A comparative analysis of the British reaction to ‘animal cruelty’ in South Korea and in Spain, 1986–1990
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 29 November 2025
https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v5i2.135
https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v5i2.135
Abstract
This article seeks to provide a comparative analysis of the reaction of the British public and the British government to reported cases of animal cruelty in South Korea and in Spain in the late 1980s by examining relevant government papers produced by the British Foreign Office which are housed in the National Archives in Kew, England. As South Korea geared up to host the 1988 Summer Olympics, various British media publications printed articles depicting the dog-slaughtering and dog-eating practices in Korea in lurid detail. Outraged and dismayed by such reports, prominent animal rights organisations as well as ordinary members of the British public organized nationwide petitions and sent letters to the Korean Embassy in London, to various Members of Parliament, to the Foreign Secretary, to the Prime Minister and even to Buckingham Palace protesting against such Korean practices and demanding that the British government apply pressure on the Korean authorities to introduce anti-cruelty legislation and issue a threat to boycott the Seoul Olympics should the Korean government refuse to take appropriate action. The British government replied that government ministers personally shared the British public’s “disgust” at the practices mentioned, that the Korean authorities were aware of the “revulsion” felt by the British people and that the British government would monitor the situation and raise the issue with the Korean authorities whenever suitable occasions arose. Around about the same time, the British media also published stories about local festivals in Spain where donkeys and other animals were being either crushed or strangled to death in addition to the traditional bullfighting. The British public’s fury at these reports was on a par with the reaction towards the Korean practices. But the British government’s response to the Spanish instances were markedly different to that demonstrated towards the Korean cases. The British authorities stated firmly and unequivocally that they could not interfere in the internal matters of another country, had no intention of using European Economic Community legislation to curb such practices and advised all protesters to send their correspondence to the Spanish embassy in London, even though the embassy officials had informed the Foreign Office that they would not deal with such communications.
Keywords: Britain, Korea, Spain, animal cruelty, animal welfare
논문초록
본고는 영국 큐(Kew)의 국립 공문서관에 보관된 영국 외무부(British Foreign Office)의 관련 정부 문서를 검토하여 1980년대 한국과 스페인에서 보고된 동물학대 사건 에 대한 영국 대중과 영국 정부의 반응을 비교분석하였다. 서울 올림픽 준비가 한창이었던 1988년 초, 영국 여러 일간지 및 잡지에서 한국의 개고기 식용 및 개 도축을 다룬 선정적인 기사들을 대대적으로 실었다. 이 기사들의 내용에 분노한 영국의 일반 시민들과 동물권단체 들은 영국 왕실, 총리실, 외무장관실, 주영국 한국대사관 등에 서신을 보내 한국의 개고기 식 용 문화에 대해 강력하게 항의였다, 또한 이들은 한국 정부가 동물학대방지법 통과 등 적합 한 조치를 취하도록 영국 정부가 압력을 가할 것을 요구하였으며, 만약 한국 정부가 협조하 지 않을 경우 서울 올림픽을 보이콧할 것마저 촉구하였다. 이에 대해 영국 정부는 정부 고위 인사들이 한국의 개고기 식용에 대한 영국 시민들의 “혐오감”을 공유하고, 영국 시민들이 느 끼는 “역겨움”을 한국 정부가 잘 이해하고 있으며, 영국 정부가 상황을 계속 주시하고 기회가 있을 때마다 한국 정부와 이 이슈를 논의하겠다고 답하였다. 이와 비슷한 시기에 스페인의 지방 축제 기간에 당나귀 및 기타 동물들이 압사당하는 사례가 빈번하게 발생하고 있다는 기 사 또한 영국 언론에 등장하였고, 영국 시민들은 한국의 개고기 식용문화에 대해 보여주었던 반감과 비슷한 수준의 분노와 항의를 보였다, 그러나 스페인 문제와 관련하여 영국 정부는 다른 국가의 내정에 간섭할 수 없음을 분명히 하였고, 유럽경제공동체를 통해 스페인의 동물 학대 관습을 근절시킬 의지가 전혀 없음을 시사하였으며, 동물학대에 대한 영국인들의 항의 에 대응하지 않을 것이라고 입장을 분명히 밝힌 주영국 스페인대사관에게 모든 항의서한을 보내도록 시민들을 유도하는 등 한국의 경우와는 상당히 다른 반응을 보였다.
References (34)
Borsay, Peter and Rosemary Sweet. (2023). The Invention of the English Landscape: C. 1700–1939. Bloomsbury.
Golden, Andrew. (1988, January 17). Cooked Alive: Shame of dog eating in the Olympic City. Sunday Mirror.
Kean, Hilda. (1998). Animal Rights: Political and Social Change in Britain since 1800. Reaktion Books.
Kinnersley, Simon. (1988, July 9). Welcome to Olympic City: I’ll never forget walking into the kitchens of hell…The howls of torture and the brutal slaughter of the cats and dogs. Woman’s Own.
Landborn, Adair. (2015). Flamenco and Bullfighting: Movement, Passion and Risk in Two Spanish Traditions. McFarland.
MacKenzie, John M. (1997). The Empire of Nature: Hunting, Conservation, and British Imperialism (Vol. 71). Manchester University Press.
Petersen, Shannon. (2002). Acting for Endangered Species: The Statutory Ark. University Press of Kansas.
The National Archives. (1990). Dog-eating in South Korea [FCO 21/4637]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1988a). Treatment of dogs and cats in South Korea: Correspondence with MPs and the public [FCO 21/4103]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1988b). Treatment of dogs and cats in South Korea: Correspondence with MPs and the public [FCO 21/4104]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1988c). Treatment of dogs and cats in South Korea: Correspondence with MPs and the public [FCO 21/4105]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1988d). Treatment of dogs and cats in South Korea: Correspondence with MPs and the public [FCO 21/4106]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1988e). Treatment of dogs and cats in South Korea: Correspondence with MPs and the public [FCO 21/4107]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1987a). Letters from MPs and members of the public regarding cruelty to animals in Spain [FCO 9/5797]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
. (1987b). Letters from MPs and members of the public regarding cruelty to animals in Spain [FCO 9/5798]. Kew, UK: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
