Understanding the Repatriation Movement: A Saga of Politics, Propaganda, and Perseverance

By Jheel Doshi

Historical Set-up: Colonialism

To understand the context of the repatriation program, we must first delve into the history of Koreans in Japan. From 1910 to 1945, Korea was ruled as a part of the Empire of Japan. In the 1920s, Japan faced a labor shortage, and Koreans looking for better education and employment opportunities swarmed into Japan.[1] Since many of them were illiterate, they engaged in manual work.[2] Even when immigration before World War II was largely voluntary, it transformed Korea into a warehouse to extract forced labor due to wartime shortages.

Around two million Korean immigrants congregated in poor dwellings and received lower wages than their Japanese counterparts. Though poor and discriminated against, they were considered emperor’s subjects and Japanese nationals. Additionally, efforts were made to fully assimilate them into Japanese society by imparting Japanese education and promoting intermarriage.[3] After Japan’s surrender in World War II, only 600,000 Koreans remained in the country.[4]

Discrimination Against Ethnic Koreans In Japan Post World War II

Korean immigrants and their descendants were frequently called Zainichi (literally "residing in Japan"). This term became common immediately post-war and reflected the expectation that Koreans only lived temporarily in Japan.[5][6] Additionally, it implied that Koreans were a distinct community rather than a part of Japanese culture, indicating a lack of inclusivity of the former in the broader Japanese society. It also impacted how Korean immigrants and their descendants identified themselves, unable to identify as Japanese or Korean.

After the war, the discrimination and alienation experienced by Koreans in Japan escalated dramatically. By December 1945, they lost their voting rights. Following this, in 1947, the Alien Registration Law consigned ethnic Koreans to alien status and were rendered stateless. In 1950, the Nationality Law stated that only children with Japanese fathers could keep their Japanese citizenship, while those born to Japanese mothers lost it. Zainichs were even excluded from the non-national rights considered in Japan's postwar Constitution.[7] This invoked an identity crisis in the Koreans, as they had lost their legal and cultural ties with their homeland and faced extreme social injustice in Japan. The legal vulnerability of losing citizenship brought difficulty in accessing essential services and job opportunities. They were not eligible for employment in the public sector or any job that required Japanese nationality. Thus, ethnic Koreans were often engaged in the informal sector, pursuing marginal and even illegal economic activities.[8]

Formation of Chongryon

This cultural and social alienation led to the formation of two ideological groups, Chongryon and Mindan, which aligned with North and South Korea, respectively. Both offered cultural belonging and propagated the idea of long-distance nationalism, which is a set of practices and identity claims that connected Koreans to their ancestral homes.[9]

Even though the majority of Chongryon were ethnically from South Korea, due to social injustice, they resonated with the ideology of Socialist North Korea. The ideals of equitable distribution of resources and involvement in the political framework appealed to the impoverished Korean workers. In addition, while the South Korean dictator refused to support the Zainichis, North Korea’s Kim Il-Sung provided financial assistance. Due to its economic and industrial advantage over South Korea, Zainichis were keen to reestablish ties with the newly formed socialist state.[10]

Chongryon utilized this funding to establish Korean schools, where students were educated in Korean language, culture, identity, and history. However, by the 1960s, these schools heavily emphasized North Korean ideology. Students were taught North Korea was their true homeland, and the schools featured prominent portraits of Kim Il-Sung. They read books about the history and legacy of the Kim family, that came from North Korea, and didn’t mention any of the controversial aspects of the regime, such as human rights violations and rampant poverty.[11] Although Chongryon schools were a place for students to be nurtured in Korean culture and values, which provided them with a sense of belonging and identity, they also served as platforms for political indoctrination and North Korean propaganda, fostering anti-Japanese sentiment among their students.

Events Leading To The Repatriation Movement

Amidst these socio-political dynamics, the idea of repatriation to North Korea gained momentum. South Korea was lagging economically, which helped Chongryon establish North Korea as a communist paradise where one day the miserable Zaichinis could return to. In 1958, with support from Chongryon, a mass movement arose amongst Koreans demanding that they be given the right to return to North Korea.—even when Japan had no diplomatic ties or regular transport links to North Korea at the time. In August 1958, North Korean leader Kim Il-Sung called for Koreans living in Japan to “return to the socialist fatherland”, adding fuel to the repatriation movement. In response, the following February, the Japanese government announced it was calling on the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to assist in overseeing a project to repatriate those who wished to leave for North Korea.[12] In August 1959, the repatriation movement, or the “Return to Paradise Movement,” was launched and South Korea was the only country to oppose it. Earlier, the country had opposed the deportation of Koreans who entered illegally in Japan after 1945, which contributed to its stance being viewed as anti-humanitarian in Japan.[13]

Chongryon media outlets published about the luxurious lifestyle in the socialist paradise. They promised Zaichinis better jobs, homes, and education. In summary, a better life. Nevertheless, the most crucial aspect that the repatriation program offered was citizenship.[14] This could give them a sense of belonging and identity that had been lacking for years. Along with Chongryon, Japanese newspapers also painted North Korea positively, claiming that those who migrated would have a better and more secure life in North Korea than in Japan.

The Lesser-known Role Of Japan In The Repatriation Movement

In her book ‘Exodus to North Korea’, Tessa Morris-Suzuki—a renowned historian of modern Japan and North Korea—mentions that the first concrete proposal for mass repatriation came from Japan in late 1955. According to the author, there was a remarkable degree of collaboration, as each side sought to use the other for its own ends. The repatriation was a co-production that would have been impossible without efforts from both sides and the ICRC facilitation.[15]

This research suggests that the Japanese government drove out destitute Koreans intentionally, as they were left-wing and were perceived as a potential political threat. Therefore, rather than incorporating them into the community, the most straightforward solution was to get rid of them through widespread repatriation. However, this phenomenon can also be understood from a structural perspective. It suggests that the Japanese government used biopolitical measures to manage and regulate the Korean population in their country due to economic and social factors. Furthermore, repatriation served as a means to alleviate the strain on Japan's fiscal budget caused by subsidies provided to impoverished Koreans.

This highlights the government’s aim to control its population and manage its resources efficiently without having any ulterior motives to expel Koreans because of their political views.[16] In any case, alienating Koreans in Japan and banishing them from the country by organizing a so-called repatriation movement, albeit without providing them with the means to return, is far from humanitarian.

The Reality Faced In North Korea

In North Korea, the reality proved harsh for some of those who decided to participate in the repatriation program. For instance, there’s the documented case of Mr. Lee and his family, who moved to North Korea when he was 8 years old, only to discover poverty and destitution.[17] They were trapped in the country for forty-six years until he managed to escape to South Korea in 2009. In North Korea, he witnessed extreme poverty, people walking without shoes or umbrellas under the rain, and had to rely on aid from relatives in Japan. He faced discrimination in school and lived in constant fear of being labeled disloyal and sent to prison camps, as some of his family members did. Some families in Japan were forced to pay for the release of their imprisoned loved ones. 

However, a range of experiences is recorded among repatriated people, such as the story of Mr. E, a refugee from Jeju Island who entered Japan illegally.[18] He voluntarily returned to North Korea in 1959, where he worked in a factory in Wonsan and later pursued higher education. He became an engineer, returned to his original factory, and remained there until passing in the early 2000s. Mr. E wrote over 80 positive letters to his relatives in Japan and died fulfilling his dream of dedicating himself to his homeland. However, in general, repatriates had to endure a life of economic hardship, under political control and surveillance, being subjected to ideological indoctrination, and facing deprivation of necessities.[19] Consequently, the number of participants in the repatriation program dramatically dropped in the 1960s, although it officially continued until 1984.[20] 

The Stakeholders Involved

It is clear that the governments and Red Cross organizations of North Korea and Japan, the ICRC, and Chongryon were all involved in the repatriation process —which did not consider the possibility of returning to Japan.[21] The legacy of this movement is multifaceted, with neither Chongryon nor the Japanese government having addressed their roles in it. The deception and exclusionary nationalist politics of the Japanese Government, the discrimination and identity crisis faced by Zaichinis, the propaganda spread by Chongryon, and the dynamic power play among these stakeholders made those who departed to North Korea scapegoats, subjecting them to a lifetime of misery. The so-called Zainichi Koreans found themselves in a unique predicament, not truly belonging to South Korea, Japan, or North Korea. They had been forgotten amidst the backdrop of the Cold War era.

Throughout the years, the researchers have focused on understanding the true intentions of the governments involved in the repatriation. But the lives of those repatriated to North Korea go on regardless of what the governments truly intended. Human rights were and are systematically violated in North Korea, including those of the repatriated Koreans, just like they experienced in Japan. We cannot try to measure one government’s wrongdoing against another, ranking them by the severity of their cruelty, canceling them out, or asking whether Japan was worse than North Korea or vice versa. It renders itself an unproductive exercise lacking meaningful inquiry.[22] North Korea, Japan, and ICRC should acknowledge their roles in altering the fate of those repatriated to North Korea. Condemning the other country for actions for which it was equally culpable is futile. All of those involved manipulated the lives of nearly 100,000 individuals and treated them as pawns in a geopolitical game, at the expense of their human dignity, in pursuit of their hidden agendas.[23]

Woes Of The Repatriated Individuals Who Returned Back

Around two hundred repatriated individuals managed to escape North Korea and return to Japan. [24] A substantially more significant number settled in South Korea, but most of the repatriated populace remained in North Korea. In 2018, five plaintiffs who escaped to Japan filed a lawsuit with the Tokyo District Court seeking 100 million yen ($900,000) each in compensation for “illegal solicitation and detainment”. The first trial in the District Court dismissed their demands by declaring that the right to claim compensation had expired and Japan had no jurisdiction, as the misery was faced in North Korea. The verdict was challenged by four plaintiffs, who argued that their trauma began when they boarded ships in a Japanese port, where the court has jurisdiction. The high court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and held Chongryon and North Korea responsible for providing false information regarding livelihood in the socialist country. The District Court will now review the compensation amount that North Korea must provide. [25] This can be considered a victory for those who were able to escape the human rights abuses in North Korea. However, the verdict is not feasible in action, as North Korea will never comply with the sentence. It will take years if it responds at all because of diplomatic pressure. If North Korea does not oblige, Japan should assume responsibility for the compensation charges to alleviate the suffering of the affected individuals, acknowledging its share of accountability for the inflicted suffering upon people. The current ensuing blame game threatens to compound their suffering. 

Conclusion

This untold chapter of history highlights the profound impact of politics, propaganda, and discrimination on civilians caught in the crossfire of geopolitical strife. The decisions and motivations of these individuals, particularly those from marginalized communities are characterized as acts of free will, but they are far from that. As stated in the article, their actions were influenced by many external forces like state-sponsored propaganda, societal ostracization, and the manipulative tactics of political agendas. This manipulation is a broader institutional problem, transcending any historical context. Today’s youth, mostly from marginalized communities are manipulated and indoctrinated with extremist ideologies, and they are exploited. This phenomenon emphasizes a pressing need to investigate those who suffered in the repatriation movement thoroughly. Some of them were able to escape, but most struggled in North Korea. Their plight and incredible resilience should be acknowledged by the international community at large. Their struggle should serve as a stark reminder of the long-lasting consequences of political agendas and societal pressures on the lives of civilians.

About the author

Jheel Doshi is a second-year undergraduate student pursuing a B.A. (Hons.) in Economics at O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana. Her interest lies in Macroeconomics, Development Economics and Game Theory.

Endnotes

1. John Lie, “Zainichi: The Korean Diaspora in Japan.” Association for Asian Studies, Fall 2009. https://www.asianstudies.org/publications/eaa/archives/zainichi-the-korean-diaspora-in-japan/

2. Rennie Moon, “Koreans in Japan.” Spice Digest, Fall 2010. https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/koreans_in_japan.

3. Ibid

4. Ibid

5. Ibid.

6. Samantha Sudrek, “Chongryon: North Korea’s Outpost in Japan.” The Cornell Diplomat. December 2020. https://journals.library.cornell.edu/index.php/tcd/article/view/598/558.

7. Rennie Moon, “Koreans in Japan.” Spice Digest, Fall 2010. https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/koreans_in_japan.

8. Bermet Talant, “Hyangsu’s Uncle Sought ‘Paradise’ in North Korea. It Took 20 Years to Learn What Happened to Him.” SBS News, August 31, 2023. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/dateline/article/hyangsus-uncle-sought-paradise-in-north-korea-it-took-20-years-to-learn-what-happened-to-him/fr39zi7vp.

9. S. Surdek, "Chongryon: North Korea's Outpost in Japan." The Cornell Diplomat, no. 4 (2020). https://journals.library.cornell.edu/index.php/tcd/article/view/598 

10. Ibid.

11. Michelle Ye Hee Lee and Julia Mio Inuma. “North Korean Schools in Japan? Geopolitics May Shutter Them.” The Washington Post. December 2022. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/02/japan-north-korea-schools-closing/.

12. Tessa Morris-Suzuki, “Exodus to North Korea Revisited: Japan, North Korea, and the ICRC in the ‘Repatriation’ of Ethnic Koreans from Japan.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 9, no. 22 (May 2011): 2. https://apjjf.org/2011/9/22/Tessa-Morris-Suzuki/3541/article.html.

13. Seung K. Ko, “South Korean-Japanese Relations since the 1965 Normalization Pacts.” Modern Asian Studies 6, no. 1 (1972): 49–61. http://www.jstor.org/stable/311986.

14. Sonia Ryang, “Japan, North Korea, and the Biopolitics of Repatriation.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 21, no. 6 (June 2023): 4. https://apjjf.org/2023/6/Ryang.html.

15. Tessa Morris-Suzuki, “Exodus to North Korea Revisited: Japan, North Korea, and the ICRC in the ‘Repatriation’ of Ethnic Koreans from Japan.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 9, no. 22 (May 2011): 2. https://apjjf.org/2011/9/22/Tessa-Morris-Suzuki/3541/article.html.

16. Sonia Ryang, “Japan, North Korea, and the Biopolitics of Repatriation.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 21, no. 6 (June 2023): 4. https://apjjf.org/2023/6/Ryang.html.

17. Choe Sang-hun, “They Were Promised a Socialist Paradise, and Ended up in ‘Hell.’” The New York Times. May 25, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/world/asia/north-korea-japan-migration.html.

18. Sonia Ryang, “Japan, North Korea, and the Biopolitics of Repatriation.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 21, no. 6 (June 2023): 4. https://apjjf.org/2023/6/Ryang.html.

19. Bermet Talant, “Hyangsu’s Uncle Sought ‘Paradise’ in North Korea. It Took 20 Years to Learn What Happened to Him.” SBS News, August 31, 2023. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/dateline/article/hyangsus-uncle-sought-paradise-in-north-korea-it-took-20-years-to-learn-what-happened-to-him/fr39zi7vp.

20. Keun Woo Nam, “Rethinking the North Korean Repatriation Program: The Change from an “Aid Economy” to a “Hostage Economy.” Korean Social Sciences Review 44, no. 4 (December 2010): 137–58. https://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/79840/1/07_Nam%20Keun%20Woo_OK2.pdf

21. Ibid.

22. Ibid.

23. Jonathan Vit, “Return to paradise’, North Korea urged Japan’s Zainichi. Their reward? So much pain and regret.” South China Morning Post, August 26, 2023. https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3232333/return-paradise-north-korea-urged-japans-zainichi-their-reward-so-much-pain-and-regret

24. Yujin Han, “Migration Trajectories of North Korean Defectors: Former Returnees From Japan Becoming Defectors in East Asia.” Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia Vol. 19, No. 2: 61-83. (February 2020). http://koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO202036457032943.pdf

25. Mari Yamaguchi, “A Japan court says North Korea is responsible for the abuses of people lured there by false promises.” AP News, October 30, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/japan-north-korea-ruling-repatriation-abuse-compensation-4a27a58212b8917352accb858d897b6a