This week, people are commemorating the anniversaries of the only war time use of nuclear weapons, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Last week, a different anniversary passed almost unnoticed; July 27 was the 60th anniversary of the signing of the ceasefire agreement that marks the end of the Korean War.
Veterans groups and some commentators, including President Obama, took the opportunity to memorialize the military personnel who were wounded, taken prisoner or killed in the conflict, and to extol, rightfully, the sacrifice of those who fought so hard and long. Few remembered to mention that there is no peace on the Korean Peninsula, or to ask why tens of thousands of American and Korean troops still face each other along the Demilitarized Zone created by the armistice. In South Korea, however, a collection of non-governmental organizations are seeking a peace treaty that will truly end the conflict before it stretches into its seventh decade.
Why bother after sixty years? Here are several good reasons:
-
North Korea has asked for/demanded a peace treaty in every negotiation with the United States and South Korea since its nuclear program was first discovered over twenty years ago. Opening trilateral or even multilateral talks on a peace treaty would be a very important confidence building measure and would reduce tensions and suffering in the long term.
-
South Korean governments have long offered the “North Korean threat” as the rationale for its internal security apparatus. For decades, Korea's military dictators cited the danger from North Korean spies and provocateurs to justify its draconian national security law. Despite some reforms, democratically elected presidents, including the late Kim Dae Jung who was a frequent target of the national security apparatus, kept the laws on the books. As South Korea celebrates 25 years of democratic politics, now is an appropriate time to remove the law by concluding a peace treaty and thereby ending the rationale for the law.
-
The “North Korean threat” has also been used to justify robust South Korean military spending and the continued U.S. military presence both along the DMZ and behind the front line on bases occupying choice real estate in Seoul and other major Korean cities. Lately, South Korean military expansion has caused much controversy and suffering in the town of Kangjeong, on Jeju Island. As long as there is a large U.S. military presence on the Korean Peninsula, Korean hawks can deflect some criticism by claiming they are responding to U.S. pressure when they construct new bases or purchase (from U.S. weapons manufacturers) expensive weapons systems.
If you support a peace treaty to end the Korean War, endorse the campaign here. Tell your friends and acquaintances, and take a photo to post to the website.
Comments