PSPD in English Peace/Disarmament 2011-08-22   3330

New approach toward eliminating threat of nuclear weapons and military tension in Northeast Asia

International
meeting

2011
World Conference against against A & H Bombs

 

Lee Tae Ho(General Secretary),

Park Jung Eun (Director, Team of Peace and International Solidarity)

People’s
Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD)

Republic of Korea

 

 

 

 

New approach toward
eliminat
ing threat of nuclear weapons and military tension in Northeast Asia:

Necessity of a preemptive action of peace

 

 

 

1. North-South military conflict and
another cold war structure in northeast Asia

 

The sinking of South Korea’s warship “Cheonan” and a North-South
exchange of gunfire on Yeonpyeongdo island have helped increase a new Cold War structure
in Northeast Asia, including North and South Korea.
After these incidents, the Lee Myung-bak government adopted the so-called “proactive deterrence strategy and raised
the level of military retaliation against North Korea beyond
“proportionality”.
While fortifying five islands in northwest waters, the Lee Myung-bak government drew up concrete operational plans to occupy North Korea
to dismantle
facilities of weapons of mass destruction in
response to a sudden and contingent political change there.

 

The ROK and the United States
have strengthened their military cooperation more than ever.  At the 42nd Security Consultative Council meeting(SCM) in October 2010, the defense ministers of
both governments
promised to 1) officially specify an “unstable state” of the North in joint statement
and strengthen readiness to respond to regional provocation by North Korea
and a contingent situation there; 2) create an “
extended deterrence policy committee” to strengthen the nuclear
umbrella and increase the missile defense
capability, and 3) promote “ROK-US cooperation in dealing with challenges to large-scale global security.”
Immediately after the regular Security Consultative Council Meeting(SCM), Korean
National Defense Minister Kim Tae-young made controversial remarks in the
face of
national policy audit in the National Assembly that
would regard participation in the MD program as an accomplished
fact.

 

The
crisis of the Korean Peninsula is, in particular,
offers an important turning point that will help the ROK and the United States resolve their old differences. The ROK is requesting
that the United States
defer the returning to the ROK of its right of wartime control until 2015. In exchange for accepting
this ROK request, the United States could receive ROK guarantee in many ways such as diversion of defense burden sharing costs, the readjustment
of ROK-US
FTA negotiations, dispatches of troops to Afghanistan,
and sanctions against Iran.

 

The
crisis on the Korean Peninsula and the
strengthened ROK-US alliance is leading to promoting defense
cooperation between Japan, ROK and the United States.   After the sinking of the “Cheonan,” the US
government succeeded in having Japan’s ruling Democratic Party change its public promises in regard to the
relocation of the US Marine Corps Futenma Air Station. An atmosphere is being created to put emphasis on military cooperation also between South Korea and Japan.  When the ROK-US joint military exercises took place on the East Sea
in July last year, four Japanese Self-Defense personnel
attended as observers. It was also learned that the South Korean forces
observed Japan-US joint exercises.
The South Korean government in 2011 agreed with Japan to promote bilateral military
cooperation by considering a
n
Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA) and
a General Security of Military Information Agreement
(GSOMIA).  However, both South Korea and Japan still keep silent about the possibility of
concluding a Japan-ROK military agreement.

 

In
the meantime, ROK-China relations
are worsening. They could become the worst
since they were normalized. While the Lee Myung-bak government has made efforts to upgrade its relation
with the United States as a
strategic alliance, it
has done
little to develop partnerships with China. Unlike in the past, China directly
expressed its unpleasant sentiment
about
the stronger ROK-US military alliance. China
reacted strongly to the ROK-US joint exercises involving the USS George Washington, which took place immediately after the
Yeonpyeongdo incident.
The USS
George Washington
was
operating within an area of 1,000 km,
which
covers the whole of North Korea as well as key Chinese regions like Beijing
and Shanghai.
This aircraft carrier was
initially supposed
to
participate in the ROK-US joint
exercises conducted just after the “Cheonan” incident. However,
in the face of Chinese opposition, the vessel
could not enter the West
Sea
.

 

The
conflict has been expanded to the Southeast Asia.
W
ith naval ships of the US Pacific Fleet
being deployed in the region, potential factors for
conflict are
becoming real.

 

 

2. SixParty Talks in a stalemate

 

The
Six Party Talks have been suspended since North Korea conducted its second
nuclear test in 2009. Diplomatic discussions
recently began cautiously to resume talks between the North and the South
Korea
as well as the Six Party Talks. However,
the mistrust and conflict that arose between the South Korea-US side and
the China-North Korea side in the wake of the sinking of a South
Korean warship
appears to
remain deep.

 

In the US view, there is still a room for considering that maintaining close relationship with South Korea would be more beneficial in geopolitical terms than holding uncertain and difficult negotiations with North Korea. Furthermore,
even if the US and other countries in the
region might want to have bilateral talks with North Korea or to hold the Six
Party Talks, they will not be able to sit at
negotiating table anytime soon because the South Korean
government maintains its position that North Korea’s apology over the sinking
of the naval ship and the attacks on Yeonpyeong Island must come first.

 

In
May, South Korean government secretly met with the North and proposed resuming
the North-South summit on condition that the North shows its regret over Cheonan-sinking
incident by using words that can be taken by the South and not by the North, as
an apology.  However, North Korea disclosed the
fact of negotiation and rejected the South Korean proposal.

 

Since
then,
there has been dim
chance for the
two
sides to build bilateral
cooperation in order to resume their summit meeting and
break the deadlock. Recently the Korean
government allowed civilian aid of wheat flour and diagnosis equipments for
prevention of malaria to North
Korea
. It’s first allowance for civilian aid
to North Korea,
which has been prohibited by sanction measures from 24th May 2010.
But it is
not clear if the South Korean
government, which has stressed the instability of North
Korea
and maintained hostile attitude to North Korea,
can easily get away from its own trick.

 

North Korea, which twice conducted nuclear tests, has
continuously calling on relevant states to “re
cognize North
Korea
as a nuclear weapons nation and to
negotiate.”  This call is a heavy burden
on member states of the Six
Party
Talks.  There is a high possibility that North Korea
continues taking this position
until
2012
, the year defined as the “First
year
as a strong and
prosperous country.”  Because of this, some people are skeptic of North
Korea
because it has no willingness to abandon nuclear weapons from the beginning and in the future.

 

However,
whether neighboring countries consider North
Korea
as nuclear weapons state or not, in order to have North Korea sit
at the negotiati
ng table, totally new
conditions should be presented.

 

Since
facing UN sanctions in 2009, North Korea made public its uranium enrichment work and in 2010, it invited
Dr. Siegfried Hecker and opened
its uranium enrichment facility
, which
has
an estimated 2,000 centrifugal
machines
, to the press.  Later, the issue of North Korea’s nuclear program moved to a stage where themes regarding plutonium
extraction, uranium enrichment, nuclear weapons, and energy problems
need to be dealt with comprehensively.  Until recently, the ROK government has
maintained a position that “the Six-
Party Talks should be held after a report
on
the uranium enrichment
program
is adopted by the UN.” At the end of February
this year, the U.N. Security Council discussed
the question whether to adopt the UEP report made by the expert
panel on sanction against North
Korea
. However, the discussion was
unsuccessful because China
proclaimed that the issue should be discussed at the Six-party talks. This shows
that hostile situation, which looks like a new cold war era, formed in North East Asia. Such phenomenon has been foreseen when
the South Korean and the US
government took the matter of sunken warship Cheonan to U.N. Security Council
meetings, although the question has not yet examined thoroughly.

 

Finally,
double standards held by the ROK government and by Japan
and the United States
in regard to the “
the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes” or the “safety of
nuclear
materials” are also making the
situation difficult.

 

While
urging North Korea
to nullify its nuclear reprocessing facilities, the ROK government is enabling
itself to possess such facilities and calling for the completion of the South
Korean nuclear cycl
e program. To this end,
the ROK government
of President Lee Myung-bak is seeking
to revise the ROK-US nuclear agreement. 
With India,
it already reached an agreement for bilateral nuclear trade.
Worse still, India is not a member state to the
NPT and is a country that possesses nuclear weapons.  Such double standards towards nukes
are making the North Korean nuclear issue more
difficult to be solved.

 

Surprisingly,
this attempt
continues even after disaster at
the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Still south Korean government seeks
export of NPP abroad, new construction of NPP and reoperating old nuclear power
plant in Korea,
which outlived its life and suspended operation for various reasons. The Lee
Myung-bak government announced that it will use the Nuclear Security Summit
scheduled for March 2012 in Seoul
as a forum for sale of South Korean NPPs.

 

 

3. Necessity of new approach

 

Looking back on nuclear talks negotiations with North Korea, we
cannot deny that the one-sided and hypocritical nuclear policy of South Korea,
Japan, and the United States have served
North Korea justify its “nuclear deterrence”. Not only North Korea but also South
Korea
and the United States
are to blame for the agreements on denuclearization of Korean
Peninsula and normalization
relationship with North
Korea
becoming powerless. As to
North Korea’s exacerbating nuclear issue in the last several
years, the governments of Japan,
the United States, and South Korea have not accepted earnestly the
existing mutual agreement, on the basis of subjective judgment about North Korea’s
instability or its possible collapse.

 

Citizens
of South Korea, Japan, and the United States must be the first to
take a step forward by overcoming suspicion
s and fears. Now
we
need to take action for
preemptive peace for
denuclearization
of every country, and of the whole East Asia,
not for preemptive attacks. We can start a series of peaceful preemptive
action,
regardless of condition that North Korea
must firstly give up its nuclear weapons.
 This is the feasible and
effective strategy to dissolve nuclear threat
s in East Asia.  This is because countries
with massive conventional force can easily make such a decision.

 

In
February 2010,
Japanese and
South Korean parliamentarians
network for nuclear disarmament(PNND) published a joint statement calling for
establishing a nuclear-free zone in North East Asia.
In the
civil society forum for nuclear weapon free zones held in New York
on April 29, 2010 just before the year’s NPT Review Conference, a proposal by
citizen calling for a nuclear-free zone in Northeast
Asia
was adopted. It was
a modest fruit borne by non-governmental organizations (NGO) of Japan and South
Korea
and Japan,
municipalities, as well as cooperation of parliamentarians for
denuclearization.

 

As
stressed in the joint statement, policy depending on nuclear deterrence will
bring about nuclear threat again. Countries
that are dependent on nuclear deterrence are not limited to North Korea alone but include neighboring
countries such as Japan, the
United States, and South Korea,
all with excellent military force. However, the governments of South Korea, the United
States
, and Japan
still think that the nuclear umbrella and North Korea’s
abandonment of nuclear weapons must not be traded for.
 They think that military
threat
s from North
Korea
and China
exist, but completely ignore
the military threat
, which the buildup of
conventional armament by the United States,
Japan, and China
poses to others.

 

Let
me stress again that distrust and fear of North
Korea
or groundless expectations of North Korea’s fall have justified the argument
about North Korea
as a threat spread among citizens of three countries, excessive military
spending, dependence on nuclear deterrence, and hypocritical nuclear
policy. In return, what we had were new cold
era in NEA and two nuclear tests made by North Korea.

 

We
must never repeat the failed strategy. We must adopt a more positive and
reciprocal measures
, which we have not chosen
before. The
Six-Party Talks
must not be limited to North Korea’s
giving up of nuclear weapons but must be closely linked to efforts to remove
nuclear threat in
Northeast Asia. The talks must also be closely
linked to efforts to increase exchanges and cooperation among governments and
citizens of the Korean Peninsula and of the North East
Asia
for removing military threat and consolidate peace.
Discussion for a peaceful system in the Korean Peninsula
and in Northeast Asia and for a nuclear-free zone in the region must start at once.   

 

Lastly,
We PSPD is going to suggest peace and environmental groups of the world to pay
attention and start discussion of joint response for 2012 Nuclear Security
Summit which will be held in Seoul
next March. The nuclear powers which had heavy responsibility of nuclear
proliferation and exporting race of nuclear power plants only want to emphasis
on the safety of nuclear plants and joint response against nuclear terror. They
make nukes as not only means for security but also object to be secured. They
don’t want to say the abolition or disarmament of nuclear weapons and nuclear
plants. They don’t learn the lesson from Fukushima
disaster.

 

That’s
the reason why we peace and environmental movements should gear up the voice of ‘no
nukes’ and respond jointly for the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit. Let’s start
and organize for No Nukes Civil Forum internationally now.



* This speech was done at 2011
World Conference against against A & H Bombs of Gensuikyo in Hiroshima on 3th August, 2011.

 

 

정부지원금 0%, 회원의 회비로 운영됩니다

참여연대 후원/회원가입


참여연대 NOW

실시간 활동 SNS

텔레그램 채널에 가장 빠르게 게시되고,

더 많은 채널로 소통합니다. 지금 팔로우하세요!