November 2000

Views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily of the AFSC.

A View of the Korean Summit Five Months Later

Karin Lee works for AFSC in their East Asia Quaker International Program <EAQIAR@aol.com>

Viewers all around the world were glued to their TV sets last June when Kim Jong Il and Kim Dae Jung warmly greeted one another at the Pyongyang airport in North Korea. This unexpected airport meeting between the two Korean leaders, with thousands of cheering men and women in the background, immediately generated strong hopes for the historic June Summit.

The excitement on the airport tarmac quickly spread throughout Korean communities around the world. South Koreans, who had been taught for so long that North Koreans were untrustworthy enemies, reacted with surprise that Kim Jong Il seemed like a normal person, not a monster. In Osaka, Japan, where the Korean community has been sharply divided between those affiliated with the North (Chosen Soren) and those affiliated with the South (Mindan), crowds from both sides spontaneously poured into the street. Where once they had kept a watchful distance from one another, the two communities of overseas Koreans celebrated together for the first time.

Some reacted with cynicism to the outpouring of so much joy, and frankly, I myself was only cautiously optimistic. Though genuinely moved by the scene at the airport, I thought, "let's wait and see what agreements are made at the summit. And then let's wait and see how many of these agreements are realized." But so far it seems that I was, happily, wrong. The June Summit has provided renewed vigor at all levels of engagement, from the government, to the nongoernmental organization (NGO) level, to the average citizen. Reunification is no longer an abstract idea. Civil society in South Korea has been encouraged to address not only issues of unification, but other challenges, such as the presence of US troops on the peninsula. According to one unification activist, Kim Chang Soo, "Because of the summit, there is a real window of opportunity for progressive forces in South Korea. We have to work hard to take advantage of this opportunity."

The Summit and its Aftermath

Analysts point to a number of factors leading to the Summit. With President Kim Dae Jung's policy of engagement, initiated soon after he took office in 1998, the South Korean government has encouraged an unprecedented level of contact and economic transaction between the two Koreas. North Korea, although initially critical of President Kim's "Sunshine Policy," now seems to have begun to trust in it. In the North, Kim Jong Il has consolidated his power, which has grown gradually since Kim Il Sung's death. The North Korean leader has been responding to changes in the geo-political environment (the collapse of the Soviet trading bloc, pressures from China) as well as the current economic difficulties North Korea is facing. In addition to engaging in on-going negotiations with South Korea, Japan, and the United States. , the North Korean government has been working assiduously to expand ties by normalizing relations with Italy, Australia, and Canada. Also, the North Korean government recently sent letters to seven European Union members requesting the initiation of negotiations. And not all initiatives have been at the governmental level; non-governmental organizations from South Korea, the US, and elsewhere have been working steadily to maintain contact with North Korea. Multilateral agencies such as the UN Development Program and UNICEF, in addressing the recent food shortages, have increased North Korea's contact with non-Communist countries, and have contributed to a broader understanding of North Korea's agenda and negotiating style. In short, the Summit was the result of several years of expanding contacts, ongoing political trends within the two Koreas, and a shift in the strategic environment in East Asia.

Now, in the wake of the summit, steps toward reconciliation between North Korea and its former foes are occurring on a regular basis. Cooperation at the government level between the two Koreas has greatly intensified. Both countries are preparing to de-mine a portion of the demilitarized zone in order to re-establish a rail link between Seoul in the south and Wonson in the north. Unprecedented talks between South Korean Defense Minister Cho Sung-tae and Kim Il Chul, minister for the People's Army of North Korea, took place in September. And a visit by Kim Jong Il to Seoul has been scheduled for early next year. Investment activity has increased, and the ruling party in South Korea said that it would raise about $448 million to help carry out inter-Korean cooperative projects. The two Koreas are to sign a US$90 million loan agreement. Television viewers who missed the historic handshake at the Pyongyang airport had another opportunity in September to see the new era of Korean cooperation. At the Sydney Olympics, athletes from the north and south marched together into the stadium of wildly cheering sports fans.

The choreographing constraints of the past--would North Korea reconcile first with South Korea, or with the US?--seem to have evaporated as North Korea negotiates with both countries nearly simultaneously. North Korean envoy Jo Myong Rok's visit in mid-October to the United States produced signs of rapid progress in improved relations. A joint communique stated that "neither government would have hostile intent toward the other" and confirmed the commitment of both governments to make every effort in the future to build a new relationship free from past enmity. The DPRK pledged not to launch long-range missiles of any kind while talks on the missile issue continue, and both sides reaffirmed the principles of 1994's Agreed Framework. US Secretary of State Madeline Albright is now visiting North Korea to prepare for a visit by President Clinton.

The communique was silent on the issue of US troops. According to South Korean President Kim Dae Jung, North Korea has for the present lifted its long-standing ultimatum and agreed to the continued presence of US troops for an unspecified period during and after reunification, removing an obstacle to US government support for reunification. For the time being, internal newspapers in North Korea are still calling for troop removal, but negotiations on this highly sensitive issue may be taking place privately.

Meanwhile, Japan and North Korea plan to hold the next round of negotiations on normalizing diplomatic ties at the end of October. Recently, Japan agreed to give 500,000 tons of rice in food aid to North Korea, exceeding the World Food Program request for 195,000 tons. Japan's ruling party, the Liberal Democratic Party, hopes that large-scale aid will advance normalization talks.

For Koreans both within and outside the two Koreas, movements toward reconciliation reverberate at a very personal level. One of the most tragic outcomes of the Korean War was the division of families that left relatives on opposite sides of the DMZ. Therefore, one of the most significant humanitarian outcomes of the summit was the well-publicized reunion of 200 separated families, which took place in Seoul and Pyongyang on August 15 and 16. More such meetings are planned for later this year. Perhaps less well publicized in the United States are the people-to-people reunions involving Koreans in Japan. Historically, South Korea's National Security Law prevented Chosen Soren members unwilling to renounce North Korea, many of whom were born in the south, from visiting their hometowns. But at ministerial talks in July, South and North Korea agreed to encourage such visits. In September, fifty Korean residents of Japan who support Pyongyang came to South Korea to visit relatives and graves.

Reconciliation between Japan and North Korea is also taking place at a people-to-people level. The pro-South Korean organization and the pro-Pyongyang organization have pledged to work toward cooperation on a variety of projects. In mid-September a third delegation of Japanese wives of North Koreans visited Japan and saw their Japanese relatives for the first time in decades. Japanese nationals, born in the North Korean town of Hoeryeong when it was under Japanese colonial rule, visited their birthplace for the first time in 55 years, raising hopes for other Japanese born in Korea.

Fears

Many factors threaten the current momentum. For instance, some accuse the Kim Dae Jung government of being overly generous and too conciliatory, and are demanding that North Korea show more good faith in joint agreements. Such skeptics point to the issue of South Koreans remaining in North Korean prisons. South Korea recently sent 80 prisoners still loyal to the North back to a hero's welcome in Pyongyang. But the estimated thousands of South Koreans still imprisoned in the North have still not been allowed to return to the South. South Korean conservatives are concerned that food will be diverted to military troops, and that North Korea has no means to pay back the loan. While the ruling party has remained calm in the eye of this and other storms, a growing number of people may raise complaints, particularly as promised events are postponed, such as the next set of family reunions. Originally scheduled for October and November, North Korea is insisting on a month's delay.

Although the US, Japan, and South Korea have been able to coordinate their policies thus far, the coalition may weaken. One concern is that the US or Japan, fearful of the prospects of a reunited Korea, will discreetly pressure South Korea to stall further negotiations. Negotiations over Japan's diplomatic recognition of North Korea have been stop-and-go, as Japan has not been willing to abandon the issue of the Japanese nationals allegedly abducted by North Korea. Recently, the US government has pledged to take up this issue in its own negotiations. This agreement may reveal either an admirable level coordination between the US and Japan, or insistence on the part of the US government that it be central to the process.

Meanwhile, despite improvements on the Korean peninsula, signs of growing militarism in the region indicate that East Asia will remain a tinderbox of tensions. The US is determined to keep troops in South Korea to protect US interests in the region. The recently revised US/Japan Defense Guidelines require Japan to support US military operations in the region though civilian utilities such as communication networks. Article 9, the heart of Japan's "Peace Constitution," is under threat by this and other attempts to redefine Japan's Self-Defense Forces. While Clinton recently postponed a decision on National Missile Defense, research for Theater Missile Defense continues, with support from the Japanese government and researchers. TMD colors in with dark ink the Cold War line separating US allies from China, Russia, and North Korea. Along with TMD, increased US arms sales to Taiwan exacerbate the tense situation across the Taiwan Straits.

The Work Ahead

In the face of these threats to peace, NGOs in the region are hard at work. Regional peace groups used the Okinawa Summit to demand changes in US military policy in the region. In September, groups in Okinawa, Korea, and Vieques held joint actions against US military bases. In early October, NGOs in Korea and Japan joined a world-wide action against TMD and NMD, issuing a joint press statement.

Anticipating conflicts between people from the North and the South in the course of reunification at the grass roots, three Korean NGOs and the American Friends Service Committee are organizing a series of trainings on conflict resolution skills. A recent workshop in the series brought a delegation from the former East Germany and West Germany to Korea to discuss the social and psychological conflicts caused by unification in Germany, and the developing field of conflict resolution there.

The AFSC's agricultural program in North Korea, one of the few NGO prpgrams to have relationships with cooperative farms, has developed beyond its early days of providing direct relief and is now providing fertilizer and seeds to four farms to assist them in restoring agricultural output and increasing self-sufficiency. AFSC is working with the farm directors and the Academy of Agricultural Sciences on double and inter-cropping, pest management, and soil improvement. In particular the Korean farmers are experimenting with methods of maximizing the benefit of "green manures"--winter crops that fix nitrogen, decreasing dependency on fertilizers in the spring. The program is unfortunately under-funded, as images of the DPRK famine have been replaced by the joyful scenes of the Summit. A typhoon at the end of September, which damaged almost 100,000 homes and destroyed an estimated 153,000 metric tons of rice, puts additional burdens on an infrastructure that is already weak.

For information on how to contribute to AFSC's agricultural program: Alice Andrews, Aandrews@afsc.org or phone 215 241 7149

Endnote

As this article was going to press, we received the thrilling news that President Kim Dae Jung has received the Nobel Peace Prize. Many of our friends and colleagues in South Korea have shared their excitement and pride with us. AFSC sent a letter congratulating President Kim: "The world remembers your years of struggle and the times you endured in prison, under house arrest, and in exile. Your steadfast adherence to nonviolence has been a contribution not only to the strengthening of democracy in the Republic of Korea but in the world at large."

The Nobel Peace Prize citation gave a far-reaching review of President Kim's contributions to peace and human rights, naming his struggles for democracy and internal reconciliation within South Korea, his work toward reconciliation with neighboring countries such as Japan, and his public commitments for democracy in Burma and against repression in East Timor. The citation also recognizes his bold work for reconciliation with North Korea, saying "his visit to North Korea gave impetus to a process which has reduced tension between the two countries. There may now be hope that the cold war will also come to an end in Korea."

Within South Korea, there were some critics who, pointing to signs of new economic instability, criticize Kim Dae Jung for his preoccupation with international over domestic matters. Some analysts have worried that by not naming Kim Jong Il as well, the Nobel committee will exacerbate North-South tensions rather than hasten their resolution. The citation states "The Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to express its recognition of the contributions made by North Korea's and other countries' leaders to advance reconciliation and possible reunification on the Korean peninsula," without naming Kim Jong Il. So far North Korea's official response to the prize has been to congratulate Kim Dae Jung while regretting the omission of Kim Jong Il.

Nobel Committee Chairman Gunnar Berge said he did not think a prize to one side in the Korean conflict would impede the process because "North Korea will be totally dependent on people like Kim Dae Jung." The viewpoint that reconciliation will occur through South Korea's leaders and actions independent of North Korea's leaders and actions follows the precedent established by German unification: viewing unification issues primarily through the eyes of West Germany and its allies. The long-term results of such an asymmetric perspective may be reunification without reconciliation.

--John Feiffer and Karin Lee

Previous Article