China's Position on the UN Resolution of the Situation of Human Rights in the DPRK

Abstract

Since its first debate on North Koreas human rights issue in 1992, the United Nations has gradually publicized the issue over time. In 2003, a resolution condemning North Koreas human rights situation was eventually adopted in the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR). Titled Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, this was the first official resolution that could bring North Koreas human rights issue to the General Assembly. When the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) became a subsidiary body under the General Assembly in 2006, the resolution on human rights situation in the DPRK was adopted on an annual basis since then. With regards to this resolution, Peoples Republic of China has consistently voted against it. By revealing its opposition on discussing human rights issue of North Korea in the United Nations, China reinforced the non-intervention principle according to the UN Constitution and urged other member-states not to interfere with domestic affairs of the DPRK. Significantly, when North Koreas human rights issue was extended up to the Security Council level in 2014, the delegation of China publicly argued that politicizing North Koreas human rights issue in the Security Council was absolutely inappropriate. Regardless of the ups and downs in the Sino-North Korean relations, Chinas position on human rights issue of North Korea remains unchanged. When China was increasingly engaged with international human rights regime, it again did not give up on its role to stand as a defender of North Korea when it comes to the issue of human rights. Throughout the Cold War Era up until the Post-Cold War Era, Chinas position on the human rights issue of North Korea remained consistent in general. The only changes were noticed from the grounds of Chinas support for North Korea. Chinas support for North Korea during the Cold War Era was based on the strong ideological affinity, anti-imperialism alliance among Socialist countries, and the bipolar international system. On the contrary, there were significantly weakened implications of ideology, changes in Chinas foreign policy towards the Korean peninsula, and the emergence of the unipolar international system accompanied by the rise of China in the Post-Cold War Era. There could be a number of factors contributing to Chinas consistent opposition towards the resolution. One could be drawn from Chinas ideological homogeneity to North Korea. Sharing similar values on their perceptions of human rights, this could motivate China to prevent international condemnations on human rights in North Korea. Chinas poor records of domestic situation of human rights could also have affected its decision on the resolution, along with its controversial policy on North Korean refugees. To avoid the criticisms from the outside world on such issues, China could have actively defended on behalf of North Korea. Chinas reputation as the representative of developing countries with a veto power could provide another explanation for its decision as well. Faced with strategic competition with the United States in the multilateral arenas, Beijing was brought to stand against Washington in the international human rights regime. Whether which factor was more determinant than the other is not a matter of concern. Yet, it is important to note that the complex interplay between both domestic and international factors contributed in shaping Chinas position on the UN resolution of the situation of human rights in the DPRK. Speaking of China's intention behind its behaviors within the international human rights regime, China has maintained a high level of assertiveness when dealing with the issue of human rights in any multilateral settings. This has been consistent since China came under severe censure by the international society for the Tiananmen crackdown. Yet, there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate China's revisionist behavior within the current international human rights regimes. Rather, China's strategy leaned more towards the engagement. Beijing sought to comply with the established international norms of human rights and follow by global standard in formality.