Why does it continue to antagonise large, Western powers into tougher economic sanctions and less political freedom? And why does it continually alienate itself from the international community, such as with the shooting of four Chinese citizens in 2010 on the North Korean border with Liaoning province?

To understand these seemingly irrational actions, we need to look beyond the series of pampered dictators that take the brunt of international criticism . It is obvious to see that the late Kim Jong-il had less power in the Democratic People’s Republic than his father, Kim Il-Sung, who is still revered as the immortal “Eternal Leader”, and yet the country continued in the same fashion as it did before his death in 1994.Rather, North Korea has been, and remains, a party-led country. Just as the Queen may be the international ‘face’ of the United Kingdom, the Kims of North Korea make public appearances, waving the ecstatic crowds into frenzy with their national celebrity status, but they do not hold all of the strings of political power.

When the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was formed in 1950, the North had been subject to more U.S. bombing than the entire Pacific Theatre of World War II. Many thousands, (possibly hundreds of thousands) of suspected Communists were slaughtered during the Bodo League massacre. And on top of this, President Truman announced in a November press conference his “active consideration” of the usage of nuclear weapons. China’s “Aid Korea to Resist America” campaign boosted the morale of communists in the country, and anti-American sentiment rose as an inevitable result of the proxy-war between the two powers.

Kim il-Sung’s government began as a pro-Soviet entity with Communist ambitions. Yet from 1956 onwards, he led the North Korean people away from traditional Stalinism towards his own Juche ideology. Like Josip Tito, he found support in an non-Soviet independence movement, allied neither completely with the U.S.S.R. nor with China. His anti-imperialism philosophies ignited the people against U.S. ideology, fuelled by their hatred of the Imperial Japanese as a historical example of the evils that superpowers can bring upon small, defenceless countries.

It is important to understand that change has come very slowly within North Korea, and the traditions set in place by Kim il-Sung’s reign have been difficult to erode. Like Israelis, North Koreans hold regular defensive drills, taking their children to underground bunkers in case of an impending nuclear attack. North Koreans have seen what has happened to the other countries opposed to the U.S., Iraq and Afghanistan, and what potentially awaits their own country if they let down their guard. The nuclear ambitions of the North Korean government are hailed by the ordinary citizen as the only effective deterrent to a world superpower, especially one which has threatened to use nuclear weapons upon it in the past (not to mention the only one which has actually used them.)

Whether it is due to the mechanisms of propaganda or not, North Koreans are fiercely proud of their small state. Along with Iran, they are one of the only surviving nations that are ideologically opposed to capitalist expansion, and they recognise that the only way to continue this survival is through increased military strength. They have witnessed numerous authoritarian governments in neighbouring South Korea through the 70's and 80's, meaning that the strikingly obvious difference in living conditions between the two from our perspective does little to ease their overwhelming concerns of Western capitalist imperialism. The North Koreans have formed a very isolationist philosophy toward foreign interference; better to have their own dictators than one implanted by a foreign power.

North Korean nuclear breakthroughs are therefore more of an inevitability than a potential outcome; and yet the U.N. continue to attempt to thwart this steady progression toward a point of no return for the peninsula, and impose greater economic sanctions on a country which is already struggling to feed it’s people. Such continued pressure upon a country only leads it’s people to greater extremism and alienation. The North Koreans, through a mixture of bad history and political indoctrination, would rather starve than face the threat of extinction, from which they see nuclear power as the only effective safeguard.

Perhaps a more important question than why the DPRK continues to alienate itself from the international community is why the international community accepts this outcome. We should be asking at this stage how the developed world can deny nuclear power to a country which famously cannot be seen from space at night due to it’s lack of electricity. We should be asking why the international community continues to punish the people of a nation for the behaviours of it’s ruling party, and in doing so reinforces their determination toward increasing military strength Perhaps in a supervisory role, Western diplomatic involvement could help the North Koreans develop safer nuclear technology and prevent their weaponisation. And by helping the North Koreans integrate into the international community instead of pushing them away from it, we could lead Korea towards a more stable future rather than leaving Reunification as the only goal for the next generation of propaganda-bred North Koreans.