hankyoreh

immigration and quarantine facility near the DMZ in Paju

The North closed the inter-Korean border completely on March 9, allowing all passage the following day. The second total border closure came March 13, with passage allowed for repatriation only March 16. All passage was allowed March 17, but what will the North do next?

This is the shift in attitudes over land passage to and from the Gaeseong (Kaesong) Industrial Complex and Mount Geumgang (Kumgang) shown by North Korea since the start of the joint South Korea-U.S. military exercise Key Resolve, which concludes March 20. There is no clear regularity to it, other than the fact that the days on which all passage was allowed were both Tuesdays. Tuesday is the day for admission to and from Mount Geumgang, which takes place once a week.

With no regular pattern in evidence, it is impossible to predict how things will turn out on Wednesday. The government has been circumspect as well. When North Korea first lifted its passage ban on March 10 after one day of closure, it was taken as a sign of normalization. Unification Ministry spokesman Kim Ho-nyoun said of it, “We can just interpret it as meaning that passage to and from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and Mount Geumgang regions has returned to normal.” But on Tuesday, an official said, “Who knows what’s going to happen tomorrow?” North Korea did not say anything on Tuesday either.

It is possible to speculate on North Korea’s reason for allowing all passage Tuesday. On Monday it opened the way for workers to return home, avoiding criticisms of “detaining” civilians. Its actions Tuesday could be read as an attempt to ease paralysis in operations at the Gaeseong complex by opening up the rest of the course to North Korea. The complex’s tenant businesses experienced tremendous misery and discomfort with their exchanges of raw materials, subsidiary materials and personnel cut off for four days. With one company after another ceasing operations, the businesses even issued a statement Monday urging North Korea to allow all passage. An official said, “If North Korea itself was not prepared to shut the Gaeseong Industrial Complex this time, it would have been difficult for it to play dumb.”

Pyongyang may have concluded that it had already used the complex sufficiently as a means of pressuring South Korea. It used the Key Resolve training as its pretext, but many suspect that it did not play the card of shutting down passage simply in the interest of responding to Key Resolve. A former high-ranking official said that they “tried using the Gaeseong Industrial Complex as a higher level of full-on pressure toward the South.” Through this situation, Pyongyang has communicated to all concerned that the Gaeseong Industrial Complex will not be regarded as a “calm zone” for inter-Korean relations, showing a resolute face in saying that a worst-case scenario could see the complex abandoned completely. It was a high-intensity warning to Seoul that it should change its North Korea policy, if only in the interest of the complex’s development. Others, including one former high-ranking official, are analyzing it as an unspoken message to businesses with their fates tied to the Gaeseong complex, encouraging them to “guide the government in a future-oriented policy shift.”

North Korea’s future course of action must be seen as riding on how it evaluates the effects reaped thus far compared with its initial goals. If it views it as necessary to further shake the South, it will close the borders once again, perhaps even on Wednesday. But if it deems to be potentially counterproductive, with critical public opinion in South Korea and heightened dissatisfaction among businesses, there is a strong chance the situation will not deteriorate further.

Another important factor this time is the response from the South Korean government. Former Vice Minister of Unification Lee Bong-jo said, “At this time, the North is touching on the issue of passage by limiting it to the Key Resolve training period.” But there is a possibility that the situation could continue even past March 20 if Seoul immediately demands complete measures to prevent recurrence and approaches its response strategy rashly, Lee added.

The concern is that it could all too easily become a vicious cycle like last year’s Mount Geumgang shooting incident, with both parties ratcheting up the level of their response and leading to a complete halt in the project itself. It is a situation where a flexible response is demanded from the government. Some are commenting that this will require a dispassionate and temperate response that does not disparage North Korea’s permission of passage as complete “surrender.”

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