PSPD in English Archive 2003-01-31   1463

South Korean NGO’s Recommendations for a Peaceful Solution of the North Korean Nuclear Issue

On October 17, 2002, the U.S. announced that during its contacts with Pyongyang, North Korea admitted to having a nuclear weapons development program. Since then tension has been mounting between Washington and Pyongyang. Under the circumstances, the KEDO, mainly due to strong insistence by the Bush administration, has decided to suspend fuel shipments to North Korea from December 2002, and the US has reportedly forced the South Korean government to suspend cooperative ventures with the North following the recent Republican mid-term election victories. In South Korea too some are calling for a review of reconciliation and cooperation policies toward North Korea.

At present, the United States insists the North should terminate its nuclear weapons program before any talks resume, while the North retorts Washington has to abandon its hostile policy toward Pyongyang by concluding a non-aggression pact.

There are deep concerns and fears nationwide that the current situation might escalate into a military crisis on the Korean Peninsula in 2003. South Korean NGOs signing below regard this situation as one of the most serious obstacles for the ongoing peace process between the two Koreas.

In an effort to find a breakthrough of this deadlock, we propose principles which all countries concerned should respect, and we make recommendations for the peaceful resolution of the North Korea nuclear issue.

1. Basic Principles: Peace, Denuclearization, Reconciliation and Cooperation

1.1 Peaceful Resolution through Dialogue and Negotiation

Above all, the security of humans on the Korean Peninsula is of utmost importance, and no justification for the use of military force is acceptable. Remembering clearly the fact that the U.S. actually drew up a plan to attack nuclear facilities in Yeongbyon and mobilize 100,000 U.S. troops in 1994, we unequivocally state that such radical action should not even be contemplated. Such military plans would hold the lives of 70 million Koreans as collateral and grievously fail to reflect their opinion about their own fate.

1.2. A Nuclear Free Korean Peninsula and the Agreed Framework

Whatever the circumstances, the Korean Peninsula must be a nuclear free zone and the use of nuclear weapons or development of nuclear weapons there is wholly unacceptable. For peace on the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia, the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the US-DPRK Agreed Framework must remain intact. We firmly oppose North Korean nuclear weapons development and are equally opposed to any forceful U.S. preemptive strategies.

1.3 Continuation of Cooperation for Reconciliation and Exchange

Despite the current nuclear issue and as North and South Korea as well other countries concerned have agreed on principles of a peaceful resolution, Seoul and Pyongyang must continue to work toward reconciliation and cooperate to improve their bilateral relations. As the North Korean nuclear problem impacts the continuation of a viable and vibrant Korea, the South Korean government must recognize its role in resolving the problem and initiate measures to renegotiate an agreement between North Korea and the U.S.

2. Recommendations for a Peaceful Solution of the North Korean Nuclear Problem

2.1 Reaffirmation of the US-DPRK Agreed Framework

Scraping the US-DPRK Agreed Framework would bring immediate negative contingencies to the Korean Peninsula. Negating the Agreed Framework would mean North Korea and the U.S. tear up the only available foundation for preventing nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula. In this regard, we are extremely apprehensive that there are opinions favoring the abolition of the Agreed Framework. Therefore, we propose that North Korea and the U.S. re-affirm their commitment to the Agreed Framework, settling the suspicions about North Korea’s nuclear weapons development within the Agreed Framework. At the same time, we strongly recommend that the U.S. modify and supplement articles promising security assurances to North Korea.

2.2 Prompt Dialogue without Prerequisites

Insisting on peaceful resolution without dialogue and negotiation is nothing but political rhetoric. It is not a matter of whether renouncing nuclear development or signing a treaty of non-aggression comes first. We urge both sides, North Korea and the U.S., to meet as soon as possible without prerequisites to initiate dialogue on resolving North Korea’s nuclear issue and thereby guaranteeing peace on the Korean Peninsula. In this regard, North Korea has backed down from its initial stance of no renouncement of nuclear development without prior guarantee of non-aggression, showing a desire for dialogue. The U.S. needs to acknowledge that it is impossible to resolve the North Korean nuclear problem through a rigid hard-line policy in the absence of assurances to North Korea that its security will not be threatened.

2.3 Resolution on “Peace, Denuclearization, Reconciliation and Cooperation”

We should not forget the bitter experience of the nuclear crisis of 1994 when South Korean politicians insisted on a hard-line policy, thereby excluding any negotiation process between North Korea and the U.S. We ask politicians, regardless of their party affiliations, to cooperate together to solve the nuclear problem peacefully, and we ask the National Assembly to adopt a resolution on peace, denuclearization, reconciliation and cooperation.

2.4 Cooperation of Neighboring Countries such as Japan

We courteously ask Japan and other neighboring countries, which have been supporting South Korea”s reconciliation and cooperation policy towards North Korea, to play an active role in peacefully resolving the North Korean nuclear problem. We ask them to continue to improve their relations with North Korea, cooperating for humanitarian support and exchange, rather than joining the U.S. in isolating North Korea.

2.5 Continuous Supply of Heavy Fuel Oil to North Korea

It is hardly acceptable that the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) stop heavy fuel oil shipments to North Korea. For a desirable solution of the North Korean nuclear problem, the assistance stipulated in the Agreed Framework, including heavy fuel oil, should proceed as planned. We particularly urge the South Korean government, which is paying for 70 percent of the total KEDO expenses, to clarify its position towards the U.S. policy on North Korea with respect to the cutting off of the supply of heavy fuel oil. The South Korean government should take the lead in urging neighboring countries to cooperate in supplying energy to North Korea.

2002. 11. 13

Citizens Solidarity for Peace and Unification

Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea

Council for National Reconciliation

Forum of the June

Green Korea United

Korea Professors” Association for Democracy

Korean Women Link

Korean Women’s Associations United

Peoples Solidarity for Participatory Democracy

Self-Reliance and Reunification of Korea

Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea

Women Making Peace, Korea

South Korean NGOs

정부지원금 0%, 회원의 회비로 운영됩니다

참여연대 후원/회원가입


참여연대 NOW

실시간 활동 SNS

텔레그램 채널에 가장 빠르게 게시되고,

더 많은 채널로 소통합니다. 지금 팔로우하세요!