I want to talk about a new character for this post. This
person was instrumental in Kim’s success as a candidate, although he was unbeknownst
to this. He arguably could’ve held the post that the Kim family now holds
today, but under much different circumstances. His name, is Cho Man Sik (조만식).
Just to give you an overview of his political relevance and
stature:
He received an education in law and legal structure from a
Japanese University. He was an iconic leader of the Korean nationalists in 1945
and also the head of a movement for economic self-development. Most notably, he
was often referred to as the “Korean Gandhi” because of his stance on
non-violent civil disobedience. A good example of this was his refusal to ‘adopt
a Japanese surname, in exchange for his Korean surname.’
Although largely unknown, the North Korean political sphere
was heavily dominated by nationalist ideals, as opposed to those of communism.
A local people’s government founded by Cho was headed by 17 nationalists and 3
communists. This tidbit is important because the ratio would later change as a
result of Soviet Deception regarding Cho, and nationalists as a whole.
[The most important thing to note about Cho, was his
involvement in catapulting Kim to a position of political dominance.]
Cho was himself approached by Soviet leadership to be
groomed for what would eventually be Kim’s role. However, he was reluctant to
accept due to his “strong aversion to communism and mistrust of foreign
superpowers.” This led to Kim’s selection for the role instead.
In 1945, Kim was largely unknown to the general public. The
Soviets decided to hold a conference to boost Kim’s notoriety. On October 14,
1945, “Lebedev (Soviet NKVD leader) opened the rally and presented Kim as a
national hero and outstanding guerilla leader.” That day, Kim spoke alongside
Cho in what was perceived to be a conference held by two of the most prominent
political figures in North Korea. Kim was later appointed to a position within
the ranks of the “Democratic Party,” an organization founded by Cho with minor Soviet
involvement.
Following the revelation that “ministers of the Soviet
Union, U.S. and Britain…. made a decision to establish a joint trusteeship over
Korea for a period of 5 years,” Cho resigned from his position in the
Democratic Party and was followed by a multitude of his supporters.
This led to problems regarding the authenticity of the group,
which was slowly becoming dominated by communists. Thus, in an effort to recoup
the legitimacy, the Soviets attempted to persuade Cho to return to his post.
Being the Korean Gandhi he was, Cho refused to relinquish his political ideals
to appease soviet leadership.
Unfortunately this left very few options for the USSR. One
of which, was ousting Cho as a foreign spy, which they did, by pushing that he
was “in contact with South Korean reactionaries” and in “secret cooperation
with Japanese police.” “Cho was promptly arrested” and his supporters expelled.
His position was given to another communist guerilla leader, subsequently
making the USSR the ‘majority shareholders’ of the Democratic Party.
In essence, Cho was important because he allowed Kim (unintentionally)
to piggyback off of his prowess as a powerful and authentic Korean leader. This
allowed Kim to maintain public attention and eventually gain control, once the
public perceived the nationalists to be polluting the Democratic Party.
I apologize if this is longer than it should be. I tried to cut some irrelevant details, but still retain the core content of the post. If you took the time to read it though, let me know what you think!
Thanks!!
-TLDR; Powerful and well known Korean leader, Cho, becomes associated with Kim, thus allowing Kim to piggyback off of his notoriety. Eventually Cho's stubbornness leads to his demise and the destruction of an authentic leadership, with Cho, in a powerful North Korean party. This party is then overtaken by the USSR to maintain a veil of legitimacy for Kim's campaign.
(This information is taken from Andrei Lankov, a respected historian of this time period)
Lanʹkov,
A. N. From Stalin to Kim Il Sung: The Formation of North Korea,
1945-1960. New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers UP, 2002.
Wow that is extremely interesting. I wonder how Cho was able to reconcile nationalism with pacifism. It seems to me that most nationalists are totally okay with violence. I wouldn't think that a nationalist could be a pacifist, because if our country is the most important thing we must be willing to kill for it. Likewise, a pacifist believes that violence is never the answer and would have to therefore be willing to sacrifice their nationalism to preserve pacifism.
ReplyDeleteI was also surprised to learn that Kim Il Sung got his start in the "Democratic Party", since Democracy and Communism are diametrically opposed from one another. Was the North Korean Democratic Party some other form of democracy? I am thinking a party called the "Democratic Party" would have to be in favor of Liberal Democracy that we have in the United States, Europe, and the rest of the Global North/First World.
I am fascinated as this story develops-I'm really looking forward to your presentation towards the end of the semester. This story is so much more *dramatic* than mine!
ReplyDelete