Changes on the Korean Peninsula

The dramatic meeting in June between North and South Korean leaders has given new hope for peace on the Korean peninsula. Divided at the 38th parallel since the Korean War (1950-53) and occupied by Japanese militarists for 35 years before and during World War II, Korea has seen little peace in the last century. No treaty was signed when the country was divided, only an arm- istice agreement that left Korean and U.S. troops gathered around a tense demilitarized zone (DMZ).

In the first decades after the Korean War, industrialized North Korea (officially called "Democratic People's Republic," or DPRK) held a slight edge over the predominantly agrarian South ("Republic of Korea" or ROK). Under U.S. tutelage, South Korea's military dictators began an ambitious economic development plan, soon propelling the ROK ahead of its northern Communist rival. During the turbulent 1970s and 1980s, churches, students and unions in the South pressed for a more open society, while the DPRK remained firmly under the thumb of "Great Leader" Kim Il Sung until his death in 1994.

After a turbulent transition period of uncertainty and heightened military tension, Kim Il Sung's son, Kim Jong Il, emerged as the undisputed leader in the North. In the South, the aftermath of the Asian economic crisis led to the election in1998 of reform leader (and former political pris- oner) Kim Dae-Jung as president. Under his so-called "sunshine policy," President Kim began to reach out to the DPRK, which was foundering in the throes of a serious food shortage and famine. Unsuccessful at first, Kim persisted, and North Korea gradually began to open its doors. Kim Dae-Jung's lifelong work for human rights and reconciliation were rewarded by his receiving the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize.

Sunshine Between the Koreas

The Korean rapprochement took many observers by surprise, including the U.S. government. Kim Jong Il had, after all, been portrayed as a dangerous recluse, the fanatical leader of one of the world's last Stalinist states. As news from successive meetings and interviews began to filter out of the DPRK, a new side of the "Dear Leader" emerged; an intelligent, if eccentric, man with immense curiosity about the outside world, more like the monarch of a hermit kingdom than a Communist apparatchik. One State Department official who visited North Korea in October confessed that "within thirty minutes, we all realized that everything we had been told about Kim Jong Il was wrong."

Despite his new openness and even popularity, however, Kim Jong Il rules over a country in desperate straits. The economy is nearing a complete breakdown. Visitors report seeing virtually no cars or people on the roads, even around the capital city, Pyongyang. The food crisis, which appeared to be receding in 1999, is now reported to be worsening, in what a United Nations official terms "a big step backward for the country." Refugees continue to cross the border into China in unknown, but significant, numbers.

North Korea's immediate food needs have been ameliorated through aid from the UN World Food Program, including large contributions from the U.S. Reconstructing the economy is another matter. Several South Korean companies have begun operations in the North, with small to negative returns to date. The ROK itself is struggling to recover from years of crisis and recession, with nothing approaching the capacity of West Germany, for instance, to absorb the economy of its Eastern partner in 1990.

Taking these challenges into account, Kim Dae-Jung's plans for Korean reunification aim towards gradual integration, rather than quick unification on the German model. Initial steps since the June summit have consisted of feel-good measures, such as North-South family reunions, and symbolic actions, such as clearing landmines to rebuild a Seoul-Pyongyang rail link. The tougher economic and military issues, where the two Koreas are still far apart, will be discussed later. With two years remaining in Kim Dae-Jung's only presidential term, some Koreans are beginning to worry that time is running short.

The U.S.-South Korean Alliance

The United States has stationed troops in South Korea since the Korean War. There are now approximately 37,000 GIs in Korea, part of a 100,000-strong "forward-deployed" U.S. presence in East Asia. The U.S. controls a string of bases, many but not all near the DMZ, and, together with the 500,000-member South Korean army, has planted over one million landmines on Korean soil, with an additional three million stockpiled for future use. Despite the deepening North-South dialogue and the overwhelming superiority of U.S.-ROK forces, the U.S. plans no change in this posture. The Pentagon continues to use Korea as a justification for spending billions on missile defense schemes and refusing to sign the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty.

South Korea depends on the U.S. as a key political and economic partner. Its relations with more immediate neighbors China and Japan have been strained, though there have been recent improvements. Out of both regional and inter-Korean security considerations, the South Korean government supports the presence of U.S. troops-even after full unification with the North. In talks between the Kims earlier this year, Kim Jong Il also expressed apparent sympathy for this view, although most DPRK statements suggest the opposite.

Among South Korean society, however, there is a great deal of anti-U.S. bases sentiment. Like in Japan, American soldiers in Korea have committed a string of horrendous and highly publicized crimes, with many targeting sex workers who live in the sprawling kijichon or base towns. U.S. forces have also been responsible for a series of environmental disasters, including the dumping of formaldehyde into a major river. The Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, that governs the conduct of U.S. troops in Korea protects the U.S. from most legal sanctions and gives extraterritorial jurisdiction for most crimes committed by U.S. personnel.

These social and environmental costs accompany nearly every military base around the world, including domestic bases in the U.S. But the laws that protect American citizens living near bases do not apply overseas. Perhaps because of South Korea's historical dependence on the U.S., the Korean SOFA is seen as the most discriminatory arrangement of all, with fewer rights for the host country and citizens than similar agreements in Japan, Germany and elsewhere.

In addition, the prominent investigations over the No Gun Ri massacre, in which U.S. troops gunned down hundreds of Korean civilians in 1950, have contributed to the growing impatience among South Koreans with the U.S. military's behavior. With the threat of war between the Koreas dissipating, many people see no further need for a foreign occupation. At a minimum, South Korean churches and civil society are calling for revision of the SOFA, U.S. acceptance of responsibility for its actions, and willingness to consider troop reductions as inter-Korean negotiations continue.

U.S. Engagement with North Korea

Following the lead of Kim Dae-Jung, the U.S. has opened up its own direct channels to the DPRK leadership in 2000. In October, Secretary of State Albright led the first official U.S. visit to North Korea. A visit by President Clinton is still possible, though not likely, before the end of his term. This process, if it is continued by the next administration, could lead towards full normalization of relations within the next year.

These are astonishing developments, given the open hostility between the U.S. and DPRK until just recently. Official North Korean media and political statements routinely portrayed the U.S. (rather than the ROK, which was viewed as a puppet) as the great enemy of the Korean people. The U.S. responded in kind, placing the DPRK on its lists of terrorist regimes and "rogue states" (now euphemized to "states of concern"). The two countries came perilously close to conflict in 1994 over Kim Il Sung's nuclear program.

The crisis was diverted by an Agreed Framework, under which the DPRK agreed to convert its weapons-grade plutonium to civil- ian use, and the U.S. pledged to provide the technology and fuel oil to run less dangerous "light-water" reactors. (Six years later, no reactors have yet been completed.)

In a similar fashion, Kim Jong Il has recently offered to exchange North Korea's missile program for advanced satellite technology.

The U.S. has responded grudgingly to these compromises, which have averted conflict but left a taint of blackmail. More significantly, neither nuclear nor satellite technology contributes anything to taking care of the severe human needs in North Korea. Perhaps the most experienced U.S. official regarding North Korea, Rep. Tony Hall (D-OH) has made six trips there since 1996. After his most recent visit in November, Hall urged the U.S. and international donors to "rethink [their] 'Band-Aid' approach to this crisis." "With all the news about North Korea's diplomatic initiatives," Hall added, "it is easy to forget that people there are still struggling to survive a famine that has not ended."

U.S. food aid, distributed through the UN and a consortium of non-governmental organizations, has contributed both materially and psychologically to the well-being of the North Korean people. Although foreigners' movements are still restricted, the atmosphere has improved noticeably as contacts have increased. As the DPRK learns more about the outside world, its leaders have shown a willingness to moderate their views and cooperate in finding solutions to their admittedly daunting problems.
The post-election transition in the United States puts the progress that has been made on the Korean peninsula at a crossroads. It is crucial that the momentum of the inter-Korean summit be maintained in 2001. The Bush Administration should continue and expand humanitarian assistance to the people of North Korea, as well as supporting the diplomatic initiatives of Kim Dae-Jung's sunshine policy.

Suggested Action:

During this time of transition in Washington, it is important that our elected representatives hear from voters about crucial foreign policy issues. Foreign policy was largely neglected during the presidential campaign, and the electoral crisis in Florida has distracted many of our leaders away from urgent concerns around the world.

This is nowhere more true than in Korea, where the dramatic changes in the past year are at risk of being stalled or rolled back if the U.S. fails to act. Write your Representative and Senators, urging them to maintain the momentum of engagement in Korean integration, provide needed food aid to North Korea, and reconsider America's military posture in South Korea.

A sample letter follows; use this as a basis for your own thoughts.

Write to:

The Honorable ______________
US House of Representatives
Washington DC 20515

The Honorable ______________
US Senate
Washington DC 20510

Dear Rep./Senator ______________:

I am writing out of concern for peace on the Korean peninsula. This past year has seen dramatic progress in Korea, with the summit between the leaders of the North and South, as well as Secretary of State Albright's visit to North Korea. It is crucial that the next Congress and Administration continue the process of engagement and integration that has started.

The recent reports from North Korea indicate that the food shortage is getting worse. Rep. Tony Hall (D-OH) recently returned from a trip there and spoke with great concern for the humanitarian needs he witnessed. I urge you to continue U.S. support for the World Food Program in North Korea, and to consider extending U.S. aid through churches and non-governmental channels to help the Korean people in the broadest way possible.

Through the long-term presence of our troops and military facilities in Korea, the United States has invested a great deal in the region's development and security. Now that peace is on the horizon, we should be flexible in finding new approaches to security that might look different from the Cold War posture. I urge you to support a fairer Status of Forces Agreement between the U.S. and South Korea as one step towards this goal.

Sincerely yours,
(Your name here)

General Assembly Notes:

The General Assembly of 2000 noted that the division of Korea continues to be a source of tension for Northeast Asia and a tragedy for the Korean people. It stated that the United States has a responsibility to help the two Koreas reconcile, and it recommitted itself to working with partner churches in Korea. Furthermore, it called upon the U.S. government to promote a peaceful unification policy that will lead to normal diplomatic and trade relations. As guarantees for peace are assured, the Assembly supported the reduction of military forces on the peninsula as well as the removal of land mines.