Excited to share a new article in Journal of Korean Studies (@JournalKorea) on how geopolitical considerations shape the citizenship claims of North Koreans, as well as the ROK state's response to those claims:
dx.doi.org/10.1215/073116…
It's pretty common to hear "North Koreans get automatic citizenship in South Korea." That idea's been used to turn down NKoreans seeking resettlement in other countries. But in practice, claiming citizenship status is much more difficult than the phrase "automatic" implies. 2/
Acquiring effective South Korean citizenship is difficult, protracted (multi-stage process before NKorean resettlers are accorded full rights of citizenship), & contingent, especially when trying to claim that one should be treated as an ROK citizen *abroad.* 3/
Difficulties often have to do w/geopolitics & state security concerns. North Korean accounts suggest that when one comes from an env emphasizing ethnic/communitarian notions of belonging, & ROK rhetoric echoes some of that, the difficulties can be hard to understand. 4/
Most attn to resettlement focuses on Hanawon, not these earlier stages. But my guess is that for some North Koreans, those are formative experiences: they're the first time many NK resettlers encounter the ROK government and seek their help. 5/
The policy implication is that scholars/policymakers focused on North Korean resettlement may want to look more at the signals sent in these formative encounters. & asylum courts in third countries hearing North Korean claims should be aware of practice, not just policy. 6/
This is part of an ongoing research project on the global North Korean migration & diaspora politics. Hope to have more to share soon. If anyone can't access the article & needs a copy, please DM. 7/
For the project, we have collected every published North Korean memoir in English & Korean that we could find. We are also looking at eventually digitizing the collection in future so others can use it for research. 8/
I should also thank three terrific researchers who worked with me on this project when it started several years ago @MizzouPoliSci: @ImMyungheeLee @Yubs89 @YJuliaJung. They do awesome research & you all should look them up!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sheena Greitens

Sheena Greitens Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SheenaGreitens

13 Apr
I think this is the wrong question.
CIs were, by design, embedded in US universities in ways that other countries' outreach hasn't been.
What justifies giving Confucius Institutes continued *preferential* treatment in US higher ed--that eg Alliance Française etc do not get?
If Hanban (or its successor org) want to fund teaching Chinese language, give $ to the university & let the university do the hiring/curriculum independently, w/o donor influence. That's how eg Korea Foundation-funded faculty lines work - but not CIs.
Or if Chinese side wants to keep control over personnel, programs, & curriculum, set up a nonprofit like Alliance Française & operate outside the university context. That's another valid option.
Read 4 tweets
11 Apr
I've now taken a look at the original report from Internet 2.0 (source of NYPost & ABC reporting) on surveillance in Shanghai. Per @rpotter_9's request, here're my thoughts on the report itself. Overall take: a good illustration of dynamics we've seen before. Thread: 1/
First, some context: Shanghai has a population of ~23million people. ~40% are migrants, meaning they're harder for PSB to track using regular tools like hukou. The database appears to cover several thousand people. It's actually very (to me surprisingly) selective. 2/
Report says this is not the full back-end Shanghai PSB database, but a subset. pdf actually doesn't give the area of focus, but media reports have suggested it was named "Uyghur terrorist" & is terrorism-focused. Says "shows willingness to use the term terrorist more broadly." 3/
Read 19 tweets
11 Apr
Every American/foreigner in China has their passport scanned at airports (& every hotel) & provided public security. Unclear from @nypost writing if/how this list departs from routine practice.
I’m more puzzled that it *only* has ~600-some.
Language describing this as “unprecedented” is misleading; MPS having this info has been routine as long as I’ve been going to China.
If there’s a reason why this subset was extracted & placed on a special list, *that* would be interesting & important to know.
But also, uh, the thousands of Uyghurs - & what this list actually indicates about their treatment - seems equally important. But again, the article doesn’t say enough for us to find out. Frustrating.
Read 8 tweets
14 Mar
Being a woman in academia sometimes means being lectured to about how surveillance works in China & Taiwan by a [checks notes] archaeologist who works on [checks notes] Africa. Sigh.
Exchange occurred because I responded to statement that "Methods Taiwan's used [for COVID response] were same as those on the Chinese mainland," & suggested that scholarship, including my own, found this to be incorrect. I provided this article: cambridge.org/core/journals/…
Article looks at use of health surveillance in various political systems & tries to assess effects on liberalism & democracy. It's motivated in part by concern about use of surveillance under emergency conditions by democracies. But it also shows how democratic guardrails matter.
Read 29 tweets
29 Oct 20
So @BaldingsWorld fabricated a "source" for the Zhenhua data (not "leaked"). Now he says he fabricated an "author" (Aspen) for the Biden report. I have no idea why, but academics actively fabricating sources is not ok. It undermines public trust & discredits serious work. ImageImage
Thread from @BeijingPalmer on Zhenhua, which I noted at the time story broke appeared to be an unprotected Elastic Search database, not a confidential "leak" which was at @BaldingsWorld blog stated (see screenshot):
Image
Read 6 tweets
1 Sep 20
As one who respects both @chinaheritage's & Hessler's work, I find this sad. Both viewpoints have validity--because China is simply too big & complex to be captured in a single story. People experience & respond to life under authoritarianism in hugely varied ways. Thread:
I think about this as someone who, every year, looks at a syllabus & thinks about what constellation of pieces adequately captures modern China for my students. It's tough to do in a collection of 30 readings, let alone one long-form journalism piece. So what do I do? /2
Answer: find pieces that speak to each other. I've said before I don't think Hessler's piece is really about "how China beat coronavirus." Bad headline. It's about where state (authoritarian) response to the virus was & wasn't visible to citizens. Which is fascinating. /3
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!