[imText1]The South-North Cabinet-level talks held in 13 months ended leaving an agreement containing 12 clauses. As expected, unlike previous talks in the past where the ministers of the two countries struggled through over nights for producing an agreement, this time, the representatives of the two sides came out with an agreement at the scheduled time and showed a showmanship of reading out the agreement side by side.
The agreement has 12 clauses, and of course, it has many sub-clauses, we look at it in three aspects. One, nuclear problem, two, completion invalidation of the “Protectorate Treaty” (Ûlsa Choyak was the treaty signed in 1905 that made Korea a Japanese protectorate), and three, next cabinet level talks to be held in Paekdu Mountain.
Only to support North Korea’s position of ‘Nuclear Problem of the Korean Peninsula”
The nuclear problem, as have been expected, “The ultimate goal to be denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, and (as far as) the “mood” allows, substantial actions must be taken to solve the nuclear problem in peaceful manner through talks.” The “in peaceful manner through talks” is something is a matter of course. The parts we must focus on is “Denuclearization of the Korean peninsula” and “as the mood allows.”
The currently created nuclear problem is “North Korea’s nuclear problem” not of the Korean peninsula. North Korea has always been calling the nuclear problem that of the Korean peninsula. In other words, because North Korean nuclear (devises) were created to defend against the US, if denuclearization is to be done, it must be done South-North together. That is why North Korea argues the six-party talks must be changed to address WMD instead of nuclear problem. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the expression of “denuclearization of the Korean peninsula,” but if we fail to point out the fundamentals of the problem, then we will be simply supporting North Korea’s position that “the (North Korean) nuclear problem is the nuclear problem of the Korean peninsula.”
Furthermore, unless the condition, “(as far as) the “mood” allows,” is secured, it means that North Korean would take whichever path it desires to take. Subject and standard to determine that “mood” is unclear so basically it means that South Korea will support North Korea do whatever it wants do.
The second thing we must pay close attention to in the agreement is the verification of the abolition of the “Protectorate Treaty”. The reason why this matter of course with no significant meaning of action is included in the agreement is because it intends to take the South-North Minjok mutual sentiment to anti-Japan sentiment. In order to build a minjok mutual sentiment (similar to sense of nationalism) there needs a target, an “enemy”, and North Korea has made those targets as the US and Japan. It is involving South Korea into its plan. Ultimately its intention is to make the six-party talks into “2 to 4” (US and Japan vs the rest four), and such intention was assured during the talks last few days.
The Important Thing is not an Agreement but Practice, Stick Needed when Wrong Done
The third thing is the decision to hold the next Cabinet-level talks in Paekdu Mountain, which is a real “event.” Family reunion is another meaningful achievement of this agreement but meeting at Paekdu Mountain is a co-production of the two governments that truly like events. With it, they could shows something alluring on TV about the South-North relations but what we want is not that kind of one time event but substantial progress; solution to nuclear problem and eradication of the insecure element of the Northeast Asia. We have seen many events produced by the two governments but we have also seen many times that such events dropping into nothing overnight whenever North Korea changed its mind. I only hope this event does not become one of the “festival of words.”
The important thing is not the text of agreement but practice. They decided to hold the Red Cross meeting in August to discuss about “verification of life of those whose whereabouts were lost during the war and humanitarian matters.” From media sector, some evaluated the meeting to be for the discussion about POWs and abductees to North Korea, but the same decision was made in 2002 and was never fulfilled. North Korea still argues there is no POWs or abductees in North Korea. They also agreed upon (building of) a meeting place in Keunkang Mountain before, but they did not make any progress on it.
We cannot help but ask, “till when is the validation of the present agreement?” Till when will South Korea play the father who accepts the wandering son? Although the wandering son in the bible sincerely repented before his father, but North Korea that abandons the father occasionally and goes in and out of the agreement, is always proud. Sometimes it is worth responding not with a smile but a stick to teach the lesson, “when you breaks agreements again there is a price to pay.”
