South Korean Unification Ministry defends North Korea policy
Seoul, Aug 6
South Korea's Unification Ministry said Thursday it will continue its push for peaceful coexistence with North Korea, aiming to produce results despite the challenging situation.
"The ministry will continue efforts for peaceful coexistence with North Korea to bear fruit, keeping in mind the president's call for patience," it said in a statement.
"Nothing will happen if we stay put," it said, stressing the need to make "ceaseless" efforts to "create even the smallest opportunity to bring peace in challenging conditions."
The statement came a day after President Lee Jae Myung struck a cautious tone on the ministry's initiative during a policy briefing, including its proposal to drop the "main enemy" label against North Korea and refer to it by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as part of a trust-building strategy.
South Korea currently uses "North Korea" rather than its official name, as Seoul does not recognise the two Koreas as separate states under the 1991 Inter-Korean Basic Agreement, Yonhap News Agency reported.
On his way to work earlier in the day, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young defended his ministry's peace initiative toward North Korea and said the president backed the effort.
"The president said it must feel like a cry that goes unanswered," the minister said. "But he told us to keep working toward peaceful coexistence, and to be patient."
That approach has drawn concern that the Lee government is leaning too dovish toward a North Korea that shows no sign of softening in return.
During Wednesday's policy briefing, Lee warned that policies, however well-intentioned, can be exploited for political gain. "You really need to think this through carefully," he said.
In a possible sign of division within the government over how to handle North Korea, Foreign Minister Cho Hyun expressed scepticism about Chung's proposals during a meeting with reporters the previous day.
Cho, in particular, called a proposed four-way dialogue among the two Koreas, the United States and China to address security issues on the Korean Peninsula "idealistic."
"It would be great if that vision came true. But realistically, our ministry does not see it as achievable," Cho said, adding that the proposed plan has not been coordinated within the government.
"We only can change reality only if we have idealism," Chung said in response. "I believe we can help move the government forward when we cooperate with each other."
The ministry echoed Chung's remarks, saying its approach "is not idealism but the most realistic and practical approach at this moment."
At a regular briefing later in the day, the foreign ministry said the government's North Korea policy remains consistent, seeking to present a unified front.
"The government has been consistently pursuing its North Korea policy through close coordination among relevant departments, centred around the National Security Council," ministry spokesperson Park Il said.
A senior foreign ministry official said Cho's comments reflected the fact that Pyongyang has refused to engage with Seoul's outreach for dialogue.
"We are doing everything we can to make even the slightest breakthrough, at a time when North Korea does not respond at all to calls for dialogue and has designated inter-Korean relations as those between two hostile nations," the official said.
Cho's characterisation of the unification minister's approach as too idealistic came from that context, the official added.
Any multiparty security dialogue, aimed at building a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula, the official said, would need to "go through additional consultations and fine-tuning."
— IANS
Reader Comments
I appreciate the patience approach, but this feels a bit naive. North Korea has been calling South Korea a "hostile nation" and has refused every offer for dialogue. At what point does idealism become a liability? The foreign minister's skepticism seems more grounded in reality. We need to be practical while keeping the door open, not chase unrealistic dreams.
Honestly, I think this is a good move, but it should come with conditions. We in India have also tried to engage Pakistan in dialogue many times, and it often goes nowhere if there's no reciprocation. The idea of changing the "main enemy" label is a bold step, but what are they getting in return? I hope South Korea's government is not putting all their eggs in one basket.
As someone who has lived in both India and now Korea, I can see the internal struggle in the Korean government. It's similar to the debates we have in India about how to handle China. One side wants to maintain peace and keep talking, while the other wants a tougher stance. But you can't keep offering an olive branch when the other side keeps throwing stones. The fact that even their own foreign minister is skeptical says a lot.
I find this really interesting - the Unification Minister says "nothing will happen if we stay put" and that's actually a deep thought. But look at India's situation: we tried dialogue with Pakistan many times and it often backfired. I think South Korea is making the right call in trying to keep the lines open, but they need to be very careful not to seem weak. The patience policy needs to come with clear red lines. 🇮🇳🇰🇷
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.