Will Korea truly unite afterwards?
(Or "How rivals suddenly chose
to amicably settle differences in Panmunjom")
to amicably settle differences in Panmunjom")
Source: Firstpost.com
Starting with a several steps from the Demilitarised zone in Panmunjom, Kim Jong Un, filled with courage, personally crossed a territory once called "hostile", breaking away from decades of hostility and distrust since 1953.
From that historic event, it marked a new beginning: After 65 years in a technical state of war that has periodically descended into real conflict, news from all over the world sought how North Korea's leader shaking hands with his counterpart, promising an era of peace and eventual reunification.
It may appear strange, knowing that Kim Jong Un be at first appeared as following his father's and grandfather's footsteps of preserving Socialism, he chose to promote a new kind of development that uplifts the well-being of each and every North Koreans, and this time, promoting peace instead of the usual saber-rattlings that affect not just South Korea but also its neighbours.
For as according to Rodong Sinmun, it declared: “Historic summit opens new history of national reconciliation, peace and prosperity."
Source: VoA News
Joint agreements as a basis for peaceful reunification
True to its desire for reunification through peaceful means, an agreement was brought by the leaders of both North and South Korea wanted to "reconnect blood relations" and "bring forward the future of co-prosperity and unification" through:
1.) Full implementation of all existing joint-agreements and declarations;
2.) Agreeing to hold dialogue and negotiations in various fields including at high level, and to take active measures for the implementation of the agreements reached at the Summit;
3.) To establish a joint liaison office with resident representatives of both sides in the Gaeseong region in order to facilitate close consultation between the authorities as well as smooth exchanges and cooperation between the peoples;
4.) Encourage more active cooperation, exchanges, visits and contacts at all levels in order to rejuvenate the sense of national reconciliation and unity;
5.) Swiftly resolve the humanitarian issues that resulted from the division of the nation;
6.) Actively implement the projects previously agreed in the 2007 October 4 Declaration, in order to promote balanced economic growth and co-prosperity of the nation.
Besides that, another portion of the agreement focuses on "joint efforts" in order to "alleviate the acute military tension" and "practically eliminate the danger of war" on the Korean Peninsula via:
1.) Agreeing both sides to to completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain, including land, air and sea, that are the source of military tension and conflict. In this vein, the two sides agreed to transform the demilitarized zone into a peace zone.
2.) Agreeing both sides to devise a practical scheme to turn the areas around the Northern Limit Line in the West Sea into a maritime peace zone in order to prevent accidental military clashes and guarantee safe fishing activities.
3.) Both sides taking various military measures to ensure active mutual cooperation, exchanges, visits and contacts.
And lastly, both North and South Koreans will actively cooperate to establish a permanent and solid peace regime on the Peninsula by:
1.) reaffirming the Non-Aggression Agreement that precludes the use of force in any form against each other, and agreed to strictly adhere to this Agreement.
2.) Agreeing to carry out disarmament in a phased manner, as military tension is alleviated and substantial progress is made in military confidence-building.
3.) Pursuing a trilateral negotiation involving the two Koreas and the United States; or quadrilateral meetings involving the two Koreas, the United States and China, with a view to declaring an end to the War, turning the armistice into a peace treaty, and establishing a permanent and solid peace regime.
4.) Both North and South Koreans confiming the common goal of realizing, through complete denuclearization, a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula.
With this agreement, what more of its meeting, somehow reminds of the late leaders Kim Jong Il and Kim Dae Jung met, followed by agreements which involves resolving nuclear tensions and an active promotion of inter-Korean cooperation especially those of economic projects.
Source: Russia Today
How about the Conservatives?
On the other hand, that historic moment has its opposition.
Especially in the south wherein conservatives, driven by Cold War nostalgia, chose to protest that event citing the past agreements as going nowhere if not assailing the "doves" as subservient to the interest of the North.
For according to groups such as "Liberty Korea Party" and other "hardliners", they criticised the agreement for being "too vague", if not describing the entire negotiation as a "show of fake peace" led by a "tyrant".
Furthermore, these groups favoured to retain the controversial "National Security Act" that made communism illegal, and that includes recognition of North Korea as a political entity, and a potential restriction on freedom of speech as the law not only regulates activities that directly threaten the safety of the State, but also punishes those who praise or incite an anti-state group.
Worse, it favours the interest of the Americans, whose military bases continue to remain despite opposition. The existence of US military bases served as deterrent against possible North Korean as well as Chinese attack, making the United States remains a major regional actor and a force for peace and stability in the far east.
However, not all conservatives aren't as hardline as those who stubbornly protest, some would would even favour some semblance of "peaceful coexistence" alongside the usual birksmanship, but that "coexistence" requires reciprocity that includes denuclearisation and market liberalisation, that according to critics it rather favours the south despite latter's promise of economic assistance to its northern neighbour. Others, such as then-president Park Gyun-Hye, first attempted to balance coercion and engagement in her “Trustpolitik” policy, which emphasized trust-building between Seoul and Pyongyang.
Especially in the south wherein conservatives, driven by Cold War nostalgia, chose to protest that event citing the past agreements as going nowhere if not assailing the "doves" as subservient to the interest of the North.
For according to groups such as "Liberty Korea Party" and other "hardliners", they criticised the agreement for being "too vague", if not describing the entire negotiation as a "show of fake peace" led by a "tyrant".
Furthermore, these groups favoured to retain the controversial "National Security Act" that made communism illegal, and that includes recognition of North Korea as a political entity, and a potential restriction on freedom of speech as the law not only regulates activities that directly threaten the safety of the State, but also punishes those who praise or incite an anti-state group.
Worse, it favours the interest of the Americans, whose military bases continue to remain despite opposition. The existence of US military bases served as deterrent against possible North Korean as well as Chinese attack, making the United States remains a major regional actor and a force for peace and stability in the far east.
However, not all conservatives aren't as hardline as those who stubbornly protest, some would would even favour some semblance of "peaceful coexistence" alongside the usual birksmanship, but that "coexistence" requires reciprocity that includes denuclearisation and market liberalisation, that according to critics it rather favours the south despite latter's promise of economic assistance to its northern neighbour. Others, such as then-president Park Gyun-Hye, first attempted to balance coercion and engagement in her “Trustpolitik” policy, which emphasized trust-building between Seoul and Pyongyang.
Still, there's hope
Amidst criticism and possible threats endangering the unity of North and South Koreans, it is worth admissible that reunification will still happen.
Amidst criticism and possible threats endangering the unity of North and South Koreans, it is worth admissible that reunification will still happen.
For after 65 years of armistice, saber-rattlings, and stalled negotiations, the recent meeting between Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae In shows that there are chances of reconciliation, dialogue, and agreement that may benefit each and every Korean. Critics, especially the hardliners, may still insist that the negotiations will go nowhere due to its past ones if not still clinging to their hawkish tendencies as self-proclaimed "fighters for freedom" when in fact they stood on the side of interests.
Perhaps, in looking back at the late Kim Il Sung's "10-Point Programme of the Great Unity of the Whole Nation for the Reunification of the Country" made a decade ago, Kim Jong Un would had looked this as a basis in his desire for a peaceful reunification with its southern neighbour as it follows:
1.) A unified state, independent, peaceful and neutral, should be founded through the great unity of the whole nation.
2.) Unity should be based on patriotism and the spirit of national independence.
3.) Unity should be achieved on the principle of promoting co-existence, co-prosperity and common interests and subordinating everything to the cause of national reunification.
4.) All political disputes that foment division and confrontation between fellow countrymen should be ended and unity should be achieved.
5.) The fear of invasion from both south and north. and the ideas of prevailing over communism and communization should be dispelled, and north and south should believe in each other and unite.
6.) The north and south should value democracy and join hands on the road to national reunification, without rejecting each other because of differences in ideals and principles.
7.) The north and south should protect the material and spiritual wealth of individuals and organizations and encourage their use for the promotion of great national unity.
8.) Understanding, trust and unity should be built up across the nation through contact, exchange visits and dialogue.
9.) The whole nation, north, south and overseas, should strengthen its solidarity for the sake of national reunification.
10.) Those who have contributed to the great unity of the nation and to the cause of national reunification should be honoured.
Because of these and possible succeeding agreements to come, may everyone pray and struggle to upheld peace, unity, and freedom over that "land of morning calm."