Economic Integration, External Forces and Political Cooperation Between South and North Korea in the UNGA

Changzoo Song (bio) Perspectives on Korean Unification and Economic Integration, edited by Young Back Choi, Yesook Merrill, Yung Y. Yang, and Semoon Chang. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 2001. 193 pp. $85.00 cloth. The collapse of the Communist bloc in Eastern Europe and the consequent unification of Germany in 1990 opened new prospects for Korea's reunification. Especially with the grim economic situation in North Korea, German-style "absorption" unification seemed a natural course for the two Koreas. Nonetheless, the difficulties experienced by Germany after the unification called for more practical assessments of the costs and benefits of Korea's unification. This was the background when unification discussions in Korea actively began to embrace economic, cultural, and social considerations in the 1990s. In the past, the discussions had been very much dominated by political discourse. The book under review reflects such a change in unification discussion. Composed of twelve articles, the book can be roughly divided into three parts: the first three articles examine security issues of the Korean peninsula; the next six articles deal with economic integration and cooperation between North and South Korea; and the last three articles analyze the costs and benefits of unification. While the book covers several different issues from different angles, the contributors have a relatively unified view. This is that an abrupt collapse of North Korea will result in huge costs. They therefore advocate gradual integration. In this respect, the book supports the "Sunshine Policy" of South Korea's former president Kim Dae-Jung. Such a view is well represented in Tony Hall's introduction, in which he observes that North Korean people's perception of foreigners (especially Americans) became much more favourable in the late 1990s after food aid programs. Such changes in "ordinary people's thinking can play an important role in its leaders' reaching out," he states (p. XV). In a similar vein, Young-Sun Lee argues that gradual unification would cost less (chapter 10), and Young-Back Choi suggests immediate unification would not bring any good either to North or South Korea (chapter 12). One of the most controversial articles in the book is "Cost and Benefits of Unification" by Choi. This article argues that, contrary to the belief of Korean nationalists, South Korea would not benefit from unification in terms of natural resources, cheap labor, bargaining power, or defense budget reduction. Choi estimates that South Korea will have to assume all the costs to develop North Korea, to produce welfare provisions, and to solve social conflicts if the two countries are unified. Based on this assessment, Choi carefully, but confidently, contends "no unification" is a "superior alternative" for both Koreas (p. 175). While the idea that unification would be too chaotic and costly is not totally [End Page 140] new, it is rare to see such a daring view openly declared. As most Koreans believe that unification is an absolute necessity, Choi's argument is innovative and makes this book rather special. A further important article is "Can Reindustrialization of North Korea Support a Sustainable Food Supply?" This article maintains that North Korea, in its comparative disadvantage in agricultural production, would be able to import grains if it hosted labor-intensive light industry such as textiles and footwear manufacturing from South Korea (p. 83). By so doing, this article directly supports the Sunshine Policy and South Korea's project to build industrial complexes in North Korea. While the book poses good arguments for a functionalist approach to national integration, it suffers from some defects. Although the book focuses on economic cooperation between the two Koreas, including telecommunication cooperation, the possible benefit of the Trans-Korean Railway if connected to the Chinese and Russian railway systems is not covered. In addition, some of the articles in the book are too short to be able to offer a sustained argument. For example, chapters 3 and 2 are only four and six pages each. In chapter 12 some footnotes are numbered incorrectly. A more serious problem, however, lies in the volume's heavily economic orientation. While this is understandable if we consider that most of the contributors to the book are economists, some readers may find this volume's orientation...

Liberalists has declared that economic trade brings about political cooperation and peace between two countries through enhancing the economic benefits, promoting conversation, and removing misunderstanding. On the basis of this declaration, the policy on North Korea has been pushed ahead by the Korean government which tries to transform the relationship with North Korea from mistrust and hostility to reconciliation and cooperation. It has been twenty three years since the economic trade between South and North Korea began in January, 1989 under President Noh Taewoo which was triggered by the Declaration of July 7 and the North-South Korean Economic Relation Measure of October in 1988. The total turnover between South and North Korea was about 15.9 billion USD during the period from the beginning of January, 1989 to the end of September, 2011, out of which 13.2 billion USD is for commercial trade and 2.6 billion USD is for economic aid. However, the controversy is being aroused in South Korea about the policy on North Korea because North Korea tends to keep hostility towards South Korea through nuclear experiment, blowing up the Cheonan ship, shooting a South Korean tourist in Keumkang Mountain, and shelling of Yeonpyeong Island. It seems to the realists that the economic trade between South and North Korea brings about reinforcing the North Korean military power and weakening the security in South Korea, which results in hindering the peace in Korean Peninsular. From the point of this issue, this paper aims to analyse the effect of trade and economic aid on easing conflicts between South and North Korea empirically. The result of this study can be summarized as follows. First of all, the increase of total turnover is significantly effective on creating the cooperative relationship between South and North Korea, which means that the increase of total turnover will decrease the conflict index. Secondly, the increase of commercial trade does not significantly affect the conflict index. Thirdly, the increase of non-commercial trade is significantly effective on the conflict index, which means that the increase of non-commercial trade will bring about creating the cooperative relationship between South and North Korea. Finally, the multi-variable analysis shows that rate of change in non-commercial trade is significantly effective on the conflict index, but rate of change in commercial trade is not. To sum up the results of the empirical analysis, the increase of total turnover and/or non-commercial trade is significantly effective on creating the cooperative relationship between South and North Korea, but not in the case of the increase of commercial trade. In other words, the economic trade between South and North Korea does not necessarily reduce the conflict in Korean Peninsular. In fact, it has been happening in the real world since fifty years ago. Social welfare in North Korea should be enhanced to reduce the conflict in Korean Peninsular through the economic support and trade from South Korea. The amount of social welfare increase in North Korea should be enough to offset the amount of social welfare decrease due to the cessation of the economic support and trade. Therefore, the economic trade between South and North Korea needs to be vitalized more and more so that North Korea be economically dependent upon South Korea. Limits of this paper, which are left to be studied in the future, are as follows. First of all, it needs to be analyzed how much social welfare has been enhanced in North Korea through the economic trade between South and North Korea for the past twenty three years. Secondly, it also needs to be studied what is the level of dependence of North Korea on South Korea, and whether the economic sanction toward the North Korea of the Lee Myung-bak administration is significantly effective or not.

통일 후 남북한 산업구조 재편 및 북한 성장산업 육성방안 (Ways to Reform Industrial Structure of North and South Korea and Nurture Growth Industries in North Korea after Unification)

In 2010, with the implementation of the May 24th measures, inter-Korean economic cooperation was suspended in all areas except the Kaesong Industrial Complex. Then, in 2016, with the closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex, all inter-Korean economic cooperation came to a halt. The joint venture enterprises in inter-Korean economic cooperation were mainly concentrated in the Pyongyang region. However, there was a case of inter-Korean economic cooperation in the form of a joint venture enterprise outside the Kaesong Industrial Complex that could be accessed using the entry and exit procedures of the Kaesong Industrial Complex. South-North Equity Joint Venture Enterprise in Kaesong can utilize the industrial, transportation, and transit facilities of the Kaesong Industrial Complex and has the advantage of active participation by North Korea, which holds shares. In the Equity Joint Venture Act, it is necessary to clarify the criteria for setting land usage fees, ease the all-out agreement system, and ensure education for workers. In addition, it is necessary to fairly define subsequent procedures in cases where consultation is impossible. Under the North-South Economic Cooperation Act, it is necessary to simplify the North's project approval process and stipulate that the North should manage its property in good faith, at least to a minimum extent, in special circumstances. The law on the development of inter-Korean relations needs to clearly define the special relationship between North and South Korea and elevate the legal status of the inter-Korean agreements to the level of general treaties. The law on inter-Korean exchange and cooperation should clearly stipulate in writing the procedures for obtaining North Korean visit approvals and for importing and exporting goods, and should minimize the time required for these processes. The agreement on investment protection between North and South Korea should specify in detail the abnormal issues that impede economic cooperation and provide for step-by-step investment protection accordingly. Regarding the agreement on the resolution of commercial disputes between North and South Korea, the follow-up procedures of the agreement should be promptly carried out, and the establishment of a governing law that applies to both North and South Korea is necessary. The inter-Korean agreement went through the legislative approval process outlined in Article 60, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution, thereby establishing its legal validity. However, due to North Korea's non-compliance, it has become practically ineffective. However, as North Korea has not explicitly rejected the validity of the agreement, it is not advisable to disregard the agreement and its provisions in preparation for future inter-Korean cooperation. North Korea has been attempting to improve its external economy through scientific and technological exchanges, economic development zones, and other means since the 2010s. However, the situation has worsened due to North Korea's nuclear tests leading to U.S. sanctions and the impact of COVID-19. Due to COVID-19, there have been zero exchanges of people between North and South Korea for a period of two years starting from 2021. In the current tense situation of strained inter-Korean relations, inter-Korean economic cooperation should be carried out flexibly and adaptively, taking into account the interests of both North and South Korea and contributing to their reunification, in accordance with the dynamics of inter-Korean and international relations.

통일 후 남북한 금융ㆍ재정 통합방안 (Financial and Fiscal Integration Plan between South and North Korea after Unification)

Economists have expressed their opinion that the economic trade between countries brings about economic prosperity as well as peace. Their opinion is based upon that the trading countries do not want to face the situation of decline in their welfare and benefits due to not participating in economic trade. They argue that economic trades between countries give them the opportunities of conversation, decrease misunderstanding, and leads them to peaceful mind and behavioral attitude to adjust the political conflicts. On the basis of this kind of opinion and the reunification of Germany, the economic trade between South and North Korea has been suggested as the most efficient measure to maintain the peace in Korean Peninsula. It has been twenty four years since the economic trade between South and North Korea was triggered in January, 1989 under President Noh Taewoo’s Declaration of July 7 in spite of several crises. The total turnover between South and North Korea is about US$ 18.3 billion from 1989 to 2012, out of which US$ 9.2 billion is the export to the North and US$ 9.1 billion is the import from the North. Since the end of cold war, South Korea and China have established diplomatic relations on July 24, 1992, and they have become strategic cooperative partners. The total turnover between South Korea and China was US$ 6.4 billion in 1992, and it increased to US$ 215.2 billion in 2012. On the other hand, the total turnover between North Korea and China amounts to US$ 5.9 billion in 2012, which is around three times as much as that between South and North Korea. The results of theoretical analyses are summarized as follows. First of all, exports and imports between South and North Korea turned out to ease the conflicts between two countries. Therefore, ‘theory of peace through trade’ by the liberalists was supported here. Secondly, it turned out that the economic trade between North Korea and China affects to easing conflicts between South and North Korea only if South Korea and China are in friendly partnership. It implies that China induces North Korea to ease the conflicts between South and North Korea. Thirdly, exports from South Korea to China affects to easing conflicts between South and North Korea only if North Korea and China are friendly partners politically. Imports from China to South. Korea affects to easing conflicts between South and North Korea only if North Korea and China are in antagonistic relationship politically. Empirical analysis shows that the difference quotient in the total turnover between South and North Korea turned out to have a significant positive relationship with the conflict index of the former year. It implies that the increase of the difference quotient in the total turnover between South and North Korea is likely to ease the conflicts between two countries. On the other hand, the difference quotient in the imports turned out to have significant positive relationship with the conflict index of the former year. It tells that the increase of the imports is likely to ease the conflicts between South and North Korea. While the expand of trade with China will ease the conflicts in Korean Peninsula from the theoretical viewpoint, empirical analyses present opposite results. It implies that the relationship between North Korea and China since the end of cold war is not the same as that before the end of cold war. It also tells that North Korea puts the higher political priority to developing the nuclear weapon and long-range missile. Inter-Korean policy has to keep consistency focusing economic cooperation apart from political issues. Long-term goal of inter-Korean policy should be unification, although short-term one is peace and stability in Korean Peninsula.

In 2023, the Constitutional Court ruled that the prohibition of anti-North Korea leaflets under Article 24, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3 of the Inter-Korean Relations Development Act and the punishment provisions under Article 25 of the same Act were unconstitutional. There is no disagreement in the Constitutional Court’s decision that the act of sending anti-North Korea leaflets is protected by the freedom of expression under the Constitution. However, the majority of the Constitutional Court judged that the prohibition of ‘distributing leaflets, etc.’ was not a regulation of the method of expression, but a regulation of the content of expression. Since it was a content regulation, strict review was applied, and the law subject to this case, which prohibited and punished the distribution of anti-North Korea leaflets, was ruled unconstitutional. Based on the theory of the special relationship between South and North Korea, the Constitutional Court judged that freedom of expression should be guaranteed in North Korea under the Constitution, and that the freedom to express North Korean residents that the North Korean regime does not tolerate is also protected by the Constitution. Through this decision, the Constitutional Court confirmed that freedom of expression is a constitutional norm that we must not forget even in the special relationship between South and North Korea. In the framework of special relationship that aims for peaceful unification, leaflets sent to North Korea can be protected as an act of freedom of expression. However, if the framework of the special relationship between North and South Korea is broken, leaflets sent to North Korea cannot be considered as an object of protection of freedom of expression. As of 2024, inter-Korean relations are increasingly entering a state of hostile confrontation. In the current inter-Korean relationship, anti-North Korea Leaflets, like filth balloons, are clearly dangerous acts that stimulate military tensions between the South and the North. Therefore, anti-North Korea Leaflets and filth balloons must be stopped for the sake of peace on the Korean Peninsula. Looking back at the Constitutional Court’s decision, if leaflets sent to North Korea are to be stopped by law, the purpose must be to ensure national security. Not the entire act of sending leaflets, but the act of sending leaflets north of the Military Demarcation Line without permission from the military authorities should be defined as an illegal act that is prohibited. And it is appropriate to punish those who “endanger military facilities and the lives and bodies of citizens” due to such illegal acts. The fact that anti-North Korea Leaflets are the only means of conveying opinions to North Korean residents is not a matter that needs special consideration in order to protect freedom of expression, but rather a reality that needs to be overcome in order to expand freedom of expression.

The relevance of the research topic is due to the active development of the U.S.-South Korean relations and their impact on inter-Korean relations. The role of the United States in the foreign policy of the Republic of Korea is great which not only limits it in developing of its own potential due to the direct dependence on decisions and actions but also hinders the normalization of relations between the two Koreas. The purpose of the research is to examine the dynamics of relations in the triangle ‘‘ROK (Republic of Korea) - DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) - U.S.”. The main methods of the study include analyzing the events in the triangle ‘‘ROK - DPRK - the U.S.” as well as the texts of UNSC (United Nations Security Council) resolutions on nuclear non-proliferation on the Korean peninsula. The study concludes that despite South Korea’s attempts to stabilize relations with its northern neighbor, its pro-American course in foreign policy has prevented it from making significant concessions. For today, the ROK’s foreign policy is aimed at deepening cooperation with the US and its security partners in the region. Therefore no warming in relations between the two Koreas is expected in the near future.

After World War 􀸋, West Germany started internal trade with East Germany, and through intra-German trade, the two Germanys could accomplish unification based on continuous human exchange and economic integration. Recently, China has also completed free trade level agreements (ECFA and CEPA) with Taiwan and city states, Hong Kong and Macau. China and Taiwan have made a stronger economic foundation and unification circumstance through the agreement. The trade of divided nations such as Korea, Germany and China usually started from private level transactions in the beginning, and it developed to internal level, later to international level trade. In 1992, South and North Korea agreed on internal trade through the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement. Recently, South Korea also received recognition for Gaeseong products as outward processing goods through free trade negotiations. Thus, it may be said that the two Koreas have already laid a firm foundation for a South and North Korea FTA. However, in order to achieve FTA level trade between the two Koreas, the internal trade of both Koreas needs to be legally recognized from the international society and trade organizations such as the WTO. Above all, sincere attention and intention of North Korea to international and free trade would be one of the most indispensable factors. This paper tries to prove that, through the existence of various international economic activities of North Korea such as a Special Economic Zone and investment law, North Korea can join substantive economic co-operation with South Korea in the near future. This paper also shows that a South and North Korea FTA is a possible mission considering the North's intention to opening and reformation if South Korea encourages cooperation properly. Simultaneously, a South and North Korea FTA is not only the most adequate alternative to resolve the economic dependence of North Korea on China, but also preparation to confront the diplomatic relationship between Japan and DPRK. This set up of a two-Korea FTA would eventually make an indispensable foundation of unification of the two Koreas

North Korea's Economic Integration and Growth Potential

North Korea's Economic Integration and Growth Potential

What changes has the Cheonan incident brought about in the Northeast Asian region? How and to what extent have those changes shifted as time goes by? I find that the Cheonan sinking has played a key role in deepening the ideological chasm in South Korea between conservatives and progressives. It has also become a serious obstacle to the improvement of South Korea-North Korea relations, and has been the catalyst for the emergence of a Cold War-like rivalry between the US-South Korea-Japan and the China-North Korea-Russia blocs. However, relations among neigh-boring countries in Northeast Asia have shifted over time, including significant improvement in China-Republic of Korea relations and worsening of relations between China and North Korea and South Korea and Japan. KEYWORDS: Cheonan incident, ideological divide, South Korean politics, inter-Korean relations, Northeast Asian security relations.ON MARCH 26, 2010, THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA (ROK OR SOUTH Korea) navy corvette PCC-722 Cheonan sank while conducting a patrol mission in the Yellow Sea just south of the Northern Limit Line near Baekryeong Island. As a result, forty-six out of 104 crew members were killed while fifty-eight were rescued. Following an investigation, a Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group (JIG) consisting of experts from the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Sweden, and South Korea, announced on May 20 that the Cheonan had been sunk by a North Korean torpedo attack. What changes has the Cheonan incident brought about in the Northeast Asia region? How and to what extent have those changes shifted over time?The JIG's official report, instead of leading to a consensus view among South Koreans, sparked a debate over the cause of the incident. The already deep ideological chasm between con- servatives and progressives in South Korean society worsened. The sinking of the Cheonan also further undermined interKorean relations and served as the catalyst for the emergence of a Cold War-like rivalry between the US-ROK-Japan and the China-North Korea-Russia blocs. Along with these changes in regional security dynamics, the tragic incident also exerted significant influence on interstate relations among neighboring countries in Northeast Asia. In the short run, the Cheonan sinking weakened China-ROK, US-DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or North Korea), and US-China relations, whereas it helped strengthen China-DPRK, US-ROK, US-Japan, and ROK-Japan relations. Further shifts have occurred since the incident as China-ROK relations have significantly improved while China-DPRK and ROK-Japan relations have notably worsened.In this article, I first examine the widening ideological gap between conservatives and progressives in South Korea after the sinking of the navy ship by exploring the hotly contested points of the JIG's report. I then look into the impact of the Cheonan incident on Northeast Asian security relations and how and to what extent the changes produced by the incident have shifted over time.The Ideological Divide in South KoreaA Catalyst for Deepening MistrustIdeological disputes between conservatives and progressives in South Korea are hardly new. Since the end of the Korean War, the two camps have mainly clashed over policies toward the DPRK and the security role of the United States. Conservatives give top priority to fostering a close partnership with the United States and maintaining vigilance against the threat from North Korea. Progressives, however, radically oppose that narrative, seeing the North more as a kin nation with which to be reconciled and the United States as a disruptive interloper (Chae and Kim 2008, 77).This ideological divide became more evident after progressive President Kim Dae-jung (1998-2002) launched an engagement policy toward North Korea, called the Sunshine Policy. Conservative politicians, intellectuals, and media strongly opposed the Kim government's initiatives, criticizing him for not demanding reciprocal actions by the DPRK. …

Last orders in Pyongyang

남북한이 상이한 사회적 규범체계 하에 분단국가로 장기화될수록, 건설기술에 대한 이론적 기술적 차이가 많이 발생하게 된다. 따라서 남북한이 화해의 국면에서 상호 교류시, 공동으로 사용하는 철근콘크리트 도로교의 성능수준도 명확히 차이가 발생한다. 이에 본 연구는 북한의 철근콘크리트 도로교 설계기준과 관련된 자료를 면밀히 비교 분석하고, 철근콘크리트 슬래브교에 대한 표준설계 제원과 사례를 토대로 구조해석을 수행했다. 특히 남북한의 설계트럭하중에 대하여 활하중 영향을 분석함으로써, 북한의 철근콘크리트 슬래브교에 대한 수준을 추정하였고, 이를통해 통행에 대한 안전성을 사전에 검토할 수 있도록 기초 연구를 수행하였다. 따라서 향후 남북한이 화해국면에 접어들어 교류가 활발히 진행되거나, 더 나아가 통일국가로 준비하는 단계에서, 공통의 철근콘크리트 도로교 설계기준을 작성하는데 기초자료로 활용될 것으로 기대한다. If North Korea continuously remains an isolated nation without social interaction with South Korea, the gaps in the theoretical and technological status in construction technology become greater between North and South Korea. Therefore if interactions between North and South Korea can be made, there will be significant improvement in infrastructure technological performance can be made(i.e., Reinforced Concrete bridges). This study was performed to compare and analyze data related to the design standards of North Korean RC bridges and to execute a structural analysis based on standard design specifications of RC slab bridges. Especially, basic study of analyzing the influences on design truck loads of North and South Korea was conducted for the purpose of predicting the performance of North Korean RC slab bridges and the safety levels of traveling vehicles in advance. It is expected that the results of this study can be used as fundamental data for the set-up of South-North RC bridge specification when South and North Korea enter a stage of cooperation and interaction between South and North Korea are actively pursued to prepare for reunification.

This article analyses the results of thirty years of Russia’s policy towards the Korean peninsula, since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Moscow and Seoul in 1990. The dynamics, scale, and nature of the economic interaction between the two countries are assessed against the backdrop of stagnation, in the same period, in trade and economic relations between Russia and the DPRK. The main trends of South Korean private investments in Russia are examined. A lack of progress is observed in the implementation of major projects in transport, gas industry, and electric power industry, which imply trilateral cooperation between Russia, South Korea, and North Korea. Despite political dialogue at a bilateral level between Moscow and Seoul, Moscow and Pyongyang, the instability of inter-Korean relations has become a serious obstacle to the implementation of trilateral projects. The main challenges faced by North and South Korea, their priorities in foreign policy, the possibility of developing inter-Korean relations in these conditions, and the position of Russia and China on a Korean settlement are compared. The possible economic transition of DPRK to a market economy is also analysed as a factor in regional cooperation. The role and position of Russia and China on negotiations of North Korea’s missile and nuclear projects are described as well as the assessment of prospects for strengthening Russian policy on the Korean peninsula in economics, political and security issues. Lastly, the correlation of Russian regional developmental priorities with the position of South Korea on this issue is considered and an outlook on the integration processes in Northeast Asia with the participation of China, Japan, and the ROK, and the possibility of Russia’s cooperation, is provided.