[Analysis] Just how new is Seoul’s ‘new’ N. Korea policy?

Posted on : 2009-01-01 12:31 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Unification Ministry will make a ‘shift toward new South-North relations’ in 2009 -- provided that Pyongyang is the first to change

The Ministry of Unification carried out a presidential briefing Wednesday. The ministry set its 2009 goals for unification policy as “stable, productive and reciprocal inter-Korean relations through a shift toward new South-North relations,” but no mention was made of a shift in the tenor of North Korea policy, such as assurances that it will carry out the terms of the June 15 and October 4 declarations, which North Korea has demanded as a precondition of restoring inter-Korean relations. As a result, the ministry predicted that for the time being in the new year, the current state of inter-Korean relations will continue as long as there are no independent changes in Pyongyang’s stance.

The Unification Ministry’s briefing stated that inter-Korean relations are currently in an “adjustment period” and expressed the goal of realizing a “shift toward new South-North relations” within 2009. The ministry indicated that to realize this goal, it would suggest inter-Korean dialogue through major occasions and focus its efforts on resuming dialogue between authorities from the two Koreas.

The emphasis on leading efforts by South Korean authorities to restore inter-Korean relations was noteworthy. But the fact that no clear blueprint to accomplish this was present is being pointed to as a definite limitation. There was a total absence of any reference to a shift in the tenor of North Korea policy, such as a promise to fulfill the terms of the June 15 and October 4 declarations as North Korea is demanding.

The ministry did present projects for inter-Korean economic cooperation to be pursued if South-North relations are resumed, including repairs to railroads and highways and joint use of the Han River estuary as included in the October 4 Declaration. The two projects were not included in a briefing submitted in March 2008. At that time, the Unification Ministry only stated that it would selectively carry out inter-Korean economic cooperation efforts indicated in the October 4 Declaration as long as they adhered to the four principles of: progress in resolving the North Korean nuclear issue, ability to bear financial burden, national consensus and feasibility. The impression is that they are attempting to elicit a pragmatic response from Pyongyang by slipping in small projects to attract its interest, with no promise to carry out the terms of the October 4 Declaration.

But there appears to be little possibility of a response from Pyongyang, which has demanded a shift in the tenor of Seoul’s North Korea policy as a main priority. The Unification Ministry itself predicted that “the period of adjustment for inter-Korean relations will continue in the foreseeable future unless there is a change in North Korea’s stance.” This means that even though they are presenting efforts from South Korean authorities, there will be no fundamental improvement in South-North relations if Pyongyang does not first change of its own accord.

The tenor of the Unification Ministry’s North Korea policy has been based in the understanding of inter-Korean relations of President Lee Myung-bak, who once said that “waiting is also a strategy.” As such, it appears unlikely that it will escape its limitations.

President Lee said Wednesday that “rather than starting inter-Korean relations off with ambiguity and making something difficult to undo, we need an approach of building up solid inter-Korean relations by starting off the right way, however difficult it may be.”

The inter-Korean economic cooperation projects suggested by the ministry included: forestry cooperation for low-carbon “green growth,” passage of a Siberian PNG pipeline through North Korea as agreed upon at the South Korean-Russian summit, implementation and regularization of the reunions of separated families, and the pursuit of a fundamental solution to the issues of South Korean prisoners of war and abductees. But even entering inter-Korean discussion on these issues is a formidable task without any change in Seoul’s North Korea policy.

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

Most viewed articles