hankyoreh

left

The South Korean government’s flip-flopping between hawkish and dovish reactions to the shooting death of a South Korean tourist by a North Korean soldier at Mount Geumgang (Kumgang), a resort on North Korea’s eastern coast, has failed to resolve the case as critics point out that the government’s inconsistent countermeasures have been a major stumbling block to finding a solution.

Over the past 10 days, the government’s stance on whether to continue a tourism project involving another North Korean site, the city of Gaeseong (Kaesong), was changed three times.

Until July 11, or for three days after the shooting death occurred, the government had made it clear that it would separate the project in the Gaeseong industrial zone, and tours to the city of Gaeseong, from the incident at Mount Geumgang. At the time, Unification Ministry spokesman Kim Ho-nyoun said the government would “deal separately with the matter of Mount Geumgang and inter-Korean relations. The Gaeseong tourism project will continue without suspension.”

On July 18, President Lee Myung-bak held a meeting of the National Security Council to discuss the shooting death. After the meeting, presidential spokesman Lee Dong-kwan said the government will “fully reconsider the Gaeseong tourism project if there is a problem with ensuring tourists’ safety.”

In the wake of the National Security Council meeting, the first convened by President Lee since he took office in February, the government switched its stance and decided to use the Gaeseong tourism project as a bargaining chip to press North Korea to allow South Korean officials to investigate the incident at Mount Geumgang. That change was fueled by the increasingly hard line taken by conservatives in the South after North Korea rejected South Korea’s request to cooperate with the investigation.

Prime Minister Han Seung-soo took a step forward on July 20. In a meeting with Cabinet ministers and the ruling Grand National Party on that day, he said the government “will review possible measures against all (inter-Korean) exchange projects, including the tourism project to Gaeseong.” Han’s remark was considered more hawkish because it indicated the South Korean government could step up the pressure on the North beyond the Gaeseong tourism project.

However, the government became ambiguous about its stance on July 21. In a parliamentary meeting on that day, Unification Minister Kim Ha-joong said the government had “decided to separate the issue of Mount Geumgang from inter-Korean relations. Efforts are underway to prevent (the Geumgang issue) from expanding.” Kim also said, “The tourism project to Gaeseong is very meaningful in the context of inter-Korean relations. I think it should be reviewed very carefully.” The unification minister’s remarks were similar to what the government’s stance had been before the National Security Council meeting on July 18.

Also ambiguous was a remark made by Prime Minister Han on July 21. When asked about whether the government would suspend tours to Gaeseong, Han said, “So far, the government has not reviewed the possibility of a suspension. The government is trying to ensure the safety of tourists to Mount Geumgang and Gaeseong.”

Prior to this, the government had been contradicting itself over whether to link the Mount Geumgang shooting to the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. On July 15, Unification Minister Kim said, “The six-party talks are likely to be negatively affected if international public opinion worsens.” But two days later, Kim Sook, the South Korean chief negotiator to the six-party talks, said the government “won’t link the shooting death at Mount Geumgang to the North Korean nuclear issue.”

Critics say the government’s inconsistent stance is problematic because it has delivered confusing messages to its negotiating partner, North Korea.

North Korea has been tight-lipped about the Mount Geumgang incident since July 12, when the North’s organization in charge of the Mount Geumgang tourism project issued a statement. North Korea’s media outlets for foreigners had reported the incident four times, but did not report it to North Korean citizens.

A South Korean government official said, “When an issue in inter-Korean relations pops up, North Korea comes up with countermeasures after thoroughly analyzing the remarks made by South Korean officials. It is very important to send consistent messages to the North.” It will not help if South Korea makes it difficult for North Korea to figure out what it wants, according to the official.

Experts attribute the flip-flopping to a lack of a government-wide consensus on foreign affairs and security policy and the Blue House’s inability to coordinate the opinions of government officials. In particular, they say the government committed a serious mistake in allowing high-ranking officials to make conflicting statements after the National Security Council meeting.

Yang Moo-jin, a professor at Seoul’s University of North Korean Studies, said, “Cheong Wa Dae (the Blue House) is the place to coordinate policy, but its officials in charge of foreign affairs and security were mainly picked up from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade or were pro-U.S. experts. The lack of awareness of, and attention to, North Korea policy at Cheong Wa Dae has reached a serious level.”

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