Today, 9 September 2010, is the 62nd anniversary of the founding of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which came about a month when the Americans founded the Republic of Korea from Seoul within their area of occupation. Today supposedly was also going to be the final day of the unprecedented 3rd Party Conference of the ruling Korean Workers Party (KWP). Much has been speculated that this would be the occasion that Kim Jong-il would introduce his youngest son Kim Jong-un into a public political role, much like how his father did with him at the 6th Party Congress in 1980. However, due to a Pyongyang-imposed media blockout, there have been no reports about this conference, nor has there been even any confirmation that it has even taken place! This pretty much is proof of how isolated North Korea is, and the fact that there have not even been intelligence reports about what is happening in Pyongyang shows how much the West has no idea about what actually occurs in the reclusive country.What has created much commotion and confusion is what is the significance of a 'Party Conference'? How come a 'Party Congress' like in the old days of the Cold War was not called? What is the difference between the two? Andrei Lankov, an eminent expert on Korea, and backed with his first-hand experience of having grown up in the Soviet Union, is able to give a valuable insight into answering these questions and providing clarification and implications.
In an article he wrote for the Asia Times Online, Lankov explained that since the fall of Leninist states in 1989-1991, the Western media are no longer familiar with the various strata of Leninist party structure and function, thought he adds that younger journalists are now probably better informed about the specifics of various Muslim sects.
Lankov goes on to describe that:
In the Cold War era most communist parties once every few years staged a large and pompous convention that was known as a "party congress". This was where the new central committee was "elected". Some of the representatives were prominent bureaucrats and officials, but a majority came from the party rank-and-file. Exemplary milkmaids and steel workers were dispatched to the congress to demonstrate the broad support communist rule allegedly enjoyed among the ''masses''. Nobody expected from them any meaningful discussion of political issues, and in most cases any attempt at such discussion would be promptly suppressed.
It should be added that footage of these party congresses, in the USSR and China in particular, along with the milkmaids and steel workers, usually also prominently showed ethnic minorities arriving in national costume.
Party Congresses were set a fixed 5-year terms, however North Korea was unique in not following these statutes. Lankov said that:
In the Kim Il-sung era, North Korea, however, was remarkable in its relative disregard for legal niceties. The KWP's statute has all the necessary articles, copy-pasted from Soviet regulations, but these have been ignored. Throughout its 65 years history, the KWP has had six congresses, but none of them ever met within the officially prescribed interval. The last KWP congress took place in 1980, and was the venue at which Kim Jong-il was officially and publicly proclaimed the successor to his father. The next congress was supposed to meet five years later. It has never met (and the coming convention will be not be a congress, but a humbler conference).
So it should be added that the congress prior to the last one in 1980 had happened in 1970, a ten year difference much at odds at the congress intervals rigidly applied in other Eastern Bloc countries such as the USSR and the GDR.
What is supposedly is happening in Pyongyang now is a 'Party Conference'. As Lankov describes: Party statutes also stipulated that a minor version of a congress could be convened if the party leadership considered it fit. The minor version was known as a party conference. Officially, a party conference met to discuss peculiar questions of current policy, but in real life it was, essentially, a minor version of the party congress. Generally speaking, the conferences were much less common then congresses.
This explains why many Western media reports have been stating that this has been the first party conference since 1966, insinuating that such gatherings should be more often and regular. However, it would be more correct to say that this 'party conference' is the first gathering of its kind since the 1980 Party Congress 30 years ago.
So this opens the question why a party conference now and not a party congress? Lankov responds by suggesting that it could be for economic reasons:
In North Korea [as was somewhat the case through the former Eastern bloc] it has become an established tradition that a party congress should be accompanied by lavish celebrations and expensive gifts to both the elite and the general public. This tradition was burdensome, therefore a conference, on the other hand, is not expected to be celebrated on such a lavish scale. These economic considerations seem to be the reason why in Pyongyang we are going to see the third KWP conference, not the seventh KWP congress. Nonetheless, in practical terms, the difference between those two events are negligible.
Party Congresses were set a fixed 5-year terms, however North Korea was unique in not following these statutes. Lankov said that:
In the Kim Il-sung era, North Korea, however, was remarkable in its relative disregard for legal niceties. The KWP's statute has all the necessary articles, copy-pasted from Soviet regulations, but these have been ignored. Throughout its 65 years history, the KWP has had six congresses, but none of them ever met within the officially prescribed interval. The last KWP congress took place in 1980, and was the venue at which Kim Jong-il was officially and publicly proclaimed the successor to his father. The next congress was supposed to meet five years later. It has never met (and the coming convention will be not be a congress, but a humbler conference).
So it should be added that the congress prior to the last one in 1980 had happened in 1970, a ten year difference much at odds at the congress intervals rigidly applied in other Eastern Bloc countries such as the USSR and the GDR.
What is supposedly is happening in Pyongyang now is a 'Party Conference'. As Lankov describes: Party statutes also stipulated that a minor version of a congress could be convened if the party leadership considered it fit. The minor version was known as a party conference. Officially, a party conference met to discuss peculiar questions of current policy, but in real life it was, essentially, a minor version of the party congress. Generally speaking, the conferences were much less common then congresses.
This explains why many Western media reports have been stating that this has been the first party conference since 1966, insinuating that such gatherings should be more often and regular. However, it would be more correct to say that this 'party conference' is the first gathering of its kind since the 1980 Party Congress 30 years ago.
So this opens the question why a party conference now and not a party congress? Lankov responds by suggesting that it could be for economic reasons:
In North Korea [as was somewhat the case through the former Eastern bloc] it has become an established tradition that a party congress should be accompanied by lavish celebrations and expensive gifts to both the elite and the general public. This tradition was burdensome, therefore a conference, on the other hand, is not expected to be celebrated on such a lavish scale. These economic considerations seem to be the reason why in Pyongyang we are going to see the third KWP conference, not the seventh KWP congress. Nonetheless, in practical terms, the difference between those two events are negligible.
Once today's celebrations are over, we will await and see whether Pyongyang will confirm whether the conference was on at all, let alone any possible new developments for this unique society.
No comments:
Post a Comment