Former officials who served as Unification Ministers under progressive administrations have publicly opposed the upcoming inaugural meeting of the regular "Korea-U.S. Policy Coordination Meeting on North Korea," which could take place as early as December 16. Their opposition stems from the belief that the U.S.-South Korea working group model, which has been used in the past, is not effective in breaking the current deadlock in inter-Korean relations.
On December 15, six former Unification Ministers issued a statement titled "We Oppose a Second U.S.-South Korea Working Group," saying, "While South Korea and the United States must closely consult on North Korea policy, it is not desirable to do so through the same working group approach as in the past." The statement was signed by six former ministers: Lim Dongwon (25th and 27th), Jeong Sehyun (29th and 30th), Lee Jaejung (33rd), Cho Myounggyon (39th), Kim Yeoncheol (40th), and Lee Inyoung (41st).
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently announced that it is pursuing a regular "Korea-U.S. High-Level Consultation on North Korea Policy," but there have been internal disagreements within the ministry regarding the nature and role of this consultation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs explained that the consultation is intended to discuss follow-up measures to the outcome document of the Korea-U.S. summit, including the "North Korea issue." In contrast, the Ministry of Unification is concerned that this consultation may take the form of the "U.S.-South Korea Working Group" attempted during the Moon Jae-in administration.
The former ministers stated, "The previous U.S.-South Korea working group did not serve as a productive forum for resolving issues, but rather played a negative role by hindering the improvement of inter-Korean relations and raising the threshold for sanctions." They further expressed concern that "given the clear differences in opinion between President Trump and U.S. government agencies regarding North Korea policy, consultations with U.S. working-level officials are more likely to worsen inter-Korean relations than to improve them." In particular, they criticized Kevin Kim, the Acting U.S. Ambassador to South Korea, who is expected to lead the U.S. side in these consultations, saying, "Based on recent reports about the views of the U.S. working-level representative, it appears that as long as he participates in the Korea-U.S. policy consultation, it will not help create an environment for a North Korea-U.S. summit."
They also directly criticized the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which is discussing this Korea-U.S. consultation structure, stating, "It goes against the principles of the Constitution and the Government Organization Act for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to lead North Korea policy at the government level." They added, "In past inter-Korean history, whether it was the creation of the Kaesong Industrial Complex or the consideration of sanctions relief, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was far more negative and conservative than the U.S. government." They emphasized, "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs lacks expertise and does not understand inter-Korean relations, so it cannot be entrusted with North Korea policy."
The former Unification Ministers concluded, "The Ministry of Unification is the lead agency for North Korea policy, and the process of promoting talks in all areas-including economic, military, humanitarian, and socio-cultural-has been designed to ensure inter-ministerial consultation." They stressed, "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should halt its plan to operate a U.S.-South Korea working group, the Ministry of Unification should take the lead in devising ways to resume inter-Korean relations, and efforts should be made to help President Trump achieve a successful North Korea-U.S. summit."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
