How to parrot Kim Jong-un on unification
Published: 30 Sep. 2024, 19:33
Chang Se-jeong
The author is an editorial writer of the JoongAng Ilbo.
During the sixth anniversary of the Sep. 19 joint inter-Korean declaration, Im Jong-seok, the chief of staff to former president Moon Jae-in, proposed walking away from unification and accepting the two separate states ideology. North Korean defectors as well as People Power Party (PPP) Rep. Park Choong-kwon condemned Im’s remark in a press conference, saying that it was “hammering a nail” into the hearts of 34,000 defectors and 10 million separated families.
Seoul mayor Oh Se-hoon, floated as one of the ruling party’s candidates for next presidency, accused Im of groveling for Pyongyang’s favor by advocating for the North Korean regime. Oh, who usually keeps his distance from sensitive political issues, is believed to have spoken up to appeal to his conservative supporters.
Kim Min-seok, a member of the Supreme Council of the Democratic Party (DP) and avid spokesman for DP leader Lee Jae-myung, joined the conservative front in criticizing Im. He said that the late liberal president Kim Dae-jung, who became the first South Korean president to meet a North Korean leader, would have “persuaded” Kim Jong-un instead of agreeing with his ideas. Perhaps the DP veteran — who had been hurling bizarre theories about the conservative government planning to declare martial law or launch a terrorist attack on the oppostion leader — might not have lost all of his good senses.
But did Im’s comment really come out of nowhere? As the chair of progressive student body Jeondaehyop in 1989, Im arranged a secret visit by student activist Lim Su-kyung to North Korea to attend the World Festival of Youth and Students. A symbolic figure of the generation who had fought for democracy and rapprochement toward North Korea wouldn’t have come to deny unification and call for the elimination of the Unification Ministry. But a few days later, he reiterated that the two Koreas are “undeniably two separate states” to confirm his sobriety.
Im more or less rephrased Kim Jong-un’s blunt declaration at the plenary meeting of the Workers’ Party of Korea on Dec. 30 last year. At that time, the North Korean leader defined the two Koreas as “two hostile states in a state of war.”
〈YONHAP PHOTO-6183〉 발언하는 임종석 2018 남북정상회담 준비위원장 (광주=연합뉴스) 정다움 기자 = 19일 오후 광주 서구 김대중컨벤션센터 다목적홀에서 열린 '9?19 평양공동선언 6주년 기념식'에서 임종석 2018 남북정상회담 준비위원장이 발언하고 있다. 2024.9.19 daum@yna.co.kr/2024-09-19 19:07:13/ 〈저작권자 ⓒ 1980-2024 ㈜연합뉴스. 무단 전재 재배포 금지, AI 학습 및 활용 금지〉
Unlike the past when statements from Pyongyang had been heavily censored, South Koreans today are freely exposed to the North’s uncensored propaganda machine. Since the DP curtailed anti-North Korea espionage activities of the National Intelligence Service during Moon Jae-in’s presidency, society’s sensitiveness toward North Korea has significantly weakened. Some are even rejecting the constitutional provisions on unification.
But the unification renunciation from Kim Jong-un and Im differs in their motives. Kim’s disavowal has stemmed from desperate brinkmanship to sustain the hereditary Kim dynasty. Even with nuclear arms in his hands, Kim knows what could come out of active exchanges with South Korea: Any integration can lead to the end of his regime as North Korea was clearly defeated by South Korea in their system competition.
To the North’s younger soldiers who trust the marketplace more than the party to feed them, the South’s “free-minded” capitalism would be a serious threat to his regime. Kim has disavowed the legacy of his grandfather and father who worked toward unification to instead turn to a reign of terror and seclusion. We cannot know the reaction of North Koreans due to the country’s strict isolation, but we can still infer that many of them would have been confused by the abrupt turnaround of abandoning the goal of unification after methodically being brainwashed throughout their lives to commit themselves to the reunification for a better future. Kim’s renunciation of the unification campaign has been a dangerous political gamble.
Im’s denial, however, has no excuse, and therefore gains little sympathy even from his peers on the liberal front. He cannot even be compared to the late lawmaker Yoo Seong-hwan who challenged the Chun Doo Hwan regime in October 1986 to make “unification” the mother lode of national policy instead of “anti-communism.”
Im’s unification abandonment also derails him from his political trajectory. He headed the preparatory committee for the 2018 inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang. In retiring from politics in 2019, he vowed to devote himself to unification-related activities as a civilian. But he has come to parrot Kim in less than a year since the North Korean leader deserted the unification agenda.
Unification may still be far-fetched, but we can never surrender our strategic national goal. The pro-unification generation is beginning to retire, and the younger generation who have never experienced a war is indifferent to the idea. By seconding Kim Jong-un’s concept, Im ironically could be doing a favor to society through a sober awakening that denying unification doesn’t ensure peace, but fixates division to invite intervention by China and Russia in case of contingencies related to North Korea.
Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)