초록 열기/닫기 버튼
The author proposes a long-term, comprehensive roadmap toward building a Korean peninsula peace regime that can replace the 1953 Korean armistice agreement. A two-track approach to a Korean peninsula peace regime is examined at inter-Korean and international levels. The inter-Korean level involves the two Koreas and the international level requires participation of the six parties, namely the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Japan, and Russia. The parties involved in the dual tracks may concurrently make efforts through confidence-building measures, national reconciliation, and international cooperation to build a peace regime and to replace the 1953 Korean armistice agreement. This regime can take the form of a four-party peace treaty that can be institutionalized by implementing the inter- Korean basic agreement (1991) and by concluding a Korean peninsula peace treaty at four-party peace talks involving the United States, China, and the two Koreas. This article presents three major arguments: First, the two Koreas and the four relevant powers need to agree on a comprehensive roadmap for a Korean peninsula peace regime. Second, in the short-term, the North Korean nuclear issue should be resolved peacefully and diplomatically through the six-party process. Third, the two Koreas need to abandon their respective positions: Seoul’s proposal for an inter-Korean peace agreement and Pyongyang’s proposal for a DPRK-U.S. peace treaty. The author proposes a Korean peninsula peace treaty among the four parties involving the ROK, the DPRK, the United States and China as an alternative to the formula of a peace regime just between the two Koreas. Peace talks among the four parties, in tandem with denuclearization negotiations at the Six-Party Talks, should be pursued.
