Lawrence Peck
North Korea's Dictionary of Political Terminology defined the term "united front" as "a political coalition of various political parties and social organizations as well as of individuals, formed for the purpose of opposing common enemies....These tactics aim at isolating counter-revolutionary forces and nurturing auxiliary forces to assist the main revolutionary forces." Lenin described united front tactics as "taking advantage of every, even the smallest opportunity of gaining a mass ally, even though this ally be only temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional." Lenin's true motives in advocating the united front tactic were clearly revealed by his comment "In my opinion, utilize is a much more accurate and appropriate word than support and alliance." In remarking on such temporary and conditional "support" which Lenin urged British communists to give to the British Labor Party against conservatives in the 1920s, Lenin said that such communist "support" for the non-communist left should be viewed in the way that a noose "supports" a man to be hanged.
A declassified 1953 CIA report noted with regard to the communist united front tactic that "The Communist objective in this sphere is to attain political power by means of alliances with other Left-wing groups. When this objective has been obtained the Communists gradually discard the non-Communist elements, whose support has helped them to power....The way is then open for the elimination or absorption of other parties, by such methods as treason trials against political opponents, party splits and mergers, and the introduction of Communist puppets into other party hierarchies. The results are always the same: parties which have collaborated with the Communists disappear as genuine organizations as soon as the Communists have obtained office, and the non-Communist politicians who have attempted to co-operate find, to their cost, that the Communists, once in power, tolerate no rivals."
Since 1917, those who have entered into united front coalitions with communists and extreme-left forces have been betrayed, suffered defeats, and brought disaster to their nations. This has been the case in authoritarian states as well as in democracies. In different eras, on different continents, and under various labels, from narrow "democratic fronts" and broad "popular fronts" to "united fronts from above" at the leadership level to "united fronts from below" among the masses, whether lasting months or several years, it has always been the same. Such alliances have consistently brought ruin to those forces which have naively sought to collaborate with communists and other extreme-left elements. In some countries, socialists fell into this trap of foolishly entering into coalitions with communists, which at a minimum damaged the cause of such non-communist leftists, and at worst destroyed them.
From the communist point of view, entering into a united front with non-communists provides several important advantages over the short term, and also makes it possible for them to pursue their long term goals. First, it provides the communists with a certain degree of legitimacy and respectability, enabling them to avoid isolation. Second, it allows communists the opportunity to influence the policies and actions of the allied parties or organizations within a coalition, and to disseminate their own ideological views within such groups. Third, it gives the communists access to a much larger segment of the populace than they would ordinarily be able to reach through their exclusive efforts and thus expand their reach within a society. Fourth, it enables the communists to achieve their most important long term goals of waging a struggle from within against their nationalist, reformist, bourgeois, or social democratic rivals, and if they fail in converting them, to then either attempt to seize overall control of the coalition, or if that is not possible to destroy it from within.
After Lenin and his Bolsheviks seized power by overthrowing the democratic government of Kerensky in 1917, the communists turned against and annihilated their previous allies of the non-Marxist Socialist Revolutionary Party. In Central and Eastern Europe after the end of World War Two in 1945, Stalin and his communist henchmen in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania, co-opted and then eradicated their coalition partners in agrarian, peasant, and social democratic parties. In China after Mao and his communists conquered the mainland, small democratic parties which had joined in a united front with the communists were subjugated and made into mere puppets of the regime. In France during the mid-1930s, socialists joined in their famous "Popular Front" with the communists. But when the Soviet Union allied itself with Nazi Germany late 1939, the French communists betrayed their former socialist allies by seeking the defeat of their own country. The French socialist Leon Blum, who led that Popular Front government in the mid-1930s, later learned his lesson and warned his fellow countrymen about the communists, saying "We can't deal with these people at all — I know them well. There is nobody who has been more thoroughly fooled by them than I have."
In the aftermath of World War Two, the leftists of the U.S. Progressive Party were exploited and then abandoned by the communists who had been loosely allied with them. The American conservative intellectual James Burnham, a former communist, rightly explained that "It is a law of modern politics without exception that non-communists always lose by entering into a united front, for any purpose whatsoever, with communists. They lose no matter what happens to the supposed specific purpose of the united front." Perhaps the most tragic example of non-communists being weakened and eventually destroyed after joining united fronts with communists was that of China prior to 1949. The nationalists of the Guomindang at various times had entered into united fronts with the communists, and in each of those cases it resulted in disaster for the non-communists, empowered the communists, and eventually enabled Mao to emerge victorious on the Chinese mainland. As Stalin put it in his instructions to the Chinese communists, they should use the Guomindang solely for their own benefit, "to squeeze it out like a lemon," and once the alliance was no longer useful to the communists, it would then be "thrown away." Mao later described united front tactics as one of his "magic weapons" for defeating non-communist forces.
Korea has been no exception to this dangerous trend. During the Japanese colonial period, in the late 1920s, Korean nationalists joined a united front with the Korean communists, forming a nationwide organization called the Singanhoe in opposition to colonial rule. However, as the Korean American historian Suh Dae-sook correctly noted with regard to the differing intentions of each faction within this alliance, "The purpose of the national reformists in complying with the Communist proposal for a united front was far different from that of the Communists." Indeed, in a speech to a Comintern conference in Moscow in 1920, one of the leading Korean communists of that time, Pak Chin-sun, indicated how communists viewed non-communist elements in such united fronts, and foretold the eventual fate of the Singanhoe. Pak gave a clear warning regarding what would happen to non-communist "allies" who were no longer useful to the communists, by declaring that "we will know how to turn our weapons on the allies of yesterday." Pak, however, failed to realize that he would later be a target of his comrades. When Pak's usefulness to the communist cause ended as a result of him losing a factional struggle among his fellow Korean communists, he was executed by the Soviets in 1938.
In 1928, on orders from Moscow based on a decision by Stalin and enforced by the Comintern, the world communist movement entered what was known as the "Third Period" of communist strategy. Under this new approach, a highly sectarian "class against class" strategy replaced the previous "united front from above" tactics, and communists around the world were instructed to abandon efforts to engage in alliances with non-communist groups. These orders from the Soviet Union, especially those issued by a branch of the Comintern specifically directed to Korean communists in late 1930, denounced the Singanhoe as an irredeemably "bourgeois reformist" and anti-Soviet organization. These new policy instructions from Moscow were eventually delivered to the Korean communists, who then deliberately destroyed the Singanhoe by voting to dissolve it in 1931. This betrayal of the Korean nationalists by the communists obviously damaged the efforts of nationalist forces in Korea. As the American historian Richard Gid Powers observed in the context of American politics in the 1930s, "Group after group learned that it was almost always a fatal mistake to try to cooperate with communists."
After the 1945 liberation of Korea from colonial rule, the Soviets occupation forces in North Korea, prior to the formal establishment of Kim Il-sung's regime, made some early and very short-lived attempts to work with and form a temporary governing coalition including non-communists, just as had been the standard Soviet strategy in the Central and Eastern European nations which they occupied in 1945. In North Korea, the Soviets attempted this by trying to co-opt and secure the cooperation of the highly respected nationalist and Christian leader Cho Man-shik, who for a couple of months essentially headed a de facto government body in the North, and who later established his own political group, the Democratic Party in the North. However, this united front coalition attempt, termed a "national front," did not last very long, since Cho was unwilling to serve as a figurehead for communist rule and refused to agree to the Soviet proposal for a trusteeship over the Korean peninsula which would delay independence for years. When Cho refused to cooperate with the Soviet plans, he was arrested and his Democratic Party was taken over by pro-communist elements. It was later revealed that undercover communists had deeply infiltrated Cho's Democratic Party and were attempting to manipulate and sabotage it from within. Cho was falsely accused by the communists of being a "reactionary" and "pro-Japanese," and after years of imprisonment he was executed by the Kim Il-sung regime sometime during or after the Korean War.
According to Soviet Ambassador to North Korea A.M. Puzanov, Kim Il-sung in June of 1960 revealed to him a type of strategy aimed at the ROK which was similar to or at least involved a "united front" type of approach. Kim Il Sung significantly told Puzanov that "at the present time the situation in the South is quite favorable. Labor troubles, demonstrations, and strikes are continuing there. It is especially important to note such a positive aspect as the creation of a number of parties with a progressive orientation. These parties distinguish themselves by the advancement of good slogans which are to our advantage. ...The truth is, there are also some negative aspects in the platforms of these parties - anti-Communist slogans, calls to cooperate with the UN, etc. However...this is being done at our instructions so that these parties are not disbanded. In the final analysis, the anti-Communist slogans are easy to remove."
In terms of how the united front tactic is to be applied within the context of modern ROK politics, the Marxist-Leninist Park Kyung-soon wrote in 2006 that "In order to secure a base of popular support in future political schedules (elections) and win the political confrontation against pro-American reactionary forces, we are also in a desperate situation where we must build an anti-conservative grand coalition to counter the new conservative grand coalition of pro-American conservative forces." More recently, the Marxist-Leninist Cho Deok-won wrote in late December of 2024 that "If the reform movement shifts from pro-American to anti-American, it is the end. U.S. domination of Korea will come to an end. In Korea, the united front consists of the Anti-Fascist Front, where the entire Revolution and Reform movement are united, and the National Democratic Front, where parts of the Revolution and Reform movement are united. The former is a tactical united front, even though it represents the whole, while the latter is a strategic united front, even though it represents only parts. A democratic coalition government emerges from the Anti-Fascist Front, and a people's democratic government emerges from the National Democratic Front." The term "Reform movement" refers to the left, center-left, and some far-left forces in ROK politics, whereas the term "Revolution movement" refers to the most extreme-left, Marxist-oriented, and pro-North Korean forces. This is classic Leninist doctrine as refined by Lenin's successors, and even Karl Marx called for such tactical alliances as early as 1850.
This practice of united front tactical alliances has very recently taken the form of "electoral coalitions" between the ruling leftist Democratic Party of Korea and some smaller far-left parties, such as the Fatherland Innovation Party, some of whose leading members are rabidly anti-American and opposed to the U.S.-ROK alliance, as well as other minor far-left parties. Prior to the 2024 ROK legislative elections, the Democratic Party of Korea formed a so-called "Democratic Alliance" with smaller far-left parties and civic groups to compete for proportional representation seats in the legislature. In anticipation of the 2025 presidential election, the Democratic Party of Korea also entered into an electoral coalition with smaller far-left parties, and even held joint rallies with openly anti-U.S. and extreme-left groups such as "Candlelight Action," with leading figures from the Democratic Party of Korea speaking at such rallies. In early 2026, the Democratic Party of Korea again formed an electoral alliance with the far-left Fatherland Innovation Party for joint efforts in the June 2026 local election. The Democratic Party of Korea and the Fatherland Innovation Party even entered into discussions for a formal merger of their two parties, but it was decided to delay further consideration of such a merger until after the June 2026 local election. For some within the Democratic Party of Korea, there seems to almost be a "Pas d'ennemis à gauche" mentality. This French phrase, meaning "No enemies on the left," is a classic united front principle which had its origins in France's "Popular Front" government of the mid-1930s.
What would be the "worst case scenario" for the potential success of a united front type of infiltration strategy aimed at the ROK at some time in the future? It would perhaps be analogous, at least to some extent, to the communist subversion efforts in Guatemala in the mid-1950s as described in a U.S. State Department report from 1957, which noted that "What is almost incredible is the measure of success the Communists achieved in penetrating, subverting, and finally controlling the governmental machinery of Guatemala....Within 10 years a handful of Communists in Guatemala attained a position of political influence which was unique in the free world...the Communists had come to enjoy the confidence, protection, and support of the Government. Communist agitators infiltrated public and private organizations. Operating in the guise of "reformers"....They dominated the social security organization....Through the technique of the "popular front" they dictated to the Congress and openly manipulated the President. The judiciary made one valiant attempt to protect its integrity and independence; but the Communists, using their control of the legislative body, cause the Supreme Court to be dissolved when it refused to give approval to a Communist-contrived law....So entrenched, the Communists were also able to steer Guatemala's foreign policy..."
The purpose of explaining these concepts and outlining these possible future scenarios as they currently relate or may eventually relate to ROK politics is not to cause Korean patriots and American supporters of the U.S.-ROK alliance to suffer from nightmares. It is to simply to alert Koreans and Americans to the dangers, in a general sense, of united fronts with anti-democratic forces that seek to extinguish freedom, and warn of the specific threats posed to the ROK and the U.S.-ROK alliance by such united front tactics used by some political forces within the ROK. With the upcoming local elections in the ROK, this is certainly something which Korean voters, in particular, should keep in mind. As President Ronald Reagan observed, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It has to be fought for and defended by each generation." A Korean political party, even one which claims to be a force of the "mainstream left," may contribute to the extinction of freedom about which Reagan warned by entering into united front coalitions which lead to ruin.
President Lee Jae-myung and Cho Kuk, leader of the Rebuilding Korea Party. [YonhapNews]
By Lawrence Peck
Lawrence Peck has been researching and monitoring the activities of pro-North Korea and far-left groups and activists in the U.S. for over 25 years. He has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and a Juris Doctor degree from Loyola Law School of Los Angeles. For several years, he lived and worked in Korea for some large Korean business groups, and he is currently an advisor to the North Korea Freedom Coalition of the U.S. Lawrence may be contacted at the following address: write.to.lawrence.now@gmail.com
Lawrence Peck
댓글
0