오늘의 출연자

• 진행 : 김희순 간사 (참여연대 사법감시센터)
• 초대손님 : 서기호 변호사 (19대 국회의원, 전직 판사), 한상희 교수 (건국대 법학전문대학원)

참팟 73회 / 법원 특집

참팟 권력감시 특집 3부, 법원 개혁에 대해 이야기 나눴습니다. 

1부에서는 지금 한창 문제가 되고 있는 '법원 블랙리스트'가 말하는 법원 구조의 문제, 사건의 배경와 앞으로의 전망, 2부는 '법'을 바로 세우기 위한 법원 개혁의 과제와 앞으로에 대한 기대에 대한 이야기 입니다.

'판사는 법으로 말한다'는 법원. 이명박근혜 정권 이후의 법원은 어떻게 달라져야 할까요? 참팟과 함께 같이 고민해 보세요.

법원 특집 1부 - 법원 블랙리스트, 왜 문제일까?

* 플레이어가 보이지 않는 경우 : https://goo.gl/DmqtvD (팟빵에서 듣기)

* 아이튠즈로 듣기 : https://goo.gl/kARiVu

법원 특집 2부 - 법원의 법은 무엇인가?

* 플레이어가 보이지 않는 경우 : https://goo.gl/iQ4RfC (팟빵에서 듣기)

* 아이튠즈로 듣기 : https://goo.gl/ix7fak

같이보기

• [판결비평 국정농단특집①-최순실] 국정농단 주범은 엄벌, 재벌엔 관대... 사법부 절반의 심판
• [판결비평 국정농단특집②-이재용] 박근혜 겁박 희생자? 이재용은 국정농단 공범
• [자료] 이재용 판결문 1, 2심 전문
• [성명] 대법관들, 의혹 부인이 아니라 대국민 사과부터 하라
• [자료] '법관사찰' 관련 법원 추가조사위원회 조사보고서 전문 공개
• [논평] 김명수 대법원은 사법개혁 거침없이 나아가길

2015 핵확산금지조약 검토회의 (NPT Review Conference)

참여연대 백가윤 간사 시민사회 구두발언

2015년 5월 1일(금)

의장님, 각국 대표님들, 그리고 시민사회 여러분 

저는 대한민국 서울에 있는 참여연대 백가윤 간사입니다. 이 발언문은 참여연대와 평화와통일을여는사람들(평통사)가 공동으로 작성하고 전세계 300여명이 넘는 개인들과 100여개가 넘는 단체들이 연명한 공동 선언문을 요약한 것입니다. 

참여연대는 현재 한반도에서 지속되고 있는 정전체제에 깊은 우려를 표하며 관련 정부들에게 핵없는 동북아시아를 실현하기 위해 한국 전쟁을 끝낼 것을 촉구합니다. 

지난 20여년간 한반도 핵문제를 평화롭게 해결하기 위한 다양한 추가적인 합의가 있었지만 제대로 이행되지 않았습니다. 결과적으로 북한은 3차례의 핵실험을 강행하였습니다. 한반도 핵 위기는, 적어도 어느 일방이 아니라 미국과 북한, 남한과 북한, 주변국과 북한 사이의 누적된 불신에 의해 악화되어 왔다고 볼 수 있습니다. 이는 단순히 한 국가의 문제가 아닙니다. 모든 국가들이 책임을 져야 합니다. 

지난 20여년간 미국의 동맹국과 파트너들이 주로 동원해온 압박과 봉쇄, 핵우산과 재래식 군비의 강화 같은 일방적 대북정책 수단들은 북한 핵문제를 둘러싼 갈등의 해결에 전혀 효과적으로 작동하지 않았습니다. 적어도 협상과 대화가 진행되는 동안은 북한의 핵무기 개발이 중단되었습니다. 반면, 적대적인 정책과 제재가 가해지는 동안에는 북한은 핵 능력을 키워갔습니다. 특히 체제 붕괴 혹은 전환 같은 주관적인 기대를 품은 채 대화를 배제하는 정책은 사태를 크게 악화시켰습니다.

북한으로부터 긍정적인 답변을 이끌어내기 위해서는 양쪽 모두가 동의할 수 있는 새로운 형태의 대화, 대담하고도 건설적인 제안이 이뤄져야 합니다. 이 새롭고 포괄적인 해결책은 한반도의 평화 체제 구축, 북미‧북일 관계의 정상화, 그리고 동아시아의 핵위협을 제거하는 것에 바탕을 두어야 합니다. 

이에 저희는 다음과 같이 제안합니다.

• 한반도 핵 위기 해결을 위하여 2005년 9.19합의에 입각한 6자회담을 조속히 재개해야 한다.
• 정전체제 종식과 새로운 평화협정 체결을 위한 남‧북‧미‧중 등 관련당사국간의 회담을 6자회담과 동시에 혹은 선제적으로 추진해야 한다.
• 북미, 북일 관계의 포괄적 관계 개선을 위한 양자대화를 6자회담과 동시에 혹은 선제적으로 추진해야 한다.
• 남과 북은 대화와 협력을 확대하고 주변국은 이를 적극 지원해야 한다.
• 한반도와 동아시아의 군비경쟁을 촉발하는 미사일 방어 협력을 비롯한 한미일 군사협력/동맹 추진을 중단해야 한다.
• 동아시아 평화의 보루인 일본 평화헌법을 무력화하는 일본의 집단적 자위권 추구를 허용하지 말아야 한다.
• 한반도 비핵화 논의는 한반도 혹은 동북아시아 차원의 비핵지대 건설의 전망 속에 이루어져야 한다. 
• 한반도 평화협정 체결과 병행하여 남북이 각각 맺은 상호적대적인 군사동맹을 단계적으로 해소하고, 한반도와 동아시아의 공동안보에 기여하는 호혜적이고 평화적인 관계로 전환해야 한다.

이제는 한국전쟁을 끝내고 핵무기 없는 동북아시아로 한걸음 나아가야 할 때입니다. 우리는 여기 계신 여러분 모두가 핵무기 없는 동북아시아를 만들기 위해 우리의 제안에 동의하고 연의 마음으로 함께 해 주시기를 촉구합니다.

감사합니다. 

Launch of GPPAC Publication

Reflections on Peace and Security in Northeast Asia

– Perspectives on the Ulaanbaatar Process

The publication Reflections on Peace and Security in Northeast Asia - Perspectives on the Ulaanbaatar Process was launched in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia on August 29, on the occasion of the third meeting of the Ulaanbaatar Process, a civil society-led dialogue for peace and stability in Northeast Asia. The publication is a collection of essays which capture the diverse and uncompromised opinions, concerns, tensions and contradictions of a region in turmoil at the time of the 3rd Ulaanbaatar Process Meeting held on August 29–30, 2017.

Articles of the printed publication are made available online at https://medium.com/reflections-on-peace-and-security-in-northeast. Please visit this site. 

Reflections on Peace and Security in Northeast Asia - Perspectives on the Ulaanbaatar Process explores the contentious issue of nuclear weapons in the region, the current security climate on the Korean Peninsula which is frozen in a fragile armistice, as well the successes and challenges faced by non-governmental organizations in the context of peacebuilding in Northeast Asia. It features articles by the participants of the Ulaanbaatar Process; representatives of civil society from China, Japan, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, the United States of America, the Russian Federation as well as Mongolia.

The Ulaanbaatar Process, launched by the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) in June, 2015, aims to support the creation of conditions of peace and stability in Northeast Asia through the promotion of greater civil society dialogue and interaction. It is hosted by Mongolian NGO Blue Banner in cooperation with GPPAC Northeast Asia, and with the support of the Mongolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The third Ulaanbaatar Process meeting provided an opportunity for sincere and open civil society dialogue on the current peace and security situation in Northeast Asia, and particularly the crisis on the Korean Peninsula. The previous two meetings, similarly held in Ulaanbaatar, also saw the participation of civil society representatives of all the Six Party Talks countries and Mongolia. 

For more information about the Ulaanbaatar Process, please visit the GPPAC Northeast Asia as well as Facebook page  https://www.peaceportal.org/web/ulaanbaatar-process/home

For more information on GPPAC, please visit http://www.gppac.net/.

<Photo from GPPAC NEA, Aug 29-30, 2017>

Vancouver Women’s Forum

on Peace and Security on the Korean Peninsula

>>> Statement [Download]

The Vancouver Summit on Korea missed a critical opportunity for peace. Instead of supporting the reduction of tensions in the Korean peninsula that began with the inter-Korean dialogue and the Olympics truce, the Foreign Ministers chose to further isolate and threaten North Korea.  

We urged Foreign Ministers to prepare the table for dialogue with North Korea.  Instead, they chose to obstruct the path for peace being laid by North and South Korea.   

The US-led “maximum pressure” approach has utterly failed to halt North Korea’s nuclear and missile program. Seventy years of sanctions and isolation of North Korea have only furthered the DPRK’s resolve to develop its nuclear arsenal.  

A maximum pressure campaign is not diplomacy that will lead to peace. Increased sanctions hurt ordinary people.

Secretary Tillerson’s depiction today of commercial airline flights as potential targets of North Korea’s missile tests is reminiscent of Colin Powell’s UN presentation about Iraq’s “so-called” weapons of mass destruction. This provocative effort to demonize North Korea sets up justification for even more extreme measures against DPRK, such as a naval blockade, which will be viewed by North Koreans as a war-like action. 

We are profoundly disappointed by the Foreign Ministers representing countries with a commitment to peaceful diplomacy and feminist foreign policies. At a time of great global instability, we looked to them for leadership for true global peace and security.

We are resolved to build a global campaign to challenge sanctions that we know have cruel and punishing effects on ordinary North Koreans, to strengthen our feminist peace movements to challenge the drive for war, and to work towards the formal resolution of the Korean War. 

Our commitment to peace is unshaken.

January 16, 2018

Vancouver Women's Forum on Peace and Security on the Korean Peninsula

Christine Ahn, Women Cross DMZ

Kozue Akibayashi, WILPF

Lisa Natividad Guahan, Coalition for Peace and Justice

Ewa Eriksson, Fortier Women Cross DMZ

Yehjung Yi, Korean Sharing Movement

Mihyeon Lee, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy

Liz Bernstein, Nobel Women’s Initiative

Moon-sook Lee, National Council of Churches in Korea

Susan Bazilli, Women Peace Security Network

Nan Kim, Alliance of Scholars Concerned about Korea

Ellen Judd, Canadian Voice of Women for Peace

Ann Wright, Women Cross the DMZ & Veterans for Peace

Patti Talbot, United Church of Canada

Mary-Wynne Ashford, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War

Erica Fein, Win Without War

Lyn Adamson, Canadian Voice of Women for Peace 

STATEMENT OF THE VANCOUVER WOMEN’S FORUM

ON PEACE AND SECURITY ON THE KOREAN PENINSULA

>>> Statement [Download]

As sixteen delegates representing peace movements from all over the world, we have traveled from Asia, Pacific, Europe, and North America to convene the Vancouver Women’s Forum on Peace and Security on the Korean Peninsula, an event held in solidarity with Canada’s Feminist Foreign Policy to promote a peaceful resolution to the crisis on the Korean Peninsula. Sanctions and isolation have failed to curb North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and instead severely harm the North Korean civilian population. A Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons will only be achieved through genuine engagement, constructive dialogue, and mutual cooperation. We issue the following recommendations to the Foreign Ministers participating in the January 16 Summit on Security and Stability in the Korean Peninsula: 

● Immediately engage all relevant parties in dialogue, without preconditions, to work toward achieving a nuclear-free Korean peninsula;

● Abandon support for the strategy of maximum pressure, lift sanctions which have deleterious effects on the North Korean people, work toward the normalization of diplomatic relations, remove barriers to citizen-to-citizen engagement, and strengthen humanitarian cooperation;

● Extend the spirit of the Olympic truce and affirm the resumption for inter-Korean dialogue by supporting:

i) negotiations for the continued suspension of joint US-ROK military exercises in the south, and the continued suspension of nuclear and missiles tests in the north,

ii) a pledge not to conduct a first strike, nuclear or conventional, and 

iii) a process to replace the Armistice Agreement with a Korea Peace Agreement;

● Adhere to all the Security Council recommendations on Women, Peace, and Security. In particular, we urge you to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, which acknowledges that the meaningful participation of women in all stages of conflict resolution and peacebuilding strengthens peace and security for all. 

These recommendations are based on our long experience engaging with North Koreans through citizen diplomacy and humanitarian initiatives, and from our collective expertise on militarism, nuclear disarmament, economic sanctions, and the human cost of the unresolved Korean War. The Summit is a sobering reminder that the gathered nations have a historic and moral responsibility to formally end the Korean War. A pledge not to conduct a first strike can de-escalate tensions by significantly reducing the apprehension of an attack and the risk of miscalculation that could result in an intentional or an inadvertent nuclear launch. Resolving the Korean War can be the single most effective action to halt the intense militarization of Northeast Asia, which gravely threatens the peace and security of 1.5 billion people in the region. The peaceful resolution of the Korean nuclear crisis is the key step toward the total global elimination of nuclear weapons.

January 15, 2018

Vancouver Women's Forum on Peace and Security on the Korean Peninsula

Christine Ahn, Women Cross DMZ

Kozue Akibayashi, WILPF

Lisa Natividad Guahan. Coalition for Peace and Justice

Ewa Eriksson, Fortier Women Cross DMZ

Yehjung Yi, Korean Sharing Movement

Mihyeon Lee, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy

Liz Bernstein, Nobel Women’s Initiative

Moon-sook Lee, National Council of Churches in Korea

Susan Bazilli, Women Peace Security Network

Nan Kim, Alliance of Scholars Concerned about Korea

Ellen Judd, Canadian Voice of Women for Peace

Ann Wright, Women Cross the DMZ & Veterans for Peace

Patti Talbot, United Church of Canada

Mary-Wynne Ashford, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War

Erica Fein, Win Without War

Lyn Adamson, Canadian Voice of Women for Peace 

<사진 = 밴쿠버여성포럼>

11 January 2016

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
UN Headquarters
405 East 42nd Street
New York, NY 10017
USA    

Cc : Zainab Hawa Bangura, UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Rashida Manjoo, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
Pablo de Greiff, UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation, and Guarantees of Non-recurrence
H.E. Choi Kyong-lim, President of the UN Human Rights Council
Members of the UN Committee against Torture
Members of the UN Human Rights Committee 
    

Re: Clarification on the UN Secretary-General’s Position on the Recent Republic of Korea-Japan Agreement on Wartime “Comfort Women”

People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) is a non-governmental organization based in Seoul, the Republic of Korea (ROK) with United Nations(UN) ECOSOC consultative status. We are writing to you today to seek clarification of the Secretary-General's position on the recent ROK-Japan agreement on wartime “comfort women”. We express our concern on your recent congratulatory remarks on the agreement, because we view that the agreement was not made in a way to implement the values and principles put forth by the UN, which has emphasized a victim-centered approach.

In the official statement regarding the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan on issues related to “comfort women” from the ROK which was released on 28 December 2015, you welcomed “that the Governments of Japan and the Republic of Korea have reached an agreement,” and hoped “that the agreement will contribute to improving the bilateral relationship between the two countries.” Following your statement, the ROK President’s Office (Blue House) released a briefing on 1 January 2016, saying that you congratulated President Park Geun-hye, via telephone, on reaching the agreement with Japan, and stated that “history will laud President Park’s courageous decision based on her vision.”   

Yet, the latest agreement between the ROK and Japan hardly reflects the wishes of the victims themselves, nor did the process involve any participation by the victims. Lee Yong-soo, one of the few surviving victims of Japan’s wartime sexual slavery policy, harshly criticized the agreement, saying “The agreement does not reflect the views of former ’comfort women’. I will ignore it completely.”  Ms. Lee condemned the deal as amounting to “a second death of the victims.” The latest agreement indeed does not incorporate any of the demands which include official apologies, legal reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence. The victims have consistently put forward these demands since making their past agony public for the first time in 1991. According to the recent agreement, the Japanese government did promise to provide JPY 1 billion (around 8.3 million USD) for a new special fund to be set up for a foundation for the surviving “comfort women”. However, Mr. Fumio Kishida, Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs, made it clear that the money was not legal reparation , and still refuses to recognize Japan’s legal responsibility for wartime sexual slavery. However, the governments of both countries have concluded that the latest agreement will be the “final and irreversible” resolution to the “comfort women” issues, thus inviting mounting criticism from inside and outside the ROK.

We would like to remind you that the latest agreement on “comfort women” does not even satisfy the UN recommendations regarding Japan’s wartime sexual slavery and related issues which were made in the past. Different human rights mechanisms of the UN have condemned the acts of wartime sexual slavery committed by Japan as “crimes against humanity,” and recommended that the Japanese government acknowledge its legal responsibility, make formal reparations to the victims, and prosecute the parties responsible for such crimes. During its review on Japan in July 2014, the UN Human Rights Committee noted that most “comfort women” were recruited by, transported to, and managed at Japanese military bases or agencies working on behalf of the Japanese military through force and coercion, and expressed concerns at the Japanese government’s continued denial that these women were “ever mobilized or migrated by force” (CCPR/C/JPY/CO/6, para 11). In August 2014, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed its concerns that the Japanese government had not recognized nor apologized to “comfort women”, and urged the Japanese government to immediately conclude investigations and bring to justice those responsible for human rights violations (CERD/C/JPN/CO/7-9, para 18).

We would also like to point out that the UN and the international community at large uphold a consistent set of victim-centered principles and standards with respect to the rights of victims of human rights violations.

In February 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights (now the UN Human Rights Council) adopted “Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity” (E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1), followed by “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law” (A/60/509/Add.1) adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 2005. These two documents endorse the “victim-centered perspective” in international human rights law, and emphasize the victims’ right to justice, right to reparation, and right to know. These documents also stress as essential principles the need to give victims restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, reparation, and redress.

Since its establishment in 2002, the International Criminal Court has also stressed the need for victim participation in all phases of investigation and judicial procedures. “The Chicago Principles on Post-Conflict Justice 2001-2008”, which provide basic guidelines on the handling of atrocities perpetrated under authoritarian rule and amid armed conflicts, also emphasize: “Policies that seek justice for past violations should be victim-centered and should address victims’ rights to remedies and reparations.”

We note with serious concern that your remarks on "welcoming" the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan, and lauding it as a “courageous decision” by the South Korean President are not in line with the human rights principles and positions the UN and the international community have accumulated so far. 

We would therefore like to request your response to the following questions to further clarify your position. 

1. Do you think that the recent agreement between South Korea and Japan satisfy the UN-emphasized principles of the rights of the victims of human rights violations and properly address war crime legacies and past recommendations made by the UN human rights mechanisms to Japan?

2. According to the briefing issued by the Presidential Blue House of the ROK, you phoned the President of the ROK to discuss the recent agreement. Have you done the same with the Prime Minister of Japan? If so, what exactly was discussed or remarked in the latter conversation? If no such conversation took place with the Prime Minister of Japan, why have you had such a conversation with the President of the ROK and not with the Prime Minister of Japan?

3. The UN Secretary-General is obligated to make efforts to promote human rights in all Member States. Therefore, some argue that the UN Secretary-General should help invalidate the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan that seems to condone war crimes. What do you think of this argument?

4. Is the Secretary-General inclined to urge both the government of the Republic of Korea and Japanese governments to resolve the “comfort women” issues through official apologies, legal reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence from the Japanese state through processes that are actually based upon victim participation?

We thank you for your reply in advance and look forward to hearing back from you at the earliest possible time. If you have any questions or would like clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected] or +82 (0)2 723 4250. 

Yours sincerely,

 
Ms. Hyunback Jung
Co-Representative
People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy 

South Korean Civil Society’s Declaration against the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of Japan 

Immediately cease the GSOMIA negotiation

(16 November 2016, Seoul) We, 225 public figures and 113 civil society organisations, call upon Park Geun-hye administration to stop the signing of dogmatic, undemocratic and unpeaceful General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of Japan. Both governments held the first meeting in Tokyo on 1st of November, the second meeting in Seoul on 9th of November, the third meeting in Tokyo on 14th of November and tentatively initialed the GSOMIA. The Park administration has already requested the legislative office for examination in an aim to ratify the GSOMIA within this month. We strongly condemn the government’s undemocratic decision and warn the Government to immediately stop negotiation on the GSOMIA.

We strongly protest against the way how negotiation process has been carried out in an unfair and non-transparent manner. As we all recall, this Agreement was secretly carried out to the point of initialing by Lee Myung-bak administration in 2012 and was ceased due to the strong opposition from the people. People were outraged by the fact that the government pushed ahead with the agreement without consensus from the general public with the power vested and the national assembly as the representative body of the government.  

This undemocratic behavior is repeated and getting even worse. The Ministry of National Defense, which is mainly responsible for the GSOMIA has vowed until recently that forming general public consensus is crucial and that the “signing the GSOMIA can only be proceeded with conditions established.” Regardless, the Park Geun-hye administration has disregarded such conditions and without any attempt to reach a general public’ s consensus, it has decided to continue signing the GSOMIA like a military operation. 
 
While South Korean people are angered and shocked by the recent Presidential scandal, the GSOMIA is being enforced. As proved by a million protesting on 12th of November, majority of people are calling for the President’s immediate resignation. As the Park administration has failed to carry out the constitutional responsibility bestowed by the people, it is not qualified to proceed the GSOMNIA. Paradoxically speaking, this GSOMIA negotiation clearly proves that the President must not be involved both in domestic and international affairs. 
 

We are extremely concerned about the negative impact of the GSOMIA. The government has granted indulgence through abruptly settling on the Agreement on ‘comfort women’ to Abe Shinzo administration in Japan, which has been right wing-led and distorted its history of aggression. Signing the GSOMIA will rather encourage Japan’s remilitarization and exercise of collective self-defense. As the most affected victims of Japanese imperialism, we will not accept the government to blindly take such actions.  

The GSOMIA will instigate the possible new cold war in Northeast Asia. Republic of Korea is the closest neighboring country to North Korea, an explicit enemy of the US-Japan alliance, and China and Russia, strategic competitor countries of US. The reason for the US-Japan alliance to include South Korea in their military strategy largely lies in geopolitical factor. The Korean Peninsula will be a strategic advantage as battle front and troop as the last resort. The South Korea-US-Japan Military Information Sharing Pact signed in 2014 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) deployment decision made in this July are in the same context. Such South Korea’s trilateral alliance may raise increasing concern in strengthening the trilateral alliance between North Korea, China and Russia. The result will be a new cold war in Northeast Asia and exacerbation of arms race as well as permanent loss of peace on the Korean Peninsula. As the victim of cold war, we will not allow the re-emergence of a new cold war. 

Some may assert that military cooperation with Japan is necessary in a pragmatic approach against the acceleration of North Korea’s missile and nuclear weapon threats. Nevertheless, the GSOMIA for trilateral missile defense system establishment will not assure South Korea’s safety. According to a report published by the US Congress Research Service (CRS) in June, 2013, it is assured that “South Korea might not benefit as much, because it is so close to North Korea that incoming missiles would likely fly on a lower trajectory and could arrive in a matter of minutes.” Considering our reality that we are still under ceasefire, this is a valid criticism. 

Military approach like the GSOMIA will clearly not stop North Korea’s nuclear development. This is just expansive reproduction of a failed policy. This will only lead to self-harm result in the Korean Peninsula. This will erupt cold war in Northeast Asia in reality and waste valuable resources that should be utilized for welfare and proliferation of humanity not for military competition.

The cooperation between South Korea-Japan and South Korea-US-Japan should not head in such direction. The objective of cooperation should be focused on peace and the means should be through diplomatic channels. Six-party talks should be resumed as it has been discontinued for about past eight years and relations between North and South Korea, North Korea and the US as well as North Korea and Japan should be resolved.

However, the Park administration has clearly proved that it has no will or capability to do so. It is gradually being disclosed that a shadowy advisor who is at the center of the corruption scandal has exerted extensive influence on domestic and international affairs but the government is still attempting to sign the GSOMIA. '

We will never accept such a historical regression. We can no longer trust the government that has lost ability to realize the seriousness of the issue and the President Park Geun-hye has no credibility, qualification or capability as a leader of this country. 

GPPAC Northeast Asia Statement Welcoming the 2018 Inter-Korean Summit

Supporting new hope for peace on the Korean Peninsula,

towards a peaceful, nuclear-weapons free Northeast Asia

April 28, 2018

The Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) Northeast Asia, a network of civil society organizations working for peace and dialogue in the region, wholeheartedly congratulates the leaders of the DPRK and the ROK, as well as the Korean people, for the historic achievement of the “Panmunjeom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula” issued following the Inter-Korean Summit of April 27, 2018 at the Peace House on the southern side of Korea's Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The Summit contributed to a significant reduction of tensions and indeed avoidance of the catastrophe of a potential nuclear war. Furthermore, it showed the world the true impact of committed leadership and diplomacy, and the direct, personal meeting between the leaders of both Koreas sent a powerful wave of emotion around the world.

The landmark steps of goodwill and promises for action shown on this day mark a historic moment, and the beginning of a “new era of peace” for the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia. A peaceful resolution of the ongoing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, and a shift from the current Armistice regime to a permanent peace regime, is vital for the security not only of both Koreas, but for the Northeast Asia region as a whole. We strongly welcome the declaration to bring a swift end to the war on the Korean Peninsula, and realize a peace treaty, as well as the concrete steps outlined to end hostilities and encourage active cooperation. Concrete steps including the establishment of a joint liaison office, continued high-level dialogue, and active contacts will mark the historic start of this new area.

Reaffirmation of the common goal of attaining a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula through “complete denuclearization” is greatly encouraging. We also share the view that the DPRK's measures to cease nuclear and missile tests are important steps for reducing tensions. We sincerely hope that these developments will be followed by clear commitments for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and for nuclear disarmament by all related parties. Both Koreas could celebrate complete denuclearization by together signing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We call on other parties in the region to also do so, as a step towards the future establishment of a Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone in Northeast Asia.

The encouragement of more active cooperation in social, economic and cultural fields is also significant, as are the steps outlined regarding practical implementation of previous agreements. We underline the role played by cultural exchange in creating the positive environment for the Inter-Korean Summit. Having organized regional civil society meetings at joint sites such as Mt Kumgang and the Kaesong Industrial Complex, we can directly testify to their significance as symbolic spaces for interaction between people from both Koreas and internationally, as well as for concrete cooperation and the development of joint inter-Korean institutions – important steps towards eventual unification. We therefore welcome commitments to expand such activities, such as on June 15 and other upcoming events. The clear declaration to restart reunions for tragically separated families, and solve humanitarian issues on the peninsula, are also crucial steps forward.

GPPAC Northeast Asia, with members from throughout the region including both Koreas, pledges to continue to do all we can to support diplomacy and the creation of an environment in which the Panmunjeom Declaration, as well as past agreements and future efforts to build peace, can be realized. In 2018, we will continue to convene the Ulaanbaatar Process, our civil society dialogue for regional peace and stability, to complement official processes towards the development of a peaceful, nuclear-free Northeast Asia.

We call upon the international community to undertake all efforts to support the implementation of the Panmunjeom Declaration, as well as previous joint agreements. The success of this Summit should be carried on to the upcoming US-DPRK discussions, which we sincerely hope will conclude with concrete steps towards denuclearization and a peace treaty for the Korean Peninsula. Space should be ensured for all stakeholders, including GPPAC members, civil society, states and the United Nations, to make utmost efforts to build on this success, and work towards the establishment of regional peacebuilding mechanisms for Northeast Asia.

The Summit is a powerful symbol of a process to overcome conflict and achieve peace through shifting from reaction to prevention. We sincerely believe that the realization of peace on the Korean Peninsula will develop into peace for the Northeast Asian region, and in turn contribute to momentum for building peace and security around the world.

>> Download

The dialogue must go on

PSPD strongly condemns the announcement of the abrupt withdrawal of the US from the DPRK-US Summit

On May 24 President Donald Trump of the United States canceled the summit scheduled to take place on June 12 in Singapore with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, shortly after ROK-US summit in Washington DC and North Korea's destruction of its Punggye-ri nuclear test facility. This act is very rude and clearly goes against all the efforts and world’s support for the peace process on the Korean Peninsula. The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) strongly condemns the abrupt announcement by the US on its withdrawal from the planned DPRK-US summit and urges the US to return to the summit.

President Donald Trump wrote that he was pulling out of the meeting because of North Korea’s recent “tremendous anger and open hostility.” It was, however, the US who actually provoked North Korea, by mentioning the "Libya Model" and "abandoning nuclear weapons first, compensating afterwards." The hostile communication between DPRK and US is the very reason the DPRK-US summit is necessary.

We, the Korean people, who wholeheartedly welcomed the inter-Korean summit and the Panmunjeom Declaration in April, are now deeply disappointed by the recent ROK-US “Max Thunder” joint military exercise, the cancellation of high-level inter-Korean talks, and the sudden cancellation of the DPRK-US summit. Through the inter-Korean summit, we have affirmed the power of dialogue. We believe that the only realistic way to alleviate the military tension surrounding the Korean Peninsula and to establish permanent peace and denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula is through dialogue and negotiation. The dialogue must go on.

[Statement] See / Download

Korean Version >>