hankyoreh

The process of closing and sealing the North Korean nuclear facility begins this weekend, meaning that the February 13 agreement has finally begun to be implemented. This is late in coming if you consider that April 13 had been the date by which the first phase of the agreement, closing down the Yongbyon facility, was to have been completed. It has also been close to three whole weeks since North Korea announced that the issue of its money in Macau’s Banco Delta Asia had been resolved. It is time for all of the nations participating in the six-party talks to tie their shoes tight for the work ahead.

Next week, the top negotiators at the six-party talks are going to meet to review the state of the February 13 agreement and how it is being implemented, and will then talk about the next phase. A full round of talks as well as a series of separate working-level talks are scheduled to be held when the closing of the Yongbyon facility is complete. If you look only at the schedule it looks like things are going to go smoothly, but that is not necessarily going to be the case. For starters, the February 13 agreement calls for a meeting of the foreign ministers of the six participating nations to be “held shortly after the first phase is implemented,” but they have not even set a date. There are other awkward tasks, beginning with things like North Korea’s job of drafting a list of its nuclear facilities and plans, including the uranium enrichment program that is supposed to be disabled; then there things that are supposed to be done for Pyongyang in response, the issue of dealing with the North’s spent fuel rods, and the discord between Pyongyang and Tokyo. If things are not set in the right direction now, everything else from here on in could be quite complicated. That is why it is important that there be increased momentum for the six-party process through high-level talks such as the meeting of foreign ministers.

No less urgent than abolishing North Korea’s nuclear program is the discussion about establishing peace on the Korean peninsula. “Nations with a direct concern in a permanent peace accord for the Korean peninsula will negotiate this issue in an appropriate seperate forum,” says the February 13 agreement, and the sooner the better when it comes to talking about permanent peace. It is therefore timely and appropriate that individuals in and close to the South Korean government are talking about a proposal to make a formal declaration to end the hostilities, which would be a stage immediately prior to the long process of concluding a peace agreement. Declaring an end to the Korean War would function to provide for and accelerate the process of ending the current cease-fire moving to a peace regime. U.S. President George W. Bush discussed the idea of having North Korea, South Korea and the United States declare a formal end to hostilities during the U.S.-South Korean summit in November of last year.

South Korea must play a leading role in both the six-party talks and also in the discussions of permanent peace on the peninsula. It is the Korean peninsula that stands to benefit the most from six-party success, and it is the Korean peninsula that stands to suffer the worst consequences should the process fail. Though it is important that there be cooperation between all nations party to the talks, it is for this reason that South Korea should stay a few steps ahead. Now would be the time to actively consider a North-South summit, charged with the task of establishing peace. This is because there is now an increased call for an advance in North-South relations. In the course of the normalization of ties between Pyongyang and Washington and between Pyongyang and Tokyo, positive inter-Korean relations would be a foundation making for a smoother road ahead.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]