The Views of the Korean Civil Society on the Occasion of the ROK-US Summit Meeting

A summit meeting of the presidents of the Republic of Korea and the United States of America is scheduled to be held on June 11, 2005 (Korean time), focusing mainly on the topics of the “North Korean Nuclear Weapons Development Program” and the “ROK-US alliance”. The upcoming summit meeting, dealing with various issues directly impacting on the destiny of the Korean people, is taking place at a time the situation of the Korean peninsula is unfolding in a very dangerous and complicated manner. The summit meeting, therefore, could be perceived as to have weighty influence on the future situation of the Korean peninsula and its surroundings.

Given the importance of the upcoming summit meeting, the civil society groups, which have, in various ways, devoted our efforts for the realization of national independence, peace, and national reunification, are moved to declare our views on occasion of the ROK-U.S. Summit meeting, being held midst extraordinary interest and concern.

The “Korean peninsula nuclear issue” must be brought to a resolution in peaceful manner through dialogue and negotiations. We oppose sanctions against North Korea and the use of military means.

With the intensification of the tension over the nuclear issue, while there is a growing expectation of the re-start in the 6 party talks, there is at the same time, on the other hand, a growing sense of deepening crisis. The Bush Administration, while reported to be waiting for a North Korean response after conveying to it through the New York channel that it holds “North Korea as a sovereign nation” and that “the U.S. has no intention of undertaking a military attack on North Korea”, is, on the other hand, clearly stepping up its hostile policies towards North Korea and aggressive military maneuvers. Such a behaviour is aggravating the mistrust of direct and indirect interested parties of the true intention of the U.S. government.

The Bush Administration has recently developed a precision strike scenario against North Korea, named “CONPLAN 8022”, which includes an option to resort to the use of nuclear weapons. It has also pressed on the government of Republic of Korea to develop an “operational plan 5029” which sets out a possibility of a military campaign against North Korea in case of a sudden outbreak of instability in North Korea. The Bush Administration has stepped up the forward stationing of B-2, B-52 fighter-bomber planes in Guam, and stockpiled F-117 Stealth planes, which are entrusted with bombing of strategic positions in North Korea, which house the leadership of North Korean government, in case of a break out of hostilities in the Korean peninsula. Furthermore, the highest leaders of the U.S. government, including the president Bush and the vice-president Dick Chenney have, with only few days left to the scheduled summit meeting, have made direct actions that can only be interpreted as being aimed at provoking and threatening North Korea.

If the Bush Administration is genuinely interested in bringing the “Korean peninsula nuclear issue” to a resolution, it should bring an end to the policies of hostility toward North Korea, including the plan of pre-emptive nuclear attack, which have been the key obstacles in the peaceful resolution of the “North Korean nuclear weapons development program” issue, and begin a process of substantial negotiations with North Korea. North Korea itself must, in order bring about a peaceful resolution of the “Korean peninsula nuclear issue” endeavour to avoid the aggravation of the situation, and commit itself to the framework of dialogue.

President Roh Moo-hyun must recognise the gravity of his own role in the present situation more than any other time. President Roh must articulate a categorical stance oppositing any further measures of sanction against North Korea in his meeting with the president Bush in the upcoming summit meeting. He must also rule out the development of operational plan of military strike or the stationing and training in the Korean peninsula involving the arsenal of pre-emptive attack on North Korea. President Roh, in a recent statement, expressed that “war must be prevented whatever takes place”. President Roh must clearly convey the views of the Korean people opposing the hostile policies of the U.S. towards North Korea to the U.S., with a grave sense of responsibility on the issue that would determine the destiny of the nation and the people.

We note that there is a growing anticipation of an increased pressure on the government of Republic of Korea by the U.S. to step up south Korean government’s commitment to pressurizing North Korea and sanctions against North Korea, in the name of balance, in the run up to the upcoming summit meeting, in view of the long-delayed resumption of the “government level talks” between south and north Korea and the special celebration of the “fifth anniversary of the June 15 Joint Declaration”.

We warn that the Bush Administration will be faced with a powerful resistance of the entire people of Korea, if it bears out that the upcoming summit meeting was intended to undermine the development of south-north Korea relations. President Roh must make clear to the U.S. that the improvement in the south-north Korea relations contributes to the realization of peace in the Korean peninsula and the peaceful resolution of the “nuclear issues”, and that such a development is not a matter subject to intervention by the U.S.

We oppose categorically the “strategic flexibility” of the U.S. troops in south Korea and the transformation of the ROK-U.S. alliance into a regional alliance, which would only bring about an intensification of the military tension and conflict in the Korean peninsula and northeast Asia region.

The Bush Administration, in pursuing a “strategic flexibility” for the U.S. troops in south Korea aimed at developing a pre-emptive strike capacity against North Korea and locking out China, is committed to a comprehensive readjustment of its position, which includes, the relocation of the Yongsan base and the Second Division, the transfer of the responsibility of defense against North Korea to the south Korean military, the restructuring of the armed forces, reinforcement of the war capacity involving new weapons procurement amounting to 11 billion dollars, strengthening the attack capacity of operational plans, such as the operation plan 5029, and related military exercise.

The Bush Administration claims that the south Korean government’s opposition to the involvement of the U.S. troops in south Korea in conflicts in northeast Asia outside the Korean peninsula as a “violation of the sovereign right of the U.S.” and pressuring the south Korean government to accept the transformation of the U.S. troops in south Korea into an “Asia Pacific rapid deployment force” as beneficial to the defense of Korea. The “strategic flexibility” of the U.S. troops in south Korea and the concomitant consolidation of the attack capacity will undoubtedly give rise to military tension with north Korea and China, further heightening the threat of war in the Korean peninsula and the northeast Asia region. The opposition to this development, therefore, is not only justified, but common sense response. The prevention of the deployment of the U.S. troops stationed in south Korea to involve in a conflict in other parts of northeast Asia, which has a direct impact on Korea’s security, is a justified right of a sovereign nation. It is also a logical implication of the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty that limits the scope of the operations of the U.S. troops stationed in south Korea. The defense contribution of 100 billions of won every year for the maintenance of the U.S. troops in south Korea or the support for the use and transfer of various military bases is not to help the U.S. to consolidate its regional hegemony.

The Bush Administration must not attempt to force the south Korean government to accept its plan of “strategic flexibility” for the U.S. troops stationed in south Korea nor the “transformation of the ROK-US alliance into a regional alliance”, which it is pursuing as a part of its own hegemonic project. It is a matter that can jeopardize the peace in the Korean peninsula and east Asia, and it runs head-on against the position of the Roh Moo-hyun government which has declared that “it will not involve itself in any conflicts in northeast Asia”. President Roh Moo-hyun, therefore, needs to make a categorical opposition clearly known to the U.S.

The Roh Moo-hyun government must not, in the upcoming summit meeting, commit itself to any agreement, such as, “regional significance of the alliance”, a “re-interpretation of the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty or adoption of a ROK-US Security Declaration”, the “adoption of a guideline for defense cooperation or a mechanism of prior assent (consulation) for overseas deployment of the U.S. troops stationed in south Korea”, which paves the way for the establishment of the “strategic flexibility” of the U.S. troops in Korea. These are matter of grave importance that the president of the south Korea should consult with the people of Korea first, not the president of the U.S.

The ROK-US Summit Meeting is a test ground for the future of the independent foreign policy endeavours for peace. The Roh Moo-hyun government must not be afraid of bring to surface policy difference with the U.S.

The challenge and demand of the Korean people to achieve a system of peace in the Korean peninsula through the peaceful resolution of the “Korean peninsula nuclear issue” and the realization of peaceful reunification on the basis of cooperation with neighbouring nations of northeast Asia cannot but differ from the policies of the U.S., which aim, through “war against terrorism”, “non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction”, “human rights diplomacy” to build a military hegemony in northeast Asia. Roh Moo-hyun government need not be afraid of bringing these differences to the view.

We are moved to question what have been achieved from the so-called “pragmatic diplomacy” that the Roh Moo-hyun government has been pursuing. As can be seen in the cases of troop dispatch to Iraq and negotiations for the transfer of the Yongsan base, the Roh Moo-hyun government has often failed to act appropriately having failed to grasp the central importance of issues or has been seen to be intent on bring dragged around without its own clear goals, accepting the U.S. position and policy as given and immutable reality. We shall be able to determine whether the recent series of statements of President Roh Moo-hyun reflects or constitutes a genuine commitment for consistent policy program of diplomacy for peace on the basis of the proceedings and outcome of the upcoming ROK-US Summit Meeting.

We call on the President Roh Moo-hyun to approach the Summit Meeting with a determination to defend peace in the Korean peninsula whatever the difficulties and obstacles lay on its path. We sincerely look forward to the opening of a new chapter in independent diplomacy for peace by successfully paving the way forward for the peaceful resolution of the Korean peninsula nuclear issue and defusing the moves to introduce “strategic flexibility” for the U.S. troops in south Korea and to transform the ROK-US alliance into a regional alliance.

8 June 2005

April Revolution Society(Roh Joong-Sun), Buddhism Human Rights for Committee(Ven. Jee Won), Buddhist Solidarity for The Peace(Ven. Jin Gwan), Busan Women Organigation(Park Young Mi), Catholic Human Rights Committee(Pyon Yeon shik), Catholic preists’ assosiation for justice(Mun Kyu Hyeon), Center for Peace Museum (Rep, Lee Hae Dong), Christian Alliance For Church Reform (Deuk-Hoon Park), Christian Solidarity for Justice and Peace(Kim Dong Han, Lee Young Ja, Choi Young Suk), Citizens’ Action Network (Rep, Phil-Sang, Lee), Citizens’ Coalition for Democratic Media (Rep, Lee Myoung Sun), Citizen’s Solidarity for Peace & Unification(Lee Jang-hie), Commitee for Independence,Peace&Reunification of Korea(Kim Eul-Soo), Corea Peace Solidarity(KIM YEONG MAN), Corea Youth Movement Council (Jeon Sang Bong), Cultural Action (Rep, Kim Jung-heon), Ecumenical Youth Council in Korea(Yoon Seok-Min), Federation of Korean Trade Unions(Lee, Yong-deuk), Feminist Artist Network( Lee Hyae Kyoung), Green Korea United (Rep, Park Young Sin), Gyeonggi Women’s Groop Solidarity(Representative Mi-Joung, Choi), HanChongRyun(Song Hyo Won), Jeonbuk Women’s Association United(Standing Representative :Eun Kyung Kim), Korea Christian faculty fellowship, Korean Association of Women Theologians(Kwak, Boon Yi), Korean confederation of trade unions(Lee Soo-Ho), Korean Federation for Environmental Movement(Rep, Yoon Jun Ha, Shin In Ryung), Korean Peasants League(Mun Kyong-sik),Korean People’s Solidarity(Jung Kwang-hoon), Korean Women Workers Associations United(Sang Rim, Choi), Korean Women Peasants Association(Yoon Geum-Soon), Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center(Mi-Kyung Lee), Korea Student Christian Federation, Korea Women’s Associations United(Nam In Soon), Korea Women’s Hot Line(Park Inn Hea), Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Rep, Lee Suk-Tae), MINKAHYUP, HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP(Cho Sun-Deok), My sister’s place Durebang(Yu Young Nim), National Alliance for Democrate & The Reunification of Korea(Oh Jong-Ryul), National Clergy conference for justice and peace(Kim Byoung Kyun, Park Deok Sin), Council of YMCAs of KOREA (Lee, Hack Young), National Federation of the Poor of Korea(Lee Pil Du, Kim Heung-Hyun), One Korea Buddhist Movement(Ven. Bop Ta), People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (Park Sang Jung, Lee Sun Jong), P.R.O.K. Committee for Peace and Unification(Na Heak Jib), Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea(Hong Keun Soo), Solidarity for Reunification of Korea(Han Sang-Ryul), Southern Headquarters of Pan-Korean Alliance for Reunification(Lee Gyu-Jae), Supporting commitee for prisoners of conscience(Kwon Oh-Heon), Suwon Women’s Association(Lee Ki Won), The Christian Institute for the Study of Justice and Development, The coalition for the spirit of Baeg-Bum(Han Myoung Soo), The Korea Greens(Lee chang Lim), The Korean Association of Bereaved Families for Democracy(Gang Min-Jo), The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan(Shin Hei Soo), Tongil Women Organigation(Lee Jung Lee), Ulsan Women Organigation(Lee Eun Mi), Women Organization against U. S. Occupation (Lee Mi Hae), Won Buddhist Reverends Association for Unfolding the New Society (Chairman Kim Dae Seon), Won beautiful life, Women Making Peace(Sook Im Kim), 21C Corea Institute(Cho Duk-Won) (Total 62 organizations)