Yoon’s unification “doctrine” refuted

President Yoon Suk-yeol delivers a speech marking Liberation Day, the 79th anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule, at an event at the Sejong Center for the Performing Arts on August 15, 2024. (Pool photo)

President Yoon Suk-yeol's vision and plan for reunification, which he expressed in his South Korean Liberation Day address on Thursday, are quite different from the familiar reunification policy, North Korea policy and inter-Korean agreements pursued since Park Chung-hee came to power.

Mutual respect, reconciliation and cooperation, and unification through agreement are the core principles of the South-North Korea Joint Communiqué of July 4, 1972 – the first joint declaration signed by the two Koreas after the division of the Korean Peninsula – the National Unification Formula – the official unification policy pursued by the South Korean government since 1994 – and the Agreement of Principles between the two Koreas of 1991.

However, Yoon argues that South Korea should lead the way to reunification: “The freedom we enjoy must be extended to the icy kingdom of the north, where people are deprived of their freedom and suffer from poverty and hunger.”

Yoon’s definition of “freedom” calls for unification through absorption, which is in direct contradiction to the government’s official position, which rejects any possibility of violent unification.

Declaration of a “Freedom March to the North”

Yoon stressed that we must “expand the value of freedom for the North” in order to “change the minds of the North Korean people and make them fervently desire a unification based on freedom.” He said that we will “expand the 'right of access to information' so that North Koreans can use various channels to obtain a variety of information from abroad.” In addition, a “Fund for Freedom and Human Rights in North Korea” will be established to “actively support non-governmental activities that promote freedom and human rights there.”

So we can see that he is using the beleaguered North Korean people as a pretext to bring outside information to North Korea. This is contrary to the first four articles of the 1991 Basic Agreement between the two Koreas, which state that the Koreas shall “recognize and respect each other's system,” “not interfere in each other's internal affairs,” “not slander or defame each other,” and “not engage in acts of sabotage or subversive action against each other.”

Similar to how North Korea sent balloons filled with garbage to South Korea in retaliation for propaganda leaflets circulated by North Korean defector groups in South Korea, it is certain that such actions will provoke a hostile reaction.

The President’s proposal for an “Inter-Korean Working Group”

Yoon also put forward the idea of ​​establishing a working-level advisory body between the two Koreas. This is the first time since taking office that Yoon has personally defined the format, level and topics of the inter-Korean dialogue.

In response to this inappropriate suggestion by a head of state to set up a working group as an advisor, a senior official in the presidential office stated, “Spontaneous events where the two Korean leaders shake hands in front of the camera will not bring about sufficient change.” This is a direct rejection of the Moon Jae-in administration's top-down approach to advancing relations between North and South Korea by holding three summits in 2018.

The problem is that North Korea will almost certainly ignore any efforts at dialogue after the South Korean president loudly proclaimed the importance of giving the North more freedom and South Korea taking the lead on the road to unification.

And as if to make matters worse, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un recently vowed to cut off all relations with South Korea, calling the country a “filthy, vile and unchanging enemy.”

Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies, criticized Yoon's offer of dialogue as “a flimsy, easily debunked attempt to disguise South Korea's argument for unification through takeover.” A senior presidential official also said: “We cannot expect North Korea to respond positively.”

A unification “doctrine” instead of a “policy”

Yoon's vision of a unified Republic of Korea that stands for freedom, peace and prosperity has almost nothing in common with the step-by-step approach of the National Unification Formula and its three principles (independence, peace and democracy).

Kim Tae-hyo, first deputy director of the National Security Bureau, clarified that the “August 15 Unification Doctrine” is an action plan that “provides a clear direction toward unification that is not evident in the formula for unifying the national community,” while taking into account the reality in which “reconciliation and cooperation are impossible.”

While the President's Office claims that this “doctrine” represents the Yoon administration's unification policy, it was careful to avoid using this exact wording, showing that the government has strayed far from its original aspirations to come up with a new unification plan. It had previously criticized the National Unification Formula for “lacking a liberal philosophy and vision.”

A former senior official who worked for the current government pointed out that the government is pursuing a tactic that “benefits from political propaganda, but is also aware of the current trend of opposition to a new reunification plan, which can be observed even among conservatives.”

A veteran expert on inter-Korean relations commented: “Yoon's new plans for unification, like former President Park Geun Hye's so-called 'unification bonanza' theory, will disappear into obscurity with the impending change of government.”

By Lee Je-hun, senior editor

Please direct any questions or comments to [[email protected]]