hankyoreh

It has been a full 60 years since the Korean War erupted, but our minds are not at ease. Not only is the partition system ongoing, but there have also been insufficient internal efforts to overcome the situation. The recent instability in the political situation on the Korean Peninsula clearly shows the danger of rash behavior by North Korean and South Korean authorities based on the negative legacy of the past.

The war ended after three years, but its scars have yet to heal 60 years later. Those directly victimized by the war amounted to a full 10 percent of the population then, and a far greater number of families were split apart. Of the 600,000 to 700,000 estimated members of separated families currently in South Korea, only around 24,000 have met their relatives in North Korea through either face-to-face or video reunions. The wartime massacres of civilians across the peninsula, the pain of those whose family members were abducted or defected to North Korea, and the issue of those abductees and of South Korean prisoners-of-war remain unresolved.

The Korean War is at the heart of the partition system. The fairly frequent military clashes between North Korea and South Korea and the amassed forces near the armistice line may be direct relics of that conflict, but the fact that a non-democratic structure of oppression emphasizing antagonism between North Korea and South Korea has not yet disappeared also bears some connection to the war. The Cold War forces that grew on the foundation of hostile coexistence between North Korea and South Korea were nourished by the war, and that inertia continues on to this day. What this reality tells us is that unless we are able to overcome the current unstable armistice system, the peace will be broken from time to time, and the development of democracy will remain hindered.

This is why the establishment of a peace regime is of paramount importance. Indeed, the very fact that an armistice system has carried on for close to 60 years is itself abnormal. Nor is the discussion of a peace regime a new idea. The issue of signing a peace treaty was already raised among concerned nations in the 1990s, and the September 19 Joint Statement of 2005 also included a reference to discussions of a “permanent peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.” The United States also agrees with advancing discussions on the North Korean nuclear issue and a peace regime simultaneously. The parties to such a regime would be North Korea and South Korea, and the same applies to the discussion. This is the reason a forward-thinking attitude from the South Korean government is needed now more than ever.

In a recent policy recommendation, the National Unification Advisory Council, a group advising the president, reportedly suggested that the government not allow the Cheonan incident to overwhelm overarching aspects of North Korea policy. The council instead recommended embarking on the establishment of an escape strategy for inter-Korean relations. The local election results provided evidence of the people’s desire for peace. We hope that the administration will leave behind its vague North Korean collapse scenarios and set about engaging in real action to guarantee peace on the peninsula and resolve the nuclear issue. The time has come for us to emerge from the long, dark tunnel of the Korean War.

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