Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
| Visitors to the presidential office take photos, Sept. 9, 2018, at a special exhibition at Cheong Wa Dae to commemorate the inter-Korean summit a few months earlier on April 27./Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae |
By Do Je-hae
The 1950-53 Korean War is still very much a factor in the lives of Koreans today, and peace remains an elusive goal as the two Koreas mark the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the conflict.
Since then the two Koreas have taken diverging paths, experiencing intermittent closeness during certain periods such as the liberal administrations of former Presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun, and the earlier phase of the Moon Jae-in presidency under an engagement-centric North Korea policy.
One of the questions that is on the minds of many proponents for Korean peace is why the two countries, even after so many decades have passed, are not closer, despite various agreements for peace and reconciliation.
As a "driver" in the Korean Peninsula's "peace process," President Moon has exerted all-out efforts, but inter-Korean relations have plummeted recently to the lowest level in years after the North's unilateral destruction of an inter-Korean liaison office and other moves likely to discard the Panmunjeom Declaration signed between Moon and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on April 27, 2018.
Factors perpetuating division
Experts contacted by The Korea Times on the occasion of the 70th anniversary highlighted a range of international and domestic factors that have perpetuated division.
"North Korea is now a nuclear-weapons state, something the U.S. simply won't admit to or craft policies to mitigate. Instead, Washington demands Pyongyang surrender its nuclear arsenal ― its only security, the ultimate military insurance policy ― something most likely it will never do," said Harry J. Kazianis, senior director of Korean studies at the Center for the National Interest.
Many experts have suggested Kim's ultimate goal in talking to the U.S. is to gain recognition as a nuclear power.
 |
| President Moon Jae in, right, and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un hug each other ahead of a summit at the North's side of Panmunjeom, May 26, 2018. Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae |
"Until Washington is able to summon the political courage to deal with North Korea as it is ― instead of how it wants it to be or how it wants it to act ― there will never be a diplomatic breakthrough that guarantees true so-called peace," Kazianis said.
Donald Kirk, a veteran columnist and correspondent covering Korean Peninsula issues for decades, highlighted the rivalry among the major powers as one of the big reasons preventing the two Koreas from achieving peace in the last 70 years.
"The Korean Peninsula is at the vortex of huge countries caught up in great power rivalries," he said. "Korean kings paid homage to Chinese rulers for centuries before the Japanese, having defeated the Chinese in 1895, took over the country. Russia, defeated by Japan in 1905, also has a strategic interest in the Korean Peninsula. The United States fought for the preservation of the anti-communist South in the drive to stop communism, as perceived in North Korea's invasion of South Korea with the support of both newly Communist China and the Soviet Union. These same major powers continue to have a stake in Korea," he said.
"Rivalries among them may not be the only reason for the failure to achieve peace, but they certainly rank at the top of the list of factors perpetuating the division of the peninsula."
There are also domestic factors, according to Lee Seong-hyon, the director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the Sejong Institute. "South Korea has been ineffective without a leader who could unite South Koreans before uniting the two Koreas," Lee said, adding that South Korea first needs a leader with a "sophisticated understanding of global politics and wisdom to heal South Korea's polarized politics" before talking about unification.
Way forward
Analysts underlined that to overcome the current impasse and defuse political tension, the key parties concerned ― the two Koreas, U.S. and China ― should keep diplomatic channels open.
"The first rule of keeping tensions down is to keep channels of dialogue open. All four parties reduce risks of conflict by staying at the table, even when negotiations are not making progress. The U.S. and China can support the dialogue process by stepping up their efforts when the two Koreas are reducing or severing the lines of communication, as is occurring at present," said John Delury, a professor of Chinese Studies at Yonsei University Graduate School of International Studies.
Experts highlighted that efforts toward mutual trust, cooperation and various exchanges must continue despite the current difficulties. Such efforts can lead to actual outcomes, such as reunions of divided families.
"The best they can do is to go on trying to talk to one another. The problem is that no deal with North Korea seems to work. Despite all the words on paper, North Korea has gone on producing nuclear warheads and other weapons of mass destruction plus the missiles for firing them at distant targets," Kirk said. "One dividend of the summit between Kim Dae-jung and Kim Jong-il was an agreement on regular reunions of families divided by the Korean War."
Mason Richey, an associate professor of international politics at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, said the involved parties need to "work together seriously, strategically, in a sustained fashioned, and in good faith to build trust through simultaneous, phased action-for-action on a range of issues including denuclearization of North Korea, economic cooperation, military confidence-building and people-to-people exchanges."
For a real breakthrough for peace, a declaration of the end of the war is seen as crucial, according to some experts.
"In order for there to be a real breakthrough in inter-Korean as well as U.S.-North Korea relations, an end of war declaration is essential. All sides need to have some sort of historical closure, but also embrace the end of the Korean War as the first step of a long process of reconciliation and compromise that will lead to an overall lowering of tensions," Kazianis said.
"By ending the Korean War, if Donald Trump, Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un were all to sign some sort of agreement, they would all do something that no other leaders that have tackled this issue have done ― and gain politically from that act. This will all give them the ability later to make tough compromises that will be needed to continue any sort of peace drive ― such as embracing arms control first instead of demanding North Korea completely hand over all of its nuclear weapons."
Moon's peace overture
With North Korea taking a path toward more conflict lately, concerns are rising about Moon's North Korea policy centered on engagement. Already, the outcomes of his previous efforts such as the three summits with Kim are being harshly contested.
 |
| President Moon Jae-in is greeted by North Korean leader's sister Kim Yo-jong at the North's side of Panmunjeom, May 26, 2018, ahead of the second Moon-Kim summit. Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae |
"History will record that Moon failed because he didn't get enough support from Seoul's main ally, Washington. In private conversations in Washington, Moon is seen as a pro-China figure. This is the blind spot in South Korea's public diplomacy in Washington," Lee said.
Moon has shown an intense focus on having a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping here, primarily for economic reasons, but soliciting Xi's help with the Korean Peninsula issue is also a major motivation for Moon's keen efforts to improve relations with Beijing this year.
Lee, an expert in Korea-China relations, says Korea needs a clearer understanding of China's stance in the peninsula issue. "China prefers a stable status quo on the Korean Peninsula, which is divided. That means, China is good at crisis management, but is ineffective in crisis resolution of the nuclear issue. South Korea fails to distinguish the two. Xi will not pressure Kim to give up nukes, but he can tell Kim to tone down provocations."
A change in the U.S. administration could also be good for Moon, according to professor Delury. "President Moon may have one more chance at progress toward peace if there is a change of administration in Washington. The transition to a new U.S. president would open up possibilities, although success would require extraordinary diplomatic skill, political courage and a dose of good luck."
Outlook on unification
Seventy years after the outbreak of the tragic war, some Koreans wonder if unification is still an attainable goal in the long run. But experts say it is better for them to remain apart until they can actually learn to get along and co-exist first.
"For the foreseeable future, the people of the two Koreas are probably better off learning how to get along ― in other words, realize a peaceful coexistence. Neither side looks ready for unification. It would be momentous enough to achieve peace," Delury said.
"Differences still appear so great as to make peaceful unification an impossible dream," Kirk said. "There does not seem to be any way for North and South Korea to come to terms for unifying two such different systems. As long as the Kim dynasty and the system of total state control prevails in North Korea, peaceful reunification is not going to happen. Better for North and South to remain apart ― though the North's nuclear program hangs like a dark cloud over not only South Korea but also the region and the world."
