|
Present Situation of Inter-Korea Relations and Ways to Its Improvement
Prof. JONG Ki-phung, DPRK
The situation on the Korean Peninsula, which had been worsened to the extreme early this year, came back to the phase of relaxation at the initiative of the DPRK government.
Dialogues resumed between the north and the south and Kaesong Industrial Park has gone back into normal operation after 160 days of suspension.
It was also planned to have reunion of separated families and relatives in Mt. Kumgang on the autumn festival day and open the inter-Korean working-level talks for the resumption of tourism of Mt. Kumgang.
Unfortunately, however, the north-south relations have got worse again and the situation on the Korean Peninsula has returned to acute confrontation.
The root-cause lies in the reckless anti-DPRK confrontation rackets kicked off one after the other in the north against the development of overall situation.
First; the south Korean authorities have intolerably turned up their nose at the sincere efforts of the DPR Korea dedicated to dialogues and peace.
They maliciously claimed that the north had put Kaesong Industrial Park into normal operation not for sincere dialogues and peace, but for money and maintenance of its system.
The present ruler of south Korea let loose a ridiculous remark that Kaesong Industrial Park was put to re-operation “because of her patient adherence to the principle”.
She was followed by the reunification minister, the foreign minister and other high-rankers of south Korea who asserted about the draw in the fierce mental tug of war between the north and the south.
The south Korean ruler went the length to say that the improvement of north-south relations should not be expected, and that she would control the speed awaiting the change in the north.
In coincidence, the conservative press and mass media widely misled the public opinion that the north had knelt down and their pressure on the north had paid off.
In the last-ditch attempt, they threw mud to our supreme dignity and spread leaflets over the areas of the north.
The south Korean military have decided to involve psychological warfare agents of the United States in the South Korea-US joint military exercises to expand the anti-DPRK psychological warfare from next year, and to develop next generation mobile transmission devices which can transmit radio and TV signals simultaneously to the whole area of the north and sophisticated leaflet-bomb launchers.
It is as clear as a day that nerve-touching vituperations and acts against the counterpart of the dialogue affect the north-south relations.
Second; Park Geun Hye “government” wholly denies our system and overtly reveals its ulterior intention to do harm to it.
In the relations between the north and the south, each of which has its own ideology and system different to the other, confrontation is naturally unavoidable if one attempts to force its ideology and system upon the other and destroy it.
Denial of our system finds its concentrated expression in the so-called “purge of the forces following the north” now underway in south Korea.
The “purge of the pro-north forces” is, in essence, to drive out all the people who advocate reconciliation with the north by labeling them as those who try to “collapse the system of the south, and thus destroy the foundation for inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation.
The conservative authorities of south Korea has accused the progressive political parties aspiring after independence and reunification as “pro-north” organization and fabricated the case of “plotting internal disturbances” in a vicious attempt to dismantle them.
In south Korea posting of criticism against the “government”, dropping of credit ranking of the economy, the minute of the summit talks of the previous “president” and anti-“government” demonstrations are all labeled as “pro-north propaganda”, “pro-north opinion”, “pro-north action” and what not.
On September 9 this year, the national day of DPR Korea, Park Geun Hye openingly directed a drama of appointing governors of North and South Phyongan Provinces and North Hamgyong Province.
Widely spreading in south Korea is the speculation about the collapse of system in the north.
The south Korean “government” has gone so far as to involve ignorant foreign anti-DPRK elements to spread the rumor that the system in the north is so unstable that the south should be full ready for its collapse, and has divided their jurisdiction over the areas in the north.
This frenzy is uprooting the foundation for dialogues and reconciliation between the north and the south.
Third; Park Geun Hye “government” stages dangerous anti-DPRK war drills one after the other behind the screen of dialogue.
At the height of north-south dialogues, the south Korean military staged the “Ulji Freedom Guardian” war exercise in collaboration with the United States, calling in the US B-52 strategic bombers.
The south Korean military war-hawks, on their frequent field inspections of the frontier units, ordered them to get fully ready for a war without being carried away by the north’s tactical offensive for dialogues, arguing that the north would attack the south in 3 years.
In the celebration of the “Day of south Korean Army” on October 1 this year, Park Geun Hye let loose a spate of anti-DPRK vindictive that the south should never tolerated “someone’s” provocation, that the north’s line of promoting the development of nuclear forces and the economy simultaneously is an illusion, and that they would make the north’s nukes and missiles useless.
At the 45th session of south Korea-US annual security consultation, the US and south Korean brass-hats signed the so-called “tailored deterrence strategy” which envisages the preemptive strike on the nuclear and missile bases of the north.
In October this year, the south Korean authorities staged an anti-DPRK war drill with the US nuclear aircraft carrier “George Washington” operating in the South and West Seas of Korea.
This clearly shows that Park Geun Hye “government” pursues confrontation with the north behind the screen of much touted “dialogues” and “confidence building”.
These factors has plunged the inter-Korean relations again into dilemma, and the situation on the Korean peninsula into acute tension.
Then, what are the ways to improve the worsened north-south relations?
First, the south Korean authorities should opt for independence, free from their policy of depending on foreign forces.
It is not possible at all to improve the inter-Korean relations by depending on the foreign forces who are responsible for the Korea’s division and deterioration of north-south relations.
In particular, the United States does whatever possible to tense the Korean situation to find a pretext for their domination of, and interference in the Korean Peninsula and the rest of Asia.
It is none other than the United States which instigates Park Geun Hye “government” to inter-Korean confrontation.
When the DPRK’s active effort for dialogues and peace led to the re-opening of Kaesong Industrial Park and the adoption of final agreement for normalization of its operation at the North-South working-level talks, the United States put pressure on Park Geun Hye “government” not to be led by the north.
A number of high-ranking officials of the United States urged Park Geun Hye “government” not to have dialogues unless the north make commitment to denuclearization, saying that they were doubtful whether the inter-Korean dialogues would be helpful to the realization of their strategic goal.
Several good opportunities have been lost for improvement of north-south relations because the south Korean authorities have tried to tune the development of inter-Korean relations to the principle of priority to south Korea-US alliance.
The inter-Korean relations continue to go from bad to worse after Park Geun Hye took office all owing to the south Korean authorities’ policy of depending on foreign forces and the intentional moves of the United States to foil its improvement.
Therefore, the north-south relations can improve as desired by the whole nation only when the south Korean authorities free themselves from dependence on foreign forces and follow the road of independence.
Second; the south Korean authorities should abandon their evil inclination to system confrontation with DPPR Korea.
It is recognized by the whole world that our socialist system based on the single-hearted unity behind its great leader and Songun policy is as firm as a rock. Any attempt to destroy it is something like trying to break a rock by throwing an egg.
History proves that all the forces who had pursued system confrontation with the wild ambition for unification through absorption faced were doomed to miserable end.
But Lee Myung Bak “government” clinged to the strategy of waiting for the system collapse in the north, and now Park Geun Hye “government” clamours that it would hasten the collapse.
Long ago, the north and the south adopted the July 4 Joint Declaration and the historical North-South Joint Declaration, in which they have agreed to respect each other’s ideology and system and refrain from slandering each other and pursuing confrontation.
So long as the south Korean authorities approach the inter-Korean relations with hostility against our system, we can neither avoid confrontation and war, nor realize peaceful co-existence.
Likewise, so long as the south harbors hostility against the north and slanders it, the environment for reconciliation and cooperation will never come true.
We strongly urge the south Korean authorities to stop defaming our system, particularly, our supreme dignity.
Third; the south should refrain from forcing unilateral denuclearization upon the north.
If the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula is to be solved, it is imperative to resolve its origin: the United States should put an end to nuclear threat against us, stop all anti-DPRK nuclear war drills and pull its troops out of south Korean with all its nuclear weapons.
When Park Geun Hye initiated the “confidence-building process”, she said that “north’s abandonment of nuclear programme” was not its precondition, but she availed all possible opportunities to announce that they could never tolerate the north’s nuclear programme.
They are now more frantically staging nuclear war exercises against the north, driving the danger of nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula to the extreme.
The previous ruler of south Korea Lee Myung Bak set the “north’s abandonment of nuclear programme as a precondition for inter-Korean relations, thus plunging the relations between the north and the south to catastrophe.
The prevention of a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula is wholly attributable to the fact that we possess the powerful self-defensive nuclear force
Therefore, the south Korean authorities should show sincerity to the improvement of inter-Korean relations instead of following the United States and forcing the north to give up its nuclear programme first.
I would like to conclude my speech by expressing my hope that the foreign and overseas Korean participants in this conference have a clear understanding of who is responsible for the aggravation of tension on the Korean Peninsula and dynamically step up international solidarity activities for peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.
Thank you
&&&
Cause of Division and Ways for Peace on Korean Peninsula
Dr. PAK Yong chol, Deputy Director, DPRK Institute for Fatherland’s Reunification
If we are to find out the correct ways to ensure peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, it is necessary to have a clear understanding of the cause of Korea’s division.
The Korean nation who has long lived as a homogeneous nation in the same territory was halved neither through a civilian war nor by the international convention pertaining to a defeated nation.
Korea suffers from the division of the nation and its territory wholly because of the foreign forces.
The possibility of Korea’s division was first offered by the Japanese imperialists who had occupied Korea and turned it into its colony. Then, the possibility was turned into reality by the United States.
It is the United States which arbitrarily drew the 38゜parallel line across the country.
The Soviet Union declared war against Japan on August 8, 1945 near the end of the World War II and Japan expressed its will to surrender.
On August 10, the United States called an emergency meeting of 3 departments – the Department of State, the Department of the Army and the Department of the Navy – to discuss the division of Korea into two, one part under the US domination and the other under the Soviet domination.
In his reminiscences, the then US President Truman wrote: Korea’s division was never put on the agenda of an international meeting.
It is really a deplorable tragedy that the Korean nation, not such a defeated nation as Japan which had inflicted unfathomable holocaust upon humanity but only a victim, was divided into two through bargaining of big powers.
Some people argue that the cause of Korea’s division is the “left-right confrontation” within the nation, but in reality, the confrontation between different ideologies and systems existing on the Korean Peninsula is not the cause of division but the result of division imposed by the United States.
After the liberation of Korea from the Japanese colonial rule, even in presence of foreign troops in the north and the south of Korean Peninsula, the entire Korean nation in both parts of the country unanimously aspired after the establishment of a unified government.
Nevertheless, on November 14, 1947 the United States arbitrarily put the Korean issue on the UN agenda, and at the 2nd session of UN General Assembly, they railroaded the motion of organizing the UN Provisional Committee on Korea which they instigated to cook up a separate pro-US “government” in the south of Korea.
Against the US moves to fabricate a separate “government”, the entire Korean nation in the north and the south had an all-Korea general election on August 25, 1948.
In the northern half of Korea 212 deputies were elected through direct election, and in the southern half of Korea 1 080 people’s representatives were selected through signing of the list, who then gathered in Haeju to elect 360 deputies.
In September 1948 the 1st session of the Supreme People’s Assembly of the DPR Korea was held in Pyongyang, which announced the establishment of the unified government.
At the initiative of the DPRK government to withdraw all foreign troops from the Korean Peninsula, all the Soviet troops stationing in the northern half of Korea went back home by December 1948, but the United States refused to pull its troops out of south Korea and concocted the separate pro-US “government”.
This resulted in the existence of the DPR Korea, a legitimate government representing the whole nation, and of the separate pro-US “government” in the southern half of Korea.
Afterwards, the war ignited by the United States on June 25, 1950 drew the military demarcation line on the Korean Peninsula, fixing Korea’s division physically.
Third; Korea’s division is protracted by the presence of US troops in south Korea and the US moves to obstruct Korea’s reunification.
Article 60 of the Korean Armistice Agreement stipulates that within 3 months after its entry into force, representatives of the signatory parties shall hold a political meeting to discuss and agree on the issue of withdrawing all foreign troops from Korea and making peaceful settlement of the Korea question.
However, the United States deliberately disrupted the preliminary talks at Panmunjon for convening a political meeting, and in April 1954, at the ministerial meeting held in Geneva, they opposed the DPRK proposal to withdraw all foreign troops from Korea and establish a unified government through free general election.
In the 1970s the north and the south adopted the July 4 Joint Statement and had high-ranking talks. The United States obstructed this process clamouring “there may be talks for unification but integration of north and south is inconceivable”. Then, it made up the scenarios of “simultaneous UN membership of the north and the south” and “separate UN membership of the south” to fix Korea’s division internationally.
The eternal President of the DPR Korea great Generalissimo Kim Il Sung consistently adhered to the principle of One Korea and made strenuous efforts for its realization: he put forward the 3 principles of national reunification in the 1970s, the proposal of founding the Democratic Federal Republic of Koryo in the 1980s and the 10-point Programme for Great Unity of the Whole Nation in the 1990s.
Nevertheless, Korea remained divided due to the persistent US moves to keep it divided and increase tension there. Accordingly, confrontation and danger of war increased on the Korean Peninsula.
On the basis of the causes of national division, we can define the following ways for durable peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
First; the United States should give up its hostile policy towards the DPR Korea and sign peace pact with it.
Today the hostile policy and moves of the United States to stifle the DPR Korea represent a major factor that disturbs peace on the Korean Peninsula.
We have done everything possible for peace, including dialogues with the US and adoption of a series of agreements, but with the change of the government in the US, the process of reconciliation with it has always returned to zero.
The United States, not contended with the DPR Korea following the independent road free from any great power, has pursued the policy of power for more than half a century, imposing military threat and economic sanctions and pressure.
US sanctions and pressure upon the DPR Korea has reached the extreme.
The DPRK policy was to concentrate all efforts to economic construction on the basis of the self-defensive war deterrence so that the Korean people would no longer tighten their belts.
But the United States kicked off the frenzy of sanctions taking issue with the DPRK’s peaceful and transparent launch of a satellite based on the international space convention and other international laws.
The United States has ferociously violated the sovereignty of the north and persistently pursued the policy of isolating and stifling the north taking issue with our launch of satellite. Heedless of the principle of simultaneous action, it has increased unilateral sanctions against us and disrupted the 6-party talks, thus trigging off the evil cycle of distrust.
This clearly shows that unless the United States give up its hostile policy towards the DPR Korea and replace the unstable armistice agreement with a peace treaty, it is impossible to talk about peace on the Korean Peninsula.
Second; all anti-DPRK war drills should be stopped at once.
The history of inter-Korean relations shows that the situation on the rise always goes down again whenever there is a joint war drill with foreign forces.
It is a common sense that the war hardware and mobility have reached such an incomparable level of development that there no longer exist a purely defensive drill and military exercises presuppose offensive.
The United States incessantly stage tens of nuclear war drills against the DPRK every year under the cloak of annual defensive drills.
The anti-DPRK war drills of different codenames known to the world number over 18 000.
This year, too, the United States and south Korea staged Key Resolve, Foal Eagle and Ulji Freedom Guardian and other codenamed military exercises – over 50 in all – with the involvement of nuclear aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, strategic bombers, stealth fighters and other nuclear strike means.
There are some hot spots in the world, but there is no such place as the Korean Peninsula where the United States stages one nuclear war drill after another every year by enlisting huge armed forces and nuclear strike means.
All these war exercises should be stopped at once to ensure peace.
Third; the north-south joint declarations should be respected and implemented to the letter.
In the 21st century the north and the south had the historical summit meeting for the first time in the history of division, which led to the adoption of June 15 Joint Declaration, the landmark for reconciliation, cooperation, peace and reunification, and of October 4 Declaration for former’s implementation.
When these declarations were adopted, the atmosphere of reconciliation and cooperation prevailed over the country, and the entire Korean nation and the world were given the hope for peace and reunification.
But since conservative Lee Myung Bak “government” ruled south Korea, the period in which the north-south relations developed favorably with the adoption of June 15 Joint Declaration and October 4 Declaration has been labeled as a “lost decade” and the inter-Korean relations has worsened to the extreme.
Park Geun Hye “government” has deleted the implementation of declarations from their north Korea policy and the situation on the Korean Peninsula gets worse than ever before.
Park Geun Hye “government” advertizes about confidence building between the north and south through so-called “confidence-building process”, but the process implies that the DPR Korea should first give up its nuclear programme. This kind of confrontation policy will lead us to nowhere.
Implementation of June 15 Joint Declaration and October 4 Declaration is the only way to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula.
I do hope that all foreign and overseas Korean participants have a clear understanding of who is to blame for Korea’s division and what should be done first to ensure peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
Thank you.
&&&
Necessity of Peace Agreement and Its Prospect
Lawyer Jang Kyung Uk, J.D. (South Korean Lawyers for Democratic Society)
1.Lasting Truce and Danger of War Recurrence
The Corean Peninsula has now been in truce since July 27, 1953 when the armistice agreement was signed for temporary ceasefire. Truce is a potential warring state which makes inevitable the lasting hostile confrontation and military tension between the two warring parties – north Corea on one side and US and south Corea on the side. The political and military confrontation and contradiction between north Corea and US-south Corea on the Corean Peninsula which is in truce may result in military conflict any time. As truce has lasted without satisfactory settlement through political and military negotiations between the two warring parties, the danger of recurrence of a devastating war of national ruin has hovered over the peninsula all the time and our nation have not been able to free themselves from fear of war.
2.Futility of Armistice Agreement
Article 12, Chapter 2 of the Armistice Agreement bans all hostilities, while Paragraphs c and d, Article 13, Chapter 2 ban reinforcement of military personnel and operational weapons from outside Corea.
In the truce where the two warring parties are engaged in constant arms buildup and military drills, it is impossible to have dialogues and negotiations to give satisfactory solution to political and military confrontation and contradictions. The truce increases the military tension and the danger of war recurrence on the Corean Peninsula while hampering the peaceful atmosphere for peaceful solution through dialogues and negotiations to root out the danger of war on the Corean Peninsula.
3.Incomplete Armistice Agreement and Frequent Military Conflicts in the West Sea
The Armistice Agreement draws the clear-cut land military demarcation line, but not the maritime one. Particularly in the West Sea around the 5 islands under the control of south side, it is very difficult to fix the territorial water lines because of the complicated distribution of jurisdiction over the neighbouring islands between the north and the south. In the state of truce, therefore, it is essential to fix the maritime military demarcation line between the north and the south. The south insists on the North Limit Line, while the north keeps to the maritime military demarcation line in the West Sea, which is different from the former. In this situation, if the north and south keeps on hostilities to each other without fixing the maritime military demarcation line through dialogues and negotiations, there will inevitably occur frequent military conflicts between the north and south in the West Sea.
4.Inevitability of Peace Agreement
As seen above the Corean question in the truce represents the political and military confrontation and contradictions between the two warring parties – north Corea and US-south Corea – which constitutes the cause of danger of war recurrence. For more than half a century we have failed to find a peaceful solutionc to the Corean, and the serious nuclear confrontation between north Corea and US and the danger of a nuclear war are getting worse.
For peaceful settlement of political and military confrontation and contradictions, particularly the nuclear confrontation between the two warring parties in the truce, it is essential to remove mutual distrust and build confidence by making consistent effort to give peacefulsolution to the Corean question, including all political and military issues, through dialogues and negotiations. This is the very implication of Article 60, Chapter 4 of the Armistice Agreement, which stipulates about a political conference. Peaceful solution of the Coreanquestion under the Armistice Agreement lies in sincere approach of the warring parties to the political and military talks.
For peaceful solution of the Corean question, it is also imperative for the warring parties to stop al hostilities including military exercises and turn the hostile relations to normal relations. What is most important for peaceful solution of the Corean question is to turn from hostile to normal the relations between north Corea and the United States, the core of the Corean question and the pivot of military confrontation and contradictions.
Next, for peaceful solution of the Corean question in the truce where military conflicts frequent in the West Sea and the danger of war prevails, it is of primary importance for the warring parties to have negotiations for durable peace mechanism on the Corean Peninsula and replace the incomplete and unstable armistice agreement with a peace agreement as soon as possible. This is also stipulated in Article 62, Chapter 5 of the Armistice Agreement, which includes the provision on replacement of the armistice agreement with a peace agreement. If the Corean question is to be solved peacefully on the basis of the Armistice Agreement, it is absolutely necessary for the warring parties to have high-level political and military talks on withdrawal of all foreign forces from the Corean Peninsula and peaceful solution of the Corean question and conclude on a political level an appropriate agreement for peaceful solution, particularly a peace treaty, replacing the armistice agreement.
5.Prospect of Discussion on Conclusion of Peace Agreement
If north Corea and the United States, the warring parties, are to settle dispute on an equal and fair footing, they should seek comprehensive settlement of the root of Corean question by taking mutually tuned actions included in the September 19 joint statement adopted at the 6-party talks.
According to the September 19 joint statement and the February 13 early steps adopted at the 6-party talks, the directly related parties are recommended to have an appropriate separate forum to discuss about the establishment of durable peace mechanism on the Corean Peninsula.
It implies that the conclusion of a peace agreement for peace mechanism on the Corean Peninsula shall be discussed on the basis of the armistice agreement at a political negotiation separate from the 6-party talks.
Recently, the negotiation on the resumption of 6-party talks is maturing. When the 6-party talks, which has been suspended for a long period of time due to political and military confrontation and contradictions, all parties concerned should create the atmosphere for dialogues and negotiations to prevent another suspension or step backward.
Within the framework of 6-party talks, the directly related parties should hold an appropriate separate forum as indicated in the September 19 joint statement and the February 13 early actions to successfully negotiate on the establishment of durable peace mechanism on the Corean Peninsula. In this way the conclusion of a peace treaty should be discussed in a practical way for comprehensive solution of the root-cause of the nuclear issue on the Corean Peninsula, leading eventually to the conclusion of a peace treaty, which will be a contribution to peace of the Corean Peninsula, Northeast Asia and the rest of the world.
In keeping with the resumption of 6-party talks, the north and the south of Corea should sincerely implement the July 4 Joint Statement, the June 15 Joint Declaration and the October 4 Declaration to abolish the hostile relations and move towards independent and peaceful reunification.
The United Nations should play an active role to mediate, support and guarantee the resumption of 6-party talks, the inter-Corean talks between the authorities for the conclusion of a peace treaty and the process of reconciliation and cooperation between the two parts of Corea.
I avail myself of this opportunity to pay my sincere tribute to peace activists and citizens in different countries of the world for their positive attention and efforts for peace and reunification of Corea and sincerely hope they will continue to extend solidarity until the day comes when peace and reunification is realized on the Corean Peninsula.
Thank you.
&&&
Global Ecumenical Initiative for Peace and Reconciliation in Korea
Rev. Sung-koog M. Hahm, PhD (USA)
I. Opening Remarks
In this brief presentation, I would like to delineate the global ecumenical initiatives for peace and reconciliation in Korea. For three decades, various global Christian denominations and ecumenical councils of churches have participated in the struggles for Korean Christians for peaceful reunification in Korea. It has been a rocky road but by prodding relentlessly the global ecumenical communities for Christian response to Korea’s peaceful reunification, there has been good progress made.
In this presentation, I will be outlining the various Korean Christian insistences for global churches to take up the issues related to the divisions, and for possible peaceful reunification efforts. In conclusion I will try to sum up the new directions for the United States policy toward Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia. In the final section, I will touch upon the immoral and unethical aspects of United States policy toward the Korean peninsula over the last six decades. Global ecumenical religious communities are challenging the United States Government for more salient and humane approaches toward a sustainable and lasting peace and reunification of Korea.
II. Global Christian Church Initiative.
In February 1982, the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK) attempted to establish a Committee for Reunification Affairs. Due to interference by the South Korean government, however, NCCK was not able to establish it. In March 21-23 and May 23-25, 1982 NCCK tried twice to establish this Committee. However, again due to government interference, it could not be established.
During consultation between the NCCK and the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA (NCCCUSA) in March 21-24, 1984, General Secretary Kim So Yong of the NCCK made a strong plea to the world-wide communions, particularly, to the NCCCUSA and the World Council of Churches (WCC), stating that the most important mission priority for Korean Christians is to deal with the national reunification mandate. General Secretary Kim So Yong made a further plea that it is a Christian responsibility for the world-wide Christian churches to rally around the peaceful reunification of Korea.
The Kwangju massacre in 1980 and subsequent perpetuation of military dictatorship convinced South Korean Christians that their human rights and democracy movements could not be won without accomplishing a national reunification.
The churches in South Korea began to raise issues of Christian responsibility for peace and reunification through consultation with the ecumenical partners of the United States, Japan, Germany, and other countries including the World Council of Churches. These ecumenical support of the world-wide churches encouraged Korean churches to do their task with courage and determination.
The World Council of Churches began to take on Korean issues. The document of the WCC stated that the division was the source of evil, like an original sin, and that the true path to peace and reunification was the overcoming of division and the achieving of reconciliation and mutual trust through the meetings and exchanges between North and South Koreas.
Under the sponsorship of the WCC, for the first time since the division, the Christian Federation of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK -North Korea) and the National Council of Churches in Korea (South Korea) began to establish mutual trust through various meetings and consultations.
On October, 1984, the Christian Federation of North Korea was not able to attend the Dosanso meeting in Japan, but they sent a congratulatory telegram. Since that time, there have been several opportunities for delegates from both South and North Korean churches in different locations to strengthen mutual trust and friendship based on Christian faith.
In Glion, Switzerland, on September 2-5, 1986, Christians from North and South Korea with ecumenical partners met and shared holy communion together and studied the Bible, discussed the issue of Christian responsibility and the tasks for peace and reunification for the first time.
It may be good to share with you that during the centennial celebration of the establishment of Korean Methodism in 1985, the Korean Methodist Church adopted a historic statement as follows:
“Faced as we are with the forty years of tragic division on the Korean peninsula, we express our longing for unification of the nation in any form possible through peaceful means at the earliest possible time.
This must be done through establishing a democratic political structure based upon freedom and human rights, and must be fulfilled by working toward the establishment of a just society built for the sake of the People. We commit the whole strength of the Korean Methodist Church to the peaceful reunification of our country.”
At the General Conference of The United Methodist Church, for the first time, a resolution on “Korea-peace, Justice and Reunification” was adopted. It stated that “in support of the Korean people and in cooperation with partner Christian groups, it is recommended that the United Methodist Church, its members, churches, annual conferences, and agencies undertake the following actions through education, public advocacy and support of programs furthering justices, peace and reunification. And the following actions are proposed:
1) engage in prayers of penitence and petition;
2) urge all governments to exercise their influence for peace and reunification;
3) the peaceful reunification of Korea should be a formal United States policy goal;
4) a peace treaty should be signed;
5) remove economic sanctions against the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea);
6) encourage a consistent, bipartisan and long-range United States policy regarding the Korean peninsula.
It is also very important that on November 6, 1988, the NCCCUSA adopted an important policy statement on “Peace and the Reunification of Korea.” Since the division of Korea in 1945, for the first time, the churches in the United States affirmed peace and reunification in Korea. Some of us felt that it was a bit late. Nevertheless, we were happy that the churches in the United States finally came around to adopt a statement of peace and reunification of Korea by NCCCUSA’s Governing Board in Evanston, Illinois, on November 6, 1988.
The statement states that “the Korean people, whether they live in South or North, desire to restore the uniting that was theirs for more than a thousand years before the end of World War II…The churches and government of the United States must hear the plea of the Korean people for reunification…Our nation is the only foreign country which still retains an armed military presence on the peninsula. Therefore, we must assume today particular responsibilities for assisting all Koreans who strive to overcome division by peaceful means… As Christians, we regard the need to overcome division not primarily from diplomatic or military perspectives, but rather from the side of a suffering, divided people whose pain we are coming to know well…We confess that we share responsibility for their plight and for this we are truly sorry.” The statement further states a biblical and theological rationale that we are in Christ reconciling all people as God’s children. The Spirit seeks to draw all people into one and inspires all people to show forth the fruits of the work of the Spirit. The God who blesses the peacemakers and calls us the ministry of healing and reconciliation gives us hope that division can be overcome, even against the greatest odds.”
(pp. 1-2, the NCCCUSA Policy Statement on “Peace and the Reunification of Korea.”)
As you can see, world-wide ecumenical councils encouraged and facilitated for Korean Christians to grapple with their mission priority issue on national reconciliation. Since the 1980s, Christians in the North and the South have met in Pyoungyang as well as in Seoul for fellowship, worship and strategic discussion on national reconciliation.
III. Concluding Remarks on the New Directions for U.S. Policy
For more than sixty years, relations between the United States and North Korea have been marked by hostility, misunderstanding and deep mutual suspicion. Along the demilitarized zone (DMZ), South Korea and the United States have faced off against North Korean long-range artillery and missiles that can devastate Seoul, only thirty-seven miles to the south. As South Koreans are fearful of a North Korean attack, North Koreans are also fearful of United States and South Korean military maneuvers.
With harsh reality of a dangerous and ongoing military stand-off, it is perhaps not surprising that the United States and North Korea are still legally in a state of war and have lived under a mere ceasefire –the l953 Armistice which should be replaced with a Peace Treaty. By offering the prospect of a fundamental settlement of all outstanding disputes with North Korea, it is important that the United States would radically improve and change the political conditions for negotiations. As history of negotiating with North Korea demonstrates, improvements in political conditions almost always precede and facilitate agreements on security-related issues. There are many in the west taking the view that North Korea may ultimately refuse to abandon its nuclear weapons program, no matter what incentives and pressures the United States brings to bear in negotiations. However, for those of us who have been in contact with North Koreans, believe that North Korea will enter negotiations and seek agreement for its own national interests.
Today, sixty years after the Korean War, there is still no peace treaty and the United States still maintains enough conventional and nuclear forces in and around North Korea to destroy the North Korean regime with a preemptive strike. North Koreans, fully knowing the impact of war, want peace more than any other nation. In the final analysis, North Korea will take a strategic decision for security, political and economic returns in a larger negotiation. To resolve the nuclear issue as well as to lay the foundation for lasting peace on the Peninsula and in the region, the United States must try to negotiate a comprehensive settlement with North Korea.
Global ecumenical Christian councils and member denominations have been calling upon the United States Government to affirm formally that it is a policy goal of the United States to support the peaceful reunification of Korea. Ecumenical communities believe that the time has come for the United States Government to develop a relationship with North Korea, and that the United States promotes and respects the full sovereignty of the Korean people.
Global Christian religious communities consider the present United States government policy on Korea is immoral and unsustainable for lasting peace in Korea and Northeast Asia. For long term peace in Korea and Asia, the United States Government should be engaged in a comprehensive settlement with North Korea and other related partners.
Thank you.
&&&
South Corean Regime and US Troops vs Peace and Reunification of Corea
Mr. LEE Jeok, Germany
In the term of Kim Dae Jung government in south Corea, the north and the south met the political thawing season. After half a century of distrust and confrontation, the era of reconciliation and cooperation dawned up. The mutual trust implanted hope in the heart of economic community of the north and the south. North Corea began to attach importance to economic cooperation with south Corea. At last in 2007, when Roh Moo Hyun was in the office following Kim Dae Jung, the north and the south had the second summit, which led to the adoption of October 4 Declaration with 8 clauses in total. If the north-south cooperation had followed the normal track through implementation of October 4 Declaration, Corean Peninsula would have now developed into a common economy.
In 6 years after the power shift in south Corea, the landmark pointing to peace and prosperity on the Corean Peninsula was thrown into muddy water and its blueprint was brought to the danger of disappearance. With the advent of pro-US Lee Myung Bak regime, the dream of economic cooperation with the north faded away and the “4 River Improvement Project”, the unprecedentedly gigantic fraud of civil engineering, was launched to pour 30 trillion won into the river. On the other hand, Lee Myung Bak regime categorically rejected October 4 Declaration arguing that they should keep pace with the United States in dealing with the nuclear issue of the north, and that they would “promote exchange with the north only when it gives up its nuclear programme”. Tourism of Mt. Kumgang, a success story in the 10 years of reformist government, was suspended, and Kaesong Industrial Park survived only in name after the incident of warship “Chonan” wrapped in the shroud of suspicions. Worse still, the present Park Gyeun Hye regime has crippled the industrial park, squeezing its neck.
When pro-US Lee Myung Bak regime came into power in south Corea, the Obama administration of the United States hailed it and it maintained the strategy of instigating Lee Myung Bak regime to pursue a hard-line policy towards the north, imposing pressure and sanctions on north Corea to kneel down and keeping so-called “strategic patience”. It is the exact replica of abortive confrontation policy of Bush administration. The hardliners of the United States put pressure and sanctions on the north arguing that they would have dialogue with it when it first gives up its nuclear programme and bring about change.
Against this background, the frequent US-south Corea joint military exercises in the sea off south Corea got on the nerves of not only north Corea but China and further aggravated the inter-Korean relations. At the cost of abortion of dialogues with the north, the United States concentrates on tightening alliance with south Corea through its pro-US conservative regime and pursuing its interests, for example through sales of its war hardware.
In the 2013 alone, the United States and south Corea staged the biggest ever nuclear war drill Ulji against the north with the involvement of 500 000-strong military forces; Key Resolve from March 11 to 21; Foal Eagle from March 1 to April 30; Ssangryong from April 5 to May 5; US-south Corea joint marine exercise from May 13 to 14; and Ulji Freedom Guardian from August 19 to 30. All these operations enlisted the US nuclear war means: during Foal Eagle the US nuclear strategic bombers B-52 and Stealth nuclear bombers B-2A flew to the sky over the Corean Peninsula to simulate nuclear bombing; for the US-south Corea joint marine exercise the US nuclear-propelled aircraft carrier Nimitz entered the Pusan Port; during Ulji they introduced the preemptive nuclear strike system Kill Chain and south Korean-style missile defence system; and recently in October George Washington and other US nuclear aircraft carrier task forces participated in the US-south Corea-Japan joint military exercises in the West Sea of Corea.
What also draws special attention is the transfer of wartime operation control power. When the Corean war broke out in 1950, the US army took away the wartime operation control power from south Korea and has since held it in its hand. In 2006 when Ro Moo Hyon government was in the office, the United States agreed to hand over the wartime operation control power, but since pro-US conservative regimes took power, it has been putting off the transfer. On the Day of National Army, President Park Gyeun Hye, who insists on postponing the transfer of wartime operation control power, produced the nonsense of large-scale military parade. It is a common sense that any country with no operation control power over the army is not qualified to have a military parade.
At present the US-south Corea alliance is a preposterous nonsense where the south Corean government keeps soliciting the United States for its defence and the latter inevitably accept it.
On her visit to the United States, President Park Gyeun Hye poured astronomical amount of money to the US government for purchase of war hardware and expenses for proxy defence. She paid 1.8 trillion won to buy US Apachi Guardian helicopters, and is going to pay 8.3 trillion won to purchase FX fighters of next generation. The expenses for proxy defence has increased to 869.5 billion won this year, but she plans to increase the blood-stained tax from the people by 160 billion won every year to pay for redeployment of the US military bases.
For the last 6 years not only the confidence between the north and the south has dropped down but also the absolute democracy has made a serious step backward in south Corea. The minute of the summit talks between President Roh Moo Hyun and NDC Chairman Kim Jong Il was distorted and misused by the ruling party for presidential election and the Intelligence Service illegally interfered in the presidential election. The pro-US conservative regime misuses the inter-Corean relations for their political purpose, triggers off south-south contradiction and now reproduces the security and intelligence rule, the hangover of the old times. The Intelligence Service, Cyberwar Command of the Defence Ministry, Security Discipline Department and other state organs were engaged in presidential election campaign, shaking the foundation of democracy from the very root. The wind of purging the forces following the north, the south Corean version of McCarthyism, is sweeping across south Corea, in which the United Progress Party, a legitimate political party with 6 members in the National Assembly, faces the danger of dissolution and such legitimate trade unions as Jongyojo (National Trade Union of Teachers) and the Trade Union of Civil Servants have been illegalized. The 6 years under the rule of pro-US conservative regime proves that democracy and inter-Corean relations are closely interlinked to each other.
The crimes of US troops have been the source of uninterrupted nightmare for the last 68 years in Corea. The US command in south Corea announced a series of measures to prevent their recurrence, but none of them has ever worked in reality. In March this year alone there were 6 criminal cases of US troops in south Corea opened to the public: sex scandal of 6 US soldiers upon a girl in the twenties in the subway, armed violence upon Lee Tae Won, lethal weapon violence by a US ground crewman, raping of a girl in the twenties in the lift in Pyongtaek, knife stabbing by a US soldier in Tongdoochon and violence upon a policeman.
In the final analysis, the crimes committed by US troops originates from the unfair SOFA between the US and south Corea.
In 1967 before SOFA came into force, the criminal cases of US troops numbered 1 710, but in 1975 they drastically increased to 2 384. Typical example is the case of a US armoured vehicle running over Sin Hyo Soon and Sim Mee Sun to death. On June 13, 2002, two secondary school girls were walking along the sidewalk of asphalt road to go to their friend’s to celebrate her birthday when they were ran over by a floating-bridge carrier. Although all people rose up out of surging indignation in the strong anti-US campaign, the two US soldiers who had committed the crime were given the verdict of “not guilty” by the military tribunal held from November 18 to 23, 2002.
The crimes of US troops in south Corea have rooted deep in the modern history of south Corea. It is the unbreakable arrogant imperialist domination nature of the “occupier” that produces crimes of US troops one after the other. The only way to prevent the crimes of US troops in south Corea is to drive the US troops out of Corea by regaining the wartime operation control power and realizing independent reunification and self-reliant national defence.
Thank you.
Reference:
Leem Dong Won: former unification minister, seminar on reunification
Lee Byeung Wan: former senior officer of Chongwadae, seminar on reunification
Lee Dong Hun: senior researcher, Our Society institute, social analysis