:: KOREA FOCUS ::

title text
q q q

Heralding a New Discourse on Unification Yoo Ho-yeol Professor of North Korean Studies Korea University

photo

news
The recent relationship between North and South Korea is literally mired in a state of confusion, even taking account the inherent complexity and adversities of inter-Korean relations. The confusion is so intense that one is at a loss as to where to find a solution. Amid such circumstances, President Lee Myung-bak stated in his address commemorating the 65th anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule that a new paradigm is needed in tackling the existing relations between the two Koreas. He stressed that the new paradigm should aim to assure coexistence and co-prosperity, away from confrontation and stalemate, and to attain a peaceful unification rather than sheer management of territorial division.

In his famed book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the American philosopher and historian of science Thomas Kuhn defined a paradigm as a set of general concepts, such as perceptions and theories, prevailing at any particular period of time. A paradigm tends to be altered in a process of formation, development, decline and extinction.

Relations between North and South Korea have undergone paradigm shifts several times. During the Cold War era, the paradigm featured abhorrence and antagonism, severance and confrontation. As the post-Cold War age set in, a paradigm of reconciliation and cooperation emerged to highlight the conclusion of a basic agreement and the subsequent first-ever summit talks in 2000 between the two Koreas. They were tangible

outcomes of the Roh Tae-woo administration's unification policy of creating a Korean national community and the Kim Dae-jung administration's sunshine policy, respectively.

The present Lee administration, upon its inauguration, unveiled a new policy toward North Korea, calling for its denuclearization and opening up its door to the world, and offering in return a grand assistance to help the North attain a per capita income of $3,000 in 10 years. Fundamentally, the proposal was based on the policy of reconciliation and cooperation but with what seemed to be a new functional and phased approach.

Still, the general public's perception and the reactions of Pyongyang and other parties concerned essentially remain under the shadow of the sunshine policy. The Seoul government itself lacks commitment to regard the unification issue as a historical task and is more or less engrossed in demanding the North's denuclearization first and making its policies distinct from those of the Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun administrations. Thus, the current administration has produced a string of obviously dubious proposals, including calls for the creation of a happy common community, a grand bargain deal with the North, and a new peace initiative for the Korean peninsula.

According to a recent opinion poll conducted by Seoul National University's Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, some 80 percent of the surveyed believe that for the sake of unification, military tension on the peninsula should be lessened and the human rights situation in the North must be improved along with its reform and opening up, a response that is in support of the fundamental principle of the current government policy. However, nearly 60 percent are dissatisfied with the present administration's policy toward the North, calling for a new approach. As for the unification issue, only 60 percent responded that territorial unification is necessary while 20 percent were either opposed to unification itself or regarded it impossible to be achieved.

In another poll held by the National Unification Advisory Council, a constitutional consultative body for the president, about a half of those who support unification are found having no intent to shoulder expenses needed for unification; only 1 percent is ready to pay unification tax, if and when imposed. The public perception, which is dualistic and unrealistic as noticed in the surveys, underline that the existing paradigm of inter-Korean relations that is based on the past engagement policy or national community formula is no longer effective in duly reflecting the spirit and calls of the times.

The recent standoff in relations between North and South Korea and relevant anomic frictions are inevitable for the advent of a new paradigm. Neither the political disputes over a subordinate and hypothetical issue of unification tax, mentioned in President Lee's Liberation Day speech, nor the contentions for reviving the sunshine policy are vibrant enough to lead the unification debate in the new age.

Paradoxically, without firm commitment and capability to tackle the unification issue, the current stagnancy in inter-Korean relations cannot be resolved. A paradigm shift can be attained when the unification policy is based on a broad societal consensus on issues related to the inter-Korean relationship and unification, specifically including the unification formula and measures to be taken.

A new paradigm should be charted with revolutionary structural steps that can better cope with the changing global order and major powers' undisguised egoistic pursuit of their national interests and especially North Korea's machination to maintain its controversial nuclear programs and establish a third-generation hereditary dynasty while rejecting calls for reform. Therefore, a range of earnest and meaningful discourses on unification issues needs to be undertaken to devise a far-reaching vision and work out concrete and substantive measures required to achieve reunification. For the Lee administration, which has just begun the second half of its fiveyear tenure, many expectations are afoot, even belatedly, for its determined and concerted efforts to effectively pave the way for the nations eventual unification. 2010-09-28