hankyoreh

On June 7, the day after the South Korean government proposed that minister-level talks be held between North and South Korea in Seoul on June 12, Pyongyang responded by suggesting that working-level officials make contact on June 9. This is understood as indicating that the North wants an opportunity to verify South Korea’s sincerity, as well as examine questions of the agenda and location, before the talks begin. While the tight schedule could make it difficult to reach full consensus on all of the pressing issues that must be discussed, both sides must do their best so as not to squander this rare opportunity for dialogue.

The South Korean government must be careful not to rashly assume that it can do whatever it wants just because North Korea humbled itself and requested talks. This time, North Korea was the first to propose comprehensive talks. Some of the factors here appear to be North Korea’s strategic decision to focus on the economy and to move from confrontation to dialogue, as well as the pressure from the international community to denuclearize the Korean peninsula.

But that does not mean that the “current extreme level of distrust that has developed in the years since talks between North and South were discontinued” that North Korea referred to on June 7 will vanish all at once. While the South Korean government is trying to position the minister-level talks as an extension of the working-level talks for the Kaesong Industrial Complex that it had already proposed, the two talks are significantly different in character and content. The trust-building process for the Korean Peninsula is only now beginning.

The talks need to be focussed on the four agenda items that have already been mentioned, namely normalizing operations at the Kaesong Complex, resuming tours to Mt. Keumgang, restarting the reunions between separated families, and holding commemorative events related to the June 15 Joint Statement and the July 4 Joint Declaration. In relation to the Kaesong Complex and tours to Mt. Keumgang, it would be more effective to reach a generous agreement based on a future-oriented attitude than to argue about whose fault it was that the tours were canceled and to harp about strict conditions. With the family reunions, it is important to put a system in place so that families separated by the Korean War can meet together on a regular basis. And it will be possible to hold joint inter-Korean events as long as the South Korean government is willing, so the government must adopt a forward-looking attitude. Based on a general consensus on these agenda items, it will be possible to expand the agenda to reinstate past agreements including the Oct. 4 Inter-Korean Summit Agreement.

If the minister-level talks go well, the overall mood on the Korean peninsula can be changed to one that permits dialogue and cooperation.

On June 8, the US and China held a summit, where the leaders had a serious discussion about how to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. Even if no clear consensus is reached at this meeting, successful talks between North and South Korean authorities could help prod not only China but also the US into moving to engage in dialogue with North Korea. If such a virtuous cycle is put into place, North Korea will also lose its excuse for clinging to nuclear weapons. The South Korean government must play a central role in the process of bringing this cycle into action.

With new leadership in place in all of the countries related to the Korean peninsula, a new round of dialogue is beginning. Opportunities such as what we have at present do not come very often. It is the responsibility of the South Korean government to help these talks serve as a chance for untying these tangled knots.

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