South Korea and North Korea have conducted a total of 504 sessions of South-North Dialogue as of the present date of September 2005, and through the dialogues 156 cases of agreements have been produced. Although there are many issues that are not being fulfilled with the exception of North Korea Support and non-political and non-military matters, great significance is place on the fact that as visible results of South-North relationship, agreements through South-North dialogues are starting points for establishing peace within the Korean peninsula.
South Korea and North Korea were able to prevent recurrence of war and maintain minimal peace in the Korean Peninsula through the 7.4 South-North Joint Communique, Inter-Korean Basic Agreement, and the 6.15 South-North Joint Declaration. Especially, non-political and non-military contact and agreement brought about great changes in the overall South-North relationship following the 2000 South-North Summit Talks they are approaching the institutionalization stage.
However, unlike the East-West Germany of the past, the Korean Peninsula has the limitation of being bound by the stipulations of the Geneva Cease-Fire Agreement. In other words, overcoming the Geneva cease fire agreement is indeed an absolute condition for guaranteeing legal force of agreements and for securing provisions of regulations between South and North Korea, and is an important key that can resolve problems related to peace agreement and normalization process of diplomatic relations, establishment process related to basic agreements pertaining to exchange and collaboration, and the process of internal stipulations of agreements.
Dialogue between South and North Korea for changes in the cease fire system of the Korean peninsula has been consistently progressing. As the outcome of such South-North Dialogue, South-North relationship has entered the era of South-North Relationship Development that represents peaceful coexistence of South and Korea, which is also the first act that comprehensively regulates the South-North relationship, from the national security act era of the past. Even when viewing the strategic aspect of South-North Dialogue, North Korea has been showing active participation in the economic talks in order to gain economic benefit, has been controlling criticism and unreasonable claims, and has been displaying improvement in their position by controlling termination of talks or walking out of the dialogue. It can be stated that North Korea, focusing on the 6.15 South-North Joint Declaration, is exercising precaution against absorption unification strategy of South Korea and that it has changed its strategy to maintain the division between the two countries. South Korea has also been changing from the defensive unification policies to a strategy of constructive intervention. This shows that South-North Dialogue and agreements are overcoming their passive aspects and aiming towards a more active aspect, or, of resolving dilemmas.
The pivotal point for institutionalization of peace in the Korean peninsula is how the unstable status of North Korea can be stabilized as a normalized nation. With conclusion of international agreement for embarking on discussion for institutionalization of peace in the Korean peninsula as in the 6.15 South-North Joint Declaration, 9.19 Joint Communique, and the "Gyeongju Declaration" of Korea-US Summit, North Korea was provided with an important opportunity for overcoming its unstable status and diplomatic isolation. In addition, the need and the possibility for realizing institutionalization of peace in the Korean Peninsula are becoming greater than ever. The increase in exchange of cooperation between South and North Korea, institutionalization movement, and the change in the position of North position displayed in the agreement process of South-North Dialogue are elements that heighten the possibility of peace settlement institutionalization of the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, when suggestions that can present specific and realistic direction of peace settlement institutionalization are organized, they can be broadly classified into Korean Peninsula Peace Agreement Model, Union-Federation Model*, and Unification Constitution Model.
First, many standpoints exist pertaining to problems of parties involved in the pace agreement of the Korean peninsula but the most fundamental principle is that South Korea, North Korea, and the United States must be involved as direct participants. Because the peace system will only have significance when it includes forfeiture of military forces against each other by all parties involved, South Korea, North Korea, and the U.S. must involve themselves as direct participants of the peace agreement and jointly share the responsibility of its execution. And despite the need for redemption of operational command, if political and economical shock that can be brought upon by dissolution of Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the U.S. and the Korea-US Alliance are taken into consideration, limitations of the current Korea-US relationship must be recognized, and until a peace institutionalization in the Korean peninsula is established, Korea-US Mutual Defense Treaty and the transitional Korea-U.S. Alliance Agreement need to be sufficiently evaluated.
Second, when similarities between South-North Confederation referenced in the 6.15 South-North Joint Declaration and lower level federation policies are evaluated, the South-North Joint Declaration and all lower level federation policies set a "peaceful" unification as their prerequisites and instead of completion of unification, they have a transitional characteristic directing toward unification. In the modified federation system, North Korea delegates diplomatic privileges and national security to local governments granting them higher authority, therefore, their lower level federation system can be understood as "national confederation" which is Formula for the Korean National Confederation. As seen, national the middle level of the Unification Community along with South-North confederation elements of national form of South-North confederation and federation elements of (Goryeominjuyeonbangje : Democratic Federation of Korea) can be consolidated therefore, comparison of unification plan has its due significance.
Third, the great majority of discussions pertaining to unification constitution have been conducted from the perspective of South Korea therefore, their principles and contents have been discussed. Especially, constitution of North Korea could not even become a topic of debate. However, if constitution and legislation of North Korea are examined for their ability to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens and for possibility of administration through separation of power, whether the North Korean Constitution can be part of the unification constitution may be evaluated.
When the North Korean constitution to date is examined, restriction of citizen's rights, exclusive power of the labor party, and anti-constitutional elements in citizenship and national institutions can frequently be evidenced. If an attempt is made to find points that can be considered joint intentions of South and North Korea, movement of separation of parties, jurisdiction of South Korean Unification policies and, efforts in solving economic crisis can be found. Of course, if such positive evaluation cannot induce modification of the labor party agreement, which is actually the highest law of North Korea, its significance will be lost.
Just as the form of South-North Dialogue experienced changes in 1970's, 1990's, and again in 2000, a 4th era in the new form of South-North dialogue must be pursued, specifically, South-North Korea system approach and institutionalization. It is because execution of article 2 of the 6.15 joint declaration will directly lead to institutionalization problems of the South-North Korea system approach. Institutionalization in fields of economic cooperation, tourism, and finance has already been progressive. With such outcome, a "system approach" that opens the possibility of institutionalization of peace in the Korean Peninsula, in other words, the key point of the 4th era of South-North dialogue will be the key to collaboration between South and North Korea.
카카오톡
페이스북
블로그