{"title":"《韩国的人权与跨国民主》,黄英古著(评论)","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/ks.2023.a908634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea by Ingu Hwang Benjamin A. Engel Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, by Ingu Hwang. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2022. 337 pages. 55.00 hardcover. In Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, Ingu Hwang draws needed attention to the transnational nature of South Korea's democratization movement. In part because of lackluster support from the US government, which Hwang is keen to highlight, South Korean democratization is understood as a movement which succeeded through the struggle of the Korean people. While Hwang does not challenge this perception, he does show how the movement \"mobilized, adapted, and indigenized\" the international vocabulary of human rights in the 1970s and 1980s as well as argue that non-state actors in Korea contributed to transforming the global human rights landscape (p. 10). Proceeding chronologically and starting in 1972 with the proclamation of the Yushin Constitution, Hwang is arguably at his best as he traces the establishment of AI (Amnesty International) Korea and the emergence of ecumenical activist groups, most notably the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK), as major actors in the Korean Democracy Movement. In particular, Hwang's description, in Chapters 1 and 2, of how AI Korea was able to gradually break loose of AI's principle of maintaining political neutrality and not only waded into the waters of political activism but dragged AI itself along with it was an important example of the periphery impacting the center. Later chapters demonstrate how democracy activists in South Korea adopted the vernacular of the international human rights movement to state its grievances towards the authoritarian Korean regimes and work with non-state actors abroad to make their demands widely known. For example, Korean organizations began to aggressively adopt the language of torture in 1975 helping to spark an AI fact-finding mission (pp. 88–96). Anger at the Korean government's continued practice of torturing imprisoned activists would later be the catalyst that brought down the Chun regime in 1987 after the death of Park Chong-chŏl (p. 248). In tandem with these unique insights into the transnational nature of the South Korean democracy movement, Hwang also discusses how the United States and South Korean governments developed policies to counteract growing pressures from civil society. Regarding the US government's response to transnational demands that it more forcefully pressure the Park Chung Hee and later Chun Doo Hwan regimes to [End Page 419] observe human rights values, Hwang argues that the United States adopted a strategy of \"quiet diplomacy\" to placate critics while ensuring US security interests and regime security in Korea (pp. 11–12). This strategy, Hwang asserts, was consistent throughout the 1970s and 1980s, even during the Carter administration. However, Hwang's overall argument about the importance of transnational activism in the Korean democracy movement would have been strengthen if he had noted changes in US policy over time rather than insisting on the consistent use of quiet diplomacy. The initial US reaction to the declaration of the Yushin regime by President Richard Nixon in 1972 was one of complete indifference; there was no effort to discourage the promulgation of the blatantly authoritarian Yushin Constitution. But by 1975–76, as Hwang shows, even Henry Kissinger was willing to pressure Park Chung Hee on human rights (pp. 102–103, 125–126). I would argue that this development in US human rights policy towards South Korea would not have been possible without the pressure of transnational activists. Also, Hwang could have shown the impact of the transnational activism by highlighting the descension within the Nixon and Ford administrations over its human rights policy. Sarah Synder shows, in Chapter 4 of her monograph From Selma to Moscow, how in the State Department Philip Habib and Donald Ranard pushed Kissinger to address human rights abuses perpetrated by the Park Chung Hee regime. Another aspect of Hwang's attention to \"quiet diplomacy\" which seems implicit throughout the text but not addressed directly is the difference between promoting human rights and promoting democracy. Hwang is critical of the Carter administration's focus on the release of political prisoners, which allowed Park...","PeriodicalId":43382,"journal":{"name":"Korean Studies","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea by Ingu Hwang (review)\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ks.2023.a908634\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reviewed by: Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea by Ingu Hwang Benjamin A. Engel Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, by Ingu Hwang. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2022. 337 pages. 55.00 hardcover. In Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, Ingu Hwang draws needed attention to the transnational nature of South Korea's democratization movement. In part because of lackluster support from the US government, which Hwang is keen to highlight, South Korean democratization is understood as a movement which succeeded through the struggle of the Korean people. While Hwang does not challenge this perception, he does show how the movement \\\"mobilized, adapted, and indigenized\\\" the international vocabulary of human rights in the 1970s and 1980s as well as argue that non-state actors in Korea contributed to transforming the global human rights landscape (p. 10). Proceeding chronologically and starting in 1972 with the proclamation of the Yushin Constitution, Hwang is arguably at his best as he traces the establishment of AI (Amnesty International) Korea and the emergence of ecumenical activist groups, most notably the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK), as major actors in the Korean Democracy Movement. In particular, Hwang's description, in Chapters 1 and 2, of how AI Korea was able to gradually break loose of AI's principle of maintaining political neutrality and not only waded into the waters of political activism but dragged AI itself along with it was an important example of the periphery impacting the center. Later chapters demonstrate how democracy activists in South Korea adopted the vernacular of the international human rights movement to state its grievances towards the authoritarian Korean regimes and work with non-state actors abroad to make their demands widely known. For example, Korean organizations began to aggressively adopt the language of torture in 1975 helping to spark an AI fact-finding mission (pp. 88–96). Anger at the Korean government's continued practice of torturing imprisoned activists would later be the catalyst that brought down the Chun regime in 1987 after the death of Park Chong-chŏl (p. 248). In tandem with these unique insights into the transnational nature of the South Korean democracy movement, Hwang also discusses how the United States and South Korean governments developed policies to counteract growing pressures from civil society. Regarding the US government's response to transnational demands that it more forcefully pressure the Park Chung Hee and later Chun Doo Hwan regimes to [End Page 419] observe human rights values, Hwang argues that the United States adopted a strategy of \\\"quiet diplomacy\\\" to placate critics while ensuring US security interests and regime security in Korea (pp. 11–12). This strategy, Hwang asserts, was consistent throughout the 1970s and 1980s, even during the Carter administration. However, Hwang's overall argument about the importance of transnational activism in the Korean democracy movement would have been strengthen if he had noted changes in US policy over time rather than insisting on the consistent use of quiet diplomacy. The initial US reaction to the declaration of the Yushin regime by President Richard Nixon in 1972 was one of complete indifference; there was no effort to discourage the promulgation of the blatantly authoritarian Yushin Constitution. But by 1975–76, as Hwang shows, even Henry Kissinger was willing to pressure Park Chung Hee on human rights (pp. 102–103, 125–126). I would argue that this development in US human rights policy towards South Korea would not have been possible without the pressure of transnational activists. Also, Hwang could have shown the impact of the transnational activism by highlighting the descension within the Nixon and Ford administrations over its human rights policy. Sarah Synder shows, in Chapter 4 of her monograph From Selma to Moscow, how in the State Department Philip Habib and Donald Ranard pushed Kissinger to address human rights abuses perpetrated by the Park Chung Hee regime. Another aspect of Hwang's attention to \\\"quiet diplomacy\\\" which seems implicit throughout the text but not addressed directly is the difference between promoting human rights and promoting democracy. Hwang is critical of the Carter administration's focus on the release of political prisoners, which allowed Park...\",\"PeriodicalId\":43382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Studies\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ks.2023.a908634\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ks.2023.a908634","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
《韩国的人权与跨国民主》本杰明·a·恩格尔《韩国的人权与跨国民主》,黄英古著。费城:宾夕法尼亚大学出版社,2022。337页。55.00精装书。黄禹锡在《韩国的人权与跨国民主主义》一书中,对韩国民主化运动的跨国性质给予了必要的关注。黄禹锡强调的是,美国政府的支持力度不够,因此,韩国民主化被理解为“通过国民的斗争取得成功的运动”。虽然黄禹锡没有挑战这种看法,但他确实展示了该运动如何在20世纪70年代和80年代“动员、适应和本土化”国际人权词汇,并认为韩国的非国家行为体为改变全球人权格局做出了贡献(第10页)。按照时间顺序,从1972年维新宪法的颁布开始,黄禹锡追溯了韩国大赦国际(Amnesty International)的成立和大公主义活动团体的出现,其中最著名的是韩国教会全国委员会(National Council of Churches in Korea, NCCK),它们是韩国民主运动的主要参与者。特别是,黄禹锡在第一章和第二章中描述了人工智能韩国如何能够逐渐摆脱人工智能保持政治中立的原则,不仅涉足政治激进主义的水域,还将人工智能本身拖入其中,这是外围影响中心的一个重要例子。后面的章节展示了韩国的民主活动人士如何采用国际人权运动的术语来表达他们对韩国独裁政权的不满,并与国外的非国家行为体合作,使他们的要求广为人知。例如,韩国组织在1975年开始积极采用酷刑的语言,这有助于引发人工智能实况调查任务(第88-96页)。对韩国政府继续折磨被监禁的活动人士的愤怒后来成为1987年朴槿惠去世后全氏政权垮台的催化剂Chong-chŏl(第248页)。与这些对韩国民主运动的跨国性质的独特见解相结合,Hwang还讨论了美国和韩国政府如何制定政策来抵消来自公民社会日益增长的压力。关于美国政府对跨国要求的回应,即它更有力地向朴正熙和后来的全斗焕政权施压,要求他们遵守人权价值观,Hwang认为,美国采取了一种“安静外交”的战略,以安抚批评者,同时确保美国的安全利益和政权在韩国的安全(第11-12页)。黄禹锡主张,这一战略在整个20世纪70年代和80年代,甚至在卡特政府时期都是一致的。然而,如果黄禹锡注意到美国政策的变化,而不是一直坚持使用无声的外交手段,那么他关于跨国行动主义在韩国民主运动中的重要性的总体论点就会得到加强。1972年,理查德•尼克松(Richard Nixon)总统宣布维新政权成立,美国最初的反应是完全漠不关心;没有任何努力阻止颁布公然专制的维新宪法。但到了1975-76年,正如黄禹锡所示,就连亨利·基辛格也愿意在人权问题上向朴正熙施压(第102-103页,第125-126页)。我认为,如果没有跨国活动人士的压力,美国对韩国人权政策的这种发展是不可能的。此外,黄禹锡也可以通过强调尼克松和福特政府内部对人权政策的堕落,来展示跨国运动主义的影响。莎拉·辛德在她的专著《从塞尔玛到莫斯科》的第四章中展示了菲利普·哈比卜和唐纳德·拉纳德如何在国务院敦促基辛格解决朴正熙政权侵犯人权的问题。黄禹锡对“安静外交”的关注的另一个方面是,人权和民主主义之间的区别,这在文本中似乎是隐含的,但没有直接提到。黄教安批评卡特政府把重点放在释放政治犯上,这使得朴槿惠……
Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea by Ingu Hwang (review)
Reviewed by: Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea by Ingu Hwang Benjamin A. Engel Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, by Ingu Hwang. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2022. 337 pages. 55.00 hardcover. In Human Rights and Transnational Democracy in South Korea, Ingu Hwang draws needed attention to the transnational nature of South Korea's democratization movement. In part because of lackluster support from the US government, which Hwang is keen to highlight, South Korean democratization is understood as a movement which succeeded through the struggle of the Korean people. While Hwang does not challenge this perception, he does show how the movement "mobilized, adapted, and indigenized" the international vocabulary of human rights in the 1970s and 1980s as well as argue that non-state actors in Korea contributed to transforming the global human rights landscape (p. 10). Proceeding chronologically and starting in 1972 with the proclamation of the Yushin Constitution, Hwang is arguably at his best as he traces the establishment of AI (Amnesty International) Korea and the emergence of ecumenical activist groups, most notably the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK), as major actors in the Korean Democracy Movement. In particular, Hwang's description, in Chapters 1 and 2, of how AI Korea was able to gradually break loose of AI's principle of maintaining political neutrality and not only waded into the waters of political activism but dragged AI itself along with it was an important example of the periphery impacting the center. Later chapters demonstrate how democracy activists in South Korea adopted the vernacular of the international human rights movement to state its grievances towards the authoritarian Korean regimes and work with non-state actors abroad to make their demands widely known. For example, Korean organizations began to aggressively adopt the language of torture in 1975 helping to spark an AI fact-finding mission (pp. 88–96). Anger at the Korean government's continued practice of torturing imprisoned activists would later be the catalyst that brought down the Chun regime in 1987 after the death of Park Chong-chŏl (p. 248). In tandem with these unique insights into the transnational nature of the South Korean democracy movement, Hwang also discusses how the United States and South Korean governments developed policies to counteract growing pressures from civil society. Regarding the US government's response to transnational demands that it more forcefully pressure the Park Chung Hee and later Chun Doo Hwan regimes to [End Page 419] observe human rights values, Hwang argues that the United States adopted a strategy of "quiet diplomacy" to placate critics while ensuring US security interests and regime security in Korea (pp. 11–12). This strategy, Hwang asserts, was consistent throughout the 1970s and 1980s, even during the Carter administration. However, Hwang's overall argument about the importance of transnational activism in the Korean democracy movement would have been strengthen if he had noted changes in US policy over time rather than insisting on the consistent use of quiet diplomacy. The initial US reaction to the declaration of the Yushin regime by President Richard Nixon in 1972 was one of complete indifference; there was no effort to discourage the promulgation of the blatantly authoritarian Yushin Constitution. But by 1975–76, as Hwang shows, even Henry Kissinger was willing to pressure Park Chung Hee on human rights (pp. 102–103, 125–126). I would argue that this development in US human rights policy towards South Korea would not have been possible without the pressure of transnational activists. Also, Hwang could have shown the impact of the transnational activism by highlighting the descension within the Nixon and Ford administrations over its human rights policy. Sarah Synder shows, in Chapter 4 of her monograph From Selma to Moscow, how in the State Department Philip Habib and Donald Ranard pushed Kissinger to address human rights abuses perpetrated by the Park Chung Hee regime. Another aspect of Hwang's attention to "quiet diplomacy" which seems implicit throughout the text but not addressed directly is the difference between promoting human rights and promoting democracy. Hwang is critical of the Carter administration's focus on the release of political prisoners, which allowed Park...