U2NESCO 2019 CHAIR REPORT Committee: Special Focus Committee Agenda: On measures to create a unified Korea through the creation of a "One Country, Two Systems" policy Officer: Linda Zeng Introduction: Ever since Moon Jae-in becomes the president of South Korea, he continues his push to declare an official end to hostilities with North Korea. There are the Inter-Korean Summits where the leaders of South and North Korea meet and communicate on the development in the Korean Peninsula. The most heavily militarized frontier in the world is the demilitarized zone (DMZ) on the Korean Peninsula. The DMZ was established by the Korean War Armistice Agreement, signed on 27 July 1953.1 Even though the Cold War has been over since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Korean peninsula remains unstable and is often referred to as the last remnant of the Cold War. Korea is still divided into two countries and the Korean War is not officially over. Korean unification seems far more remote. This thesis seeks to answer two questions: Why has Korean unification not happened yet? What is necessary for Korean unification? The answer should be found in the history. Historically, Korea has been the focus of conflict because of its strategic location. Don Oberdorfer writes: Geography dealt Korea a particularly difficult role. Located in a strategic but dangerous neighborhood between the greater powers of China, Japan, and Russia, Korea has suffered nine hundred invasions, great and small, in its two thousand years of recorded history. It has experienced five major periods of foreign occupation--by China, the Mongols, Japan, and after World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union. 2 The international setting has impacted tremendously on the national agendas of Korea. All important political and economic changes and their influence on the Korean peninsula cannot be explained by domestic factors only but must also include an international context. Most political and economic changes on the Korean peninsula grew out of intertwined international and domestic factors. The difficulty of Korean unification can be explained by the international context. This thesis will be concerned with how international settings exerted more influence than domestic considerations on the Korean division. The context in which such a discussion has to be put is the relationship between Korea and the great powers such as the United States and the Soviet Union. Who gets to call the shots? Who has the right to stay? Who doesn t? What will the new company be called? What will the new identity be? Will this merger be worth it in the end? These are all questions that the Koreas will have to answer on a national level.
Even though the two Koreas national ambition is Korean unification, policy toward Korean unification has not been implemented proactively by the two Koreas and the great powers. The four great powers surrounding the Korean peninsula officially support Korean unification, but they might prefer status quo on the Korean peninsula. This is regrettable action because the great powers have influenced the destiny of Korea. Thus, very proactive actions should be taken to achieve Korean unification. The proactive strategy should be implemented by the two Koreas and the four powers together. Any policy for Korean unification would not be effective without coordination between the two Koreas and the four powers. The roots of the Korean War and the current North Korean nuclear crisis show the reasons why Korean unification has not happened yet and why unification efforts should be achieved through Korean and international efforts. Also, the strategy for Korean unification should be a combination of three policies military containment and negotiations, political negotiations, and economic and social engagement and should be implemented together. Definition of key terms: Korean Peninsula: The Korea Peninsula or Korean Peninsula is a peninsula in East Asia that extends southwards for about 684 miles or 1,100 kilometers from the continental Asia into the Pacific Ocean; it contains North Korea and South Korea. One country, two systems: Under the principle, each of the two regions could continue to have its own governmental system, legal, economic and financial affairs, including trade relations with foreign countries. Unification:The process by which two or more countries join together and become one country. Denuclearization:to remove nuclear arms from : prohibit the use of nuclear arms in Military containment: It is a geopolitical strategy to stop the expansion of an enemy. It is best known as a Cold War foreign policy of the United States and its allies to prevent the spread of communism. History: One Country, Two Systems" policy is a state policy formulated by Deng Xiaoping to accomplish the peaceful reunification of China by resolving the sovereignty questions of Hong Kong and Macau. Hong Kong and Macau were once occupied by Britain and Portugal due the conflict during the 1800s. In 1842, the Chinese emperor ceded Hong Kong Island to the British bringing an end to the first Opium War. China later ceded the Kowloon Peninsula in 1860, ending the second Opium War. Requiring more land and adequate defense of the colony, China leased the New Territories to the
British in 1898 for 99 years, following the end of the First Sino-Japanese War. During the 99 years, China have been through major changes post World War II, from a republic state to a communist state. The shift in its political structure started a new era in China, they then wanted to get back the areas where originally belonged to China- Hong Kong and Macau. Regarding to continue the New Territory lease, Hong Kong governor Murray MacLehose met with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping during his first official visit to China by suggesting that Britain could continue to administrate Hong Kong after 1997. The British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher raised the issue again when she visited China in 1982 to Deng but both of them were buffed. Discussion regarding to Hong Kong continued but the Sino-British Joint Declaration that was signed at the end of 1984 foreshadowed the return of Hong Kong to China. Hong Kong was agreed by the British government to be officially returned back to China as a special administrative region that retain the economic and administration system which differs from China Mainland s socialism for 50 years. Nevertheless, the relationship between Mainland China with Hong Kong and Macau is different from North Korea and South Korea. The separation of the Korean Peninsula is after World War II due to ideological disagreement from both sides. South Korea support a democratic system whereas North Korea desired a communist system. The conflict in ideology intensified with the involvement of US and USSR during the Cold War period. US wanted to control the spread of Communism in Asia and while USSR tried to make support Communism to raise in Korea. During 1945-1948, the Soviet Army and its proxies set up a communist regime in the area north of latitude 38 N, or the 38th parallel. South of that line, a military government was formed, supported directly by the United States. Michael Robinson, professor of East Asian Studies and History at Indiana University, claimed that, everything that was tried to create a middle ground or to try to reunify the peninsula is thwarted by both the Soviet Union and the United States not wanting to give in to the other. The conflict lasted for years until in 1948, the United States called for a United Nation-sponsored vote for all Koreans to determine the future of the peninsula.it was seen as a move towards unification, however, it was denied by the North. After the North refused to participate, the South formed its own government in Seoul, led by the strongly anti-communist Syngman Rhee. The North responded in kind, installing the former communist guerrilla Kim Il Sung as the first premier of the Democratic People s Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the capital of Pyongyang. The division of the Korean peninsula didn t resolved the conflict among the North and the South, conflicts still exist. Syngman Rhee and Kim Il Sung both were was content to remain on his side of the 38th parallel, however, and border skirmishes were common. Nearly 10,000 North and South Korean soldiers were killed in battle before the war even began. The border disputes soon turned into a war in 1950, when North Korean army invaded South Korea across the 38th parallel. It was the first military action during the Cold War.
American officials immediately responded to the surprised attack from the North side by sending supporting troops. At first, the war was a defensive one a war to get the communists out of South Korea and it went badly for the Allies. The North Korean army was well-disciplined and well-equipped; Rhee s forces, by contrast, were frightened, confused, and seemed inclined to flee the battlefield at any provocation. Acknowledging the situation, President Truman and General MacArthur decided on a new set of war aims, changed itself from a defensive position to an offensive position. As far as American officials were concerned, it was not a civil war inside the peninsula but a war against the international communist force. Though, they did not expect to face China. An amphibious assault at Inchon pushed the North Koreans out of Seoul and back to their side of the 38th parallel. But as American troops crossed the boundary and headed north toward the Yalu River, the border between North Korea and China, it was seen as an armed aggression against the Chinese territory by the Chinese government. Mao, Chinese leader, promptly mobilized their troops. As the most polluted nation, enormous soldiers made their way to North Korea, thus, pushed back American armies. Originally, America thought was a short war extended to an three years of war. Both side and their foreign power experienced major destruction and countless deaths. The stalemate ended the war and new border line were drew. Apart from destruction, the Korean War also enlarged the differences between South and North Korea. The division have caused both sides to developed their culture and even language. Unlike Hong Kong and Mainland China, the historical background of Korean Peninsula makes it difficult for reunification or the implementation one country, two systems as they are two equally large area with vast differences politically, economically and culturally. Past Actions: APEC The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is a regional economic forum established in 1989 to leverage the growing interdependence of the Asia-Pacific. APEC is the premier Asia-Pacific economic forum. Its primary goal is to support sustainable economic growth and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region.apec's 21 members aim to create greater prosperity for the people of the region by promoting balanced, inclusive, sustainable, innovative and secure growth and by accelerating regional economic integration. Between 1989 and 1992, APEC met as an informal senior official- and ministerial-level dialogue. In 1993, former US President Bill Clinton established the practice of an annual APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting to provide greater strategic vision and direction for cooperation in the region. APEC always have the aim to get North Korea involved in this regional forum to
create mutual economic benefits. Though the active nuclear development in DPRK threatened countries in Asia. Despite he sanctions and isolating initiatives by the global community trying to reach the agreement of denuclearization, DPRK still consider nuclear weapons as there major defence tool. There were concerns by Asian countries that DPRK is close to taking irrational and destructive action. The current environment exists largely because the regime has remained immune to moderation. Nothing has worked. China s attempt at intervention has limits; military action against the regime would be complex and risky; and there is little hope for near-term regime change. At present, no other option is being discussed because nothing appears plausible or workable. However, under certain conditions, the regime might be ready for multilateral engagement. This is a longshot, but conditions could become bleak enough to force the regime to consider engagement. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) holds the potential to be a mechanism of such engagement. It s the type of institutional affiliation North Korea needs. APEC would be a reasonable, modest, and low-risk initial step to take on the road out of isolation. The conditions that may compel North Korea s leadership to move towards diplomatic engagement include the following: (a) the policy of nuclear and ballistic testing and development aimed at the outside is costly, not yielding sufficient benefits and is dangerous; (b) in response to the tests, the outside is imposing economic and financial sanctions that are impairing the economy s capacity to function and the public sector to operate; (c) the outside s military response to North Korea s actual use of its nuclear and ballistic capacities would be so devastating that it would leave the regime and the country in ruins; (d) the magnitude of the economy s failings are so acute that even with China s assistance, dealing with them requires resources from the outside ; and (e) while China wants neither a failed state at its southern border nor a flood of refugees crossing it, its government has other objectives and cannot continue to provide the level of financial and economic assistance needed by the regime. Such calculations on the part of Pyongyang might compel the regime to think about engagement. APEC would be a useful and plausible option because its focus is on assisting member economies to strengthen their capacities to develop economically, to mature their private sectors, to benefit from industrial technology transfers, to be a party to regional cooperation, and to receive the benefits of trade expansion. Importantly, the scope of APEC s programs fits nicely with North Korea s needs as it struggles with resource shortages, infrastructure frailties, supply chain interruptions, impaired labor and managerial attributes, distributional inequities, a low level of national and personal income, and one of the world s lowest levels of human development. APEC s structure and conditions of membership also fit North Korea s needs. APEC limits its actions to economic cooperation and development, and avoids entangling in the affairs of member economies (or sovereign states). APEC stays clear of territorial and other disputes among states and imposes no strict conditions of membership. The way it works would give some time for North Korea to adjust to engagement on a partnership basis. North Korea would necessarily begin as an
official observer. Gaining full membership would come later and getting there would not be an easy journey. Numerous political and legal obstacles and long-held opinions would stand in the way. However, if these obstacles could be overcome, both North Korea and the outside might benefit. The journey can only take place if North Korea chose to move out of isolation and at the same time the outside agrees with the move. This would require openness to contacts, associations and discussions for which APEC would be helpful. North Korean officials could observe and become familiar with the professionals who work in topic-based APEC committees. For example, they would learn about APEC s Individual Plan of Action program. Each member economy s Plan takes place in two steps: in year one, the Plan is designed with the assistance of APEC-based specialists and technical professionals. The goal is to identify critical shortcomings and design ways to overcome them. In year two, each member economy reports on the progress that it has made since year one. By repeating the process, over time each member economy is able to move along a path leading to economic growth and development. A similar effort by the North Korean government would be extremely valuable. It would require the regime to think clearly about how to achieve genuine economic progress with the help of the outside. At some point the regime will need to make this fundamental a decision: either cling to its nuclear/ballistic programs even though its outputs likely will never be used, or move away from the programs to some degree while moving in the direction of multilateral engagement with its Asia Pacific neighbors. APEC could be a place to start. The most controversial discussion between South and North Korea is the nuclear development and testing in North Korea. Once the engagement of APEC has effectively stop the nuclear programs in North Korea. It would be a major step towards reunification of the Korean Peninsula. Korean family reunion In August.2018, a group of mostly elderly South Koreans travelled to a tourist resort in the North for the event, the first such reunion for three years. The Korean War of 1950-1953 left the peninsula divided and people on the northern side were unable to leave. There are 83 North Koreans and 89 from the South taking part.a hundred people had been selected by each side, but some dropped out after realizing the relatives they had hoped to see were no longer alive. Over the years, at times of relative calm, the two Koreas have arranged for selected groups to visit each other. There have been 20 such events in the past 18 years. Past reunions between brothers and sisters, parents and children and husbands and wives have been extremely emotional experiences. -North Korea crisis in 300 words -Ordinary North Koreans dare to speak out But as those who have been separated grow old, time is running out. Already,
most of the reunions were not between immediate family members. This time, only seven of the participants were due to be reunited with immediate family like parents or children while the rest will be meeting with close relatives like cousins. The reunion is seen as an significant breakthrough in the course of history for both South Koreans and North Koreans It represent both sides are willing to make a move that connect their people together. Some critics believe, the family reunion is the start of cultural communication and stepping towards the reunification of the Korean Peninsula. Inter-Korean Summit: This summit to be held at the Peace House in Panmunjeom is a product of the unyielding efforts made by President Moon and the South Korean government and the complete support of the international community, including the US and other neighboring countries, to encourage the North to enter into dialogue amidst the escalating security crisis on the Korean Peninsula. It is the first meeting of the leaders of the South and North in 11 years since the second summit in 2007 following the first in 2000, and the North s leader will be stepping onto the South Korean side of Panmunjeom for the first time. This summit will be prepared with a focus on assisting the two leaders to better concentrate on their talks. This summit to be held at the Peace House in Panmunjeom is a product of the unyielding efforts made by President Moon and the South Korean government and the complete support of the international community, including the US and other neighboring countries, to encourage the North to enter into dialogue amidst the escalating security crisis on the Korean Peninsula. It is the first meeting of the leaders of the South and North in 11 years since the second summit in 2007 following the first in 2000, and the North s leader will be stepping onto the South Korean side of Panmunjeom for the first time. This summit will be prepared with a focus on assisting the two leaders to better concentrate on their talks. The South Korean government plans to deal with the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, the establishment of permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula, and the advancement of inter-korean relations through this summit. The three items will be discussed in a balanced and comprehensive manner. Measures to ensure a consistent implementation of the agreement between the South and North are also being examined. First, this summit is expected to reaffirm the North s will for denuclearization and lay the foundation, upon which substantial progress can be made regarding the peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. The South Korean government remains dedicated to the successful staging of the two summits to encourage the North to make a strategic decision to denuclearize and take measures for denuclearization in earnest. Second, this summit will deal with a variety of issues and measures regarding the establishment of permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula including those aimed at easing military tension and building trust between the South and North.
As for the sustained advancement of inter-korean relations, the two sides will be discussing broad aspects of inter-korean relations including dialogue, exchange and cooperation, and humanitarian support, while carrying on the legacies of the July 4th South-North Joint Statement; the Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-aggression, Exchanges, and Cooperation; the June 15th South-North Joint Declaration; and the October 4th Declaration. The South Korean government will ensure that the first important step in recovering trust between the two Koreas and between the US and the North be taken effectively through this summit. Possible Solutions: No policy option for Korean unification has ever succeeded because of North Korea s position as a unification actor. North Korea has claimed that they are the legitimate government of the Korean people and reactions to the unification policies of South Korea have changed depending on domestic and international situations. Just like motivations for the nuclear program, North Korea has had multiple strategies and has switched among them for its own benefit. Therefore, unification policy toward North Korea should be comprehensive and multifaceted by combining three policies military containment and negotiations, political negotiations, and economic and social engagement. Military containment will be fundamental to deter any military action of North Korea. However, containment alone will only bring on a more unstable situation on the Korean peninsula. At the same time, military negotiations should be initiated to release tensions. Pursuing political negotiations toward a peace treaty and deciding upon the type of government would not be successful in a short time and would need confidence building measures. Economic engagement alone will provide an initiative to North Korea to start negotiations, but will not guarantee peaceful unification. Therefore, the combination of the three policies is necessary to achieve consensual and peaceful Korean unification. Proactive and synchronous implementation of the three policies is a pivotal point. Military containment and negotiations, political negotiations, and economic engagement, should be pursued together. Each policy is interdependent, but it can be implemented exclusively in order to deal with North Korea because each policy can be implemented in different fields. Militarily, strong defense is critical because it can support any other policy implementation. Without robust defense, political negotiation and economic engagement would be uncertain and insecure. Based on reliable defense, military negotiations for arms control may begin. Politically, a peace treaty can be made because North Korea has requested a nonaggression declaration from the United States and the United States is not willing to use military action to achieve unification on the Korean peninsula. Economically, engagement policy should be maintained to open North Korea and provide humanitarian aid. South Korea and the four major powers prefer a peaceful unification option.
Diplomatic recognition, a non-aggression treaty, and a peace treaty would be necessary steps for gradual and peaceful unification. Robust defense capability is necessary for stability after unification. South Korea s reliable independent defense forces to lead stability and reconstruction operations are indispensable. Without political negotiations such as a peace treaty, peaceful unification is impractical. Also, economic engagement would be an investment for the economic development after unification. William Lewis, founding director of the McKinsey Global Institute thinks Korean unification would be a lot more difficult than German Unification: North Korea s GDP per capita is only 5 percent of that of the South, yet its population is about half. The corresponding ratios for East Germany were 50 percent of West Germany s GDP per capita and only 25 percent of the population. The difficulties of German reunification look like a piece of cake next to the difficulties of Korean unification. It would be difficult to introduce the free market concept to North Koreans. Economic engagement will give them a chance to experience capitalism and a free market economy. In order to implement political negotiations and economic engagement, military containment is important. The United States and South Korea should prop up political negotiation and economic engagement with strong military containment. The strong military support will decrease the possibility of any military action by North Korea. Also, it will help earn the people s consensus and support for implementing political and economic policies. Also, a more self-dependant military capability of South Korean forces is necessary for stability in Northeast Asia after the Korean unification. For peaceful Korean unification, three indicators are inevitable. They are essential steps on the path of Korean unification. Potential indicators are outlined by Jonathan D. Pollack and Chung Min Lee in Preparing for Korean Unification: Scenarios and Implications. Therefore, the efforts for unification in the following three fields are required: 1.Military and Security Indicators Cessation of all hostile military activities would be the first step towards a peaceful unification. 2.Political indicators Political compromises and negotiations are required. A peace treaty can be signed not only from a military perspective but also a political perspective. 3. Economic and Social Indicators These fields can be initiated at the beginning of a consensual and peaceful unification process and solidify Korean unification at the end. Another difficulty of peaceful unification is the necessity of both domestic and international efforts for success. As discussed in the previous chapters, any changes on the Korean peninsula can be explained not only by internal roots but also by external roots. The international context should be considered in consensual and peaceful unification. Therefore, each policy can be divided into internal and external efforts. International External Efforts Essential Indicators
Efforts for peaceful Unification Military Containment and Negotiation Modernization of South Korean forces Military-to-Military Strong US-South Korean Alliance Reciprocal Cessation of offensive military activities Negotiations Modification of Mutual Defense Treaties Political Negotiations Political stability on the Korean peninsula Four Party Talks Endorsement of the Peace Treaty Cessation of all through another UN political propaganda Summit Meeting Peace Treaty between South Korea and North Korea by reaffirmation of three previous agreements Economic and Social Engagement Expansion of Economic Energy and food Supporting South The flow of people, goods, services, Engagement Korea and North capital and The Formation of a Korea Economic technologies free trade area Cooperation Sports/Tourism Multilateral Interchanges Economic Approach with North Korea Recommended Sources : The proactive grand strategy for consensual and peaceful Korean unification https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/3581/07mar_kim_jungsoo.pdf?seque nce=1&isallowed=y Korean Reunification Is Already Unviable https://thediplomat.com/2018/08/korean-reunification-is-already-unviable/ Korean Reunification: Challenges and Opportunities https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/10/18/korean_reunification_challenge s_and_opportunities_112490.html What would Korean Reunification Look Like? Five Glaring Problems to Overcome http://time.com/5255381/north-south-korea-kim-jong-un-reunification/ 2 generations, 2 different perspectives on Korean Reunification https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/2-generations-2-different-perspectives-korean -reunification
Bibliography: https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/3581/07mar_kim_jungsoo.pdf?sequence=1&i sallowed=y https://www.history.com/topics/korea/korean-war https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/publications/book/15anniversary_reunification_ch1_1.pdf https://www.quora.com/could-korea-reunify-under-a-one-country-two-systems-plan http://nwww.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180814000728 Contact Information Below are some contacts; please contact if inquiries arise: Linda Zeng President Chair 19lzeng@student.uiszc.org WeChat: YLZlinda Jessica Kang Secretary General unesco@utahloy.org/bosun104339@gmail.com Wechat: Jessicakang0308 Gregory Peebles Director of U2NESCO gpeebles@uiszc.org