A Report from Pyongyang, December 2011 Stewart Lone University of New South Wales (Canberra Campus)
© Stewart Lone 2012
Until 10 December 2011, I was spending another three weeks teaching one hundred boys and ten girls aged fourteen at Kumsong College, one of Pyongyang’s leading middle schools. My job was to assist them in practicing and familiarising themselves with communication in English. Put simply, this involved reading and discussing the essays in their English-language textbook, engaging them in classroom conversation on a wide range of topics, and, in informal group chats, finding out more about them, their lives and their ideas. I left Pyongyang on the morning of 10 December and, in the afternoon, gave a presentation in Beijing to the Foreign Correspondents Club of China on what I had seen and heard. Many of the questions were thoughtful, seeking only better to understand. However, one European journalist asked, ‘What is the impact of the famine?’ I could only reply, ‘Which famine? The only famine as such in Korea was in the 1990s.’ He was unconvinced. Later, he popped up again and, not asking but insisting, declared ‘There is no industry in North Korea!’ I had earlier told the journalists about the visible increase in the number of cars on Pyongyang’s roads in just the six-month interval since my last visit. I had also mentioned that many of these new cars were made in North Korea (the company uses Fiat technology and, having ridden in one of them, I can say it is no different to being in any mainstream modern sedan). The gainsayer was unconvinced again. I regularly encounter this attitude when I speak to people about North Korea. It seems I or they are living in a science-fiction world, an alternative universe in which nothing is, or can be, as it seems. In a book from 2005, North Korea: The Paranoid Peninsula – A Modern History, the author, who is trying to get to the truth but is heavily, and disastrously, reliant on the words of defectors and refugees, describes a ‘normal day in the life of Pyongyang’. In this, he explains that shopping is a desperate activity because the shelves are so swiftly emptied (I never saw an empty shelf in any of the large or small shops I entered), people struggle to obtain socks or underwear (I cannot comment on the latter but everyone I saw at work or in the street was warmly, and some elegantly, dressed), while personal ‘phone ownership is rare and virtually every call is monitored. This last is, after all, only what one would expect of ‘the most repressive society on earth’ (the stock phrase on amazon.com from anyone commenting on works about North Korea). But in my universe in 2011, the streets of Pyongyang are awash with people using mobile ‘phones with complete abandon. In a hotel coffee shop, the waitress wanted to explain the name of a dish to me in English; she could not find it on her in-phone dictionary so she ‘phoned a friend in the hotel dining room. If the security services were listening in, maybe they did learn something (the English word ‘noodles’). Go to a cafe or restaurant and mobile ‘phones are ringing all over the place. Even schoolchildren have mobile ‘phones (the younger ones do not bring them to school but the older girls do and use them openly in the school grounds). Elsewhere, there is an article from 2006 by Dr. Andrei Lankov, an old friend and colleague and also one of the leading commentators on North Korea. In this scholarly piece, he explains about the natural death of what he calls ‘North Korean Stalinism’. The definition of Stalinism that he offers begins with ‘a system of mass terror’ and ends with ‘a system of personal dictatorship’. The only problem is that, nowhere in his essay, does he identify anything corresponding to a system of mass terror in North Korea and, without terror, our understanding of the term ‘dictator’ or ‘dictatorship’ must radically change. Indeed, one of the principal differences as far as I am concerned between Korea and China is that, in Korea, there has never been anything remotely approaching the regime-sponsored internal brutality of the Cultural Revolution (about which I have heard at length from my wife’s family who were among its countless victims). So let me state this here and now: in all of my visits to North Korea over the past two years, I have seen not a single instance of personal or collective terror or even fear (with one exception – when a young woman was about to enter the hotel lift and saw it empty but for me – she froze in fear or consternation and, as the lift doors closed, for once I forgot that I pride myself on being a gentleman and did not try to reopen them). I contrast this with my own societies, Australia and England, where fear is omnipresent; it is, in fact, a way of life, and Britain, with its five million plus CCTV cameras is a deserved object of ridicule (see The Simpsons episode where Britain’s example of extreme public surveillance is tried in ‘Springfield’ and leads to a mass revolt against the proto-fascist Big Brother society). Fear of North Korea is deeply entrenched in certain societies, not least in Japan. A close friend in Osaka described the situation to me in mid-2011; ‘we are told every day by our media that North Korea is planning to attack us with every bomb at its disposal’. I mentioned this to my teaching colleagues in Pyongyang and they could not believe anyone would be so insane (their word) as to believe this; only a madman, they told me, would even think of such a possibility, and, of course, they are perfectly correct. On a brighter note, a few days after I left Pyongyang in December 2011, I was in Osaka and I saw something I had never seen before. The local TV news had a report from the DPRK. It was a curiosity; it asked the question, ‘what has happened to....?’ and it mentioned a name which I do not now recall. It belonged to a North Korean newsreader and TV presenter, a woman regarded, in Japan at least, as the media face of North Korea over many years. In recent weeks, however, she had disappeared from the screen. What struck me about this lengthy and detailed Japanese press story was that it was so lacking in any kind of hostility or suspicion. Rather, it seemed to be admiring of this woman’s longevity, her force of character even, and to be showing real concern for her health. It was a rare example in Japan, or elsewhere, of viewing North Korea as a place of people ‘just like us’. By mid-December I was back at the family home in England. Within a day or so, the leader of North Korea died of a heart attack in his late sixties. I had the misfortune to catch the ITN News report on TV; it used the footage from Pyongyang but the journalist’s voiceover (he was, of course, not in Pyongyang and probably had never been there) raised doubt about the genuineness of the tears of those shown weeping, raised fears about the security of the world now that a youth was in charge of a nuclear power (a nuclear test apparently makes one a nuclear power), and dismissed the deceased Kim Jong’il as ‘an odious tyrant’. The last press photo I saw of Kim Jong’il in December 2011 was of him inspecting the recently-opened Kaesong Youth Park in central Pyongyang. It is a fun park, filled with the kind of stomach-turning, spine-twisting rides that children adore, plus electric bumper-cars and other such diversions. It opens in the evenings during the week and, according to one of the schoolgirls I taught, stays open until 1am (for those hardy enough to brave temperatures of minus nine degrees or for those working nightshifts, I cannot say). The park has been an enormous success. It is so popular that in an ongoing exhibition of paintings at the Mansudae Art Studio, among all the studies of tigers, workers, and mountain landscapes, one of the major paintings is of a group of children on the most thrilling of these rides. In passing, another of the paintings in the exhibition is of the ‘modern girl’ of Pyongyang, elegantly and colourfully dressed, walking down a Pyongyang avenue, and fixated absolutely on the mobile ‘phone in her hand. One of the fixed ideas about Kim Jong’il is that he was reclusive, presumably terrified to go out from the safety of his tyranny, certainly terrified to leave the safety of the North. Shortly before his death, however, he had travelled quietly to the Russian Far East and had a series of meetings with the Russian president, Medvedev. The aim was to improve Korea’s access to gas and other energy supplies, and, more generally, to drum up business. The North would love to see trade and investment come in from the outside; the mobile ‘phone network was apparently set up with Egyptian investment, one of the most popular beers in Korea is now imported from Argentina, and there are cars on the roads of Pyongyang from every country (including the U.S.). Indeed, anyone wishing to do business with the DPRK can use the services of a gentlemanly Scots lawyer who has been based in Pyongyang for about seven years; he has a website, and an office at the Pyongyang Hotel. North Korea is not a hermit state or a paranoid peninsula. It has long-standing mutually beneficial ties with two of the most important countries on earth; Russia which literally is the powerhouse (it has all the energy) in Europe, and China which historically has been the dominant power in Asia and is now simply retaking that position. Critics may say that North Korea is an economic burden to China, and perhaps also to Russia, but the truth is that it provides a cast-iron guarantee of security to both of those states in a strategically vital part of Northeast Asia. They will not allow such a long-standing and indomitable ally to fall. But I am remiss. We must try to remember that North Korea is the ‘most repressive society on earth’ and that Kim Jong’il was ‘an odious tyrant’. To test these ideas, we may venture into the classrooms of Pyongyang. First point: I was frequently left entirely alone with the children, these innocent and impressionable fourteen year olds, both male and female. When a fellow teacher was in the classroom, it was for two reasons; either he or she was the teacher of this particular class and wanted to see what they were learning, or it was another teacher who would ask me if he or she could sit in solely out of a desire to learn something for themselves (the teachers were particularly fascinated by a book of tongue-twisters that I took for them and were regularly to be seen practicing ‘she sells sea shells... ‘; they just enjoyed the pleasure of language as a game). No-one at any point in any of my hundreds of hours in charge of schoolchildren in Pyongyang has ever said to me, you cannot, or should not, say that (whatever it may be): no-one has ever said, you should not have said that (whatever it may have been). On an earlier occasion, I took a copy of The Simpsons comic book to show the students what a comic in other countries might look like. One of the teachers said, ‘Oh, that’s the one where the mother has a strange hairstyle!’ They already knew about it. Another teacher told me that he has access to Google; he is not in any special position of authority, he is just a teacher. But we must remember that this is ‘the most repressive society on earth’ and that Kim Jong’il is ‘an odious tyrant’. What of the children’s view of Kim, then? His photo is hung in classrooms but, as far as I can recall, not in every classroom. If it appears, it is always beside the photo of his father, Kim Ilsung, and they both look just like senior schoolboys (young, short-haired, without glasses, in high-collared uniform, looking for once, stern and serious, not relaxed or happy). The most common place to see images of Kim Jong’il in Pyongyang is in the feel-good roadside hoardings (again, almost always with Kim Ilsung beside him), all bright colours, smiles, optimistic outlook. A British newspaper once reported that North Korean television ONLY shows pictures of Kim Jong’il and of the military. Really? We are back to that science-fiction alternative universe. From what I have observed, the most common image on North Korean TV is of someone, young or old, singing or playing music: no sign of Kim Jong’il, and not much of the military (except when it is providing the singers). In terms of images, we must also ponder the curiosity of a ‘tyrant’ who allows the most common public image – the lapel badge – to be dominated by his father’s image rather than his own (I have never seen anyone wearing a lapel badge with Kim Jong’il’s photo, only that of Kim Ilsung). The book North Korea:The Paranoid Peninsula argues that every aspect of schooling is related back to the Kim dynasty. Of course, if one were a tyrant, this is probably what one would do. But then, here lies a mystery (the schoolboys I talked to love mysteries, as well as explorers, inventors, and strange phenomena of all types and guises, so let us delve into this one). It is rooted in the fact that in the English-language textbook used in every school across North Korea for fourteen year-olds, there is barely a single mention of Kim Jong’il or even of Kim Ilsung. Instead, there are, for example, lessons on ‘Being Creative’, the science of ‘What happens to us when we sleep?’, and ones specifically on the history of Ireland, South Africa, and the Maoris of New Zealand. In the latter, the schoolchildren are given various terms from the Maori languages to learn. They are also told about the heroic resistance of the Maoris to European colonisation and how they have worked to maintain their unique cultural identity. No mention of Kim Jong’il (not even the possibility that the Maoris may have gained their fortitude by studying his works). The mystery continues. One of the finest speeches in the English language comes, unsurprisingly perhaps, from Shakespeare. It is not the soliloquy by Hamlet nor is it Macbeth’s tortured ‘is this a dagger I see before me?’ It is, instead, that remarkable speech given by Mark Antony in Julius Caesar, beginning with ‘Friends, Romans, countryman...’ but at the heart of which is the recurring, and increasingly accusatory and damning, refrain ‘But Brutus says it is so and Brutus is an honourable man.’ The schoolchildren I taught have heard about various famous names from other countries, such as Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, and the great explorers like Magellan and James Cook (they have also heard of another Englishman, Chaplin, through a documentary shown recently on North Korean TV but that is just by-the-by). I did not ask them if they have ever heard of Shakespeare but on my next visit perhaps we should practice Antony’s speech. They already understand irony. I know because we spent several class hours listening to some very witty jokes, including ones using irony, which they translated from North Korean joke books (and no teacher or official ever said to me, you cannot do this!). There are at least two major flaws in the dealing of countries like the US, Britain and Australia with North Korea. One is that they show no respect. Without respect, there can be no progress in talks and no security in co-existence. The Korean schoolchildren whom I taught in 2011 were, and are, enormously proud of their society; they see themselves as engaged in a great endeavour, still incomplete, but with constant steps towards improvement (the massive construction projects of 2011 plus the spread of mobile ‘phones and computer technology are just some examples of this progress). Yet, no-one, pupil or teacher, ever made a derogatory or disrespectful comment to me about any other society (only about the leaders of some countries). At the heart of respect for others is the ability to reflect on oneself. If we were to see ourselves from the Korean perspective, what would stand out among the good and the bad? The fragmentation of our communities is obvious. The corruption of our leaders is obvious; it is not just Bush, Blair and Howard conspiring to wage aggressive war against Iraq, or the fact that Blair, instead of being on trial, is still attempting to provoke war with Iran (let us all ignore the losses in Iran during its eight-year war against the Western-backed Iraq and kill more Iranian men and women). It is not just Berlusconi with his criminal indictments longer than most inhabitants of our overcrowded and hopeless prisons. We have leaders who tell us that they are taking ‘tough decisions’ when what they are actually doing, because they have no solution, is further destroying our social capital, our primary asset in facing future challenges far greater than the national debt which hypnotises them presently. Looking at all this, perhaps North Korean citizens would see themselves as fortunate and feel sympathy for us; after all, they apparently retain a sense of community and they have leaders who still talk of progress despite privation, not doctors addressing a terminally ill patient with yet more harsh measures and acts of ‘bleeding’ (see the philosopher Jacques Rancière on ‘doctors and democracy’). But if the North Koreans were to look at our culture, our TV and film, what then would they see, and would they still pity us? I suspect they would be appalled at our addiction to horror – look at the evening’s TV and the number of programmes dealing with murder, or that sub-genre of the horror movie in recent years, ‘torture porn’. Look at the fear of citizen towards citizen; the locked doors of the aged and the caging of our children against unseen predators at every corner (read Frank Furedi’s works for an overview of our ‘culture of fear’). Are we not in the same situation that the great philosopher-critic Walter Benjamin observed in 1930s Europe, where so many members of our society are so alienated from each other and the society itself is so fragmented and failed that we sub-consciously hope for its annihilation? The society Benjamin was describing was Nazi Germany and that should give us pause for thought about how our adoration of death, misery and cruelty as entertainment, as well as our complacency in the face of our own political hypocrisy and corruption, makes us seem in the eyes of others. The second flaw in our dealing with North Korea is the refusal to think of that country’s leader as anything but ‘an odious tyrant’. If one allows that the Kim family is not tyrannical, and that the people of North Korea willingly maintain the existing system because it offers them security from enemies with more guns and money (and aggressive intent) than they, then the entire, nakedly racist attitude towards North Korea begins to crumble; and then what would James Bond do for his next Fu Manchu-style Oriental villain? What would we all do for a pantomime ‘Oriental’, merciless, inhumane, and so utterly evil that we could all comfortably, and comfortingly, hate him and wish him ‘taken out’. If the Kim family is not populated with tyrants and madmen, then there must be another reason (in fact, a very cogent and, even for us, understandable reason) for the North Korean determination to possess nuclear weapons: it might even have something to do with our own overt hatred and contempt, that hatred and contempt which used to be directed at China a century ago, was then transferred to Japan in the 1900s, went back to China in the 1950s, and now shines bright on Korea. But, with a leader in Pyongyang who is neither a tyrant nor a madman, the entire military logic of sustaining immense forces in readiness for an outbreak (which has never come since 1950 and, at least since the 1970s, was never even likely to come) begins to stumble. With a leader in Pyongyang who is neither a tyrant nor a madman, the entire political logic of endless sanctions begins to crumble (will they be applied to Saudi Arabia when it develops its own nuclear weapons in response to those of Iran?). Instead, with a leader who is neither a tyrant nor a madman, the possibility of giving and receiving respect, of exchanging ideas, of coming to an accommodation, and of reducing hostility and hatred, which thereby defuses the fear behind nuclear weapons, begins actually to be plausible. But, of course, I am forgetting once more. North Korea is the ‘most repressive state on earth’ and the leader of North Korea is, was, will be, an ‘odious tyrant’. Our leaders and our media consistently tell us this, and they are honourable men.
November 2011 Visit to Pyongyang A Samoan in the midst of Pyongyang Litea Ah Hoi was born in Samoa and lives in Porirua, New Zealand.
North Korea, just the sound of the name would make most shudder including myself prior to my visit. When Rev Don Borrie asked if I would go to the DPRK, Dominion Peoples Republic of Korea, without thinking, I said yes. And I thank Don for the opportunity of a life time experience.
I want to make it clear, I’m not a staff member of the United Nations, so my visit wasn’t to discuss famine, food shortage, human rights issues or Labour camps. I’m not employed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, so it wasn’t tasked with discussing National/International policy on nuclear weapons and nor am I qualified to. I accepted the invitation initially because I find it hard to say no but the cultural exchange between us was enormous.
As an immigrant, I understand the concept of having my own identity. Born and raised in Samoa in the Samoan language, the cultural practices and customs gave me a steer towards my journey to Pyongyang, North Korea.
For many Pacific peoples living in New Zealand, traditional customs and cultural practices still occur for e.g., evening prayers in the home. In Samoa when the sun set, a bell in each village would ring. That bell told everyone, it’s time to go inside and have evening lotu’s, (prayers). The bell would ring again to let people know prayer time is finished and only then, were you allowed outside. If a foreigner told us, we couldn’t practice this, as it contravenes the Bill of rights or another bill, we would ignore it, putting it down to palagi ignorance of our culture.
North Korea is no different. Yes they have a very stringent regime and if that’s all they’ve known, who then are we to say, how they live is wrong? We cannot impose our version of democracy on a country that believes otherwise. Who’s to say our way of life is right? In China there’s Lao Gai Camp and no, it’s not an Easter camp where everyone finds the hidden eggs. Reading excerpts from Qi Jiazhen book “Tears of Freedom” would make any man cry, as Lao Gai camp is a labor camp. The world would never compose human rights issues on a powerful nation like China. In fact NZ have a free trade agreement with China so it’s not in our interest. Why do we cry foul with North Korea? Simple, because the US says so and because according to them any production of nuclear weapons is unacceptable.
Ironically here in NZ, professionals and statistics tell us we have over 200 thousand children living below the poverty line. Human rights issue? Yes, according to experts and the UN. There a hundreds of people living in overcrowded homes right under our noses. The health, well being, education, and hungry children are frequent events in NZ. Human rights issues? We may have to remove the log in our own eyes before trying to remove the speck from our neighbours.
I didn’t see nuclear weapons, a labour camp, human rights issues, I didn’t see people going hungry. To comment on these, would be purely unprofessional and manipulating.
What I can comment on is my visit to Kumsong School in Pyongyang. We visited a classroom of 14-15 year old males having an English lesson.
Pictured below: Kumsong students with Richard Lawrence, lecturer from Waikato Institute of Technology and Litea Ah Hoi.
A question was put to these students by the teacher: “What other energy sources are out there”? One very well spoken, articulate young man stood up and said, “Solar, hydro and wind”. I thought to myself, wow these boys are going to change the face of North Korea. They already have more than a glimpse about what’s happening in the world outside of their own.
They were like normal teenage boys, they were very courteous, intrigued, curious, well spoken and very bright. It was great interacting with them in English. Kumsong School has previously had a NZ English teacher. These students knew where NZ is and have heard many stories about NZ.
My thoughts wondered to the time while in Savaii Samoa, when accompanying my uncle to a school, where a class was having an English lesson. I also thought about my teaching time at Whitireia Polytechnic with my ESOL class. This classroom experience wasn’t any different to many classrooms around the world learning the English language.
One of my favourite moments was in Nampo city. While standing in the street, kids walked by and stared, obviously school had just finished and like most kids were probably making there way home. Typical curious cats, wondered what they’ve encountered when they saw me. I waved, they giggled and laughed. I said “hello”, they said “hello” back. I snapped a picture of them, they looked so curiously cute.
Pictured below are children from Nampo City. Nampo is about 200km out of Pyongyang.
I love this picture, it wasn’t organized or arranged and gives a snapshot of the people and children in Nampo City. The one wearing the red scarf managed to shout out a “bye bye” before leaving.
Pictures paint a thousand words and for me visiting Pyongyang, North Korea nullified much of the western propaganda we’re exposed to. I saw thousands of acres of rice fields, corn fields, orchards and vegetables. Nampo City in my view are self sustainable like many co-operative villages (farms) I visited. They have an agriculture sector that surpasses many 1st world countries, that’s not saying there’s a possibility of food shortage.
The people of North Korea are very beautiful, warm, kind and loving with a great sense of humour. The laughed, probably more at me, without me understanding. To take that away from them would be like trying to take a cub from its mother. She will defend her cub and her territory to the death.
There is a silently open statement about overpopulated countries like North Korea, equals less food and land. That’s not what I saw. To quote Paul Vallely “The idea that there are too many poor people is the propaganda of a rich, western, elite determined to preserve its privileged stranglehold on the world's resources”. The same can be said about the propaganda of the western about North Korea, its people and its country. It’s a stranglehold to control a nation that does not want to be controlled. November 2010 Fact-finding Delegation to DPRK
In November 2010 a NZ DPRK Society delegation comprising our Deputy Chairman, Dr. Tim Beal accompanied by a former member of the NZ Parliament Matt Robson visited Beijing and Pyongyang. Tim Beal is an expert on North East Asia and has published a book (North Korea - The Struggle Against American Power) as well as numerous papers on the DPRK. He maintains a website on geopolitics which monitors current affairs with a special emphasis on Korea (http://www.timbeal.net.nz/geopolitics/ ) His second book on North Korea will be published soon.Matt Robson is a lawyer. As a member of the NZ parliament he was Minister of Disarmament and Arms Control and Associate –Minister for Foreign Affairs responsible for development aid 1999-2002. Now days he is active in the Parliamentarians Network For Nuclear Disarmament (PNND) and a Board Member Of Aotearoa Lawyers For Peace (ALP) From the meetings held it became clear to the delegation that the DPRK strongly desires an end to hostilities, a nuclear free Korean peninsula, re-integration with the world community and wants discussions to bring these about (see report below). It is disappointing that the ROK/USA/Japan are refusing to enter into these discussions. It is also disappointing that our own NZ Government not only supports this stance, but has stopped the NZ Ambassador to DPRK visiting Pyongyang. Our NZ Ministry of Foreign Affairs should in fact be actively undertaking the sort of discussions that the Society delegation took part in.
Schedule of Meetings November 2010 delegation to China and DPRK BEIJING, CHINA Monday 1 November (Tim Beal only)
Tuesday 2 November (Tim Beal only)
Wednesday 3 November
Thursday 4 November
DPR KOREA Saturday 6 November
Sunday 7 November
Monday 8 November
Tuesday 9 November
Wednesday 10 November
Thursday 11 November
Report from Matt Robson- Representative Of Parliamentarians Network For Nuclear Disarmament (PNND) and Board Member Of Aotearoa Lawyers For Peace (ALP)
Fact-Finding Trip to the DPRK, With a Special Emphasis On Nuclear Disarmament Organised By the NZ DPRK Society 5 - 12 November 2010
Delegation Dr. Tim Beal (Retired senior lecturer at Victoria University of Wellington, author of a book and numerous articles on Korean Affairs, Deputy Chairman of NZ-DPRK Society) Hon Matt Robson ( PNND/ALP ,Lawyer and former NZ Minister of Disarmament and Arms Control and Associate –Minister for Foreign Affairs responsible for development aid 1999-2002) Introduction PNND and ALP were invited by NZ- DPRKS to participate in a fact-finding visit to the DPRK. The DPRK government did not fund the trip but, via the Korea-NZ Friendship Society, a unit of the government’s Committee for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries, did provide two guides/interpreters. NZ- DPRKS’ aim is to promote friendship and cooperation between our two countries and as part of that aim tries to disseminate factual information on the DPRK. It does not act as an advocate for the political system of the DPRK, anymore than its counterpart acts as an advocate for New Zealand’s system. But it does aim for New Zealand to develop normal and mature bi-lateral relations between our two countries and in so doing to act independently and assist the peace process and to recognise that an attempt is made to use the DPRK, like the South- the Republic of Korea (ROK), as a pawn in a much larger political, economic and strategic game played between much larger players, in particular the United States and China. ALP/PNND’s purpose was to explore with the appropriate government bodies, agencies, institutions and organisations in the DPRK the most practical ways to cooperated on nuclear disarmament. It was also conceived as a trip whereby the proposal for a North East Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone (NWFZ), promoted by the former Japanese Foreign Minister, could be discussed as well as re- issuing an invitation for parliamentarians of the Supreme People’s National assembly to join PNND and work with colleagues in Parliaments throughout the world on nuclear disarmament initiatives. Because to get to the DPRK from New Zealand it is necessary to travel through China and collect a visa from the embassy in Beijing, the opportunity was also taken to discuss nuclear disarmament and Chinese views on the conflict on the Korean peninsula and the 6 party talks. This was important given the heightened tension with the sinking of the South Korean naval vessel, the Cheonan, a few months ago, for which ROK blamed the DPRK, and the stalemate of the 6 Party Talks. Both Tim and I are very grateful for all the work put in by Professor Ru Ling, a researcher at Colombia University both for her hard work in setting up the various meetings in Beijing (no easy feat!) from both New York and in Beijing. As well she was at hand to ferry us around and negotiate the Beijing Traffic and in general to advise and counsel. The Chinese embassy in Wellington had also gone into overdrive to ensure that official meetings were scheduled. And of course in all of the these meetings the indefatigable Alyn Ware of PNND and ALP had a hand somewhere and contributed to the fact that meetings happened and were successful.
Synopsis Of The Trip I was in China for only 3 days in transit to the DPRK. Therefore the report does not pretend to provide an in-depth expert view of official or NGO views in either country. But I hope that it does provide a cross spectrum of viewpoints and facts that is often not evident in the reporting of the issues in mainstream media , whether it be the controlled media of China and the DPRK or the so-called “free media” in the West. Current border tensions and threats of war continue to make the Korean peninsula a world flashpoint. It is important that New Zealand and New Zealanders become informed and that our government adopts a constructive approach to the issue , refraining from the temptation to score political points by succumbing to a polarised view of “angels” on one side and “villains” ( or axis of evil) on the other. It would pay to give greater consideration to the Chinese positions on these issues. First, China as a next door neighbour is highly informed on the key issues and second, consistently plays the role of peacemaker and conciliator. New Zealand can play an effective role in promoting and assisting the resolution of conflicts in the region, including the nuclear crisis, but only as an independent actor, using its growing international credibility arising from our nuclear free legislation and leadership in nuclear disarmament initiatives such as the New Agenda Coalition, the International Court of Justice case against nuclear weapons and support for the UN Secretary-General’s Five-Point Plan for nuclear disarmament. New Zealand has supposedly moved on from being an unquestioning member of the Western nuclear alliance with its discriminatory approach of supporting nuclear weapons in the hands of some countries but not others. NZ now officially promotes a non-discriminatory norm against nuclear weapons globally, and it is this that gives NZ credibility in NE Asia. However, there are some remaining vestiges of our former discriminatory approach that could hamper our role in the region. We were part of the armed force supporting South Korea in the 1950-53 war and we are a partner in the armistice. Technically, we are still at war. It is time, and would be very constructive, to support the initiatives to have a permanent peace treaty forged. I hope that my report plays some part in the process to get New Zealand behind that initiative and to end the international isolation of the north for the benefit of all Koreans and the world at large. In the rest of the report I will provide more detail on the meetings held, concentrating on disarmament and peace initiatives. Tim who has written extensively on the DPRK and is in fact writing a new book to update a previous one, has his own report concentrating on the wider economic and political issues given his far greater knowledge and expertise on these subjects. My particular brief from PNND and ALP was to explore possibilities of further cooperation with parliamentarians and disarmament organisations on nuclear disarmament initiatives and the possible promotion of a NWFZ for North-East Asia Beijing November 3 - 5 2010 In Beijing we had meetings arranged with: - Ministry of Foreign Affairs Department of Arms Control and Disarmament - Chinese People’s Association for Peace and Disarmament - Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs - Chinese Arms Control and Disarmament Association The topics discussed with all the above were: - The NPT Review Conference held in May 2010 in New York - Views on the Obama initiatives for nuclear disarmament - North East Asia NWFZ - Korea - Encouraging Chinese parliamentarians to join PNND
All of the organisations and representatives listed above had the same or similar views on these topics. 1. NPT Review Conference Little progress had been made. China is always willing we were informed to take real steps to nuclear disarmament. But it is of the view that the NPT Review Conference achieved little and that other nuclear armed powers, in particular the US, are not sincere in actually disarming. 2. Obama China supports the UN Secretary –General’s 5-point plan but believes that the biggest obstacle is the United States. It does not believe that President Obama and his administration are sincere. The view is that President Obama is spouting rhetoric. In particular the Chinese view is that the US still wishes to encircle China militarily and that its nuclear arms strategy is geared to that. 3. North East NWFZ While not dismissing this initiative of the former Japanese Foreign Minister the view was that until the hostility of the US and Japan towards China ended and genuine steps taken to nuclear disarmament, including Ban Ki-Moon’s 5 point plan, then this NWFZ cannot be implemented. Denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and a genuine peace treaty agreed to by the US and the end of US/Japanese/ROK military exercises were also seen as essential preconditions. The MOF officials raised the recently signed Wellington Declaration (US/NZ) as a sign that New Zealand might be moving away from an independent foreign and military policy to one more closely aligned to the US. 4. Korea China is keen for the 6 party talks, which it chairs, to resume. China believes that the US and ROK should drop their preconditions (e.g. DPRK accepting responsibility for the sinking of the Cheonan, abandoning nuclear weapons without negative security assurances and without normalisation of relations.) China supports the DPRK proposal of denuclearisation of the peninsula and working towards reunification through setting up a federal system. As part of this process, the DPRK which previously accepted weapon inspection requires an absolute security guarantee that it will not be attacked by the United States and its allies. Denuclearisation of the peninsula would mean that the DPRK would abandon and destroy its nuclear weapons as long as the ROK also declared itself to be nuclear free and withdrew from a nuclear alliance with the US. The DPRK position is that the ROK does station nuclear weapons on its territory although it is generally believed that there are no nuclear weapons on ROK territory. They see the real target of US pressure, e.g. through military exercises off the Korean peninsula, as China. They want The DPRK to come out of isolation and want it taken off what was President Bush’s “axis of evil list” and is now, under Obama, a more muted “States of Concern” list. Until the above occurs China cannot see the DPRK abandoning its nuclear weapon programme. The invasion of Iraq is seen as a justification for the DPRK’s position as it is for China’s .Similarly China cannot take bigger steps to disarmament (although it has a no-first strike pledge, supports NWFZ’s expanding, signed the NPT, supports Ban-Ki Moon’s 5-point plan) until it sees the US taking what it considers t be serious steps to nuclear disarmament. China recognises that in the US Nuclear Posture Review that President Obama has actually included two of their key demands: - Lowering the role of nuclear weapons; and -negotiating further reductions with Russia. This has been a precondition for China entering nuclear disarmament talks. However, Chinese officials stressed that these proposals have yet to be put into effect. When they are they will take them seriously. 5. PNND I asked all of those we met with to use whatever influence they had for Chinese deputies to join PNND. I stressed that membership allowed for discussion and a wider appreciation of Chinese viewpoints. There is a fear it seems (although not explicitly stated) that such a group of MPs, independent of government, could be used against China. I stressed that this is not the case but it will take more contact and dialogue with government and parliamentarians to get members and participation.
The Democratic People’s Republic Of Korea 5-12 November 2010 Introduction And General Comments When invited to be part of this delegation on behalf of PNND I knew that the very fact of going to a country which has been declared to be “evil” and “villainous” and a renegade from the “international community”( a term which means all things to all people) would raise eyebrows. I was right. But on the other hand a number of friends and colleagues said they were intrigued by the country and would like to visit. I treated this as a fact finding mission. My major aim was to form as an informed a viewpoint as possible on what possible role New Zealand government and New Zealanders can play in ensuring that here is a peaceful solution to the dangerous conflict that exists between the south and the north and between the United States ( and Japan)and the DPRK. I was of the view before I went, and reinforced by my visit, that Cold War type politics and blindly following the axis of evil characterisation of the DPRK is not helpful or rational. While there are human rights violations and a deficiency of democracy in the DPRK that can and should be criticised, outright condemnation of the State and a failure to appreciate the genuine security concerns that prompt DPRK’s foreign policy will fail to resolve the conflicts and only push DPRK into an even more defensive position. These security concerns include the facts that there has been no formal end to the war; that the US has threatened” regime change” in DPRK and has not guaranteed not to attack; that South Korea, Japan and the US continue provocative military exercises off the coast of DPRK including into disputed territorial waters; and that South Korea, Japan and the US maintain a first-use policy for the possible use of nuclear weapons against DPRK. DPRK’s rationale for leaving the NPT and openly developing a nuclear weapons capability was the US/UK invasion of Iraq after the UN had destroyed Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. DPRK therefore announced that it therefore required nuclear weapons in order to deter attack. For without such weapons DPRK would be defenceless as Iraq was. The small New Zealand-DPRK Society , in which the Rev Don Borrie and Dr Tim Beal of Victoria University, has played a role well beyond its size for many years to bear light on both the DPRK as a society and its political positions. Unfortunately the lazy position of much of the media and of politicians is to just accept the “axis of evil” viewpoint and save themselves the trouble of actually looking at the facts. On returning to New Zealand the NZ-DPRK Society has suggested that the government could play a mediating role if it took an independent stance open to the security concerns of all the States involved. And New Zealand should support: -Resumption of the 6 Party Talks -Discussion of the proposals for denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula -Negotiations for a Peace Treaty to replace the Armistice of 1953 -Pursuing the steps already discussed between the North and the South under the Sunshine Policy of former President Kim of the ROK for peaceful reunification - Bringing the DPRK out of isolation
The DPRK Yes it was a shock to be relieved of my mobile phone at Pyongyang Airport. I got it back when I left 7 days later. Also to experience, after the large modern international airport at Beijing, a capital city’s an airport that was like a New Zealand airport of the 1970’s. But then that was a good introduction to a country that is in a state of siege, which is not connected by internet and satellite (for the general population) to the outside world and where infrastructure in general, from roads to buildings, is in urgent need of massive capital investment. We were met by Mr Pak Yong Gun the Secretary General of the Korean-Asia Pacific Exchange and his younger counterpart Mr Hwang Sung Chol Secretary-General of the Korea-New Zealand Friendship Society. They were to be our guides, companions and translators. Mr Pak had been in New Zealand once and in Australia a number of times. He had also studied at the University of British Guyana and had an expert knowledge of Latin America History, culture and politics as well as a broad knowledge of Western Philosophy. Mr Hwang had not been to New Zealand but followed events there closely and had spent 5 years in Tehran as a diplomat. Both had excellent English, a good sense of humour and loved to debate issues with us. Our hotel was basic but adequate with a friendly and helpful staff. You did need to get up before 7am though to get hot water!! Walking outside and around the area was no problem but there was not a lot to do and see and shops are functional not showcases.  Dr. Tim Beal, Mun Jae Col, Vice Chairman of the People's Assembly Committee for Cultural Relations, Hon Matt Robson, Hwang Sung Chol, Secretary General of the Korea-NZ Friendship Society November 6 – Saturday Kim Muy Yan Hospital Pyongyang We were guided by the head of the hospital Dr Jo Won Chol. He and his staff stressed that they provided the best care they could and cooperated with colleagues throughout the country but did not hide that they needed a great deal of investment in equipment, modern technology ,upgrading the buildings and facilities and the latest generation of drugs of all types. They stated that they wanted to collaborate internationally and blamed the international boycott of the DPRK, led by the US, as the basis for their great needs. They asked me to press for help to obtain third generation antibiotics and updating of their equipment. The governments of Japan and the United States, they advised, have prevented the importation of modern medical technology even when it has been donated from within those countries. They welcomed sharing of information and assistance from the medical fraternity in New Zealand. The message: We want to participate fully with the international medical fraternity, we don’t want war, we want to interact with the world and we want peaceful reunification with the south. We would welcome contact and assistance with New Zealand This was a constant message: we want contact and collaboration with New Zealand. The University of Science and Technology- Pyongyang This state of the art university is nearing completion and will eventually hold 2000 of the top students. The Vice-President is David Kim a Chinese-Korean who is also VP of Yonbian University in China. The University is an initiative of evangelical Christians and most of the staff we met were avowed Christians. The DPRK government accepts this, presumably reluctantly, but this is not atypical. Much of the foreign aid/education involvement in North Korea is Christian. We met with the VP and members of the international staff. A number are from the United States, teaching everything from Chemistry, IT to English. The University teaches Business, Life Sciences, Chemistry and Engineering. Dr Kim stressed, after I explained the focus of PNND that the university was not political and focused on a global vision and objective scholarship. The Head of Chemistry was a young Korean who had studied at the University of Florida. Walking together, and alone, around the campus he told me that whatever they needed they were getting and that here were great changes going on in general. He said that all Koreans knew that they had to modernise and be part of the world but wanted to do that on their terms and not have the terms imposed. The head of English was from Holland and had taught in China for many years. But she said that she loved being in the DPRK and was finding it stimulating to teach there and to interact with Korean people and the students. It was stressed to us that the University would welcome the renewal of scholarships from New Zealand (offered by NZAID but cancelled by government ), teachers from New Zealand and whatever academic collaboration possible. November 7- Sunday Bongsu Presbyterian Church Service The Rev Don Borrie has built a strong relationship with this church in Pyongyang. I gave greetings from New Zealand to the congregation and this was well received. The German Ambassador, Gerhard Thiedemann, was in attendance and the following evening he invited us to his home for a discussion. This allowed us to see more of Pyongyang at night away from our hotel. As foreigners can’t use taxis this provided us with an opportunity to tour another part of the city and to hear the views of the ambassador. Seeing the overloaded and old trams and the lack of lighting confirmed the need for a massive investment in infrastructure. The ambassador was pessimistic on the possibility of economic development and political change and also did not see much use in foreign investment and joint ventures. Nor did he think that greater development aid and involvement would assist the DPRK to enter the modern world. He was not optimistic about the DPRK moving to nuclear disarmament. It was interesting to contrast his views with that of a German businessman and his Chinese wife who live in Pyongyang and have had a joint IT company for a number of years. His view is that the regime wants to open up, in a controlled way, and forge contacts globally and that joint ventures like his can play an important part. November 8 - Monday Red Cross Society We had a short “meet and greet” meeting with the international representative from Denmark, Ole Hauge, stationed in Pyongyang, and then met with the 2 young representatives of the Korean sector. They had excellent English so no translation was necessary. They have much lower government financial help than in the past and so more and more rely on the community. They are allowed to launch independent appeals and are developing a programme to go to corporates. Their member ship is 1.07 million with a youth wing of 370,000. They have existed since 1946 and have played an important role in rebuilding from the war and the various natural and other tragedies that have struck the country. They are an important link with the outside world. In 2010 they had to cope with 5 floods. They have a bi-lateral with Norway and would welcome one with New Zealand. They work well with their counterpart in ROK and the family reunification programme has resumed. One programme that New Zealand could help with is purchasing family medical kits which cost US$ 15-20. A power point of their work and history is available.
Institute for Disarmament and Peace This is a government research institute. We met with Ma Tay Hui a Senior Researcher. He stressed that peace for DPRK threatened by the invasion threat from US, Japan and ROK. The nuclear weapons held by this alliance and the threat of invasion meant that the DPRK had to develop a nuclear deterrent. The DPRK had been the only one of the 6 parties without nuclear weapons or a nuclear umbrella ( Japan and ROK). Nuclear disarmament and disarmament in general could only be achieved if: -6 Party Talks resumed without conditions -Agreement on denuclearisation of the whole peninsula (the North would dismantle its nuclear weapon capacity and the South would withdraw from its nuclear weapon alliance with the US and not station any nuclear weapons on its territory) -A Peace Treaty with guarantees of no invasion -Peaceful reunification on a federal basis We asked on what basis the DPRK would judge that the US position had genuinely changed. This question was based on the revised US policy under Obama, the Nuclear Posture Review) whereby the US has reduced the role of nuclear weapons to primarily one to deter other nuclear weapons. He reiterated the steps above, as did almost every other representative and NGO that we met, and said that the DPRK would only be positive about the new US position if they witnessed a genuine commitment, and the steps to prove it, by the US to peaceful reunification of the two Koreas, a Peace Treaty and guarantees of no invasion and in general an end to confrontation and a new era of peaceful cooperation with good relations on all fronts. This would only occur, in his view, if trust was built by positive actions. Then they would have a positive view of Obama’s nuclear disarmament initiatives in general. A NWFZ for north-east Asia was not seen as feasible until the above was gained. But New Zealand’s anti- nuclear position was understood and respected. June 9 Ryunbak Middle School.  We toured the school and met with an English class. The level of English obtained was impressive. This is reflected in the large number of younger officials we met who speak good English. This is obviously important for a country that needs engagement with the wider world.It is also a school that specialises in drama, dance and music. A wonderful concert was put on for us. Computers are widely used but they are not linked to the internet (and the same in the universities). Schooling is compulsory and free until 17. 9 November Tuesday - Ministry of Foreign Affairs  Our topics were similar to those discussed at the Institute for Disarmament. The viewpoints were also the same- as with all our meetings. But the hostility of Japan to the DPRK, along with the US, was stressed The implementation of the 1990 Agreement with the US has been on hold and the return to this is seen as essential for solving the conflicts. New Zealand established bi-lateral relations in 2001 and this was seen as positive. The cancellation of the planned NZ ambassadorial visit in June, in response to the sinking of the Cheonan, was a disappointment s was the cancellation of the promised 20 scholarships. Scholarships were seen as a positive way of building relations and assisting the DPRK at the same time. DPRK has long had excellent relations with ASEAN and most of its individual members and would welcome excellent relations with New Zealand on all levels from economic, cultural to sport. Vice-Chairman of National Peace Committee and Deputy to Supreme People’s Assembly – Mon Jo Chol His views were in accord with those of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I invited him to join with PNND but there was no immediate acceptance. But he and the Assembly would welcome a visit by New Zealand parliamentarians to discuss issues of mutual concern and to establish closer ties. Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation (NG0) - Kathi Zellweger Kathi has been in the DPRK for 4 years. She has built up excellent relations with all her local counterparts and officials. Her NGO concentrates on: environmental sustainability, reafforestation, renewable energy development and ornithological research. She advocates greater development aid assistance as a positive contribution to change in the DPRK on many levels. She believes that greater integration with the world economy and community is a genuine policy. Kathy is very pleased with the re-involvement of UNDP and other UN agencies and can only see good coming from this for both the DPRK and for easing tensions in the region. This was also the opinion of other aid workers who we met at meal times at our hotel. All of them stressed the eagerness of those they worked with to receive their knowledge and assistance and there friendliness. They were keen to encourage a greater level of development aid both from their own countries and internationally. Kumsong College This was another high school in Pyongyang with a good English programme. They had recently had an English teacher from New Zealand sponsored by the NZ-DPRK Society. He had been very popular and the students had prepared a slide show of his time there. Knowledge of New Zealand was understandably high because of him as was the level of English of the students. Plans are underway to send another NZ English teacher. 10 November Wednesday National Reconciliation Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea -Ryong Chol Sik Secretary_General Puek Song Al Vice-Secretary General The Committee was set up in 1948. Viewpoints on the causes of conflict and solutions were similar to those of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, greater emphasis was laid on the role of the present ruling party of ROK as an obstacle by: -seeking confrontation e.g. military exercises, disputed border claims, blame for sinking of Cheonan -refusing to implement the Sunshine Policy of former President Kim -wanting to collapse the North and absorb it into the South
3 steps for reunification: - A Peaceful community - An Economic Community - A National Community They were firmly of the opinion that the ROK and US plan a pre-emptive strike- OPLAN 5029 Cheonan has been used to extend the US Operational Command of ROK military until 2015. ROK has joined the US MD System and continues joint (nuclear armed) military exercises. Like the other meetings, no hope of a North-East Asia NWFZ seen unless genuine peace, with a Treaty, achieved. Economists from Academy of Social Sciences The viewpoint was that until 1980’s DPRK was near the level of developed countries. Tim and the economists had a vigorous debate on the accuracy of this. In 1990 with the collapse of the Soviet and East European markets and then with isolation and sanctions development dived leading to what is termed the “Arduous March”. A firm foundation has been set, we were told, for rapid progress under a policy of maximum self-reliance. The following areas were instanced as proof of this: -Science and Technology and development of hydro-power to overcome electricity shortages -Agriculture advances – 320,000 hectares of land into production since 1998 Targets: -Level of production to 1980 levels -Modernisation on scientific basis -Technological basis to the economy -Raise living standards in food and housing
JOINT VENTURES Joint Ventures are important and there are 375 in place – China, Hong Kong, Thailand, Russia. Tax rate for JVs is 10%. A separate ministry with its own website now coordinates all JV’s. This is clearly a development that they want and provides and excellent area for increased cooperation with many countries, New Zealand included. We asked for budget details, including defence spending, but these were not available here or through other enquiries. The opinion on defence spending (approximately 10.8% of the budget was the estimate) and the need for a nuclear deterrent was that of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Under 19 National Football Team We met with the team and their coaches at a practice. They are highly successful. They would welcome matches against a New Zealand side.
11 November – Thursday Democratic Lawyers Association, Korean National Peace Committees and International Physicians for Peace The Secretary-General of the DLA, Ry Kyong Il, had attended a 2009 IALANA Conference and the September 2010 MPI Geneva Meeting. All of the groups welcomed contact with both the international bodies and their New Zealand counterparts.
Daedongyang Combined Fruit Farm This was reached after an hour and a half journey. A number of checkpoints, police and army, were encountered on these trips. We had no problems but it indicated the level of security. Other than that there is little evidence of a military presence in Pyongyang and its outskirts that we saw. This state farm is extremely large and has 2000 employees growing apples and pears and raising pigs. Army labour is responsible for much of the development. Large cool stores have been built and expansion is planned.
12 November –Friday Departure from DPRK. The return of my cellphone.
Concluding Impressions The concentration in the DPRK is on economic development and greater integration with the world. However, this is being attempted while maintaining the political system of the Korean Workers Party as the party in power. There is recognition of the need to change but the emphasis is that this will be decided in the DPRK and not imposed. The DPRK regards itself as being threatened militarily and political by a heavily armed and greater population in the ROK, Japan and the US. The issue of reunification is a key one. The proposal of the DPRK is that the north and the south take steps to reunification gradually, slowly and peacefully by developing a federal system which respects the different systems in the north and the south but extends gradually the areas of cooperation and contact. Investment and attention is being paid to raising educational achievements particularly in technology and engineering, science, business methods and English. The negotiating position on ending the conflict is -peaceful reunification -denuclearisation of the entire peninsula (The DPRK offers to turn over its nuclear weapons to a third country) -a Peace Treaty to replace the armistice of 1953 -an end to sanctions and isolation New Zealand, at both government level and that of civil society can play a positive role in ending the isolation of the DPRK and assisting the easing of tensions. First, NZ should support the initiative for a NE Asia NWFZ based on the 3+3 model. Such a zone would include key security aspects sought by the differing parties – the DPRK would receive assurances that nuclear weapons would not be threatened or used against them. In return DPRK would agree to forgo its nuclear weapons and accept inspections. Japan and South Korea would also not have nuclear weapons in their territories or have a US nuclear umbrella. The viewpoint of the DPRK is that denuclearisation of the peninsula means just that- mo nuclear weapons in, or threatening the peninsula. Second, as a participant in the 1950-53 war we are party to the Armistice. It is time for a Peace Treaty. The negotiating of the peace treaty would be an opportunity to discuss and solve the many vexed questions such as border disputes, including in the seas and the islands, fear of being attacked by the ROK and /or US coalition forces, and the nuclear threats from the US/Japan/ROK alliances. Denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula, particularly through the establishment of a NE Asia NWFZ, would have more chance of success if attention is given to the larger security issues, possibly through simultaneous negotiations of a Peace Treaty –or a demonstrated commitment by the US/Japan/ROK to such a treaty. Third, we can provide development aid and have a beneficial influence, well beyond our size (as the Colombo Plan showed), through our aid projects. A good place to start would be the restoration of the promised 20 scholarships and allowing the DPRK to participate in MFAT’s English Training for Officials (ELTO) programme. Fourth, on the economic front we can explore Joint Ventures and other economic and trade initiatives. Who would have thought when we first recognised China that Fonterra would now be operating dairy farms there? And a Fonterra mission to the DPRK would be a good start. Fifth, English as a second language is also a prime goal in the DPRK. Let us explore that and benefit countries as well as further eroding the isolation of DPRK and thus enhancing regional and indeed world peace. Sixth, Our educational institutions, our medical schools, our sporting codes and our cultural bodies can all play a positive role in ending the axis of evil status (now “States of Concern”) of the DPRK and exchanging it for an axis for cooperation and common security. Seventh, as always, it would be a big step forward if the government broke with cold war policies towards the DPRK and established positive and pragmatic links while not shying away from the right of each to criticise the other fully and frankly if need be. Matt Robson. Auckland, NZ. 20 January 2011.  Tim Beal and Matt Robson with pre-school children and teachers at the NZ Friendship Farm (Sambong) |