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and other European states. The prodigious literature on post-colonial analyses of African and Latin American states should serve as a guide for future post-colonial analyses of North Korea and South Korea. It was a study on the connection between socialism and anti-colonial nationalism in Africa that first averred a link between socialism, anti-colonial nationalism, and a state’s colonial legacy.[6] Through comparisons of settler-colonies such as South Africa and non-settler colonies such as the DRC, academics also established the link between a state’s colonial legacy, the strength of the state’s social institutions, and the state’s level of socioeconomic development.[7]

            Of considerable importance in post-colonial analyses of North Korea and South Korea is the mid-1900s Communist Party in South Korea. The role of Communism in early South Korean society is important to understand for many reasons. According to post-colonial theory, South Korea’s moderate- to large-sized Communist faction was likely a byproduct of South Korea’s experience under Japanese rule. During South Korea’s era as a trustee of the U.S. and incipient independent rule, the rise of Communism in South Korea was a major policy issue that spurred South Korean leaders to act in autocratic fashion. In the unified Korea before August 1945, communities inhabiting modern North Korea and South Korea subscribed to the same Communist faction. Understanding of the link between South Korea’s colonial legacy and the ideology, resources, and network of Communism in early South Korea can be applied to explain the political dynamics of early North Korea, as South Korea’s early post-1945 Communist faction was very similar to North Korea’s early post-1945 Communist faction. Post-colonial analyses of Communism in South Korea and North Korea should also serve as a guide for comparative analyses of many other major parts of South Korea and North Korea’s society, government, and economy.
 
Concluding Remarks

          Academics’ quest to attain further understanding of the inner workings of North Korea, advocates’ goals to end and prevent further human rights violations by the North Korean government, and policymakers’ promotion of peace and economic stability in East Asia have all been stalled by the North Korean polity’s harmful domestic and international actions. A lack of progress towards academics, advocates, and policymakers’ goals has disenchanted the South Korean public, the international community, and many governments. No comprehensive analyses on South Korea or North Korea through post-colonial theory have been published, despite clear reasons to explain and resolve the authoritarianism and human rights abuses of the North Korean government through North Korea and South Korea’s shared history as a colony of the Empire of Japan.

          Explanations of North Korea’s development are enabled by South Korea’s miraculous development into a durable capitalist bureaucratic democracy. In the context of post-colonial theory, South Korea’s democratic development is less easily explained than North Korea’s autocratic development. However, comparing the sociopolitical development of North Korea and South Korea will offer insight into how South Korea rejected its colonial legacy and developed into a strong democracy. These analyses should also prescribe new policy tools to promote democracy and humanitarian economic policies in North Korea.
​
            Post-colonial theory was primarily constructed through analyses of European colonialism in Africa and Latin America. However, post-colonial theory concludes that the identity of the colonial power and the length of the colonization are the most important variables in determining the effect of colonialism’s legacy on a former colony. North Korea and South Korea were subjected to the same colonial power for the same length of time. In the case of North Korea and South Korea, the time and identity variables are constant. This enables valid comparative analyses of the sociopolitical and economic development of North Korea and South Korea through post-colonial theory.

            Comparative analyses of North Korea and South Korea should be constructed through prior analyses of European colonialism in Africa and Latin America. These analyses will describe the factors that led to South Korea’s development into a durable capitalist bureaucratic democracy. The results of analyses of North Korea and South Korea’s development should objectively describe how South Korea’s democracy was achieved. These factors will serve as a roadmap for policymakers to promote humane economic policies and democracy in North Korea by respecifying the policies imposed on North Korea by the U.S. and its allies.


[1] Hamre, John, Joseph S. Nye Jr., Victor Cha, Katrin Fraser Katz, Andy Lim, and Ellen Kim. “Recommendations on North Korea Policy & Extended Deterrence.” Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic & International Studies, January 19, 2023

[2] Sørli, Mirjam E., Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Håvard Strand. 2005. "Why Is There So Much Conflict in the Middle East?" The Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (1): 146.; Grier, Robin M. 1999. "Colonial Legacies and Economic Growth." Public Choice 98 (3/4): 317-335.; Viegi, Nicola. 2016. "The Economics of Decolonisation: Institutions, Education and Elite Formation." Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 63 (147): 63.

[3] Diamond, Larry Jay, Juan J. Linz, and Seymour Martin Lipset. 1995. Politics in developing countries: comparing experiences with democracy. 2nd ed. Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers. 42-43.; Bernhard, Michael, Christopher Reenock, and Timothy Nordstrom. 2004. "The Legacy of Western Overseas Colonialism on Democratic Survival." International Studies Quarterly 48 (1): 225-250.; Young, Crawford. 1994. The African Colonial State in Comparative Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 278-290.; Abernethy, David. 2000. The Dynamics of Global Dominance: European Overseas Empires, 1415-1980. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 367.

[4] Grier, Robin. 1999.

[5] This shift is evident through a review of major political science and international relations journals from 2020 onwards. Major journals include the American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, International Organizations, International Studies Quarterly, and tangentially, Political Methodology.

[6] Young, Crawford. 1982. Ideology and Development in Africa. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 98.

[7] Viegi, Nicola. 2016. 63.

Ryan Rohrbach is an incoming PhD student in political science at Washington University in St. Louis. He is an alumnus of the University at Buffalo, where he received his bachelor’s degree in political science and international studies in 2024. His research focuses on developing academics and the US government’s understanding of the impact of international relations on states’ domestic governance of human rights and protest movements. He hopes to reach this goal through the expansion of statistical methods used to model Poisson-distributed data and advocacy for the use of sophisticated research methods in non-academic political science research. He believes these efforts will ultimately provide novel solutions through which the North Korean regime’s autocratic and human rights abuses can be addressed and stopped. 

Abernethy, David. 2000. The Dynamics of Global Dominance: European Overseas Empires, 1415-1980. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Bernhard, Michael, Christopher Reenock, and Timothy Nordstrom. 2004. "The Legacy of Western Overseas Colonialism on Democratic Survival." International Studies Quarterly 48 (1): 225-250. 
Diamond, Larry Jay, Juan J. Linz, and Seymour Martin Lipset. 1995. Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy. 2nd ed. Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers.
Grier, Robin M. 1999. "Colonial Legacies and Economic Growth." Public Choice 98 (3/4): 317-335. 
Hamre, John, Joseph S. Nye Jr., Victor Cha, Katrin Fraser Katz, Andy Lim, and Ellen Kim. “Recommendations on North Korea Policy & Extended Deterrence.” Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic & International Studies, January 19, 2023. 
Sørli, Mirjam E., Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Håvard Strand. 2005. "Why Is There so Much Conflict in the Middle East?" The Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (1): 141-165. 
Viegi, Nicola. 2016. "The Economics of Decolonisation: Institutions, Education and Elite Formation." Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 63 (147): 61-79. 
Young, Crawford. 1994. The African Colonial State in Comparative Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Young, Crawford. 1982. Ideology and Development in Africa. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.