hankyoreh

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol (center) speaks at a joint press conference held after a trilateral summit with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan (left) and Chinese Premier Li Qiang (right) at Seoul’s Blue House on May 27, 2024. (courtesy of presidential office) 

The leaders of South Korea, China and Japan said they had “reiterated positions on regional peace and stability, denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the abduction issue, respectively” in a joint declaration following the three countries’ ninth trilateral summit on Monday. 

The language reiterating their respective positions means that the three leaders failed to reach an understanding on the shared goal of the “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.” That’s an undeniable step back from the statement “We are committed to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” in a document from the eighth trilateral summit held in Chengdu, China, on Dec. 24, 2019. 

What are the reasons for that backtracking? And which country, or countries were behind it? Has the goal of the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula been abandoned?

Nobody mentions the “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” 

In a joint press conference on Monday, President Yoon Suk-yeol of South Korea and Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan both referred to “North Korea’s denuclearization,” while Premier Li Qiang mentioned “the Korean Peninsula issue.” None of the three leaders even mentioned the phrase “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” in appearances reported in the press, in a highly evocative development for the nuclear issue. 

The “denuclearization of North Korea” mentioned by Yoon and Kishida is not a concept around which an international consensus has formed. The shared goal stated in the six-party talks joint statement (Sept. 19, 2005), the Panmunjom Declaration by the leaders of South and North Korea (April 27, 2018), and the joint statement by the leaders of North Korea and the US (June 12, 2018) was “the [complete] denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.” Even resolutions by the UN Security Council refer to the “verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.” 

Referring to the “denuclearization of North Korea” — which implies that the issue would be resolved if only North Korea were to abandon its nuclear weapons — is a unilateral and outdated attitude that diverges from this international consensus. 

The “political resolution of Korean Peninsula issues” mentioned by Li, the Chinese premier, amounts to a strategy of sweeping away the cobwebs of the Cold War in Northeast Asia, including hostile relations between North Korea and the US, and achieving the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which includes North Korea’s nuclear program. 

Along with being the official stance of the Chinese government, this is largely in step with international agreements, including the six-party talks joint statement, which specified not only the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula but also the normalization of North Korea’s ties with the US and Japan and negotiations for a peace regime. What is problematic, however, is that China has taken to ambiguously avoiding the expression “the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” in contrast with its previous practice. 

What’s behind the pushback from North Korea? 

Despite these considerations, North Korea publicly objected to the trilateral statement in a Monday press statement by a Foreign Ministry spokesperson titled, “Hostile acts of infringing upon our inviolable national sovereignty will never be tolerated.” 

“This was an indirect expression of dissatisfaction with China,” a South Korean government official said on Tuesday. 

Despite the general impression that China is on North Korea’s side, the two countries have quite different positions on the nuclear issue. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has said the North will “never give up nuclear weapons” and added language about developing “highly nuclear weapons” as a “responsible nuclear weapons state”  to Article 58 of Chapter 4 of the North Korean constitution. 

But China, in contrast, has continued to repeat calls for the resumption of negotiations and a political solution. For example, Chinese President Xi Jinping expressed “acts of military intimidation by the US and its allies that escalate confrontation with North Korea” while also calling for the resumption of negotiations with North Korea and related countries in a joint statement released with Russian President Vladimir Putin on May 16. 

That’s the actual substance behind Li’s repeated emphasis during the trilateral summit on “continuing restraint from the sides in question,” but Kim basically regards this as “double-dealing” by China. 

What’s needed to rekindle hope 

If all parties are to once again embrace the shared goal of “the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” the biggest ask is for Yoon to change both his attitude and strategy. 

“The fact that the three leaders reconfirmed that peace, stability and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia are their shared interests and responsibilities and pledged to keep working for a political solution to Korean Peninsula issues represents progress,” noted a former high-ranking official in the South Korean government. 

“We should also remember that common ground is so shaky they didn’t even field reporters’ questions at their joint press conference,” the former official added. 

“Yoon needs to set aside his unilateralism and conform to the spirit of previous international agreements that have presented a comprehensive solution that would dismantle the Cold War legacy in Northeast Asia, which would mean not ‘the denuclearization of North Korea’ but ‘the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,’” another respected figure said. 

By Lee Je-hun, senior staff writer 

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]