[Editorial] Why Is the Ministry of Unification Bending Over Backwards?

Yesterday, announcing its work plan for 2007, the Ministry of Unification said that it would actively pursue the establishment of peace on the Korean peninsula as its first strategic goal.

It feels too early to regard the announcement as a follow-up measure for the 9.19 Joint Statement or Beijing Accords on February 13. It is safe to say that no Korean would oppose a cause to establish peace on the peninsula by turning the 1953 Armistice Agreement into a Peace Agreement. However, the cause itself does not automatically lead to peace. What needs to be done first is to define the terms and conditions of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

Leftists in our society are already talking about the conclusion of a peace agreement because they think the Beijing Accord has answers to the North Korean nuclear issue. Some even go so far as to say that to change the peace regime on the peninsula into one in Northeast Asia, we should downgrade the U.S-Korea Alliance to a “strategic partnership” and appease the North and China. However, it remains to be seen if Pyongyang really takes steps to scrap its nuclear programs as agreed.

That said, the Unification Ministry is talking about the establishment of a peace regime even before IAEA inspectors have gone to Pyongyang. The Ministry says a peace accord is needed for denuclearization, even when the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security (IFANS) warns of the possibility that, “The Stalinist country is trying to postpone its dismantlement of nuclear programs while demanding the withdrawal of the USFK.”

What really happened regarding this matter in the past is that four-party talks, held four times from 1996 to 1999, for peace just went to the drawing board because the North had insisted on the withdrawal of the USFK. Professor Kim Seong-han of IFANS was concerned. “Discussion of a peace regime before a future vision for the U.S-Korea alliance is finalized could seriously harm the alliance.”

The U.S, one of the concerned parties in any peace agreement, maintains its principle of “denuclearization before peace agreement.” Given the fact that the ministry knows this all too well, the ministry is either too optimistic that the North will scrap its nuclear arsenal, or wants to put cooperation of the two Koreas before the U.S-Korea alliance. It may also harbor a political motive: laying the groundwork for a South-North summit. Under the circumstances, if the North does not give up its nuclear weapons completely, any talks on a peace regime would be useless.