Google translation of a Korean article.
Prof Park is one of the most pro-DPRK scholars among the ethnic Koreans in the USA.
Sejin: I accept most of what he says, but at the same time. am critical of his inability to see DPRK with critical eyes. He sees nothing negative about DPRK>
---
“What we need now is not an end to the war, but a peace treaty and normalization of relations.”
“What we need now is not an end to the war, but a peace treaty and normalization of relations.”
[Unification News 21st Anniversary Interview]
Park Han-sik, University of Georgia Emeritus Professor ①
reporter name Reporter Kimchi-gwan
Enter 2021.11.23
On August 27th, the publication commemoration of the publication of emeritus professor Park Han-sik's memoir 『Crazy for Peace』 was held at Konkuk University Millennium Memorial Hall. [File photo - Tongil News]
---
□ Tongil News Kimchi Kwan: It's nice to see you in a video like this, even though you're far away. The interview to commemorate the 21st anniversary of the founding of Tongil News begins with Professor Park Han-sik. Thank you for accepting the interview for the founding of Tongil News.
■ Professor Park Han-sik: I'm happy. Thank.
□ I know that you are doing a lot of online YouTube courses recently. Please introduce your recent status.
■ From 1970 to 2015, after I came to the United States to study, I taught at an American university without missing a single year for 45 years. After teaching for 45 years and retiring, I thought of teaching more.
Also, for 45 years, there were some Korean students, but only American and foreign students mainly taught. Now, I wanted an opportunity to share what I learned and felt for my country's juniors and comrades.
Then, it has been over 15 months since people with a will to gather and hold a Zoom lecture called 'Park Han-sik Sarangbang' once a month. still doing it Also, it's been over a year since I've been appearing on <Souvenir TV> in Korea every week. I am enjoying that opportunity now.
□ Recently, you published the book Crazy for Peace, which had a publication commemoration in Seoul. How was the reaction or reaction?
■ I would like to thank Tongil News for participating as one of the organizations supporting the publication anniversary. This book is a bit progressive. Therefore, it is said that it is read and liked by progressive people and people with a high degree of education.
However, people who are conservative and anti-communist are not going to read this book.
I don't know how widely the book has spread, but it is said that all the people who come to the 'Unification Sarangbang' every month are devouring it. So for me, people who are qualified and ready to read understand that a lot of people are reading. I am delighted.
□ The biggest issue right now is that the US-DPRK relations have come to a complete halt after the US-DPRK summit in Hanoi in February 2019 ended without results. What is the cause and how can the North American dialogue proceed? Or is it impossible to go on forever? I'd love to hear your opinion.
■ The fact that the Hanoi summit was accomplished is only the shape of it. Practically, there was no desire or plan to improve relations with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the part of the United States.
It still is. I have lived in the United States for 55 years, teaching and teaching the US government for 50 years, and I know enough to know America. However, the more you look at the United States, the more the United States is moving by its natural color, the two primary colors. One is militarism and the other is racism.
I'm glad I'm teaching college here as a non-white person, but it's a very difficult place for non-whites to live in the United States. And it is the military-industrial complex that strikes the fortress plate in the United States. In the military-industrial complex, it moves the American economy, moves American public opinion, and moves American policy.
With that in mind, the United States cannot let the Democratic People's Republic of Korea go. It will continue to be demonized and continue to be the main enemy, and only then will it be beneficial to the military-industrial complex. Arms should also be sold to South Korea, Japan, and other countries. Therefore, it is most important for the United States that North Korea remain the main enemy. It should continue to be so.
Therefore, it seems that the United States has no intention of improving relations with North Korea. That's why it's been like this since Hanoi. Sanctions and sanctions have been repeated, and these sanctions have no particular reason. Because North Korea is communist, because North Korea doesn't listen, 'I can't leave it alone. We must not continue to exist on this planet.” There is an American intention.
Therefore, as long as there is such a thing, it is difficult to improve US-DPRK relations or maintain peace on the Korean Peninsula. Peace is not only the absence of conflict, but peace is the process of finding homogeneity by harmonizing heterogeneity and heterogeneity. In this way, peace has not been successfully pursued over the past 70 years.
That is why I assert that no progress has been made on the Korean Peninsula or in North Korea-U.S. relations because of this, the US tendency, US thinking, and US policy line.
□ If the prospects for US-DPRK relations are bleak, is there any way to get through the US-DPRK relations in the future?
■ Much of the responsibility rests with the United States. One 70% is the responsibility of the United States. America doesn't want to do it all. Because the current situation is good to contain China and expand the power of the United States internationally.
Its strategy is to demonize North Korea and use North Korea as a bait to militarize South Korea, Japan, and allies. Putting other countries here, Australia and India are all democracies. They are trying to put pressure on China, but South Korea should not be involved in that.
□ Is the US-North Korea relationship difficult to predict in the future?
■ It is difficult to see good prospects. However, improving US-DPRK relations should not be just “denuclearization, denuclearization”, but rather, each country or the United Nations should strive for both a peace treaty and normalization of relations. Moreover, we have to work hard from the south.
North Korea is also making a lot of effort to change various laws within the country to normalize it these days. Since we are the same people who know the North well, we must take the lead in expanding and modernizing the North. Not only economically and materially, but also consciously, North Korea is very contracted right now. I am so obsessed with the victim consciousness.
North Korea's nuclear weapons, CVID is impossible... A normal state must be recognized to give up its nuclear weapons
Professor Hansik Park hosted the 'North Korea-US Track 2 Talks' at the University of Georgia in December 2003. From left to right: Disaster of the North Korean mission to the United Nations Shin Sung-cheol, Deputy North Korean Ambassador to the UN Han Seong-ryeol, Professor Park, former US Ambassador to Korea Donald Gregg, US Representative Kurt Weldon, North Korean leader Cho Sung-koo (Disarmament and Peace Research Institute), and U.S. Senate Democratic Advisor Frank Januzi , Keith Ruth, Republican aide to the Senate Republican Party, Kim Myung-gil, director of the Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, and Shim Il-kwan as an interpreter. [Photo courtesy of Professor Park Han-sik]
□ If it is a North Korean issue, the Western world is raising the nuclear issue. I know that in the past, during negotiations with the United States, the thesis of “Let North Korea give up its nuclear weapons but give it ‘reversibility’” was published. How do you see North Korea's nuclear weapons problem and, more broadly, the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula?
■ I've tried in various ways so far, but the first button to unlock it has not been put on. The reason is very simple. If we are going to solve the nuclear problem, we must first understand why North Korea pursued nuclear weapons.
If becoming a nuclear state is the goal in itself, it will never be resolved. You cannot give up on purpose. However, from my point of view, the fact that North Korea is trying to acquire nuclear weapons is a means of diplomacy and a means of national security. The means can be changed. It can be replaced by other means that serve the same purpose.
The only reason why we wanted, pursued, and tested nuclear weapons was to protect the country and the system. In other words, if the international conditions for safeguarding the country and system and maintaining peace without nuclear weapons are guaranteed, nuclear weapons are to be given up.
why? He said he would give up, and that is because President Kim Il-sung, who served as an idol there, had instructed him to do so. In my view, nuclear weapons are given up when all conditions are met, and those conditions should be the same as the purpose of pursuing nuclear weapons.
The goal is to maintain the system, and in order to achieve this, there must be a peace treaty involving multi-states. We will not give up our nuclear weapons even with a non-aggression pact or a declaration of an end to the war. I think that there must be a peace treaty, normalization of relations, and in all fields, Korea will be recognized as an ordinary country, and if this is the case, it will give up all its nuclear weapons. However, if that doesn't happen, I never give up, and even if I give up, there is a very high chance that I will go back.
“Isn’t it reversible?” A lot of people ask about this, but reversibility is not given by the outside, and they already have nuclear science, scientists, raw materials, and made them, so they turn around and become another nuclear state in just three months. So, reversibility is something you already have, not something that others or the United States give you.
Recognizing that and saying, “Let’s give up because we will cooperate to become ready to give up nuclear weapons.” You have to do this to give up, and you never give up if you just forcefully unilaterally do it.
□ Since North Korea has Corona and the United States is not making a dialogue proposal that meets the conditions, I wonder if it will be time to 'solidify' its status as a nuclear weapons state as time goes by anyway. how do you see
■ It would be wrong to view North Korea as buying time to solidify its nuclear weapons, and it will only lead to further anger in North Korea.
North Korea is already a nuclear state. They made nuclear weapons and tested them six times, developed several types of guided missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons and successfully tested them. Even now, the computer asks 'Who is the nuclear state?' If you look, most of them include North Korea. In reality, it has already become a nuclear state.
However, buying time to become a nuclear state is an anachronistic and anachronistic diagnosis.
And how do we give up nuclear weapons? In some circumstances, the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said, "That's it. That's enough." Would you let me go? never let go For this reason, for that reason.
It also has to be completely proven, but there is no way to do it. Moreover, it is absurd to say that it must be done irreversibly. So I believe that complete, substantiated and irreversible denuclearization is impossible. It is practically impossible, and moreover, North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons.
□ You already saw that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons. Do you expect North Korea to conduct nuclear tests, intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launches, or artificial satellite launches in the future?
■ What North Korea does is proportionate to what South Korea and the United States do. It's not just that he's doing it himself, he'll do it if he does it in South Korea.
However, the thing that North Korea is most interested in and caring about is that “a double scale should not be applied”. 'If we do it, we don't see it, and if the North does it, it's a provocation' and let's not do that.
The most important problem is ignoring North Korea. It's a slang word. North Koreans know too well that we look down on North Korea. As I go through the drums, I feel with my skin, “Why do we have to be looked down on?” We are not a country that is so bad as to belittle North Korea. North Korea has many things to be proud of.
So, if we look at North Korea positively and do not look down on it, inter-Korean relations will improve quickly, and US-DPRK relations will improve as well. This is because there is no structure of consciousness. This is because of anti-communist education, etc.
End-of-war declaration is meaningless, “peace treaty must be signed”
Professor Park Han-sik, who won the 2010 Gandhi King Ikeda Peace Prize, was introduced as a 'peacemaker' on the cover of 2011. [Photo courtesy of Professor Park Han-sik]
□ Inter-Korean relations have also recently become difficult, but it seems that the South Korean government, including President Moon Jae-in, is focusing on the 'declaration of an end to the war'. In other words, it seems that the declaration of an end to the war is being pursued as an entrance to dialogue. So far, the North's reaction has not come out clearly, but it seems to be critical. Do you think the end-of-war declaration can be the key to overcoming the current difficulties?
■ Until now, there were declarations and agreements similar to the declaration of the end of the war that could be substituted for the declaration of the end of the war. There have been more than five or six times between the leaders of North and South Korea. Even if only half of them are implemented, there will be no war if only one of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration, and 9.19 Pyongyang Declaration are implemented.
I don't think it's right, but don't you think that not war is usually peace? In that sense, I think that a peace treaty is necessary, but it is not necessary and meaningless to make an end-of-war agreement or such an organization. Now, after signing the five or six agreements, what's the use of adding one more?
What we need now is to implement at least one of the things we have done so far, and to sign a peace treaty to move forward. The previous agreement is meaningless and cannot be implemented. There is no reason for it to be fulfilled just as everything has not been fulfilled. I don't think positively or optimistically about it.
□ Do you think the North will not respond to the declaration of an end to the war?
■ Yes. The North will think similarly to my story. “If you keep your promises, the war has already ended, so why do you have to sign again? There is a situation where it disappears to pieces of paper, but there is no point in doing it for us.” I think so. You have to show that it isn't, and you have to convince the explanation, but I don't think there's any way I can convince you.
□ Currently, South Korea and the United States are not responding to dialogue and are particularly concerned about 'double standards' and 'hostile policy'.
■ The double standard proves that the drum is demonized. He is not a civilized person, and he does not keep his promises. However, North Korea is not the only one who is not keeping its promises.
The double standard means that military training in the North is a provocation, and if it is in the South, it is justified for security, and it should not be done like this. If that's the case, everything the drums always do is bad. And even if it is necessary, if it is done in the United States or Korea, it is justified and should not be done this way.
It is said that if you do it that way, you will not be able to respond, and if you do, you will not see any results. Standards should be the same between ordinary countries and ordinary countries. If you think there is a double standard, the South and the US should thoroughly understand that North Korea will not respond to the summit.
North and South Korea “Deceive the People”
A farewell lecture on peace studies at the University of Georgia retirement ceremony in December 2015. [Photo source - University of Georgia website]
□ One of the remarks that caused controversy or wavering in the South recently is that former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyeon should aim for 'inter-Korean union' rather than unification, which is not immediately feasible, and change the Ministry of Unification to the 'Ministry of Inter-Korean Relations'. how do you see
■ To put it bluntly, it doesn't fit common sense and it doesn't fit the historical truth. What was the agreement at the top level of the two Koreas about six times? Did you not agree to unify? Apart from unification, unification is so important that it is difficult to justify the existence of our government in the South and the North.
As for the method of unification, as agreed in the 6.15 Joint Declaration, in the North it is a 'low-level federation system' and in the South it is a 'federation system'. In my view, there is no premise or reality that the coalition system will become one country next time even if you look at all the world literature.
A coalition is an economic, political, and ideological gathering in which completely independent sovereign states come together to achieve a specific goal through cooperation with each other. The United Nations is the Union and the EU is the Union.
Does the EU look like a country? is that for that purpose? Does the United Nations aim to become one world state? It's not like that. This is simply a matter of consolidating and forming alliances with each other for convenience, or by forming alliances in such a way.
To view the coalition system as a process between the South and the North toward unification is to deceive the people. You never get that result.
To achieve unification, it must be some kind of federation. If you do not want to do so because the North says that it is a 'lower-level federation', in other words, it is called a 'creative federation' or a 'creative federation'. There must be a human body, a government or a system. I think what Minister Jeong said is absurd.
□ Recently, the theory of two nations and the theory of friends are popular in the south. For example, there are suggestions about changing the Ministry of Unification to the Ministry of Inter-Korean Relations, how do you view this trend or trend?
■ Then, “Let's give up on unification. We have been divided by foreign powers, but we cannot reunify on our own, so let's accept it as a completely different country." do that Good people should not be deceived like that. It shouldn't be done as if it was unified.
If we go as Minister Jeong said, the immediate goal of coalition is to eliminate the Ministry of Unification and to make it an inter-Korean relations department. If the Ministry of Unification does not feel good, it can be replaced with the Ministry of Unification. Because we've reached an agreement five or six times to become self-sufficient. Either make it an independent Ministry of Unification, or get rid of the Ministry of Unification and not unify it.
If 7,80% of the people want it, they have no choice but to go there. However, from my point of view, more than half of our country, 70%, consider unification to be a legitimate goal. In the North, it is 100%. Going in the direction the people and the people want is the right political ideology, whether it be democracy or socialism.
“The Cold War is over in history”...The US and China are 'competition'
Emeritus Professor Park Han-sik is taking the lead in unification education through Zoom lectures in 'Park Heon-sik Sarangbang'. [Captured photo - Tongil News]
□ The biggest structural change in the recent unification conditions seems to be the intensification of the US-China hegemony competition. As the competition for hegemony between the US and China intensifies, there are concerns that the new Cold War on the Korean Peninsula will also intensify. In such a situation, what do you think is the direction and method of unification between the two Koreas?
■ I have a different opinion on that. It is said that an international new Cold War order is coming, but the Cold War has ended in history. The confrontation of ideologies, the military competition, and the absence of hot wars, but of the Cold War, put an end to decades of history.
The current US-China relationship is a competitive one. Even if it is a competition, it is a systemic competition that eats more land and turns international public opinion on them rather than such a competition. It is such a competition to make international public opinion more favorable to me.
It will not develop in the direction of the Cold War era in which China and the United States accumulate military weapons through armed competition. They each go to different countries and try to dominate the world opinion that their system is more justified and more convincing.
Therefore, China is not taking the lead in military power these days, but promoting social and cultural 'Chinese-style socialism'. The 'Chinese-style socialism' that President Xi Jinping refers to means Confucian-style socialism. Therefore, the Chinese government has provided a lot of support to revitalize Confucianism at home and to study Confucianism internationally.
What China wants is not to go between the two systems as in the past, but to allow the various systems to live in different ways. This is the blueprint for China's change of world order.
There is always a polarization in the dominance of Christianity as in the United States. I told you to love the chosen people and the unchosen people, the right and the bad, the enemy. It's not Christianity. The devil must be killed. So, Christianity is supposed to put the devil at the forefront and kill the devil, whether it's a gangster or something.
However, since China operates on the Confucian principle of living together, I think there is little chance of a military confrontation between the two countries due to military friction.
No matter how the two systems change, we can't control it, can we? So what should we do? The two Koreas should do what the two Koreas can do. It is better to allow the two Koreas to exchange exchanges, trade in various ways, travel, and do this peacefully.
However, “it was divided. Someday we will have to unite. I think politics should be conducted with a blueprint that unification should be done in this way.” There is no unification blueprint in Korea right now.
Why can't we unify now? The federal system in the North can do it right now. When you create a federal state, it becomes a federal system. Wouldn't it be a low-level federation if you gave the state a minimal amount of power? Then it becomes a federal state from the next day.
Why not right now? I can't because I'm trying to unite. We need to know in common sense that unity is never one way to unify, and I don't think it's right to say it differently.
□ It is fresh to say that the current world order is a competitive relationship between the US and China rather than the new Cold War. But from a historical perspective, isn't China's nationalism a threat to us as much as the United States? Is it correct that the United States seeks demonization through the Christian dichotomy and China seeks coexistence through Confucian principles?
■ Confucianism cannot be regarded as hegemonism. Christianity is hegemonism. Hasn't there always been a religious war around the world by setting up a Christian flagpole historically? Confucianism is not a religion that encourages military confrontation in that sense.
We know Confucianism, we know Christianity, and we know everything. So is the North. If you look at religion, Buddhism, Christianity, and Confucianism are all mixed together, and one person has all three religions. When I was a child, I prayed on my face during the ancestral rites.
To that extent, our people are religious, but they do not have an exclusive religion. That is why I believe that we can use the religious role well to create a more harmonious unified state and system.
8th Party Congress, “Planned downgrading of the nation”
During the long interview, Professor Park Han-sik immediately answered all the questions with an upright posture. [Captured photo - Tongil News]
□ I did not include it in the questionnaire, but I am asking because I think many people will be curious. North Korea is now estimating that it will be quite difficult internally due to international sanctions, lockdown measures due to the prevention of COVID-19, food shortages due to natural disasters just last year, and various problems.
In the north, while advocating for a frontal breakthrough, they are promoting self-reliance and self-reliance. I am very curious about what will happen. The professor has visited the book several times and I know that he understands the internal flow much more deeply than we do. How do you see North Korea's current reality and the battle for breakthrough head-on?
■ First of all, North Korea will never collapse. We need to know that objectively. There are many ways to maintain one's own system and maintain legitimacy.
See the 8th Party Congress. Look at the various policy expressions that have emerged. As long as the system becomes more solid, it will never collapse. There is no case in the world where the political system has collapsed due to economic difficulties or hunger among the people in any country in the world.
The system must lose its legitimacy before it collapses. With legitimacy, it cannot collapse. North Korea's legitimacy has never been found in economic prosperity. find in ideology. The ideologies that justify North Korea are nationalism, populism, and Juche ideology. As long as these ideologies are effectively working to unite the people, they will never collapse.
South Korea is waiting for North Korea to collapse. When it collapses, it is unified, and that is German unification. It is absorption unity. These are all children's cartoons, far from realistic politics.
The South Korean government, intellectuals, and the media should somehow capture the North Korean situation as it is and create such a unification policy and inter-Korean relations that can be applied realistically, but now things are going differently.
□ North Korea amended its party rules through the 8th party congress and advocated 'our nation firstism' rather than 'our nation firstism'. In the case of the <Hankyoreh>, which first reported the revised party rules, and former Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok, "Isn't North Korea giving up on unification? Isn't it a return to nationalism rather than nationalism?" These interpretations are presented. What do you think?
■ That's a very bad idea. North Korea has never undermined or given up nationalism in the slightest. It is still the same now.
Wasn't that kind of atmosphere at the 8th Party Congress? What you should always see is 'for whom, what is the event for?' You have to look at it. The 8th Party Congress was not aimed at the South. It was aimed at the world. Kim Jong-un, the general secretary, declared that he would lead such a country.
Therefore, the state was emphasized as important. If the nation is important, international cooperation is not good. The United States is even more so. To the United States, you may not know what we mean when we say that we are pursuing our nation. America is by no means a nation-state. I don't know what the nation means. I don't know if there are 20% Anglo-Saxons, but it's not a nation-state.
But aren't South and North Korea nation-states? They are not male because they are ethnic. The reason why you can't live like a man is because it is not a man, how can you live like a man?
I've been to Pyongyang about 50 times, and every time I go, I feel like, 'Oh, this is our people'. I just listen to 100% of what they say, and if we ask to eat something together, we eat together with kimchi and with soybean paste.
And there is something to humble yourself. In America, there is no way to live if you are humble. North and South, “What do I know?” It should be like this, but in the United States, if I don't say that I am the best, I will never win the election. In Korea, they are learning it.
Our nation's strengths, modesty, and the tendency to oppose other people's positions are very good characteristics of our nation. We must not give up all these things and go out selfishly.
Therefore, the unification we are pursuing now has to be done with our nation at the forefront. However, the nation should not be set as the object of the world. That is why, at the 8th Party Congress, they deliberately downgraded the concept of a nation.
If you think that we should read it that way, everything has been changed there, it is a mistake. Experts must be able to read what the ear cannot hear and what the eye cannot see. If you read only what is said, you cannot understand the system by licking the watermelon. However, if you look at Kim Jong-un's speeches and other things like that, the nation is still alive. Without nationalism, North Korea cannot exist.
□ The same can be said about unification.
■ 'Give up on unification.' If he had even thought of such a thing, Chairman Kim Jong-il would never have signed the June 15 Joint Declaration. In 6.15, he thought that the method of unification was federation and federation, and admitted that there were slight differences.
Of course, the difference is completely different, but we have to remake the blueprint for unification to suit us. When discussing and discussing unification issues, you should always include the drum. It is better not to discuss or even think about unification and peace without including North Korea.
□ Tongil News celebrated its 21st anniversary. How should we view the role of the unification media in inter-Korean relations?
■ The media is changing all over the world as well as in the US. However, the media has two roles. It could be 50% 50%, it could be 90% 10%.
what are the two reporting the facts. It is very important to report the facts without distortion. Second, to create desirable public opinion. Absolutely need it
There is a lot of talk in the West that the media only reports the facts, but there is no media that only reports the facts. If you look here too, <CNN> and <MSNBC> are very progressive. But <FOX News> is very conservative. So all the media can see the way they are going. Even if you don't show it you can see
In my view, Tongil News is very forward-looking, progressive, national, and unification-oriented because it is unification news. That's important. That is one important part of the role of the media.
And reporting the truth. You must not lie. 'Donald Trump is now president of the United States. But it was stolen and the Democrats took it.' That's 100%, 1000% a lie. But the person who believes that lie will be about 20% of the American population. As a result, the American media is not doing its job, and public opinion has changed to prevent it. The media crisis does not lie with the media, but on the readers and the people who use the media. The media crisis has arrived.
However, we consider it important to report the truth in order to understand North Korea and to correct the unification issue. I think 50%, 50%. We must take the lead in creating a desirable culture of unification and a desirable culture of peace. Even educational institutions are not doing it.
The media has a role to play in the developing world and in our country. So, always keep these two roles in mind, and I hope to develop that way in the future.
reporter name Reporter Kimchi-gwan
Enter 2021.11.23
On the 16th, we had a video interview with Park Han-sik, an emeritus professor at the University of Georgia, USA to commemorate the 21st anniversary of the founding of Tongil News. [Captured photo - Tongil News]
---
“What we need now is to implement at least one thing we have done so far, and to sign a peace treaty to move forward. The end-of-war agreement is meaningless and cannot be implemented.”
In an interview commemorating the 21st anniversary of the founding of Tongil News, Park Han-sik (82 years old), an emeritus professor at the University of Georgia in the United States, said that the implementation of agreements between the leaders of the two Koreas, such as the 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration, is more important than the 'declaration of the end of the war' or 'end of the war agreement', which the Moon Jae-in administration is focusing on, and that 'peace' is more important. treaty,” he said.
Professor Emeritus Park Han-sik, who visited North Korea more than 50 times and left a big mark, such as arranging a visit by former President Carter in 1994 and a visit by former President Clinton in 2009 He repeatedly emphasized the need to see North Korea as it is.
Professor Park said, “There have been declarations and agreements similar to the declaration of the end of the war that can be substituted for the declaration of the end of the war. There have been more than five or six agreements between the leaders of the two Koreas,” he asked.
Since the 6.15 Joint Declaration and the 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration and the 9.19 Pyongyang Declaration all contain the content of 'there is no more war', which is a declaration of an end to the war, the declaration of an end to the war is virtually unnecessary if it is followed. Instead, “each country or the United Nations should make efforts for both of the peace treaty and the normalization of diplomatic relations. Moreover, we have to work hard from the south.”
Regarding the North Korean nuclear issue, he said, “I think that there should be a peace treaty, normalization of diplomatic relations, and if Korea is recognized as a normal state in all fields, then it will give up all its nuclear weapons. The possibility is very high.”
In particular, regarding 'reversibility', which allows North Korea to return to a nuclear-weapon state if the United States overturns its promise, even if North Korea has given up its nuclear weapons, "Reversibility is not granted from the outside, and they already have nuclear science, scientists, and raw materials. , I made it, so I turn around and become another nuclear state in just three months,” he explained.
“I believe that complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization is impossible. It is realistically impossible, and furthermore, North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons.” He criticized the CVID (complete, verifiable and irreversible disarmament) imposed by the Western world, including the United States, and gave a negative evaluation to future nuclear tests or intercontinental ballistic missiles. ICBM) launches are expected to be “in proportion to what South Korea and the United States do.”
Professor Park said, "I have lived in the United States for 55 years, teaching and teaching the United States government for 50 years, and I know a lot about the United States." It moves the American economy, moves American public opinion, and moves American policy.”
Therefore, “the United States cannot let the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea go. It continues to be demonized and continues to be the main enemy, and only then will it be beneficial to the military-industrial complex.” In particular, he was wary of the double standard of 'if we do it, we don't see it as provocation, and if the North does it, it is provocation', and pointed out that "the most important problem is ignoring North Korea."
In addition, it is evaluated that China's foreign policy based on Confucianism is more peaceful than the US, which regards the US-China hegemonic competition as a 'competition relationship' that acquires legitimacy from neighboring countries rather than the 'New Cold War' and punishes 'devils' based on the Christian dichotomy. also did
Professor Park said, “Even if the two systems change in any way, we cannot control it, can we? It is good for the two Koreas to exchange exchanges, trade in various ways, and to travel peacefully,” he suggested.
Regarding the revision of the party rules at the 8th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea in January and promoting 'our national firstism', he said, "We have to look at 'for whom and for what.' He interpreted it as emphasizing the state and said, “Aren’t South and North Korea nation-states? They are not male because they are ethnic. The reason why you can't live like the South is not the South, how can you live like the South?”, emphasizing the justification for national unification.
In order to properly understand the 'Kaesong University of Unification and Peace' advocated by Professor Park recently, one has to unravel the ideas for unification one by one that he has accumulated while serving as a professor at an American university for 45 years. The first part 'Ask for Unification' and the second part 'Ask the University of Unification and Peace' to hear the ideas about the federal system and the University of Unification and Peace were divided into two parts: video interview and additional phone interview.
The following is an interview with Emeritus Professor Park Han-sik through online zoom on the 16th and the following are the questions and answers from the first part of the phone interview, 'Ask for Unification'.
America's Two Primary Colors: "One is militarism and the other is racism"
---
“What we need now is to implement at least one thing we have done so far, and to sign a peace treaty to move forward. The end-of-war agreement is meaningless and cannot be implemented.”
In an interview commemorating the 21st anniversary of the founding of Tongil News, Park Han-sik (82 years old), an emeritus professor at the University of Georgia in the United States, said that the implementation of agreements between the leaders of the two Koreas, such as the 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration, is more important than the 'declaration of the end of the war' or 'end of the war agreement', which the Moon Jae-in administration is focusing on, and that 'peace' is more important. treaty,” he said.
Professor Emeritus Park Han-sik, who visited North Korea more than 50 times and left a big mark, such as arranging a visit by former President Carter in 1994 and a visit by former President Clinton in 2009 He repeatedly emphasized the need to see North Korea as it is.
Professor Park said, “There have been declarations and agreements similar to the declaration of the end of the war that can be substituted for the declaration of the end of the war. There have been more than five or six agreements between the leaders of the two Koreas,” he asked.
Since the 6.15 Joint Declaration and the 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration and the 9.19 Pyongyang Declaration all contain the content of 'there is no more war', which is a declaration of an end to the war, the declaration of an end to the war is virtually unnecessary if it is followed. Instead, “each country or the United Nations should make efforts for both of the peace treaty and the normalization of diplomatic relations. Moreover, we have to work hard from the south.”
Regarding the North Korean nuclear issue, he said, “I think that there should be a peace treaty, normalization of diplomatic relations, and if Korea is recognized as a normal state in all fields, then it will give up all its nuclear weapons. The possibility is very high.”
In particular, regarding 'reversibility', which allows North Korea to return to a nuclear-weapon state if the United States overturns its promise, even if North Korea has given up its nuclear weapons, "Reversibility is not granted from the outside, and they already have nuclear science, scientists, and raw materials. , I made it, so I turn around and become another nuclear state in just three months,” he explained.
“I believe that complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization is impossible. It is realistically impossible, and furthermore, North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons.” He criticized the CVID (complete, verifiable and irreversible disarmament) imposed by the Western world, including the United States, and gave a negative evaluation to future nuclear tests or intercontinental ballistic missiles. ICBM) launches are expected to be “in proportion to what South Korea and the United States do.”
Professor Park said, "I have lived in the United States for 55 years, teaching and teaching the United States government for 50 years, and I know a lot about the United States." It moves the American economy, moves American public opinion, and moves American policy.”
Therefore, “the United States cannot let the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea go. It continues to be demonized and continues to be the main enemy, and only then will it be beneficial to the military-industrial complex.” In particular, he was wary of the double standard of 'if we do it, we don't see it as provocation, and if the North does it, it is provocation', and pointed out that "the most important problem is ignoring North Korea."
In addition, it is evaluated that China's foreign policy based on Confucianism is more peaceful than the US, which regards the US-China hegemonic competition as a 'competition relationship' that acquires legitimacy from neighboring countries rather than the 'New Cold War' and punishes 'devils' based on the Christian dichotomy. also did
Professor Park said, “Even if the two systems change in any way, we cannot control it, can we? It is good for the two Koreas to exchange exchanges, trade in various ways, and to travel peacefully,” he suggested.
Regarding the revision of the party rules at the 8th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea in January and promoting 'our national firstism', he said, "We have to look at 'for whom and for what.' He interpreted it as emphasizing the state and said, “Aren’t South and North Korea nation-states? They are not male because they are ethnic. The reason why you can't live like the South is not the South, how can you live like the South?”, emphasizing the justification for national unification.
In order to properly understand the 'Kaesong University of Unification and Peace' advocated by Professor Park recently, one has to unravel the ideas for unification one by one that he has accumulated while serving as a professor at an American university for 45 years. The first part 'Ask for Unification' and the second part 'Ask the University of Unification and Peace' to hear the ideas about the federal system and the University of Unification and Peace were divided into two parts: video interview and additional phone interview.
The following is an interview with Emeritus Professor Park Han-sik through online zoom on the 16th and the following are the questions and answers from the first part of the phone interview, 'Ask for Unification'.
America's Two Primary Colors: "One is militarism and the other is racism"
On August 27th, the publication commemoration of the publication of emeritus professor Park Han-sik's memoir 『Crazy for Peace』 was held at Konkuk University Millennium Memorial Hall. [File photo - Tongil News]---
□ Tongil News Kimchi Kwan: It's nice to see you in a video like this, even though you're far away. The interview to commemorate the 21st anniversary of the founding of Tongil News begins with Professor Park Han-sik. Thank you for accepting the interview for the founding of Tongil News.
■ Professor Park Han-sik: I'm happy. Thank.
□ I know that you are doing a lot of online YouTube courses recently. Please introduce your recent status.
■ From 1970 to 2015, after I came to the United States to study, I taught at an American university without missing a single year for 45 years. After teaching for 45 years and retiring, I thought of teaching more.
Also, for 45 years, there were some Korean students, but only American and foreign students mainly taught. Now, I wanted an opportunity to share what I learned and felt for my country's juniors and comrades.
Then, it has been over 15 months since people with a will to gather and hold a Zoom lecture called 'Park Han-sik Sarangbang' once a month. still doing it Also, it's been over a year since I've been appearing on <Souvenir TV> in Korea every week. I am enjoying that opportunity now.
□ Recently, you published the book Crazy for Peace, which had a publication commemoration in Seoul. How was the reaction or reaction?
■ I would like to thank Tongil News for participating as one of the organizations supporting the publication anniversary. This book is a bit progressive. Therefore, it is said that it is read and liked by progressive people and people with a high degree of education.
However, people who are conservative and anti-communist are not going to read this book.
I don't know how widely the book has spread, but it is said that all the people who come to the 'Unification Sarangbang' every month are devouring it. So for me, people who are qualified and ready to read understand that a lot of people are reading. I am delighted.
□ The biggest issue right now is that the US-DPRK relations have come to a complete halt after the US-DPRK summit in Hanoi in February 2019 ended without results. What is the cause and how can the North American dialogue proceed? Or is it impossible to go on forever? I'd love to hear your opinion.
■ The fact that the Hanoi summit was accomplished is only the shape of it. Practically, there was no desire or plan to improve relations with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the part of the United States.
It still is. I have lived in the United States for 55 years, teaching and teaching the US government for 50 years, and I know enough to know America. However, the more you look at the United States, the more the United States is moving by its natural color, the two primary colors. One is militarism and the other is racism.
I'm glad I'm teaching college here as a non-white person, but it's a very difficult place for non-whites to live in the United States. And it is the military-industrial complex that strikes the fortress plate in the United States. In the military-industrial complex, it moves the American economy, moves American public opinion, and moves American policy.
With that in mind, the United States cannot let the Democratic People's Republic of Korea go. It will continue to be demonized and continue to be the main enemy, and only then will it be beneficial to the military-industrial complex. Arms should also be sold to South Korea, Japan, and other countries. Therefore, it is most important for the United States that North Korea remain the main enemy. It should continue to be so.
Therefore, it seems that the United States has no intention of improving relations with North Korea. That's why it's been like this since Hanoi. Sanctions and sanctions have been repeated, and these sanctions have no particular reason. Because North Korea is communist, because North Korea doesn't listen, 'I can't leave it alone. We must not continue to exist on this planet.” There is an American intention.
Therefore, as long as there is such a thing, it is difficult to improve US-DPRK relations or maintain peace on the Korean Peninsula. Peace is not only the absence of conflict, but peace is the process of finding homogeneity by harmonizing heterogeneity and heterogeneity. In this way, peace has not been successfully pursued over the past 70 years.
That is why I assert that no progress has been made on the Korean Peninsula or in North Korea-U.S. relations because of this, the US tendency, US thinking, and US policy line.
□ If the prospects for US-DPRK relations are bleak, is there any way to get through the US-DPRK relations in the future?
■ Much of the responsibility rests with the United States. One 70% is the responsibility of the United States. America doesn't want to do it all. Because the current situation is good to contain China and expand the power of the United States internationally.
Its strategy is to demonize North Korea and use North Korea as a bait to militarize South Korea, Japan, and allies. Putting other countries here, Australia and India are all democracies. They are trying to put pressure on China, but South Korea should not be involved in that.
□ Is the US-North Korea relationship difficult to predict in the future?
■ It is difficult to see good prospects. However, improving US-DPRK relations should not be just “denuclearization, denuclearization”, but rather, each country or the United Nations should strive for both a peace treaty and normalization of relations. Moreover, we have to work hard from the south.
North Korea is also making a lot of effort to change various laws within the country to normalize it these days. Since we are the same people who know the North well, we must take the lead in expanding and modernizing the North. Not only economically and materially, but also consciously, North Korea is very contracted right now. I am so obsessed with the victim consciousness.
North Korea's nuclear weapons, CVID is impossible... A normal state must be recognized to give up its nuclear weapons
Professor Hansik Park hosted the 'North Korea-US Track 2 Talks' at the University of Georgia in December 2003. From left to right: Disaster of the North Korean mission to the United Nations Shin Sung-cheol, Deputy North Korean Ambassador to the UN Han Seong-ryeol, Professor Park, former US Ambassador to Korea Donald Gregg, US Representative Kurt Weldon, North Korean leader Cho Sung-koo (Disarmament and Peace Research Institute), and U.S. Senate Democratic Advisor Frank Januzi , Keith Ruth, Republican aide to the Senate Republican Party, Kim Myung-gil, director of the Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, and Shim Il-kwan as an interpreter. [Photo courtesy of Professor Park Han-sik]□ If it is a North Korean issue, the Western world is raising the nuclear issue. I know that in the past, during negotiations with the United States, the thesis of “Let North Korea give up its nuclear weapons but give it ‘reversibility’” was published. How do you see North Korea's nuclear weapons problem and, more broadly, the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula?
■ I've tried in various ways so far, but the first button to unlock it has not been put on. The reason is very simple. If we are going to solve the nuclear problem, we must first understand why North Korea pursued nuclear weapons.
If becoming a nuclear state is the goal in itself, it will never be resolved. You cannot give up on purpose. However, from my point of view, the fact that North Korea is trying to acquire nuclear weapons is a means of diplomacy and a means of national security. The means can be changed. It can be replaced by other means that serve the same purpose.
The only reason why we wanted, pursued, and tested nuclear weapons was to protect the country and the system. In other words, if the international conditions for safeguarding the country and system and maintaining peace without nuclear weapons are guaranteed, nuclear weapons are to be given up.
why? He said he would give up, and that is because President Kim Il-sung, who served as an idol there, had instructed him to do so. In my view, nuclear weapons are given up when all conditions are met, and those conditions should be the same as the purpose of pursuing nuclear weapons.
The goal is to maintain the system, and in order to achieve this, there must be a peace treaty involving multi-states. We will not give up our nuclear weapons even with a non-aggression pact or a declaration of an end to the war. I think that there must be a peace treaty, normalization of relations, and in all fields, Korea will be recognized as an ordinary country, and if this is the case, it will give up all its nuclear weapons. However, if that doesn't happen, I never give up, and even if I give up, there is a very high chance that I will go back.
“Isn’t it reversible?” A lot of people ask about this, but reversibility is not given by the outside, and they already have nuclear science, scientists, raw materials, and made them, so they turn around and become another nuclear state in just three months. So, reversibility is something you already have, not something that others or the United States give you.
Recognizing that and saying, “Let’s give up because we will cooperate to become ready to give up nuclear weapons.” You have to do this to give up, and you never give up if you just forcefully unilaterally do it.
□ Since North Korea has Corona and the United States is not making a dialogue proposal that meets the conditions, I wonder if it will be time to 'solidify' its status as a nuclear weapons state as time goes by anyway. how do you see
■ It would be wrong to view North Korea as buying time to solidify its nuclear weapons, and it will only lead to further anger in North Korea.
North Korea is already a nuclear state. They made nuclear weapons and tested them six times, developed several types of guided missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons and successfully tested them. Even now, the computer asks 'Who is the nuclear state?' If you look, most of them include North Korea. In reality, it has already become a nuclear state.
However, buying time to become a nuclear state is an anachronistic and anachronistic diagnosis.
And how do we give up nuclear weapons? In some circumstances, the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said, "That's it. That's enough." Would you let me go? never let go For this reason, for that reason.
It also has to be completely proven, but there is no way to do it. Moreover, it is absurd to say that it must be done irreversibly. So I believe that complete, substantiated and irreversible denuclearization is impossible. It is practically impossible, and moreover, North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons.
□ You already saw that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons. Do you expect North Korea to conduct nuclear tests, intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launches, or artificial satellite launches in the future?
■ What North Korea does is proportionate to what South Korea and the United States do. It's not just that he's doing it himself, he'll do it if he does it in South Korea.
However, the thing that North Korea is most interested in and caring about is that “a double scale should not be applied”. 'If we do it, we don't see it, and if the North does it, it's a provocation' and let's not do that.
The most important problem is ignoring North Korea. It's a slang word. North Koreans know too well that we look down on North Korea. As I go through the drums, I feel with my skin, “Why do we have to be looked down on?” We are not a country that is so bad as to belittle North Korea. North Korea has many things to be proud of.
So, if we look at North Korea positively and do not look down on it, inter-Korean relations will improve quickly, and US-DPRK relations will improve as well. This is because there is no structure of consciousness. This is because of anti-communist education, etc.
End-of-war declaration is meaningless, “peace treaty must be signed”
Professor Park Han-sik, who won the 2010 Gandhi King Ikeda Peace Prize, was introduced as a 'peacemaker' on the cover of 2011. [Photo courtesy of Professor Park Han-sik]□ Inter-Korean relations have also recently become difficult, but it seems that the South Korean government, including President Moon Jae-in, is focusing on the 'declaration of an end to the war'. In other words, it seems that the declaration of an end to the war is being pursued as an entrance to dialogue. So far, the North's reaction has not come out clearly, but it seems to be critical. Do you think the end-of-war declaration can be the key to overcoming the current difficulties?
■ Until now, there were declarations and agreements similar to the declaration of the end of the war that could be substituted for the declaration of the end of the war. There have been more than five or six times between the leaders of North and South Korea. Even if only half of them are implemented, there will be no war if only one of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, 4.27 Panmunjom Declaration, and 9.19 Pyongyang Declaration are implemented.
I don't think it's right, but don't you think that not war is usually peace? In that sense, I think that a peace treaty is necessary, but it is not necessary and meaningless to make an end-of-war agreement or such an organization. Now, after signing the five or six agreements, what's the use of adding one more?
What we need now is to implement at least one of the things we have done so far, and to sign a peace treaty to move forward. The previous agreement is meaningless and cannot be implemented. There is no reason for it to be fulfilled just as everything has not been fulfilled. I don't think positively or optimistically about it.
□ Do you think the North will not respond to the declaration of an end to the war?
■ Yes. The North will think similarly to my story. “If you keep your promises, the war has already ended, so why do you have to sign again? There is a situation where it disappears to pieces of paper, but there is no point in doing it for us.” I think so. You have to show that it isn't, and you have to convince the explanation, but I don't think there's any way I can convince you.
□ Currently, South Korea and the United States are not responding to dialogue and are particularly concerned about 'double standards' and 'hostile policy'.
■ The double standard proves that the drum is demonized. He is not a civilized person, and he does not keep his promises. However, North Korea is not the only one who is not keeping its promises.
The double standard means that military training in the North is a provocation, and if it is in the South, it is justified for security, and it should not be done like this. If that's the case, everything the drums always do is bad. And even if it is necessary, if it is done in the United States or Korea, it is justified and should not be done this way.
It is said that if you do it that way, you will not be able to respond, and if you do, you will not see any results. Standards should be the same between ordinary countries and ordinary countries. If you think there is a double standard, the South and the US should thoroughly understand that North Korea will not respond to the summit.
North and South Korea “Deceive the People”
A farewell lecture on peace studies at the University of Georgia retirement ceremony in December 2015. [Photo source - University of Georgia website]□ One of the remarks that caused controversy or wavering in the South recently is that former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyeon should aim for 'inter-Korean union' rather than unification, which is not immediately feasible, and change the Ministry of Unification to the 'Ministry of Inter-Korean Relations'. how do you see
■ To put it bluntly, it doesn't fit common sense and it doesn't fit the historical truth. What was the agreement at the top level of the two Koreas about six times? Did you not agree to unify? Apart from unification, unification is so important that it is difficult to justify the existence of our government in the South and the North.
As for the method of unification, as agreed in the 6.15 Joint Declaration, in the North it is a 'low-level federation system' and in the South it is a 'federation system'. In my view, there is no premise or reality that the coalition system will become one country next time even if you look at all the world literature.
A coalition is an economic, political, and ideological gathering in which completely independent sovereign states come together to achieve a specific goal through cooperation with each other. The United Nations is the Union and the EU is the Union.
Does the EU look like a country? is that for that purpose? Does the United Nations aim to become one world state? It's not like that. This is simply a matter of consolidating and forming alliances with each other for convenience, or by forming alliances in such a way.
To view the coalition system as a process between the South and the North toward unification is to deceive the people. You never get that result.
To achieve unification, it must be some kind of federation. If you do not want to do so because the North says that it is a 'lower-level federation', in other words, it is called a 'creative federation' or a 'creative federation'. There must be a human body, a government or a system. I think what Minister Jeong said is absurd.
□ Recently, the theory of two nations and the theory of friends are popular in the south. For example, there are suggestions about changing the Ministry of Unification to the Ministry of Inter-Korean Relations, how do you view this trend or trend?
■ Then, “Let's give up on unification. We have been divided by foreign powers, but we cannot reunify on our own, so let's accept it as a completely different country." do that Good people should not be deceived like that. It shouldn't be done as if it was unified.
If we go as Minister Jeong said, the immediate goal of coalition is to eliminate the Ministry of Unification and to make it an inter-Korean relations department. If the Ministry of Unification does not feel good, it can be replaced with the Ministry of Unification. Because we've reached an agreement five or six times to become self-sufficient. Either make it an independent Ministry of Unification, or get rid of the Ministry of Unification and not unify it.
If 7,80% of the people want it, they have no choice but to go there. However, from my point of view, more than half of our country, 70%, consider unification to be a legitimate goal. In the North, it is 100%. Going in the direction the people and the people want is the right political ideology, whether it be democracy or socialism.
“The Cold War is over in history”...The US and China are 'competition'
Emeritus Professor Park Han-sik is taking the lead in unification education through Zoom lectures in 'Park Heon-sik Sarangbang'. [Captured photo - Tongil News]□ The biggest structural change in the recent unification conditions seems to be the intensification of the US-China hegemony competition. As the competition for hegemony between the US and China intensifies, there are concerns that the new Cold War on the Korean Peninsula will also intensify. In such a situation, what do you think is the direction and method of unification between the two Koreas?
■ I have a different opinion on that. It is said that an international new Cold War order is coming, but the Cold War has ended in history. The confrontation of ideologies, the military competition, and the absence of hot wars, but of the Cold War, put an end to decades of history.
The current US-China relationship is a competitive one. Even if it is a competition, it is a systemic competition that eats more land and turns international public opinion on them rather than such a competition. It is such a competition to make international public opinion more favorable to me.
It will not develop in the direction of the Cold War era in which China and the United States accumulate military weapons through armed competition. They each go to different countries and try to dominate the world opinion that their system is more justified and more convincing.
Therefore, China is not taking the lead in military power these days, but promoting social and cultural 'Chinese-style socialism'. The 'Chinese-style socialism' that President Xi Jinping refers to means Confucian-style socialism. Therefore, the Chinese government has provided a lot of support to revitalize Confucianism at home and to study Confucianism internationally.
What China wants is not to go between the two systems as in the past, but to allow the various systems to live in different ways. This is the blueprint for China's change of world order.
There is always a polarization in the dominance of Christianity as in the United States. I told you to love the chosen people and the unchosen people, the right and the bad, the enemy. It's not Christianity. The devil must be killed. So, Christianity is supposed to put the devil at the forefront and kill the devil, whether it's a gangster or something.
However, since China operates on the Confucian principle of living together, I think there is little chance of a military confrontation between the two countries due to military friction.
No matter how the two systems change, we can't control it, can we? So what should we do? The two Koreas should do what the two Koreas can do. It is better to allow the two Koreas to exchange exchanges, trade in various ways, travel, and do this peacefully.
However, “it was divided. Someday we will have to unite. I think politics should be conducted with a blueprint that unification should be done in this way.” There is no unification blueprint in Korea right now.
Why can't we unify now? The federal system in the North can do it right now. When you create a federal state, it becomes a federal system. Wouldn't it be a low-level federation if you gave the state a minimal amount of power? Then it becomes a federal state from the next day.
Why not right now? I can't because I'm trying to unite. We need to know in common sense that unity is never one way to unify, and I don't think it's right to say it differently.
□ It is fresh to say that the current world order is a competitive relationship between the US and China rather than the new Cold War. But from a historical perspective, isn't China's nationalism a threat to us as much as the United States? Is it correct that the United States seeks demonization through the Christian dichotomy and China seeks coexistence through Confucian principles?
■ Confucianism cannot be regarded as hegemonism. Christianity is hegemonism. Hasn't there always been a religious war around the world by setting up a Christian flagpole historically? Confucianism is not a religion that encourages military confrontation in that sense.
We know Confucianism, we know Christianity, and we know everything. So is the North. If you look at religion, Buddhism, Christianity, and Confucianism are all mixed together, and one person has all three religions. When I was a child, I prayed on my face during the ancestral rites.
To that extent, our people are religious, but they do not have an exclusive religion. That is why I believe that we can use the religious role well to create a more harmonious unified state and system.
8th Party Congress, “Planned downgrading of the nation”
During the long interview, Professor Park Han-sik immediately answered all the questions with an upright posture. [Captured photo - Tongil News]□ I did not include it in the questionnaire, but I am asking because I think many people will be curious. North Korea is now estimating that it will be quite difficult internally due to international sanctions, lockdown measures due to the prevention of COVID-19, food shortages due to natural disasters just last year, and various problems.
In the north, while advocating for a frontal breakthrough, they are promoting self-reliance and self-reliance. I am very curious about what will happen. The professor has visited the book several times and I know that he understands the internal flow much more deeply than we do. How do you see North Korea's current reality and the battle for breakthrough head-on?
■ First of all, North Korea will never collapse. We need to know that objectively. There are many ways to maintain one's own system and maintain legitimacy.
See the 8th Party Congress. Look at the various policy expressions that have emerged. As long as the system becomes more solid, it will never collapse. There is no case in the world where the political system has collapsed due to economic difficulties or hunger among the people in any country in the world.
The system must lose its legitimacy before it collapses. With legitimacy, it cannot collapse. North Korea's legitimacy has never been found in economic prosperity. find in ideology. The ideologies that justify North Korea are nationalism, populism, and Juche ideology. As long as these ideologies are effectively working to unite the people, they will never collapse.
South Korea is waiting for North Korea to collapse. When it collapses, it is unified, and that is German unification. It is absorption unity. These are all children's cartoons, far from realistic politics.
The South Korean government, intellectuals, and the media should somehow capture the North Korean situation as it is and create such a unification policy and inter-Korean relations that can be applied realistically, but now things are going differently.
□ North Korea amended its party rules through the 8th party congress and advocated 'our nation firstism' rather than 'our nation firstism'. In the case of the <Hankyoreh>, which first reported the revised party rules, and former Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok, "Isn't North Korea giving up on unification? Isn't it a return to nationalism rather than nationalism?" These interpretations are presented. What do you think?
■ That's a very bad idea. North Korea has never undermined or given up nationalism in the slightest. It is still the same now.
Wasn't that kind of atmosphere at the 8th Party Congress? What you should always see is 'for whom, what is the event for?' You have to look at it. The 8th Party Congress was not aimed at the South. It was aimed at the world. Kim Jong-un, the general secretary, declared that he would lead such a country.
Therefore, the state was emphasized as important. If the nation is important, international cooperation is not good. The United States is even more so. To the United States, you may not know what we mean when we say that we are pursuing our nation. America is by no means a nation-state. I don't know what the nation means. I don't know if there are 20% Anglo-Saxons, but it's not a nation-state.
But aren't South and North Korea nation-states? They are not male because they are ethnic. The reason why you can't live like a man is because it is not a man, how can you live like a man?
I've been to Pyongyang about 50 times, and every time I go, I feel like, 'Oh, this is our people'. I just listen to 100% of what they say, and if we ask to eat something together, we eat together with kimchi and with soybean paste.
And there is something to humble yourself. In America, there is no way to live if you are humble. North and South, “What do I know?” It should be like this, but in the United States, if I don't say that I am the best, I will never win the election. In Korea, they are learning it.
Our nation's strengths, modesty, and the tendency to oppose other people's positions are very good characteristics of our nation. We must not give up all these things and go out selfishly.
Therefore, the unification we are pursuing now has to be done with our nation at the forefront. However, the nation should not be set as the object of the world. That is why, at the 8th Party Congress, they deliberately downgraded the concept of a nation.
If you think that we should read it that way, everything has been changed there, it is a mistake. Experts must be able to read what the ear cannot hear and what the eye cannot see. If you read only what is said, you cannot understand the system by licking the watermelon. However, if you look at Kim Jong-un's speeches and other things like that, the nation is still alive. Without nationalism, North Korea cannot exist.
□ The same can be said about unification.
■ 'Give up on unification.' If he had even thought of such a thing, Chairman Kim Jong-il would never have signed the June 15 Joint Declaration. In 6.15, he thought that the method of unification was federation and federation, and admitted that there were slight differences.
Of course, the difference is completely different, but we have to remake the blueprint for unification to suit us. When discussing and discussing unification issues, you should always include the drum. It is better not to discuss or even think about unification and peace without including North Korea.
□ Tongil News celebrated its 21st anniversary. How should we view the role of the unification media in inter-Korean relations?
■ The media is changing all over the world as well as in the US. However, the media has two roles. It could be 50% 50%, it could be 90% 10%.
what are the two reporting the facts. It is very important to report the facts without distortion. Second, to create desirable public opinion. Absolutely need it
There is a lot of talk in the West that the media only reports the facts, but there is no media that only reports the facts. If you look here too, <CNN> and <MSNBC> are very progressive. But <FOX News> is very conservative. So all the media can see the way they are going. Even if you don't show it you can see
In my view, Tongil News is very forward-looking, progressive, national, and unification-oriented because it is unification news. That's important. That is one important part of the role of the media.
And reporting the truth. You must not lie. 'Donald Trump is now president of the United States. But it was stolen and the Democrats took it.' That's 100%, 1000% a lie. But the person who believes that lie will be about 20% of the American population. As a result, the American media is not doing its job, and public opinion has changed to prevent it. The media crisis does not lie with the media, but on the readers and the people who use the media. The media crisis has arrived.
However, we consider it important to report the truth in order to understand North Korea and to correct the unification issue. I think 50%, 50%. We must take the lead in creating a desirable culture of unification and a desirable culture of peace. Even educational institutions are not doing it.
The media has a role to play in the developing world and in our country. So, always keep these two roles in mind, and I hope to develop that way in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment