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)
New approach toward
eliminating threat of nuclear weapons and military tension in
Necessity of a preemptive action of peace
1. North-South military conflict and
another cold war structure in northeast
The sinking of
exchange of gunfire on Yeonpyeongdo island have helped increase a new Cold War structure
in Northeast Asia, including North and
the level of military retaliation against
“proportionality”. While fortifying five islands in northwest waters, the Lee Myung-bak government drew up concrete operational plans to occupy
to dismantle
facilities of weapons of mass destruction in response to a sudden and contingent political change there.
The ROK and the
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
that the
defer the returning to the ROK of its right of wartime control until 2015. In exchange for accepting
this ROK request, the
of ROK-US
FTA negotiations, dispatches of troops to
and sanctions against
The
crisis on the
cooperation between
government succeeded in having
relocation of the US Marine Corps Futenma Air Station. An atmosphere is being created to put emphasis on military cooperation also between
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
cooperation by considering an
Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA) and a General Security of Military Information Agreement
(GSOMIA). However, both
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
strategic alliance, it has done
little to develop partnerships with
expressed its unpleasant sentiment about
the stronger ROK-US military alliance.
Yeonpyeongdo incident. The USS
George Washington was
operating within an area of 1,000 km,
which covers the whole of
and
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
The
conflict has been expanded to the
With naval ships of the US Pacific Fleet
being deployed in the region, potential factors for
conflict are becoming real.
2. Six–Party Talks in a stalemate
The
Six Party Talks have been suspended since
nuclear test in 2009. Diplomatic discussions recently began cautiously to resume talks between the North and the
Korea
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
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,
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
Korea
to
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
Korea
can easily get away from its own trick.
continuously calling on relevant states to “recognize
Korea
negotiate.” This call is a heavy burden
on member states of the Six–Party
Talks. There is a high possibility that
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
Korea
However,
whether neighboring countries consider
Korea
at the negotiating table, totally new
conditions should be presented.
Since
facing UN sanctions in 2009,
Dr. Siegfried Hecker and opened
its uranium enrichment facility, which
has an estimated 2,000 centrifugal
machines, to the press. Later, the issue of
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
Korea
unsuccessful because
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
the South Korean and the
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
and the
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
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 cycle program. To this end,
the ROK government of President Lee Myung-bak is seeking
to revise the ROK-US nuclear agreement.
With
it already reached an agreement for bilateral nuclear trade. Worse still,
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
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
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
Korea
are to blame for the agreements on denuclearization of
relationship with
Korea
years, the governments of
the
existing mutual agreement, on the basis of subjective judgment about
instability or its possible collapse.
Citizens
of
take a step forward by overcoming suspicions and fears. Now
we need to take action for
preemptive peace for denuclearization
of every country, and of the whole
not for preemptive attacks. We can start a series of peaceful preemptive
action, regardless of condition that
must firstly give up its nuclear weapons. This is the feasible and
effective strategy to dissolve nuclear threats in
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
In the civil society forum for nuclear weapon free zones held in
on April 29, 2010 just before the year’s NPT Review Conference, a proposal by
citizen calling for a nuclear-free zone in
Asia
a modest fruit borne by non-governmental organizations (NGO) of
Korea
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
countries such as
all with excellent military force. However, the governments of
States
still think that the nuclear umbrella and
abandonment of nuclear weapons must not be traded for. They think that military
threats from
Korea
exist, but completely ignore
the military threat, which the buildup of
conventional armament by the
Let
me stress again that distrust and fear of
Korea
about
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
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
giving up of nuclear weapons but must be closely linked to efforts to remove
nuclear threat in
linked to efforts to increase exchanges and cooperation among governments and
citizens of the
Asia
and in
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
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
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