Provocation comes as more in Washington are raising concerns about end-of-war declaration
While the international community condemned North Korea’s recent missile launches, South Korea is divided between conservatives and liberals, who are instead attacking each other. The presidential Blue House once again released a statement that does not reflect the reality of the Korean Peninsula. The top two presidential candidates clashed over the conservative candidate Yoon Seok-youl’s comment that a preemptive strike would be the only option to avoid mass destruction from North Korea’s alleged “hypersonic” missile.
A key official from the Blue House told reporters that it expresses deep regret over North Korea’s missile launch but will take necessary measures to ease tensions between the two Koreas and concerns from the people. However, the official predicted that North Korea is not going to launch another missile. “They said the launch was successful and that means that they will not launch another one,” the official argued. There were many comments online criticizing the official’s comment. One comment read, “Are they congratulating North Korea for successfully testing the missile?”
The Blue House also argued that the recent launch of missiles shows the importance of declaring an end to the Korean War, which is President Moon Jae-in’s last attempt to restart talks with the North. However, President Moon also said, “We are concerned about North Korea’s multiple missile tests ahead of the presidential election,” according to Park Kyung-mi, the Blue House spokesperson.
The ruling Democratic Party’s statements on Wednesday, a day after North Korea’s missile test, were focused on attacking Yoon Seok-yeol, the presidential candidate from the conservative People Power Party (PPP). On Wednesday, Yoon said, “I think there is no way to prevent it [North Korea’s hypersonic missile] except for using a preemptive strike measure under the kill chain principle when North Korea shows signs of launching one.”
Lee Jae-myung, the presidential candidate from the DP, held a meeting at the party’s headquarters on Wednesday. Lee responded to Yoon’s comments by saying, “I am worried, as if I am watching a child playing with fire inside an explosive warehouse… I am deeply concerned about his argument provoking dangerous war and I ask him to retract his comment.”
Lee added that “no leader from any country carelessly mentions the possibility of a preemptive strike, and this can be interpreted as inciting aggression or declaration of war in the international community.”
Even though Lee spent more time attacking Yoon on Wednesday, he also tried to keep his distance from the Blue House, which was reluctant to call the missile launches provocations. When asked if he thinks they are provocations, Lee responded, “I think they technically are provocations.”
However, Lee also brought up another conspiracy theory while criticizing North Korea for firing missiles ahead of the election. “It reminds me of previous cases where North Korea affected the election, and I think North Korea can be interpreted as helping raise a debate on populist national security policies.” He then implied that conservatives will benefit from North Korea’s recent activities.
In South Korea, the North Korea issue has had a big influence on public sentiment during elections. Conservatives tend to benefit when North Korea undertakes provocations, since leftists tend to prioritize “peace” over tension. Leftists have criticized conservatives in previous elections for exaggerating or making an issue of North Korean threats.
The PPP responded to Lee’s comments by saying he is ignorant of ongoing affairs. “Lee tried to frame Yoon as exaggerating the threat of war but he failed,” said Chang Young-il, a spokesperson from the PPP’s election team. “Lee argued that a politician should not carelessly mention the kill chain procedure, but that is well explained in the Defense White Paper that everyone can see. I think he should spend some time studying this issue. Furthermore, a preemptive strike is only possible when the President, the commander in chief, makes the decision. Thus, it is something that a presidential candidate should think about carefully.”
Cho Tae-yong, former First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and a current lawmaker from the PPP, also released a statement criticizing the Blue House’s rosy thinking that the “missile launch shows the importance of declaring the end of the war.”
Cho pointed out former U.S. ambassador to South Korea Harry Harris’s recent comments that we should ask what would change after declaring an end to the Korean War. Ambassador Harris said last week that even after the declaration, “North Korea’s missile, nuclear, chemical and conventional capabilities will still be excellent.”
Cho argued that the Moon administration should answer the question of what would change after the declaration. “The Moon administration continues to say that the declaration can be helpful to denuclearization and peace without providing specific evidence. It is like defending the country with self-hypnosis.”
Cho asked, “Is North Korea not going to fire missiles after the declaration?”, “is North Korea not going to undertake provocations after the declaration?”, “is North Korea going to stop operating its nuclear facilities after the declaration?” He argued that the government should answer these questions before calling for the declaration amid the increased tension over the North’s missile launches.
Meanwhile, Daniel Russel, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, told the Voice of America on Tuesday that Moon’s end-of-war declaration is a bad idea. He argued that the declaration “is not something North Koreans are asking for and it is not something that is going to improve the situation.” He added that “I think the Biden team has been wise in not going along with that bad idea, but not getting into a fight with Seoul about it either.”
When asked why he opposes the declaration, he responded as follows:
“You know, just as a starting point, please show me one single piece of paper, one agreement that the DPRK has signed with the ROK, with the international community, that the DPRK has honored. So it really calls into question, what is this actually going to accomplish? I think what it would do is to strengthen Pyongyang’s argument that all U.S. troops need to leave the Korean Peninsula, that somehow is the problem that’s inconsistent with the current situation now that the quote unquote “war” has been declared over,” he said. “And what’s more concerning is that today China is actually more likely than not to support that line, that the U.S. troops should leave the Korean Peninsula. So that’s why I think it’s a bad idea.”
With North Korea again signaling a return to heightened provocations, Moon’s end-of-war plan is looking even more unappealing to Washington and many in South Korea.
