NationStates Jolt Archive

Korean leaders issue peace call
Thursday, 4 October 2007

The leaders of North and South Korea have signed a joint declaration calling for a permanent peace deal on the Korean Peninsula.

South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun and the North's Kim Jong-il issued the declaration after a three-day historic summit in Pyongyang.

They called for international talks on a treaty to replace the armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War.

The agreement came a day after the North agreed to end its nuclear plans.

Source: BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7027236.stm
So both sides want peace.. good.

But.. its not enough, -apparently- they need the "permission" of US and China.

They don't need the "permission" at all.

The US and China have to agree on it as well because THEY were also at the armistice signing at the end of the Korean war.

More then likely, both the US and china will agree on the terms and support this peace treaty.

As long as North Korea remains a buffer against the US, I don't think China cares if there's official peace or not.

The US, difficult to say, given Bush's cowboy "victory is only achieved at the barrel of a gun" attitude.

As long as North Korea remains a buffer against the US, I don't think China cares if there's official peace or not.

The US, difficult to say, given Bush's cowboy "victory is only achieved at the barrel of a gun" attitude.

:D

Ok cowboy. How would the US invade China anyway?

:D

Ok cowboy. How would the US invade China anyway?

Who knows? I was talking about North Korea anyway. You know, one of Bush's axis of evil? Or is it a tetrahedron now?

He may not intend to invade it, but he sure would like to keep it as one big scary bogeyman.

:D

Ok cowboy. How would the US invade China anyway?

Harry Potter magic.

But, seriously, OD, you've gotta remember that the US and the PRC were both signatories to the armistice, and as such, any further actions in the direction of a peace treaty to officially end the North Korean war against the UN would require their involvement.

Who knows? I was talking about North Korea anyway. You know, one of Bush's axis of evil? Or is it a tetrahedron now?

He may not intend to invade it, but he sure would like to keep it as one big scary bogeyman.

10^34-hedron, actually.

They don't need the "permission" at all.

The US and China have to agree on it as well because THEY were also at the armistice signing at the end of the Korean war.

More then likely, both the US and china will agree on the terms and support this peace treaty.

God I hope so.

God I hope so.
Of course they will. The North Koreans just gave the Americans a big present, and the people in the State Department would be insane to do anything to risk these new relations.

And China probably won't care, so they won't stand in the way.

The thing is the South- and North Koreans now working out terms in the peace treaty, which will most likely be years of linguistic gymnastics.

Of course they will. The North Koreans just gave the Americans a big present, and the people in the State Department would be insane to do anything to risk these new relations.

And China probably won't care, so they won't stand in the way.

The thing is the South- and North Koreans now working out terms in the peace treaty, which will most likely be years of linguistic gymnastics.

Regretably.

Given the way I see it, Bush is finally starting to realize people aren't exactly content with his presidency. I doubt he wants to be remembered as the President that not only ordered the starting of an unnecessary war, but also blocked the necessary end to another.

If that made any sense at all, I can't seem to speak proper English today.

Of course they will. The North Koreans just gave the Americans a big present...

The thing is the South- and North Koreans now working out terms in the peace treaty, which will most likely be years of linguistic gymnastics.
Years?


Joint declaration signed by the leaders of North and South Korea after an historic three-day summit in Pyongyang.

1. South and North Korea to actively implement the June 15 [2000] Joint Declaration.

2. South and North Korea to work for mutual respect and trust in order to overcome differences in ideology, system.

3. South and North Korea to ease military tensions, resolve disputes through dialogue and negotiations. The two sides to set up a joint fishing area in the West Sea to avoid accidental armed conflict. The two sides to hold defence ministerial talks in November in Pyongyang to discuss ways of supporting inter-Korean economic cooperation and easing tension.

4. South and North Korea agree on need to end the current armistice and establish permanent peace. The two sides to push for a declaration of the ending of the Korean War in cooperation with neighbouring nations. South and North Korea to make joint efforts for the smooth implementation of the Sept 19 and Feb 13 six-nation nuclear agreements.

5. South and North Korea to expand economic cooperation for balanced development and co-prosperity. The two sides to create a special peace zone around Haeju in North Korea and nearby areas, as well as work towards a joint fishing area, peace waters, special economic zone, and joint development of the estuary of the Han River.

6. South and North Korea to develop cooperation in the history, language, education, technology, culture, sports, and social sectors. The two sides to open direct air route between Seoul and Mount Paekdu to allow South Koreans to visit the mountain in North Korea.

7. South and North Korea to actively push for humanitarian cooperation and expansion of reunion of separated families.

8. South and North Korea to strengthen cooperation for national interest in the international stage and the benefits of Korean residents abroad.

October 4, 2007, 07:00 GMT
Source: South Korea's Yonhap news agency.

Years?
I would expect so. A peace treaty would surely have to contain some words on who started the war and for what reason, right?

Anyways, maybe I'm wrong and the North Koreans are more ready to compromise than I think. But I have difficulty believing that...have a read: http://axisofeviltour.com/nk-trip1.htm

That journal probably tells you more about the way North Korean people see themselves, their country and the outside world than any news article could convey.

I would expect so. A peace treaty would surely have to contain some words on who started the war and for what reason, right?No.

All a peace treaty needs to have is something like the 8 points agreed today by Kim and Roh.

All a peace treaty needs to have is something like the 8 points agreed today by Kim and Roh.
You're aware that the thing you quoted is not a peace treaty, or anything of the sort, right? It's a joint declaration, like there is after any trip of any leader anywhere.

Points 2 and 4 are where I expect difficulties, which will take time to resolve.

But if we have a peace treaty within, say, 6 months, I'd be more than happy to admit that you were right and I was wrong.

And the day OD is right would be a first.

Points 2 and 4 are where I expect difficulties, which will take time to resolve.

But if we have a peace treaty within, say, 6 months, I'd be more than happy to admit that you were right and I was wrong.I fully expect the Bush Gov to refuse to give permission for any Peace treaty untill he is 200% sure all the nuke facilities have been scraped..

So even if both Koreas want peace.. it is not going to happen just yet.

I fully expect the Bush Gov to refuse to give permission for any Peace treaty untill he is 200% sure all the nuke facilities have been scraped..

So even if both Koreas want peace.. it is not going to happen just yet.

Actually...the only way that would happen is if it is vetoed at the United Nations. I mean, the United States never did declare war on North Korea. The United Nations authorized the use of force against North Korea. The Korean War was a UN war.

Actually...the only way that would happen is if it is vetoed at the United Nations. I mean, the United States never did declare war on North Korea. The United Nations authorized the use of force against North Korea. The Korean War was a UN war.The Peace and reunification on Korea should be up to the Koreans.. not the US, China or the UN.

besides I cant imagine the UN vetoing against a Korean peace treaty or reunification.

The Peace and reunification on Korea should be up to the Koreans.. not the US, China or the UN.
The peace is up to the parties that were at war. And reunification is not at all on the agenda at this point.

besides I cant imagine the UN vetoing against a Korean peace treaty or reunification.
Because it won't. To the US it is irrelevant whether or not the Korean War is still going, the nuclear issue is quite seperate from that. And the other SC members couldn't care less, so they're never going to expose themselves to the bad publicity.

The Peace and reunification on Korea should be up to the Koreans.. not the US, China or the UN.

besides I cant imagine the UN vetoing against a Korean peace treaty or reunification.

They won't but the question remains...if they reunite, how is it going to reunite?

The Peace Treaty is a good start. I can not wait for that to happen. Reunification? Not under the North that's for sure.

Any debate about the involvement of China and the US is all well and good except for the fact that you can't trust Kim Jong-Il further than you can throw him and, looking at his enormous pot-belly, I doubt that would be very far.

Perhaps he wants money, perhaps he's bored but, in looking at the picture of him holding his arm aloft with Roh, he doesn't look exactly ecstatic - he looks entirely unmoved by the entire affair.

Personally, I think the man is mentally unstable and utterly untrustworthy.

Will there be a change before he dies - I doubt it.

Reunification? Not under the North that's for sure.in this case both the north and the South are co-sponsors.

If you want this to work.. you cant exclude one of the sides.

in this case both the north and the South are co-sponsors.

If you want this to work.. you cant exclude one of the sides.

For peace, that's common sense. For reunification? Will not happen under a nothern dictator.

For peace, that's common sense. For reunification? Will not happen under a nothern dictator.
Reunification will be a 50+ year process. Imagine how hard it was for Germany, and the differences were nowhere near as great economically, politically and culturally.

First a peace treaty, then an "eventual commitment", then an opening for information to flow, then massive amounts of economic aid, then gradually opening borders, then a free trade zone, then a currency union. And maybe some time in 2100, reunification.

The thing that bugs me is those people stuck in North Korean concentration camps. I would rather like them to be mentioned at some point.

I would expect so. A peace treaty would surely have to contain some words on who started the war and for what reason, right?


I don't see why it would. It just has to lay out the terms for the peace and the framework for future co-operation. Who started the war really isn't relevant.

the Bush junta only delayed the inevitable.

anyone paying the slightest bit of attention to that part of the world
was well aware of the Sunshine Policy
and that Korea N & S were making peace all on their own in the latter
half of the 90s.
family reunification projects, economic ties increasing, sporting and cultural exchanges, etc...

but then the Bush regime went and tossed NKorea in w/Iran & Iraq in some sort of imaginary "axis of evil" with the transparent attempt to draw on WW2 imagery.

the Bush junta only delayed the inevitable.

North Korea was just as bad, considering they violated their agreements and continued work on the nuclear reactor.

Its not that big deal. Change would be mainly de jure, de facto everything will stay more or less same. Stalinistic North-Korea still will be one of the most perverse states on earth.

Olmedreca;13106880']Its not that big deal. Change would be mainly de jure, de facto everything will stay more or less same.#1 the broken families will be able to visit.

#2 More trade.

Reunification will be a 50+ year process. Imagine how hard it was for Germany, and the differences were nowhere near as great economically, politically and culturally.

First a peace treaty, then an "eventual commitment", then an opening for information to flow, then massive amounts of economic aid, then gradually opening borders, then a free trade zone, then a currency union. And maybe some time in 2100, reunification.

The thing that bugs me is those people stuck in North Korean concentration camps. I would rather like them to be mentioned at some point.


A free information flow?

Hey you northern guys.... did you know us southerners number nearly 60 million now, and are reasonably free to lead our lives our way without having to bow and scrape to the 'glorious leaders'.. oh and nobodies died of famine for at least 30 yrs

<northern folks> wow...look at what the south has... I want some of it.

20 million North Koreans move south of the border oops there goes North Korea just like east germany did

El-presidente Boris

PS not forgetting the 25 000 deluded socialists from the south moving north for a while......

<socialists> Hey this country is crap we're going back south! :p

North Korea was just as bad, considering they violated their agreements and continued work on the nuclear reactor.

Yeah, Clinton didn't live up to the agreements either.

"Korea's Place in the Sun: A Modern History" (http://www.amazon.com/Koreas-Place-Sun-History-Updated/dp/0393327027) Updated Edition
by Bruce Cumings

author is the "foremost" (as opposed to fivemost) Korean expert in the US.

says NKorea is not a "stalinist state",
but rather portrays characteristics of Korean ruling culture that
has always been there. leader worship being very much among them.

It would be really nice if there was a peace agreement and North Korea could develop a real socialist economy. Juche is the worst deviation from Marxism known to mankind. Just maybe, if there is peace, Kim Jong Il will need to actually fix his nation, since he can no longer use imperialist invasion as a credible excuse (although imperialist invasion is always a possibility...). The North Koreans are an extremely hard-working and dedicated people, but it's tragic, because they are brainwashed, and all of that dedication if focused towards the military. If these feelings were focused towards the economy, poverty would vanish. Peace now!

since he can no longer use imperialist invasion as a credible excuse (although imperialist invasion is always a possibility...).

the military aggression threat may vanish.
but not the imperialist threat.
the South Koreans are well aware of this.
the imf, world bank, and such.
perhaps it is called neo-colonialism.
but subjegation none the less

Yeah, Clinton didn't live up to the agreements either.Clinton did live up better than Bush.
Clinton did put it up better than Bush. :D
Clinton's is bigger than Bush.

Clinton is better than Bush in almost every way I can think of.

Clinton did live up better than Bush.
Clinton did put it up better than Bush. :D
Clinton's is bigger than Bush.

Clinton is better than Bush in almost every way I can think of.

i don't know about that.
at least the Repugs don't claim to be on your side

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com
you will find Clinton's bad foreign policy.
the dems are the other head of the imperial corporate war party

says NKorea is not a "stalinist state",
but rather portrays characteristics of Korean ruling culture that
has always been there. leader worship being very much among them.

So? South Koreans are doing fine as democracy. Stalinism is most accurate description to what is happening in North-Korea. People are brainwashed all the time, and are starving to death while state build more and more guns.

IJust maybe, if there is peace, Kim Jong Il will need to actually fix his nation, since he can no longer use imperialist invasion as a credible excuse

Totalitarian states are able to claim at propaganda that someone is going to invade them even if there is no actual threat. That is never problem for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

Searched and I didnt find the word Stalinism.

EDIT Pacificville found the word Stalinist, so that proves I was on the wrong.

I dont agree, and to see if someone agrees with you, I searched for the word Stalinism at Wikipedia/North_Korea..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

and guess what I found.. there is hundreds of words, none of them is Stalinism.

But one is Stalinist...

North Korea is a single-party state with a Stalinist, authoritarian, and totalitarian regime.

I would like to hear your definition of what a Stalinist state is, and how North Korea doesn't constitute one.

EDIT
Also, when you're referring to a plural such as 'hundreds', you say there 'are hundreds' and not 'is hundreds'.

(shows the word Stalinist at the wiki page)Bah..

I used the search button on my firefox (searched -Stalinism-)
I didnt read the Wiki.
So many words, so little time.

But yes you are right. I retract my post.

Bah..

I used the search button on my firefox (searched -Stalinism-)
I didnt read the Wiki.
So many words, so little time.

But yes you are right. I retract my post.

I used the Firefox search as well. It brings up results as you type so you should have realised you'd got a hit by the 'n'. But anyway I digress...

This, your post that is, brings up another issue though. Your position on what sort of government a country has is dictated solely by the terms on its Wikipedia page?

This, your post that is, brings up another issue though. Your position on what sort of government a country has is dictated solely by the terms on its Wikipedia page?No. Wikipedia is not what dictates my opinion on a Gov.

Take the wikipedia page about the USA.. one would think that we have a Good gov.

I should certainly hope the US and China would be consulted on an official end to a war that claimed 30,000 Americans and a quarter of a million Chinese.

I should certainly hope the US and China would be consulted on an official end to a war that claimed 30,000 Americans and a quarter of a million Chinese.I should certainly hope that The Koreans could get peace and reunification going without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

No. Wikipedia is not what dictates my opinion on a Gov.

Take the wikipedia page about the USA.. one would think that we have a Good gov.

So you still deny that NK is a Stalinist state?

I should certainly hope that The Koreans could get peace and reunification going without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

It was our (USA's and especially China's) war almost as much as it was theirs.

So you still deny that NK is a Stalinist state?I made a big mistake on the way I started that debate. searched the one word he used(stalinism).. and not the other possible words. (stalinist)

The constitution of the Nationstate of ## says that when the Dear leader(me) makes such big mistake, he should humbly leave the discussion.

Its like an -football- automatic yellow card if you want.

In another words.. I am no longer going to contest the "stalinism" tag for the foreseeable future.

It was our (USA's and especially China's) war almost as much as it was theirs.I do not care, if both Korean sides want peace and reunification, they should be able to go ahead without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

I made I mistake on the way I started that debate. searched the one word he used.. and not the other possible words.

But you said the Wikipedia page has nothing to do with your position on their style of government, so what has that got to do with that? So now that I pointed out NK's article used the word Stalinist you now accept they are?

The constitution of the Nationstate of ## says that when the Dear leader(me) makes such big mistake, he should humbly leave the discussion.

Its like an -football- automatic yellow card if you want.

In another words.. I am no longer going to contest the "stalinism" tag for today.

That is stupid. You made a mistake, not the first time. Just continue the discussion.

But you said the Wikipedia page has nothing to do with your position on their style of government, so what has that got to do with that? So now that I pointed out NK's article used the word Stalinist you now accept they are?No, but I am not going to Contest, you can call it Stalinist all day now.. I wont touch it.
.
Just continue the discussion.My freedom of speech, include -both- the rights To-talk AND not-to-talk If I so do choose.

and I choose not to contest the "stalinism" tag argument. You win, take it and run with it.

No, but I am not going to Contest, you can call it Stalinist all day now.. I wont touch it.

Either admit you were wrong or provide your definition of Stalinism. Don't be such a jerk.

Either admit you were wrong or provide your definition of Stalinism. Don't be such a jerk.
Playing with the exact language of a post is what he does. It blew up in his face this time, he acknowledges it, and that's probably all you're gonna get out of him.

Also, when you're referring to a plural such as 'hundreds', you say there 'are hundreds' and not 'is hundreds'.OK. my grammar/spelling sucks.

I do not care, if both Korean sides want peace and reunification, they should be able to go ahead without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

They lost that ability when they asked for alliances and support in their war.....

:confused: wait,

so If the US wants to stop the Iraq War, they have to ask permission from Poland, Denmark, and all the coalition-of-the-silly countries. ????

Actually no they don't because they didn't sign any official documents like China, the US, and the two Korea's for the cease fire of the Korean War.....

They lost that ability when the ask for alliances and support in their war.....:confused: wait,

so If the US ever wanted to stop the Iraq War, they have to ask permission from Poland, Denmark, and all the coalition-of-the-silly countries. ????

Actually no they don't because they didn't sign any official documents like China, the US, and the two Korea's for the cease fire of the Korean War.....thats a shame.. in the whole wide History of the World.. "Signed Documents" have almost never stopped wars.
And now you are saying they can stop peace. WTF?

I say: if the human kind has historically made wars ignoring whatever "Signed Documents" was around.. Then the Koreans should go ahead with peace treaties.. ignoring any foreign objections to peace and reunification.

thats a shame.. in the whole wide History of the World.. "Signed Documents" have almost never stopped wars.
And now you are saying they can stop peace. WTF?

Well, you know, apart from (essentially) the Korean War...

I should certainly hope that The Koreans could get peace and reunification going without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

My lord how ignorant.

To end the war, China and the US do need to agree to it as they were part of the war. As does Britain and the rest of the UN as well come to think of it. As to reunification, that is up between the two nations and no one else. Does this need to be spelled out more for you?

I do not care, if both Korean sides want peace and reunification, they should be able to go ahead without having to ask permission from the USA or China.

:headbang:

To have peace, all parties involved in the war must agree to it. UNDERSTOOD?

thats a shame.. in the whole wide History of the World.. "Signed Documents" have almost never stopped wars.
And now you are saying they can stop peace. WTF?

Almost never? Oh brother. They just stopped World War 1, World War 2, Korea(cease-fire), 'Nam, 1st Gulf War (cease-fire), Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, Spanish American War! Oh and let us not forget the Treaty of Westphelia and numerous other "signed documents" that have stopped wars and ended them.

I say: if the human kind has historically made wars ignoring whatever "Signed Documents" was around.. Then the Koreans should go ahead with peace treaties.. ignoring any foreign objections to peace and reunification.

Sorry but as the United Nations involved itself in the Korean War, they have to be at the table. Same with China. I see you will never understand this.