Warm Greetings to President Donald Gregg, staff and members of the Korea Society, and distinguished guests.

Thank you for facilitating this opportunity at short notice. I am sure that our meeting today will be a good chance to convey diverse voices from the Republic of Korea, as well as expand understanding between the two countries.

For the past 50 years, the Korea Society has “dedicated solely to the promotion of greater awareness, understanding and cooperation between the people of the United States and Korea.” Your deep trust and understanding towards Korea has contributed greatly to the efforts to overcome the many difficulties faced by Korea, and this, I hope, will not change.

Respected attendees.

I stand here to convey to you perspectives of the progressive sectors of South Korea on several vital issues regarding Korean-American relations. In the last general election in April 2004, the people elected Democratic Labor Party (DLP) members, representing laborers, farmers and the alienated majority of the South Korean society, into the National Assembly. The DLP’s ascendancy is surprising considering the downturn of the left across the globe, and is an important barometer of the direction Korean society is heading to. It is a very important first step towards qualitative enhancement of democracy, and a culmination of the Korean people’s yearning for peace, progress, and fairness. I was the chair of the DLP for the four years since its inception until last year, and now I work within parliamentary boundaries to promote issues espoused by the DLP.

Since arriving in the U.S. last Saturday, I have met and talked with many figures in the Administration and Congress. But I have not been given the impression that all of them had a deep understanding of the current perceptions and opinions of the Korean people. Ever since the nuclear crisis with North Korea, I have emphasized that the sentiments and intentions of those actually living on the Korean Peninsula need to be given the utmost priority. To do this, one needs to become familiar with the Koreans’ urgent yearning for peace.

A public opinion poll taken after the Feb. 10^th announcement by the North Korean foreign ministry on the possession of nuclear weapons shows just what the Koreans’ wishes and sentiments are. About 75 percent, despite the fact that North Korea proceeded with a dangerous declaration, nevertheless advocated a peaceful resolution through dialog or the dispatch of a special envoy. I believe this is a clear expression of opposition to the escalation of crisis that an embargo or a blockade would bring. This also suggests that there is a degree of difference between the attitudes of the Bush Administration and South Koreans on the nuclear crisis.

To the U.S., the North Korean issue may be a part of a counter-proliferation policy that aims to reduce the threat level from unexpected terror. But to South Korea, this issue relates to the very survival of the nation. Both North Korea’s declaration of the possession of nuclear weapons and its non-participation in the Six Party Talks, and the U.S.’s non-action, lower the possibility of a peaceful resolution, and raise the level of unmanageable danger. Another Korean War is unthinkable, but solely the escalation of tension and instability could lead to results that have grave consequences for the South, perhaps to the point of no recovery. If South Korea and the U.S. are in an alliance, it is natural for American policymakers to understand the essence of such a perception on the part of the Korean people, and then formulate policy that takes it into consideration.

As you are well aware, North Korea declared that it possesses nuclear weapons and that it was withdrawing indefinitely from the Six Party Talks. Various analyses have been surfacing as to why North Korea took this action when there was a renewed indication that the Six Party Talks would resume. It seems as if NK is trying to extract a favorable position for itself by using this as a ‘negotiating tool.’

Before we extrapolate NK’s intentions, we need to look into the process and background of the declaration. President Gregg has written about his participation in the Unofficial Six-Party Meeting in Qingdao, China, in September 2003, sponsored by the University of California, in which he observed that South Korea, China and Russia were in basic agreement on major issues, but the U.S., Japan and North Korea were insisting on matters opposed by all other nations — “The North Koreans by their nuclear weapons programs, which all five other countries oppose, and the U.S. by its cold and still confrontational posture towards North Korea, which was not supported by any of the other participating countries.”

President Gregg’s brilliant analysis still holds today. If North Korea does not return to the Six Party Talks, we cannot rule out the possibility of nuclear weapon testing or missile testing by North Korea. To this, Washington is solely reiterated that North Korea should return to the Six Party Talks. This uncompromising deadlock between North Korea and the U.S. is rapidly escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Moreover, through the years, the U.S. has not recognized North Korea as a partner in dialogue, and has inflamed North Korea by calling it a part of the “Axis of Evil” in 2002 and an ‘Outpost of Tyranny’ in 2005. We know that one of the ‘Axis of Evil’ - Iraq — was attacked by the U.S. and that a regime change took place. The situation regarding Iran is also getting worse. North Korea may see U.S. policy at work in Iraq and Iran and through a “learning effect,” may doubt the true intentions of the U.S. towards it.

I believe North Korea’s nuclear weapon declaration, rather than being intended to destroy the Six Party Talk framework, is more a decision intended to force the U.S. to acknowledge the North as an equal negotiating partner and to expedite accommodation of mutual demands in the context of “simultaneous action” and a “package solution.” The U.S. must provide an appropriate response to these demands, in a manner that the North can trust. Also, it must convey a message that within the Six Party Talks framework, meaningful bilateral and multilateral discussions can take place.

Respected attendees.

The Democratic Labor Party of South Korea absolutely opposes the possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea and believes that nuclear weapons do not help solve the security concerns of North Korea. Moreover, the DLP and I oppose all forms of nuclear weapon testing and favor continuous reduction of nuclear weapons and ultimately, the dissolution of the “nuclear club.” This is why I am urging for a change in the U.S. position.

At the center of the deteriorating situation has been the U.S.’s uncompromising hard-line polices towards North Korea and strong reactions from North Korea. As the Washington Post suggested, what North Korea wants to hear from Washington may be the mere mention of a “no hostile policy.” North Korea has indicated, during a recent visit by China’s foreign ministry official, that it is possible that it would participate in the Six Party Talks if the atmosphere and conditions are conducive. The country that needs to burden the most responsibility to provide that atmosphere is the U.S. When the U.S. specifies that it has no hostile intentions towards North Korea and that it is willing to co-exist with North, the North will likely rejoin the talks and concrete result could follow.

Respectable guests.

The Democratic Labor Party supports the ‘principle of simultaneous action’ of “words for words” and “actions for actions” as stated in the third Six Party Talks. The main reason for the talks’ impasse is the ‘crisis of trust.’ To build-up mutual trust, both parties need to move forward step-by-step on those issues that both can agree upon.

Today, I would like to ask your support for inter-Korean economic cooperation and exchanges, and the continuation of humanitarian support work. Inter-Korean relations have had its ups and downs, but it has developed steadily for the better. I believe that you are aware the expansion/development of inter-Korean relations has contributed positively towards stably managing the situation on the Korean Peninsular. But with North’s declaration, we again are facing a crisis. Informally though the media, it has been reported that Vice President Cheney and Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz have asked South Korea for the discontinuation of fertilizer assistance to NK and a change in pace regarding inter-Korean interaction. Historically, increased inter-Korean exchanges have contributed to the reduction of war threat, and regardless of the reopening of the 6-party talks, they can contribute to a peaceful resolution of NK’s nuclear weapon issue by maintaining inter-Korean channels of communication. The U.S. should actively support inter-Korean efforts for improved relations and under no circumstances should it be an obstacle in that process.

People in South Korea share the terrible memory of a secret plan to bomb North Korea’s nuclear facilities proceeding, without consideration for our will, in 1994. The Kim Young-Sam government at that time insisted impulsively that it would “not shake hands with nuclear weapon possessor,” which led to both North Korea and the U.S. turning away from it. Then, when the war scenario was dangerously close to being implemented, it did not have the means to do anything about it. This experience engraved the importance to the Korean people of maintaining relations between the North and South.

I also cordially ask your active support for the Republic of Korea’s initiatives in seeking a peaceful resolution of the nuclear crisis. It is clear that the North’s nuclear issue is essentially a matter of North Korea-U.S. relations, but its direction can change substantially depending on how the South Korean government reacts. Since additional costs and responsibilities due to the escalating crisis and increasing possibility of war fall squarely upon the Korean people, the ROK government’s active role and initiatives must be acknowledged. The DLP has urged the ROK government to continue its efforts to engage in an active role as the most concerned party. This involves active persuasive diplomacy to other relevant nations, dispatching a special envoy to NK, a second inter-Korea Summit in order to directly persuade the North. Your support, with your leading role regarding public opinion in the U.S. on Korea matters, will assist in setting a conducive atmosphere for the ROK’s active role.

Respected members of Korea Society and guests,

The DLP acknowledges that the U.S.’s security guarantees to the ROK, based on the Korean-American alliance, has played a role in deterring a renewed war in Korea as well as in our country’s economic development and prosperity. But for a positive future of the alliance, there needs to be a transition in it. It is time the military aspects of the alliance need to be rebalanced with an increased focus on developing a more future-oriented, comprehensive, and equitable relationship.

Through the “Future of the Alliance Policy Initiative,” the ROK and the U.S. have agreed to relocate the Yongsan U.S. military base in Seoul, and agreed to the realignment of U.S. troops. Through the “Security Policy Initiative,” discussions will take place about the role of U.S. forces in Korea and the future of the ROK-US alliance.

But many Korean people were dismayed at the non-transparency of negotiations on the relocation of Yongsan base and realignment of US troops. Koreans still strongly question why our people have to burden the enormous financial toll for the realignment of US forces in Korea that have resulted from America’s military transformation in the global era. Concerns also arose that the reduction of troops and realignment of the troops for ‘strategic flexibility’ were not geared for a situation in Korea, but rather as preparation for engaging in future conflicts in Northeast Asia.

The DLP opposes Korea-based US troops engaging in conflicts in other areas of the region, and it is also against the ROK-US alliance being reconfigured as a regional military alliance. It is likely this will destabilize Northeast Asia’s political situation and may draw the ROK into an unwanted conflict. A future-oriented ROK-US alliance must be based on the support and favorable sentiments of the people from both nations. I cannot emphasis enough your role in achieving this end.

Let me share with you an interesting public opinion poll taken in January of 2004 that I am sure you will be interested in. To the question, “Which nation poses the highest threat to Korea’s security?” 39 percent responded by singling out the U.S. and 33 percent chose North Korea. It needs to be noted that 58 percent of those polled in their 20’s, and 47 percent in their 30’s responded that the U.S. was the main threat. The mainstream in Korean society have already changed to those who struggled for democracy in the 80s as university students, and through the diffusion of internet technology and the advent of alternative media, those in their 20s and 30s have emerged as opinion leaders. US policy towards North Korea is losing credibility in this group and some have suggested that the danger of negating the past fifty years of ROK-US alliance exists. American policymakers need to ask what factors have caused the mainstream of Korean society to doubt the intentions of the U.S.

Respected attendees.

I know very well how much your interest and efforts have contributed to peace on the peninsula and prosperity in Korea. I am sure that we share the view that peace on the peninsula and a mature democracy in Korea play an important role in realizing the mutual national interests of Korea and the U.S.

A peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue, reconstitution of a future-oriented ROK-US alliance, ultimate peace in Korean Peninsula and joint prosperity - all these can be realized through constructing a new relationship of trust between South Korea and the US. That relationship of trust cannot be formed solely through dialogue between policymakers. This is the reason that diverse sectors of both nations need to engage in exchanges and efforts at mutual understanding.

I hope that this event has contributed to conveying the multi-faceted voices of South Korea, and can become a catalyst for further dialogue. I also wish that it can be the first of many meetings for mutual trust and understanding.

I would like to once again thank President Gregg and Korea Society staff for arranging this meaningful event. I wish you all good health and happiness.

Thank you.