hankyoreh

Yesterday, North Korea demanded the withdrawal of South Korean personnel from the Mt. Kumgang tourism region, with an announcement that it would be legally divesting all property rights of South Korean companies. After repeatedly mentioning the possibility of canceling Hyundai-Asan’s exclusive rights on Mt. Kumgang tourism, North Korea appears to be ratcheting up the level of its response through actions rather than words. The project, which previously functioned as a symbol of inter-Korean exchange and a stepping-stone toward peace, is now faced with the threat of collapse.
North Korea’s actions are not entirely incomprehensible. Three years have passed since the tourism effort was halted in the wake of the July 2008 fatal shooting of a South Korean tourist, identified by the surname Park. In the wake of the incident, Seoul demanded three things from Pyongyang: an apology, measures to prevent similar events from occurring in the future, and a guarantee on the personal safety of tourists. North Korea expressed its dismay and indicated that it would take the necessary follow-up measures. But as the failure to make headway with concrete discussions coupled with the Cheonan sinking and Yeonpyeong Island artillery attack, the resumption of the tourism effort moved farther and farther away from becoming a reality.
The South Korean government did recently propose working-level discussions toward a resumption of tourism. But little in its proposal gave any indication of an active intent to get the project up and running again. After all, nothing in the Lee Myung-bak administration’s policy approach has changed from the framework of the May 24 measures, where it halted all exchange and cooperation with the North following the Cheonan sinking.
This situation may be an unsatisfactory one for Pyongyang. It would also make some degree of sense for North Korea to determine that it cannot simply stand around waiting without making use of the tourism resources that fall within North Korean territory.
Even so, it is difficult to grant legitimacy to North Korea’s actions. Above all, it shows an outright disregard for the agreement between North Korean and South Korean authorities and the contract among business providers that granted exclusive rights for the tourism effort to Hyundai-Asan. Obviously, this violates international community rights and ethics for commercial transactions. Recently, North Korea began efforts toward an independent tourism venture, selecting new providers for Mt. Kumgang in China and the Americas. It is rather questionable, however, whether this method will succeed in drawing tourists.
In any case, it is clear what both North Korea and South Korea must do now. We hope South Korea will take this opportunity to make a fundamental change in its thinking and actively push for the resumption of the tourism effort. At the moment, signs are present to suggest a change in the situation around the Korean Peninsula, with North Korea-U.S. dialogue and North Korea-Russia summit diplomacy. If South Korea takes a leading role in resuming Mt. Kumgang tourism under these circumstances, it will have the effect of extending South Korean sovereignty in the political situation.
North Korea, for its part, should not shy away from forward-thinking measures such as a written guarantee on the three conditions for tourism resumption demanded by South Korea. In particular, it must refrain from taking extreme measures such as selling off Mt. Kumgang assets to a third party.
　　
Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]