The bumpy road toward unification

By Park Jung-won

President Yoon Suk Yeol said that the Ministry of Unification's purpose should no longer be to provide aid to North Korea. Whatever Yoon's true intention, fundamental reform of the unification ministry seems to be inevitable. The confirmation hearing for the unification minister nominee Kim Yung-ho, a political science professor, held on July 21 at the National Assembly illustrated the seriousness of the matter.

Kim might have been better off had he politely declined the post, no matter how earnestly Yoon asked him. He was very reluctant to comply with the opposition party's demands to submit his personal records for verification. However, what was most alarming were the dangerous and misguided perceptions of the nature of inter-Korean relations revealed by opposition lawmakers' questions and remarks during the hearing.

Hwang Hee, who served as the culture minister during the Moon Jae-in government, asked Kim whether North Korea's ultimate goal is to reunify the South through communization or to join the international community as a normal state. Kim replied that it is the former. Hwang lamented that Kim's perception was seriously wrong, as if Hwang was in full grasp of the North Korean regime's intentions. It is, however, closer to the truth that North Korea's ultimate goal is to communize the South. The fact that North Korea stipulates a mandate of "territorial completion" in its Nuclear Forces Policy Act (Sept. 8, 2022) should be understood as North Korea's clear intention of unifying the Korean Peninsula with North Korea as a strong nuclear power.

Hwang further noted that the South Korean Constitution seeks peaceful unification, asking Kim how South Korea can act as a driving force for inter-Korean reconciliation when the two Koreas have such different regimes. He added that it is quite easy to demand North Korea to denuclearize from the outside, but it is very difficult to say that North Korea's regime security is guaranteed from the outside without providing them with a strong sense of trust.

When Kim failed to provide a clear response to this, Hwang pressed the nominee, demanding a proper answer. Hwang argued that it is South Korea's role to guarantee the security of the North Korean regime. When Kim responded, "It is difficult to guarantee the North Korean regime's security from outside," Hwang retorted, "Does the South Korean government not want to guarantee the North Korean regime's security?" And he attacked him by asking, "As the minister of unification, you are the one who should do the job, but why can't you provide a definite answer?"

This scene shows how distorted Hwang's perception of the nature of inter-Korean relations is. How can South Korea or the U.S. guarantee security for North Korea's regime under Kim Jong-un? This is something they couldn't do even if they wanted to. The security of North Korea's regime is fundamentally a matter for the North Korean people to decide. International law refers to this as the right of self-determination of peoples. To demand that South Korea and the U.S. guarantee the permanence of the Kim dynasty is tantamount to asking both countries to directly violate international law, i.e., a direct infringement of the rights of the North Korean people. Hwang admonished Kim by saying that the most important thing a South Korean unification minister should do is to guarantee the security of North Korea's regime. Are North Koreans destined to live forever under a hereditary dictatorship?

Another episode during the hearing occurred when opposition lawmakers wrongly described Kim as a far-right figure. The far-right refers to a force that advocates extreme nationalism and justifies violence, such as Hitler's Nazi Party in Germany. Kim reportedly said in the past that Kim Jong-un's regime must disappear in order for the Korean Peninsula to be unified under a free and democratic order. Yet he must have recognized at the time that this does not mean invading North Korea by force, nor would this be possible, given that the South Korean Constitution aims for peaceful unification. Some candid remarks made when Kim was a scholar rather than a government official do not qualify him as being far-right. In South Korean society, if you are silent on North Korean human rights, does this make you progressive? If you emphasize North Korean human rights, have you suddenly become far-right? Since North Korea refuses to denuclearize, if you favor strengthening sanctions against North Korea, are you far-right? And if you prefer to ease sanctions on North Korea, are you progressive? Is South Korean society one that can be used for political interests by doctoring the concept of the far-right or progressive if it is only related to North Korean issues?

In the end, as demonstrated by the drama at the confirmation hearing, the unification ministry needs to be fundamentally reformed. Its name should be changed to a neutral expression such as the "Ministry of Inter-Korean Relations," rather than the current name, which gives the impression of blind unificationism. Unification is only the endpoint of inter-Korean relations and presupposes sovereign choice through the exercise of the Korean people's right to self-determination. Any half-baked promotion of unification cannot be a serious ministry policy goal.

It is thus necessary to firmly pursue a new North Korea policy with a long-term perspective that seeks the goal of North Korea's reform and opening. South Korea's economic aid to North Korea should be conditionally linked to genuine progress made toward peace on the Korean Peninsula. These conditions should be based on the principle of "benefit in return," whereby benefits are offered to North Korea in return for concessions that it makes, such as increasing openness to the outside world, mutual broadcasting, human rights improvements, allowing regular reunions of separated families and complete denuclearization. Given North Korea's attitude toward South Korea, any road toward such progress will be long and bumpy. It should start with the reform of the unification ministry.

Park Jung-won (park_jungwon@hotmail.com), Ph.D. in law from the London School of Economics (LSE), is a professor of international law at Dankook University.