Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Japan and South Korea have historically been considered strong and rather autonomous states, particularly in the realms of foreign and defense policy. Recently, however, both governments have faced varying degrees of public criticism concerning the kidnappings of their citizens by North Korea (DPRK) and their policies toward the North. Theories of state autonomy in decision-making predict that the groups articulating such public demands should have minimal influence over policy-making. Yet, particularly since September 2002 when Kim Jong-Il admitted that the DPRK had abducted thirteen Japanese citizens in the 1970s and 1980s, the organization of Japanese abductees’ families has gained significant political influence. Though the analogous association in South Korea represents the bereaved of a much larger group of abductees, that group has not been able to gain equivalent access to and influence over policy-making processes in the South. Why have these groups had such different degrees of success in influencing their governments’ policies concerning the abductees and toward the DPRK?

This paper uses the lens of the abductions issue to shed light on the nature of state-society relations and interest mediation in these two countries. This project analyzes the variations in success among advocacy groups by focusing on a subcategory advocacy groups: victims’ organizations. These are groups of individuals who explicitly blame the deliberate actions or the negligence of their own government or another state for the physical harm they have suffered. By focusing on how changes in domestic political structures have altered the opportunity structure that victims’ family associations face, this paper analyzes what the unusual case of the abductee saga reveals about broader questions of institutional change, victims’ advocacy, and civil society’s role at the intersection of domestic and international politics in Japan and South Korea.