ATTEMPTING KOREAN REUNIFICATION: THE PROGRESS OF REPUBLIC OF 'S EFFORTS TO REUNITE KOREA UNDER PARK GEUN HYE’S A NEW ERA OF HOPE AND HAPPINESS VISION (2014- 2017)

By

AULIA MAULINA ID No. 016201400025

A thesis presented to the Faculty of Humanities President University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for Bachelor Degree in International Relations Specialized in Diplomacy Studies

March 2018

THESIS ADVISER RECOMMENDATION LETTER

This thesis entitled “Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)” prepared and submitted by Aulia Maulina in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in International Relations in the Faculty of Humanities has been reviewed and found to have satisfied the requirements for a thesis fit to be examined. I therefore recommend this thesis for Oral Defense.

Cikarang, Indonesia, March 28th 2018

Recommended and acknowledged by,

______Isyana Adriani, B. A, M.Si.

i

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY

I declare that this thesis, entitled “Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)” is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, an original piece of work that has not been submitted, either in whole or in part, to another university to obtain a degree.

Cikarang, Indonesia, March 28th 2018

______Aulia Maulina

ii

PANEL OF EXAMINERS

APPROVAL SHEET

The Panel of Examiners declare that the thesis “Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)” that was submitted by Aulia Maulina majoring in International Relations from School of International Relations, Communication, and Law was assessed and approved to have passed the Oral Examinations on April 17, 2018.

______Hendra Manurung, SIP., MA. Chair – Panel of Examiners

______Prof. Anak Agung Banyu Perwita, Ph. D Teuku Rezasyah, Ph.D. Chair – Panel of Examiners Examiner

Thesis Adviser I

______Yj Isyana Adriani, B. A, M.Si. Thesis Adviser

iii

ABSTRACT

Aulia Maulina, International Relations 2014, President University

Thesis Title: “Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)” Adviser: Isyana Adriani, B. A, M.Si

The latest event which occured at Pyeongchang 2018 Olympic Winter Games showed the world that the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea could unite and marched together under one same flag. The hope for the two to reunite rose again through the possibilities. Korean reunification would be possible depending on the efforts made. Park Geun Hye was the former President of Republic of Korea, she has made various efforts to achieve Korean reunification. As the first female President of Republic of Korea, Park Geun Hye was expected to create significant efforts to achieve One Korea. Park Geun Hye was determined to achieve Korean reunification and made the reunification as her priority during her administration. Under her ‘A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision’, Park Geun Hye implemented her programs to achieve Korean reunification. By using qualitative approach, a series of significant theories (smart power, realism, rational choice theory, game theory and foreign policy) would be applied to gain the exact perspective in understanding the issue.

Keywords: Korean reunification, Park Geun Hye, Korean peninsula, Reconciliation, Inter-Korean relations.

iv

ABSTRAK

Aulia Maulina, International Relations 2014, President University

Thesis Title: “Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)” Adviser: Isyana Adriani, B. A, M.Si

Peristiwa terbaru yang terjadi dalam Pyeongchang 2018 Olympic Winter Games menunjukkan kepada dunia bahwa Republik Korea dan Republik Rakyat Demokratik Korea dapat bersatu dan berjalan bersama di bawah satu bendera yang sama. Harapan kedua Korea untuk bersatu lagi bangkit kembali melalui berbagai kemungkinan. Penyatuan kembali Korea akan bergantung pada upaya yang dilakukan. Park Geun Hye adalah mantan Presiden Republik Korea, dia telah melakukan berbagai upaya untuk mencapai reunifikasi Korea. Sebagai Presiden perempuan pertama Republik Korea, Park Geun Hye diharapkan dapat menciptakan upaya yang signifikan untuk mencapai Korea yang satu. Park Geun Hye bertekad untuk mencapai reunifikasi Korea dan menjadikan reunifikasi sebagai prioritasnya selama masa pemerintahannya. Di bawah ‘Visi Era yang Baru untuk Harapan dan Kebahagiaan’, Park Geun Hye menerapkan programnya untuk mencapai reunifikasi Korea. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, serangkaian teori penting (smart power, realism, rational choice theory, game theory dan foreign policy) akan diterapkan untuk mendapatkan perspektif yang tepat dalam memahami isu ini.

Keywords: Penyatuan kembali Korea, Park Geun Hye, semenanjung Korea, Rekonsiliasi, hubungan antar Korea.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the one and only Allah SWT, if it is not because of His blessings, I would not be able to finish anything up to this point of my life.

To my beautiful, loving and supportive family. Mama (Herlia Supiarni) & Papa (Dadeng Suhendra) thank you so much for your support in my life, I made this thesis especially to make you proud of me. I am so sorry for taking such a long time, I will not dissapoint you anymore. And to my two sisters teh Senni (Senni Tamara) & teh Sisil (Shylvia Deviani), thank you for inspiring me, I learned a lot from all of you. And to my lovely Kakek (Chairul Munir) & Nenek (Upi) whose always asking me when will I finish my thesis, I present this for you! Always be healthy Kek & Nek!

I would like to express my biggest gratitude to Miss Isyana Adriani B. A, M.Si as my thesis adviser, for being such a supportive and reachable adviser during my thesis consultation. Thank you so much! And to my other IR lecturers, thank you so much for kindly giving me your knowledge about International Relations during my study here.

And to my sweethearts, Ivena, Ratih, Kalya, Fiqa and Fanny, thank you so much for everything, my life here would be so dull without you guys, remember you all can count on me when you need anything. To the annoying boys in the whole world, Aldo, Naufal, Paksi, Dicko, Jaja, Pipiw, Rifqi, Elji and Adit, thank you for teaching me about those unimportant-boys-things and thank you for those unfunny jokes.

Next, to my brother who will always be there for me, Adiartha Budasi, thank you so much for your endless support, in case you do not know you are loved by many people and stop underestimate yourself. Curly-thing aka Raisya, thank you for being such a cutie pie, I never thought we could be this close. To my 2014 Cheers Squad, Toharu (my Captain), Ayu, Destri and Gerry, thank you! And to my E-10 mates, Ratih, Nadya, Widi, Amal, Risa and Sekar, thank you and please we need to hang out more often! To my SKIP buddies, Farhan, Hari and Alif, do not give up and thank you for the delicious Thai

vi tea ever! To my impolite juniors, Sigit, Jody, Dicky, Ibam, and the others, thank you for testing my patience. And to my beautiful juniors, Rara & Bey, thank you!

My university life would never be complete without organizational and event experiences I went through. Thank you PUMA IR 2016 (Jojo, Chacha, Pelita and the others, I am so sorry I could not write your name one by one here) for letting me be a part of your amazing team. And to Sport & Art , Paksi, Naufal, David, Suci, Yosi and Genji, SOPU was one of the most memorable moments in my university life, cheers to the General Winner & Best Supporter! To my partners in STO 2015 (especially PR members), STO 2016 (special shoutout to Asgaf, Odi and my kids in PR, Pila, Ko Billy, Devina, Yolla, Garry and Faishal) and STO 2017 (my classic PR members, Yolla, Marsha, Tamara, Garry, Wiki, Andhika and Michael) thank you for the amazing three years experiences in Public Relations! And thank you to my partners in other events, PR Dies Natalis 2016, PR PU Idol 2016, etc. To SOPU Cheers IR Squad 2015, 2016 and 2017, thank you for giving me three years experiences.

To my awesome seniors, kak Lindie, kak Mustika, kak Didis, kak Lanny, kak Putri and kak Maye, you guys are the best! To the bullies, Pila, Arep and Wiwid, thank you! My high-school buddies, Ine & Ghina, thank you so much! And to my fellow friends, IR Wolves batch 2014, we are all in this together.

To Alvin Adibrata, thank you for your endless support for me, I owe you. Thank you everyone for bringing color into my life. I am so blessed to have all of you in my life. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENT

THESIS ADVISER ...... i RECOMMENDATION LETTER ...... i DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ...... ii PANEL OF EXAMINERS APPROVAL SHEET ...... iii ABSTRACT ...... iii ABSTRAK ...... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... vi TABLE OF CONTENT ...... viii LIST OF FIGURES ...... xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... xii CHAPTER I ...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 I.1. Background of the Study ...... 1 I.2. Problem Identification ...... 7 I.3. Statement of the Problem ...... 8 I.4. Research Objective ...... 8 I.5. Significance of the Study ...... 8 I.6. Theoretical Framework ...... 8 1.6.1. Smart Power ...... 9 1.6.2. Realism ...... 10 1.6.3. Rational Choice...... 13 1.6.4. Game Theory ...... 15 1.6.5. Foreign Policy ...... 16 I.7. Scope and Limitations of Study ...... 17 I.8. Research Methodology ...... 17 I.9. Definition of Terms ...... 19 I.10. Structure of the Thesis ...... 19 1.10.1. Chapter I – Introduction ...... 19 1.10.2. Chapter II – Literature Review ...... 20 1.10.3. Chapter III – The Beginning of Divided Korea and Idea of Possible Reunification ...... 20 1.10.4. Chapter IV – Programs and ROK’s Endeavour during Park Geun Hye’s Era in Supporting the Proccess of Korean Reunification ...... 20

viii

1.10.5. Chapter V – Conclusion ...... 20 CHAPTER II ...... 21 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 21 II.1. Korea Briefing: 2000-2001: First Steps Toward Reconciliation and Reunification...... 21 II.2. Korean Dream: A Vision for a Unified Korea ...... 22 II.3. South and ’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations ...... 22 II.4. Conflicting Visions for Korean Reunification ...... 23 II.5. South Korean Attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification...... 24 II.6. Sunshine in Korea: The South Korean Debate over Policies Toward North Korea...... 25 II.7. A New Kind of Korea ...... 26 CHAPTER III ...... 27 THE BEGINNING OF DIVIDED KOREA AND THE IDEA OF POSSIBLE REUNIFICATION ...... 27 III.1. The Beginning of Divided Korea...... 27 III.1.1. (1950-1953) ...... 27 III.1.2. Korean DMZ Conflict (1966-1969) ...... 30 III.2. Post-Korean War for the Two Koreas ...... 32 III.2.1. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea ...... 32 III.2.2. Republic of Korea ...... 35 III.3. The Idea of Possible Reunification ...... 37 III.3.1. Declaration of 8.15 ...... 38 III.3.2. July 4th North-South Joint Statement ...... 39 III.3.3. ...... 41 III.3.4. 2000 Inter-Korean Summit...... 42 III.3.5. The Policy for Peace and Prosperity ...... 43 III.3.6. 2007 Inter-Korean Summit...... 46 III.4. Overview of ROK-DPRK Relations ...... 48 III.5. Responses from the Public of ROK Toward Reunification ...... 50 CHAPTER IV ...... 53 THE PROGRAMS AND ROK’S EFFORTS DURING PARK GEUN HYE ERA IN SUPPORTING THE PROCESS OF KOREAN REUNIFICATION ...... 53 IV.1. The Implementations of Park Geun Hye's Programs in Supporting the Process of Korean Reunification ...... 53

ix

IV.1.1. A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision ...... 53 IV.1.2. Trustpolitik Policy ...... 57 IV.1.3. Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation ...... 60 IV.2. International Support for Reunification ...... 62 IV.3. The Impact of Park Geun Hye’s Impeachment to Korean Reunification ...... 63 CHAPTER V ...... 66 CONCLUSION ...... 66 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 71 APPENDICES ...... 77

x

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 – The Maps of DMZ and the 38th Parallel in Korean Peninsula...... 3 Figure 2 – Implementation Framework of the Trust-Building .Process...... 7 Figure 3 – Aid Contribution from Fraternal Nations for DPRK...... 34 Figure 4 – Implementation Strategy by Stages for Establishment of a Peace Regime on the Korean Peninsula...... 46 Figure 5 – Image of DPRK from the view of ROK people...... 51 Figure 6 – Interest in Korean Reunification from the view of ROK people ...... 52 Figure 7 – Reasons for Necessity of Reunification...... 53 Figure 8 – A New Era of Hope and Happiness...... 55 Figure 9 – Three Main Tasks of Presidential Committee for Unification...... 61

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CPV Chinese People’s Volunteer DMZ Demilitarized Zone DPRK Democratic People’s Republic of Korea GPF Global Peace Foundation KIC Kaesong Industrial Complex KMAG Korean Military Advisory Group NGO Non-Governmental Organizations RMB Renminbi (People's Republic of China’s official currency) ROK Republic of Korea Ruble Russia Federation Currency USD Dollar WW II World War II

xii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

I. 1. Background of the Study Since ages ago, peace has became a never ending issue in International Relations. Every state obviously has a dream to make peace with other states, hence the problem is peace is difficult to reach. Selfishness and power make peace become a complicated and complex issue. To make peace with one another, various efforts are made through various ways. Without peace, a country will become unstable and difficult to conduct a cooperation. Other than that, innocent people will also be affected by it. For states that already have peace with other states, it may not be a significant problem for them. However, it is a huge problem for some states that are supposed to be united and they ended up separated due to various reasons. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea or abbreviated as DPRK with Republic of Korea or abbreviated as ROK are the two states with significant peace issues which made them separated. Post World War II created various unfortunate results, one of them is the . Korea had been one nation since the Shilla dynasty established a unified kingdom on the Korean Peninsula in 676.1 Even though Korea was colonized by Japan from 1910 until they surroundered in 1945, ROK and DPRK were still one country. However, when Japan surrendered after World War II or WW II in 1945, Korea was divided with the United States occupying ROK and the occupying DPRK. At that time Korea was to be temporarily divided by the 38th parallel, a horizontal line that split the Korean peninsula in two. After that, the United Nations scheduled elections in both parts of the Korea which were to be fair and democratic. In the South side, was elected and the name of ROK was established and taking control over from the United States. However, in the North side, the Soviet Union refused to hold free elections, as they were and still are a communist, therefore the state was established with Kim Il Sung as the leader or ruler of the state, who is the grandfather of the current DPRK leader, Kim Jong Un.

1 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President P ark Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 1

The United States and the Soviet Union have different ways in treating each other’s occupancy. On the communist side, the Soviet Union and China had significantly armed the DPRK with weapons and funding, in contrast with the communist, the United States were not actually as generous with ROK, as they refused to even give them any tanks and leaving them seriously ill-equipped for a war. Therefore, as DPRK knew what was the situation at ROK, in 1950 under the direction of former Soviet Union leader, , DPRK crossed the 38th parallel and invaded ROK. That was when the Korean War started until the year of 1953 and since then the split became more permanent, as it was supposed to be temporary. The end of Korean War was marked by a truce agremeent which created Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) along 155 miles (250 kilometers) with a line width of 2.5 miles that demarcates the two Koreas.2 Korean War was officially ended on 27th July 1953 with no absolute winner by the signing of Korean Armistice Agreement. The armistice ensured the safety or peace on the Korean peninsula, wondering the people in Korea if there is a possibility for reunification. After the establishment of DMZ and Korean Armistice Agremeent, people are questioning whether peace in Korea could happen or not. Despite the relatively peaceful situation since the Korean War ended, tensions remain high between ROK and DPRK and their border remains the most heavily militarised frontier in the world.

2The Korean War, 1950 – 1953. Retrieved 13 October 2017 from https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945- 1952/korean-war-2

2

Figure 1: The Maps of DMZ and the 38th Parallel in Korean Peninsula.

Source: Ilbe http://www.ilbe.com/ (ROK’s daily popular portal). 2017.

The dream of One Korea has and always been one of the most arduous challenges for both ROK and DPRK. This is a very concerning issue because up until now the gap between DPRK and ROK is still quite high and somehow it keeps widening becase of various factors. Today, as the world could see, the ROK and DPRK are having a lot of differences as two countries can be. Even though they both speak Korean and have the word ‘Korea’ in their name, that might be the only similarity that they have. The government of ROK actually has done various efforts to reduce the gap between DPRK and ROK both internally and through cooperation.3 There are many agreements, bilateral relations, and programs have been signed to achieve One Korea.4 ROK's relationship with DPRK is convoluted. While the main objective is reunification, that objective seems no closer today than it did decades ago. ROK choose gradual steps to achieve peaceful reunification, therefore the reunification would happen slowly but sure.

3 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21). 4 Ibid. 3

One of the primary goals of ROK’s unification policy is to encourage change in DPRK’s system and they did not want to attempt to isolate and await the DPRK’s sudden collapse, therefore ROK has its own unification formula using these three-phase unification approach:

1) a phase of reconciliation and cooperation 2) a phase of the Korean Commonwealth 3) the final phase of unified Korea of one-nation and one-state.

The meaning of those three approaches are, ROK wanted the Korean reunification to happen slowly but sure. First, they would build cooperation with DPRK before going into creating Korean Commonwealth while also unite Korea into one nation. The ROK government has embraced various alternatives strategy under different administrations, yet none of them led to sustained improvement in relations. Yet, every ROK leader hoped they could create a miracle in his or her legacy by achieving reunification. “Sunshine Policy” (1998 – 2003) was first proposed by Kim Dae Jung, former President of Republic of Korea in 1998, to promote reconciliation with the DPRK. 5 As a form of this policy, the ROK government started permitting ROK Non- Governmental Organizations (NGOs), businesses and citizens to have contact over the DMZ and help them by giving food and fertilizers as as they were recovering from a devastating starvation. The sunshine policy could be seen as a bold and dynamic policy to establish steady and voluntary changes in DPRK for peace, opening and reform through the step-by-step process of reconciliation, exchange and cooperation with its objective to lay the foundation for peaceful Korean unification by breaking the vicicous cycle of negative, hostile actions and reactions through peaceful exchanges and cooperation.6

5 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21). 6 Moon, C. I. (2000). The Sunshine Policy and the Korean Summit: assessments and prospects. East Asian Review, 12(4), 3-36.

4

After Kim Dae Jung, Roh Moo Hyun (2003 – 2008) continued to escalate reconciliation efforts with DPRK under the “Policy for Peace and Prosperity” which focused on bilateral aid and humanitarian assistance from ROK to DPRK.7 However, rather achieving the peace and prosperity, the deepening nuclear crisis on both states made the relations between two Koreans remain tense and complicated. Due to this, the first round of Six Party Talks, which is a series of multilateral negotiations to dismantle DPRK’s nuclear program was held.8 After Roh Moo Hyun, in 2008 – 2012, President Lee Myung Bak wanted to take a “pragmatic” approach towards DPRK9. He created “Initiative for Denuclearization and Opening up North Korea”, which promised DPRK a $3,000 per capita income for 10 years if the DPRK abandoned its nuclear program.10 Other than that, Lee Myung Bak also promised to insert human rights issues in DPRK as an important subject in ROK policy.11 However, due to some incidents occuring during Lee Myung Bak’s leadership, DPRK and ROK relations remained tense and DPRK decided to put an end of any interest in dialogue during Lee Myung Bak’s era. The end of Lee Myung Bak’s era put more pressure on Park Geun Hye, as the next ROK President. After Lee Myung Bak’s leadership, the relation between DPRK and ROK was too tense and complicated. Therefore, Park Geun Hye, former President of ROK in 2012 – 2017, promised to strengthen the economy, modify the social safety net and improve relation with DPRK.12

7 Inter-Korean Relations. (2017, April 11). Retrieved 13 October 2017, from https://www.ncnk.org/resources/briefing-papers/all-briefing-papers/inter-korean-relations 8 Ibid. 9 Korean Cultural Center. President-elect Lee Myung-bak Seeks Pro-Business Policies, Pragmatic Diplomacy. Korea Policy Review, Vol. 4, No. 1 (January 2008), 6. http://www.kccla.org/download_/download_.asp?filename=2008165113-1.pdf 10 Inter-Korean Relations. (2017, April 11). Retrieved 13 October 2017, from https://www.ncnk.org/resources/briefing-papers/all-briefing-papers/inter-korean-relations 11 Ibid. 12 Evans J.R. Revere, “Park Geun-hye’s Electoral Victory: A Sigh of Relief from Washington?” Brookings Institution, Up Front blog, December 19, 2012. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up- front/posts/2012/12/19-south-korea-president-revere 5

Park Geun Hye’s government presented the trust-building process on the Korean Peninsula. ‘Building a foundation for national unification' was set as one of the four major objectives of the Park Geun Hye government. 'Building a foundation for national unification' was first mentioned in President Park Jung Hee's statement on "Methods to build the foundation for peaceful unification" on August 15, 1980 (8.15 Declaration).13 To show her commitment in achieving Korean reunification, during her press conference on 6th January 2014, Park Geun Hye stated that she would build the foundation for an era of reunification and set this foundation as one of her main tasks of her administration, therefore the foundation for peaceful reunification would be implemented with focus because of the creation of specific policies.14 Other than that, at the same conference she stated that reunification is like hitting a jackpot (or in Korean is daebak), broken the Korean reunification discourse in DPRK, ROK, and even in the world society.15 Park Geun Hye believed that Korean reunification would be possible.16

13 Choi, L. (2012). The foreign policy of Park Chunghee: 1968-1979 (Doctoral dissertation, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)). 14 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21). 15 Ibid. 16 Choi, L. (2012). The foreign policy of Park Chunghee: 1968-1979 (Doctoral dissertation, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)). 6

I. 2. Problem Identification The idea of reunification was implemented since under the governance of former South Korean President, Kim Dae-Jung in 1998 with its “Sunshine Policy” and continued by “Policy for Peace and Prosperity” under the governance of Roh Moo Hyun. Even though during those two governances there were some success, the idea of reunification is still too complex to be solved only by the two Koreas remembering that the condition in South and North are completely different, thus, former President of ROK, Park Geun Hye, has made various efforts to achieve One Korea. Under the grand vision of “A New Era of Hope and Happiness,” President Park proposed four major national objectives: economic revival, ROK citizens’ welfare, thriving culture, and building a foundation for unification.17 Other than those four major national objectives, in 2014 Park Geun Hye has created a special committee to achieve Korean reunification, named the Unification Preparatory Committee.18

Figure 2: Implementation Framework of the Trust-Building Process.

Source: Ministry of Unification Republic of Korea, 2014.

17 Under the grand vision of “A New Era of Hope and Happiness,” President Park proposes four major national objectives: economic revival, ROK citizen’s welfare, thriving culture, and building a foundation for unification. 18 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 7

I. 3. Statement of the Problem Topic: Attempting Korean Reunification: The Progress of Republic of Korea's Efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014- 2017). Research Question: How did Park Geun Hye support the Korean reunification process under A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision (2014-2017)?

I. 4. Research Objective The objective of this research is to analyze the progress of Republic of Korea’s efforts to achieve One Korea under Park Geun Hye’s Vision of A New Era of Hope and Happiness in 2014 – 2017.

I. 5. Significance of the Study The significance of the study in the case of the chosen topic is to get in-depth understanding on how effective the efforts of Republic of Korea to achieve the reunification with Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in 2014 – 2017, as the unstable progress of Korean reunification has a meaningful relations with the study of International Relations, involving huge regime such as DPRK and ROK. The author wishes that this research will be able to give new insights on DPRK and ROK relations, particulatrly in their reunification activities during Park Geun Hye’s era. Moreover, the author hopes that this thesis will be able to provide more understanding of Korean reunification in 2014 – 2017.

8

I. 6. Theoretical Framework In this research, a series of significant theories and concepts would be applied to gain the exact perspective in understanding the issue as well as gaining the comprehensive answer of the problems. It is indeed requires spot-on approaches to gain comprehensive understanding on the matter of Korean Reunification. As one of the main concerns in ROK, Korean Reunification is getting significant, complex and affected innocent Korean people. Smart power, realism, rational choice theory, game theory and foreign policy will be the main theories used to dissert the case of the progress of Republic of Korea’s efforts to Reunite Korea under Park Geun Hye’s Vision of A New Era of Hope and Happiness in 2014 – 2017.

I. 6. 1. Smart Power There are many ways can be done to achieve One Korea, the most possible and safe way is through smart power. Rather than achieving only through soft diplomacy, smart power may work the best for Korean Reunification. Smart power is the combination of hard power and soft power strategies. Joseph S. Nye, Jr., an American political scientist, stated that foreign policy nowadays requires a combination of hard power and soft power. Smart power is about whether hard power could cooperate alongside soft power as they have their own capabilities. Smart power is the capacity of an actor to combine elements of hard power and soft power in ways that are mutually reinforcing such that the actor’s purposes are advanced effectively and efficiently.19 For Korean reunification, neither hard power nor soft power alone would provide a significant result. Rather than using force, soft power has the ability to persuade, influence and convince people or states. Joseph S. Nye defined soft power as the ability to get what one wants through persuasion or attraction rather than coercion.20

19 Wilson III, E. J. (2008). Hard power, soft power, smart power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 110-124. 20 Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign policy, (80), 153-171.

9

However, as time goes by it came to the realization that soft power alone could not maintain peace. In some occasions, hard power or force may work to achieve peace. In international relations, having power is being able to force or control one another to act in ways in which that state would not have acted something else.21 Hard power is the ability to pressure them to do what the state wanted. Hard power strategies focus on military intervention, coercive diplomacy and economic sanctions to enforce national interests.22 Hence, both soft power and hard power are needed to deal with an increasingly shattered world. Park Geun Hye during her administration as the President of ROK has been more sophisticated in her leadership, which is using smart power. The world of warfare has become more digital, networked, and flexible, and non-military assets like communications have risen in the mix of instruments of state power.23 In Korean Reunification issue, a more flexible approach and smart strategies are legitimately needed to achieve a peaceful reunification, as DPRK has its own type of leadership.

I. 6. 2. Realism Another approach would be Realism theory. The theory believes that all states seek power to decrease the power of their rivals and everything they do is in the name of power.24 In this theory, states look at the other powerful states as rivals because power is threatening if you did not have it. Realism has identical characteristics which are greedy, insecure and aggresive.

21 Wilson III, E. J. (2008). Hard power, soft power, smart power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 110-124. 22 Ibid. 23 Arquilla, J., Ronfeldt, D., Barnes-Proby, D., Williams, E., & Christian, J. (1999). The emergence of noopolitik: Toward an American information strategy. Rand Corporation. 24 Newmann, B. (n.d.). A Brief Introduction to Theories on International Relations and Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http://www.people.vcu.edu/~wnewmann/468theory.htm

10

Therefore, the realists believe that human behaviour is often related concerns about ego and individual passions and desires, and more specifically, the presence of evil in human beings.25 Realism has four major arguments, which goes as follow: 1. States are the central actors in international politics rather than individuals or international organizations; 2. The international political system is anarchic as there is no supranational authority that can enforce rules over the states; 3. The actors in the international political system are rational as their actions maximize their own self-interest; 4. All states desire power, therefore they could ensure their own self- preservation.26

Realism assumes that state will act as a human being. Like human does, the state will try to fulfill its national interest using the power that they have. The power here refers to the capability of state to act. The sovereign state could determine its own policy, therefore the realist believes that the state holds the highest position in the international system, which is called the nature of anarchy in international relations. Hans J. Morgenthau, one of the most influential figures in international relations mentioned how a state pursue its interest by strengthening its power, which holds the state as a key actor in international relations.27 Other actors such as individuals, transnational corporations (TNCs), multinational corporations (MNCs), and international organizations may also be influential in international relations, however back again, all forms of actors are governed by sovereign states which hold the most power in international system.

25 Realism in International Relations. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://internationalrelations.org/realism_in_international_relations/ 26 Goodin, R. E. (2010). The Oxford handbook of international relations. 27 Morgenthau, H. J. (1950). Politics among nations. New York: Knopf.

11

Realists try to illustrate that international relations are competitive, conflictual and full of bloodshed or in the other word, war. Hence, states will strengthen their power to achieve their interests within the international system. Therefore the states will continue to survive in the international system. The condition of anarchy in the international system creates a condition where states need to help themselves when something threatening happen to them.28 Gaining power also provide a guarantee of domestic security of a country. Those characteristics of realism will create a security dillema. Security dillema is a condition if the state strengthening their power, there will face two possibilities, which are the state will be safer because it gets stronger and will become more threatened because the other states will perceive their power as a threat which will cause an between states.29 Nevertheless, in the international system, states will continue to strengthen their power. Therefore, most of the states are relatively equivalent and will not try to use their power to attack the others.30 This is called as a balance of power. Realists believe that balance of power is considered as the most stable state in the international system. The main issues in realism are known as 3S, which are statism, self help and survival.31 Realism believes that the states are motivated only by their own interests, therefore they consider the needs and interests of other nation-states only when the other states have the capability to enforce their demands by threatening or performing damaging actions.32 Because of these, realists believe that the states are not guided by ethical or humanitarian considerations, international law, treaties and similar formalized agreements do not really restrict the international activities of states.33

28 Ibid. 29 Jackson, R., & Sørensen, G. (2016). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press. 30 Ibid. 31 Brown, C., & Ainley, K. (2009). Understanding international relations. Palgrave Macmillan. 32 Evans, G., & Newnham, J. (1998). Dictionary of international relations. Penguin. 33 Martin, H., & Steve, S. (1990). Explaining and understanding international relations. 12

I. 6. 3. Rational Choice Theory of rational choice is a development of policy applied by states which is closely related to their national interest. Rational choice explained the process of how a national interest affect the state policy. Rational choice theory is basically an action to optimize the existing options under certain conditions. Rational decision making will involve: 1. The explanation of the concept of the purpose. 2. The accuracy of the probability calculation. 3. The implementation of knowledge regarding the way of using the existing resources accurately.34

This theory illustrates the rationality in calculating actions which will be resulted cost and benefit. The concept of rational choice assumes that the international system is anarchy, which has no dominant force that can govern states in the international system. Due to the absence of a dominant force, there is no guarantee that the states will be obedient to one another. Therefore, under these conditions, the states will become dominant actors, where the states will become a rational actor in creating a relation to other states and achieve their national interests as much as possible. To create the right foreign policy, the state should make the right calculations, therefore they will not get the disadvantages and they could achieve their national interests. National interests and the purposes of the state should be considered as the way state doing cost and benefit calculation.35 To create the right foreign policy, rational choice will be used to maximize the potential of advantages that the states will gain.

34 Abell, P. (1991). Homo sociologicus: Do we need him/her?. Sociological Theory, 9(2), 195-198. 35 Mas’oed, M. (1998). Teori dan Metodologi Hubungan Internasional. Yogyakarta: Pauss Universitas Gajahmada. 13

Gabriel A. Almond stated on his book that: “It proceeds from assumption, or axioms, about human motives and behavior, and draws the logical institution and policy implication from those axioms. One aspects of this “methodological individualism”, which argues that all social phenomena are derivable from, or can be factored into, the properties and behaviors of individuals. A second aspect is that political actors-voters, politicians, bereaucrats are assummed to be material interest maximizers, seeking benefits in the form of votes, offices, power and so on, at least cost.”36 The meaning of this is the state would maximize the available potential to gain power, strength, etc with minimum cost. To achieve that, rational choice will be used to comparing the cost and benefit from the potentials. Rational choice will be used to answer the best decision to achieve national interests in international system. On his journal, Stephen M. Waltz also define rational choice, which stated that: “1. Rational choice theory is individualistic. Social and political outcomes are viewed as the collective product of individual choices (or as the product of choices made by unitary actors). 2. Rational choice theory assumes that each actor seeks to maximize its “subjective expected utility”. Given a particular set of preferences and a fixed array of possible choices, actors will select the outcome that brings the greatest expected benefits. 3. The specification of actors’ preferences is subject to certain constraints: (a) an actor’s preferences must be complete (meaning we can rank order their preference for different outcomes); and (b) preferences must be transitive (if A is preferred to B and B to C, then A is preferred to C).”37

From the explanation above, it could be concluded that rational choice theory is an instrument for state about the chosen purpose of state to achieve its national interest in the international system. This thesis used rational choice theory to analyze what the purpose of the state and to analyze the cost and benefit of the choices that the state made in order to achieve its goal.

36 Almond, G. A. (1990). A discipline divided: Schools and sects in political science (Vol. 175). Sage. 37 Walt, S. M. (1999). Rigor or rigor mortis? Rational choice and security studies. International Security, 23(4), 5-48. 14

I. 6. 4. Game Theory Other than rational choice theory, this thesis would apply a game theory to comprehend a decision making behavior when a state is facing an international conflict. In international relations, the implementation of game theory inside the states could be seen from the competition or conflict between the two states in various fields. Game theory could help predict the possibilities that occur within the relationship between actors to take decisions that will become a great influence to the international world. Game theory relates to decision making process when two or more states are in a competitive or conflicted condition. The competing states are assumed to be rational and intelligent, which means each side would adopt an action with rational strategy to win the competition, and each side also comprehend the strategy of the opposite side.38 This theory could provide insight regarding the strategic choices and possible outcomes to the states in certain condition. From this theory, decision makers could be better assess the potential impact of their actions and could make the decisions will be more likely to achieve goals and avoid conflict. Game theory is the analysis of how decision makers (may be leaders of states) interact in decision making to take into account reactions and choices of the other decision makers as the international conflict and other situation in international relations occur as a result of decisions made by people.39 Game theory analyzes and predicts the possibilities that will occur in the future in order to facilitate decision making.40 To succeed in dealing with fundamental and importat issues, such as diplomatic and military issues, the leaders of the state must have the way of thinking in a strategic way and game theory is very effective to determine strategies and policies relating to the national interest of a state.

38 Dimyati, T. T., & Dimyati, A. (1992). Operations Research Model-Model Pengambilan Keputusan. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algensindo. 39 Quackenbush, S. L., & Zagare, F. C. (2006). Game Theory: Modeling Interstate Conflict. Making Sense of IR Theory. 40 Jackson, R., & Sørensen, G. (2016). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press. 15

I. 6. 5. Foreign Policy Each state requires foreign policy to interact with other states in the international system as well as become a tool to achieve national interests. The national interest itself will be changed, depends on the changes in the domestic or internal condition as well as the ever-changing political and security conditions of international or external factor. Mark R. Amstutz stated that foreign policy will be used as explicit and implicit actions of governmental officials designed to promote national interest beyond a country’s territorial boundaries.41 Based on the definition above, foreign policy is a concrete action created by states to fulfill their national interests in the international system. Foreign policy as a system will stimulate the input from the external and internal environment that will influence the foreign policy of a state and will be filtered and converted by the decision makers into output which could be used as various kinds of cooperation such as bilateral, trilateral, multirateral and regional cooperation to fulfill their national interests in the international system.42 In every process decision making process, it could be influenced by various factors. The decision making process of foreign policy also involves lot of domestic actors coming from various institutions which also involved in the decision making process of foreign policy which will resulted different interests. However, the chosen foreign policy will be remained as a policy that is believed to fulfill the national interest maximally based on the consideration of various actors. That is why, governments select the action that will maximize strategic goals and objectives.43 Based on the explanations above, foreign policy could be defined as the decision of an individual, the deliberations of a committee, the outcome of a policy-making process, the sum of clashing interests groups, the values of a dominant elite, the product of a society’s aspirations, the reinforcement of a historial tradition, the response to an opportunity or challenge elsewhere in the world.44

41 Amstutz, M. R. (1999). International conflict and cooperation: An introduction to world politics. McGraw-Hill Humanities, Social Sciences & World Languages. 42 Jackson, R., & Sørensen, G. (2016). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press. 43 Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the (No. 327.5 (729.1)). Little, Brown and Company,. 44 Rosenau, J. N., Thompson, K. W., & Boyd, G. (1976). World Politics: An Introduction. Free Pr.

16

I. 7. Scope and Limitations of the Study In order to ensure an in-depth understanding and focused analysis, the author decided to focus on former President of ROK, Park Geun Hye’s era, which is in 2014 – 2017 mainly because in 2014 Park Geun Hye decided to create a special committee for Korean reunification process, which is Unification Preparatory Committee and marked as the year ROK finally put more attention again in Korean reunification. During Park Geun Hye’s era, she has created various strategies and approaches to achieve One Korea and to have better relations with DPRK. A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision was the most remarkable vision of Park Geun Hye to achieve Korean reunification during her era.

I. 8. Research Methodology In this research, the author will be using qualitative approach. Through the qualitative approach, the author will elaborate the correlation of available facts and data regarding the issue discussed. Morevover, by using qualitative approach, this research will provide a better picture regarding the current situation and development of Korean reunification process during Park Geun Hye era as in this issue she specifically created a special committe named Unification Preparatory Committee which mainly supported the issue of reunification process in the Korean peninsula during Park Geun Hye’s era. Therefore, the author is having a huge interest to analyze the efforts of Park Geun Hye’s Unification Preparatory Committee and her other various strategies to achieve One Korea and support the development of Korean reunification. The author also used Literature Review for this research related to Korean reunification by collecting and analyzing the data coming from books, journals and online resources.

17

I. 9. Definition of Terms 1. Reunification Reunification refers to the restoration of political unity to a place or group, especially a divided territory.45 Reunification is the process of reuniting two or more states to become one state, which was previously has been divided by historical event, such as war. Generally reunification is a program or process to unite a divided state. In this case, Korean Reunification refers to the potential reunification between ROK and DPRK and unite the DMZ under a single nation.

2. Unification Preparatory Committee Unification Preparatory Committee is a program established by Park Geun Hye to map out a blueprint on how to become one nation with DPRK.46 It is part of Park Geun Hye’s commitment to strengthen ROK relations with DPRK. This special committee was established with aim to improve the development of Korean Reunification by studying systematic and constructive directions of unification. The committee will be collecting the opinions of all levels of society and conduct transparent unification discussions.47

45 reunification | Definition of reunification in English by Oxford Dictionaries. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/reunification 46 Soon, C. J. (2014, February 25). (LEAD) Park to launch unification preparatory committee. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co .kr/national/2014/02/25/63/0301000000AEN20140225005151315F.html 47 Kim, S., & Yeob, J. W. (2014, July 16). Unification committee launched. Retrieved from http://meng news.joins.com/view.aspx?aId=2992086 18

I. 10. Thesis Structure I. 10. 1. Chapter I: Introduction Chapter I of this research will provide the reader the basic information regarding the topic that will be observed. This chapter focused on explaining the background of the study, problem identification, statement of the problem, research objectives, significance of the study, theoretical framework, scope and limitations of the study, definition of terms and a thesis structure itself. By explaining the basic informations or understanding regarding the topic observed, the author hopes the reader will comprehend the foundation of the topic before further discussions are made in the following chapters.

I. 10. 2. Chapter II: Literature Review In the second chapter, the author will provide various review suitable materials relevant to the topic discussed, comprehend the contents and write a brief summary of the materials. This chapter is directed to develop a clear frame regarding the topic discussed which has been explained on the previous chapter. Literature review is a framework, concept or orientation to do the analysis and fact classification collected in the research. The purpose of literature review is to get a stronger foundation that can support in solving the problem of the topic discussed.

19

I. 10. 3. Chapter III: The Beginning of Divided Korea and Idea of Possible Reunification Chapter III will discuss the brief history of Korean war, which started the division of Korea, and its impact to Korea particularly to the DPRK, since they have experienced several problems due to Korean war, especially in social development. Other than that, in this chapter the author will also discuss the idea of possible reunification in Korea after the division of Korea happened. It will include the policies, agreements, cooperations and efforts made by the former Presidents of ROK.

I. 10. 4. Chapter IV: Programs and ROK’s Endeavour during Park Geun Hye’s Era in Supporting the Proccess of Korean Reunification Chapter IV will provide an explanation regarding the programs and ROK’s endeavour in supporting the proccess of Korean Reunification from 2014 – 2017. Moreover corresponding with the chosen topic discussed, it will be focusing on what ROK has done to achieve One Korea during Park Geun Hye era. This chapter will also analyze the efforts and projects by Park Geun Hye to achieve Korean reunification.

I. 10. 5. Chapter V: Conclusion In the last chapter, the author will conclude and sum up all the research from the previous chapters’ explanation.

20

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

In order to explain the topic discussed in this research, the author used literature review as the tool to get a basic understanding before further analysis is made. The author would use the literature review that comes from books, journals and report.

II. 1. Korea Briefing: 2000-2001: First Steps Toward Reconciliation and Reunification The first book that being reviewed is titled “Korea Briefing: 2000-2001: First Steps Toward Reconciliation and Reunification” written by Kongdan Oh and Ralph C. Hassig. The author found that this book is relevant with the chosen topic since it gives a clearer explanation regarding the first step or the start of Korean reunification. This book provides a timely analysis of the evolving relations between ROK and DPRK. The most remarkable moment of Korean reunification journey was in June 2000 when DPRK’s leader, Kim Jong Il, finally agreed to attend a summit meeting with ROK after years of ignoring them. It was a sign of a positive Korean reunification and this book explains that special occasion. The book discusses varities of topics, such as ROK politics and economy, ROK and DPRK’s relations with its neighbors states and with the global power or the United States, the recent changes in DPRK, the fate of DPRK traitors, and the lessons for what has happened in for both ROK and DPRK’s reference. The book presents cogent and penetrating insights about Korea and ROK- DPRK reconciliation during a period of initially raised, and then dashed, hopes for peace on the Korean peinsula.48

48 Oh, K., & Hassig, R. C. (2002). Korea Briefing 2000-2001: First Steps Toward Reconciliation and Reunification. ME Sharpe.

21

II. 2. Korean Dream: A Vision for a Unified Korea The second book that being reviewed is titled “Korean Dream: A Vision for a Unified Korea” written by Dr. Hyun Jin Preston Moon. After comprehending the first steps that ROK and DPRK go through to achieve Korean reunification, there must be an explanation or discussion regarding what will happen after that. Therefore, this book is a highly recommended book for topic discussed, because it is well-written and thoroughly researched by the author of Korean Dream, concerning he is the founder and currently a chairman of Global Peace Foundation (GPF) which convened numerous international conferences on the division of Korea and prospects for reunification, as well as supported diverse civil society initiatives to bridge divisions and raise public awareness of approaches and implications of a reunified Korea.49 In accordance with the topic discussed, in an innovative way Dr. Hyun Jin Preston Moon explains Korean reunification is highly needed to answer security, economic and social problems in Korean peninsula due to the division. As someone who is really concerning the Korean reunification, in this book Dr. Hyun Jin Preston Moon provides a groundbreaking recipe for peace in Korean reunification. This book offers what the things that Koreans required in order to achieve Korean reunification in the most peaceful way. This book is a must-read book for those who are concerned in Korean reunification.

II. 3. South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations The first journal that being reviewed is titled “South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations” written by Park Young Ho, a senior researcher of Korea Institute for National Unification. The author found that this journal is relevant with the chosen topic since it gives a basic knowledge regarding the perspective of both ROK and DPRK towards reunification. Park Young Ho discussed the ROK and DPRK’s views on reunification from a comparative perspective and he also discussed the future prospects of ROK and DPRK’s relations.

49 Conference on Korea Reunification Opens with Release of The Korean Dream | Global Peace Foundation. (2014, October 2). Retrieved from http://www.globalpeace.org/news/conference-korea- reunification-opens-release-korean-dream

22

This journal gives an explanation on why the cooperation between ROK and DPRK keep failed to bring changes to the process of reunification. Other than that, Park Young Ho also gives a suggestion to both states towards One Korea. He stated that the root cause of the unchanging inter-Korean relations can be found in the DPRK’s unchanging perspective on the reunification of the Korean Peninsula, as well as ROK’s unification policy that will need to induce changes in DPRK.50 Other than that, this journal compared ROK’s National Community Unification Formula and DPRK’s Democratic Confederal Republic of Koryo to observe which one is the most suitable policy or program for Korean reunification. In the fifth chapter of this journal, Park Young Ho explains Inter-Korean relations from the perspective of unification policy. Therefore, the reader could understand the process to achieve One Korea. Overall, by giving a basic knowledge regarding ROK and DPRK’s perspective towards Korean reunification, the author found that this journal is suitable as a supporting material for the chosen topic.

II. 4. Conflicting Visions for Korean Reunification To know and understand both ROK and DPRK’s efforts to gain a reunification, the journal titled “Conflicting Visions for Korean Reunification” by Young Sun Ji is recommended to be explored. The journal highlights the development of both ROK and DPRK’s reunification policies. The policies made by the two Koreas in the journal by Young Sun Ji is being thoroughly explained, in particular to issue of Korean Reunification. Moreover, the journal also highlights the differences between the ROK and DPRK’s policies as well as the various other parties’ interests and visions toward Korean reunification. Young Sun Ji aware that the other parties’ involvement would give an impact towards Korean reunification and decided to discuss it in the journal. Young Sun Ji discusses the vision of the United States for Korean reunification, China’s interest in the Korean peninsula, Japan’s interest in the Korean Peninsula, and also Russia’s relations with both DPRK and ROK (but mostly with DPRK). Other than that, Young Sun Ji mentioned Inter-Korean Summit and Joint Declaration which are important for Korean reunification.

50 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21).

23

In the journal, Young Sun Ji analyzes the Inter-Korean Summit and Joint Declaration in the year 2000 between former ROK President, Kim Dae Jung and DPRK National Defense Commission Chairman, Kim Jong Il. Young Sun Ji stated that the summit and declaration resulted a diplomatic relationships between DPRK with Western countries, which is actually an improvement for DPRK. However, the summit was lacking in easing the military tension between ROK and DPRK. Young Sun Ji believes that the best way to bring sustainable peace and stability to the region in a longer term is to unify the two Koreas in ways that reflect the majority of the Korean people’s wishes and interests.51 This journal is recommended for the topic discussed because the author also illustrate the Korean people’s vision towards reunification through illustrating how ordinary, reasonable ROK people think about Korean reunification.52

II. 5. South Korean Attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification “South Korean Attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification” by ASAN Report is also highly recommended to be explored. The topic discussed is concerning ROK’s efforts to achieve Korean reunification in Park Geun Hye’s era, therefore this report would be very beneficial to get an in-depth knowledge regarding ROK’s attitudes toward DPRK and the reunification itself. The report showed us the perception and views of both ROK and DPRK’s people toward Korean reunification. The report found various surprising facts regarding the ROK and DPRK’s relations. For example, the report finds that the economic gap is not solely responsible for the growing divide between ROK and DPRK, the public of ROK see the differing political and values systems as an increasing factor of that divide, as well as the ethnic bond that is supposed to tie the two Koreas together is weakening among the ROK people.53 The data showed in the report stated that ROK people have a complicated views of DPRK as a state, however their perception toward DPRK’s people are much positive. Based on trusted public opinion surveys (the report showed the reader data about how the surveys was conducted), this report analyzes the attitudes on DPRK, its people and

51 Ji, Y. S. (2001). Conflicting visions for Korean reunification (Doctoral dissertation, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University). 52 Ibid. 53 Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report.

24

ROK’s policy towards DPRK. Other than that, this report also stated the major events in Inter-Korean relations from year 2013 until October 2014, which would become a great knowledge for the topic discussed.

II. 6. Sunshine in Korea: The South Korean Debate over Policies Toward North Korea The next book that being reviewed is titled “Sunshine in Korea: The South Korean Debate over Policies Toward North Korea” written by Norman D. Levin and Yong Sup Han. Learning from the past experiences through history would give an important impact to Korean reunification, particularly for ROK. One of the most memorable and valueable moment of ROK’s effort to achieve Korean reunification is when Kim Dae Jung became the President of ROK. During his leadership, the major actors, interests, and goals are influencing ROK’s policies, therefore this book seeks to better understand the sources of controversy over these policies and assess their likely future implications.54 This book analyzes in-depth on how Kim Dae Jung made the policies toward DPRK and the impacts of the policies to both ROK and DPRK. The policies created by Kim Dae Jung at that time might affect the policies created by Park Geun Hye towards DPRK. One of the most remarkable evolution in ROK’s policy was the evolution of engagement as ROK’s policy towards DPRK, hence this book discussed the relevant historical background of Korean reunification. This book also provides the major actors and describe their positions in the governance to approaching DPRK, as well as how these major actors have affected the government policy through public debate. Concerning the future of Korean reunification, this book also showed the potential longer-term policies for ROK to achieve One Korea.

54 Levin, N. D., & Han, Y. S. (2003). Sunshine in Korea: the South Korean Debate Over Policies Toward North Korea. Rand Corporation.

25

II. 7. A New Kind of Korea The last journal that is recommended for the topic discussed is titled “A New Kind of Korea” written by Park Geun Hye. This journal might be a little bit different from other journals, because Park Geun Hye is writing from her point of view regarding the relations between ROK and DPRK. Start from explaining in a brief about the history of Korean division, Park Geun Hye wrote in a description timeline the growth and development differences between the two Koreas. The author of this journal believes that trust is one of the most important aspect to achieve a genuinely Korean reunification. The journal explains that the ROK’s government should adapt its past strategies toward DPRK and create a new policy, which is an alignment policy.55 This journal was made before Park Geun Hye became a President of ROK, she wrote her own foreign policy commitments on foreign affairs and highlighted “trustpolitik” as her policy to establish a building-trust process. It is a very interesting and important journal as it is written by Park Geun Hye, the one who is the main factor in the topic discussed. This journal could become a prove of Park Geun Hye’s promise or commitment towards Korean reunification and connect it her real implementation or action to achieve One Korea.

55 Geun-Hye, P. (2011). A New Kind of Korea: Building Trust Between and Pyongyang. Foreing Affairs, 90, 13. 26

CHAPTER III THE BEGINNING OF DIVIDED KOREA AND THE IDEA OF POSSIBLE REUNIFICATION

III. 1. The Beginning of Divided Korea The division of Korea started from the World War II. The World War II was the most widespread and deadliest war in history, involving more than 30 countries and resulting in more than 50 million military and civilian death (with some estimates as high as 85 million dead).56 It caused new divisions in Vietnam (North and ), Germany (East and West Germany), and Korea (North and ) due to ideology differences from West Bloc and East Bloc. Unfortunately, Korea’s fate was not as fortunate as Germany and Vietnam which have reunited in 1990 (Germany) and 1976 (Vietnam) and Korea still remains divided until now. After that, the Korean War caused the division of Korea became stronger.

III. 1. 1. Korean War (1950-1953) Japan took control of Korea in 1910. However, after the atomic bombs dropped at Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 14th August 1945, Japan finally surrendered and let the United States took control of the Southern half of Korea, while the other side which is the Soviet Union took the North of Korea. Korea was divided by the 38th parallel, which is a horizontal line that split the Korean peninsula in two. The 38th parallel still divides the two Koreas until today, serving as a Demilitarized Zone or known as DMZ. 4,400 yards of empty space separates the two countries, whose borders are defended by armed troops 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Originally, the United States and the Soviet Union plan to divide the two Koreas into North and South of Korea to keep controlling them until a free election was held for the entire country, however the Soviet Union disagreed due to the differences in ideology. Therefore, the Soviet Union with DPRK or the North side of Korea developed socialist- while the Unit ed States with ROK or the South side of Korea developed liberalist-capitalist.

56 World War II - Battles, Facts, Videos & Pictures - History.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii

27

The DMZ was supposed to be the boundaries between DPRK and ROK and should not be crossed by the two Koreas. However, even though there was a DMZ, the tension between the two Koreas were not decreasing at all. On 25th June 1950, around 223.000 soldiers from DPRK crossed the 38th parallel which were supported by 150 tanks to invade ROK.57 This invasion was a part of Soviet Union’s plan as a Communist- pro country. At that time, the former leader of DPRK, Kim Il Sung started to seek Joseph Stalin’s support (the Soviet Union) to help them invade ROK and visited to Moscow to persuade him.58 During that time, the Soviet Union helped DPRK with the support of the fellow communist country, China. Hence, in 1950 the Soviet Union under the command of Joseph Stalin gave DPRK under Kim Il Sung’s leadership a permission to invade ROK, with the condition that China will help sending reinforcements to DPRK if needed. Responding the attack from DPRK, Soviet Union, as well as China, the United States came to ROK’s aid to support ROK in defeating DPRK. The United States created Korean Military Advisory Group (KMAG) to help train the or known as ROK Army. Other than that, with the help from the United Nations Security Council and passed Resolution 83, which is a complaint of aggression upon the ROK. The contents of the resolution are: 1. Having determined that the armed attack upon the Republic of Korea by forces from North Korea constitutes a breach of the peace, 2. Having called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, 3. Having called upon the authorities in North Korea to withdraw forthwith their armed forces to the 38th parallel, 4. Having noted from the report of the United Nations Commission on Korea that the authorities in North Korea have neither ceased hostilities nor withdrawn their armed forces to the 38th parallel, and that urgent military measures are required to restore international peace and security, 5. Having noted the appeal from the Republic of Korea to the United Nations for immediate and effective steps to secure peace and security,

57 Korean War - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war 58 Weathersby, K. (2002). “Should we fear this?”: Stalin and the danger of war with America (Vol. 39). Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

28

6. And recommends that the Members of the United Nations furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repel the armed attack and to restore international peace and security in the area.59

In 1951, Jacob Malik, a Soviet delegate to the United Nations, proposed a cease- fire for Korean War.60 On 10th July 1951, the truce discussion begin at Gaeseong or Kaesong, a part of city in DPRK. The truce discussion still continue and moved to another area, which was located at , 10 kilometers away from Gaeseong. In this small city, the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement was signed by DPRK, Chinese People’s Volunteers and the United Nations.61 The truce discussion took two years to finally reach its finalization on 27th July 1953. The discussion spent a lot of time due its concern regarding the prisoners of the war. Up until now, 4 kilometers wide DMZ with the agreed armistice line divide two Koreas with heavily armed troops by both DPRK and ROK. Looking at this situation, it clearly stated that even though the armistice agreement was created, the tension and distrust between the two Koreas still remain high. During the Korean War, Korea was a country with freezing winters and broiling summers, making the war too miserable for both sides. Disease, malnutrition, and frostbite were constant worries. The Korean War was a relatively short but costly conflict.62 620,000 soldiers from DPRK and ROK were killed, however more disturbingly, 1.6 million civilians lost their lives throughout the Korean peninsula. This number is equivalent to 60% of battle deaths and thus the second largest number of battle deaths and the largest number of annual battle deaths in the world since World War II.63 Not to mention the fact that a lot of innocent unfortunate children became orphans and the war also created a lot of separated families.

59 Security Council Resolution 83 - UNSCR. (1950). Retrieved from http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/83 60 CNN Library. (2017, June 10). Korean war fast facts. CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/28/world/asia/korean-war-fast-facts/index.html 61 Ibid. 62 Lacina, B., & Gleditsch, N. P. (2005). Monitoring trends in global combat: A new dataset of battle deaths. European Journal of Population/Revue européenne de Démographie, 21(2), 145-166. 63 Ibid.

29

Therefore, the world often seen separated families from DPRK and ROK held their reunion. However, not all the families are fortunate enough to hold reunion with their separated family members. Some of them even passing away without having any chance for meeting their long lost family members. The Korean War left two Koreas with a shared ethnic background, 5000-year history, culture and language, DPRK and ROK have built different social systems during the 60-year armistice.64

III. 1. 2. Korean DMZ Conflict (1966-1969) Korean DMZ conflict or war in 1966 – 1969 could be reffered as the second Korean War.65 The Korean War in 1950 – 1953 actually has not fully ended since the armistice agreement is just a symbol of a peace agreement which was not even signed by the ROK. Therefore, there was not a concrete guarantee that Korean War has fully ended. The treaty may have paused the war for a while, however it did not actually stop the war. It showed that neither ROK and DPRK were having rights to claiming reunified Korea under their control. At that time, the war might happen again in Korea, since both ROK and DPRK were not concede defeated to each other. After the Korean War, the United States wanted to introduce atomic weapons to ROK. However, there was a Korean Armistice Agreement which were signed on 27th July 1953 in Panmunjom, DPRK. Article 2, Paragraph 13(d) of the Korean Armistice Agreement provides as follows: “Cease the introduction into Korea of reinforcing combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapons, and ammunition; provided however, that combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapons, and ammunition which are destroyed, damaged, worn-out, or used up during the period of armistice may be replaced on the basis piece-for-piece of the same effectiveness and the same type. Such combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapons, and ammunition shall be introduces into Korea only through the ports of entry enumerated in paragrapgh 43 hereof.

64 Khang, Y. H. (2013). Two Koreas, war and health. 65 Lerner, M. (2010). ‘Mostly Propaganda in Nature’: Kim Il Sung, the Ideology, and the Second Korean War. North Korea International Documentation Project Working Paper, 3.

30

In order to justify the requirements for combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapons, and ammunition to be introduced into Korea for replacement purposes, reports concerning every incoming shipment of these items shall be made to the MAC and the NNSC; such reports shall include statements regarding the disposition of the items being replaced. Items to be replace which are removed from Korea shall be removed only through the ports of entry enumerated in paragraph 43 hereof. The NNSC, through its Neutral Nations Inspection Teams, shall conduct supervision and inspection of the replacement of combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapons, and ammunition authorized above, at the ports of entry enumerated in paragrapgh 43 hereof.”66

The United States was fully aware of this part of agreement, however they decided to ignore that and broke the Korean Armistice Agreement, even though their United Nations allies were having a huge concern toward this decision.67 DPRK criticized the disavowal of the Korean ArmisticeAgreement by the United States and they believed that the United States turned Korea into the United States’ atomic warfare zone.68 The explosion of violence started again in late 1966, when DPRK began sending guerrillas into ROK for the first time since the Korean War and was creating a relatively stable DMZ turned into a shattered and broken DMZ.69 Kim Il Sung believed that DPRK could divide the United States and ROK, hence he could impose President Park Chung Hee’s leadership. DPRK was not joking with Kim Il Sung’s words, on 17th January 1968, 31 DPRK Army officers crossed through the DMZ on a mission to assassinate ROK President Park Chung Hee, but they failed.70 In 1969, DPRK started to lose hope in making an uprising to the ROK. It was because the ROK Army were having a high improvement even the United States could reduce their military existence in ROK.

66 . (1953). The korean war armistice agreement. Retrieved from United Nations Command website: http://www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/G_Armistice_Agreement.pdf 67 Selden, M., & So, A. Y. (Eds.). (2004). War and state terrorism: the United States, Japan, and the Asia- Pacific in the long twentieth century. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 68 Jae-Bong, L. (2009). US Deployment of Nuclear Weapons in 1950s South Korea & North Korea's Nuclear Development: Toward Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The Asia-Pacific Journal, 8, 3- 09. 69 Lerner, M. (2010). ‘Mostly Propaganda in Nature’: Kim Il Sung, the Juche Ideology, and the Second Korean War. North Korea International Documentation Project Working Paper, 3. 70 Ibid. 31

III. 2. Post-Korean War for the Two Koreas After the Korean War ended in 1953, a physical peace has for the most part been achieved, however a psychological peace is not yet part of the Korean existence.71 It means, the impact of Korean War is still affecting the people, as well as the government in both DPRK and ROK. Even the armistice could not decrease the tension between the two Koreas, reminding that the potential war is still there. Post-Korean War, without a doubt, a lot of people dead, wounded and even lost their home and precious family members. Other than that, people who were born during Korean War was experiencing difficulties in economy and health, as during that time everything was very difficult to access and they need to create everything from zero.72

III. 2.1. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea The most significant and destructive effect of post-Korean War was the economic and social damage to the two Koreas, letting them to lay in total ruin. However, DPRK suffered more than ROK due to the labor shortage caused from the war and they have less resources than ROK. Fortunately, at that time DPRK still obtained the assistance from the Soviet Union and China, creating the high growth of DPRK in the 1954 – 1960s, as they exceeded the average growth rate, averaging 39% and was probably the highest in the world.73 After the war, DPRK had been destroyed as an industrial society, therefore DPRK has the main priority to re-build the industry. Again, by the help from the Soviet Union, DPRK received Soviet technicians to help them with the rehabilitation effort and the bulk of factory reconstruction in the post Korean War of DPRK was supervised by Soviet experts.74 During that time, DPRK received the funds from Soviet Union with Ruble or the currency of the Russian Federation in the past.

71 Haan, P. D. (2002, May). 50 Years and counting: the impact of the Korean war on the people of the peninsula. Retrieved from http://www.calvin.edu/news/2001-02/korea.htm?dotcmsredir=1 72 Lee, C. (2014). In utero exposure to the Korean War and its long-term effects on socioeconomic and health outcomes. Journal of health economics, 33, 76-93. 73 Kuark, J. Y. T. (1967). A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN NORTH AND SOUTH KOREA DURING THE POST KOREAN WAR PERIOD. 74 Armstrong, C.K. (2010). The Destruction and Reconstruction of North Korea, 1950-1960. The Asia- Pacific Journal, 8(51).

32

Figure 3: Aid Contributions from Fraternal Nations for DPRK.75

Other than Soviet Union, China also held an important role in helping DPRK post Korean War. The helps that DPRK obtained from China include: 76

1. China cancelled DPRK’s debts from the Korean War, and offered RMB 800 million in aid for the period of 1954 – 1957. 2. China and DPRK signed an economic and cultural cooperation agreement. 3. China helped DPRK in factory reconstruction and became a major source of textiles, cotton and food. 4. China gave DPRK the volunteers named Chinese People’s Volunteer (CPV) who remained in DPRK until 1958 to help in repairing roads, rail lines, schools, bridges, tunnels and irrigation dams.

75 1 Russian Ruble equals to 0.016USD 76 Armstrong, C.K. (2010). The Destruction and Reconstruction of North Korea, 1950-1960. The Asia- Pacific Journal, 8(51). 33

However they faced the economic problems due to their external debt which was estimated to be worth US$2 billion and made them fall behind ROK’s economy.77 Rather than improving their infrastructure and the living standard of its people, DPRK prefer to focus spending their money on nuclear weapons and military interests. After the Korean War in 1950 - 1953, DPRK with their centered leader during that time, Kim Il Sung, created educational programs for the people of DPRK to wary of ROK and the United States as well as to be familiar with their leader.78 Improving their nuclear weapons and heavy industries are their way to recover its economy. DPRK has differences with ROK when they were facing a crisis. At that time DPRK was too focused to worship their leader and brainwashed their citizens to comprehend their one and only leader. Meanwhile ROK at that time was busy in developing its economy sector. Therefore, currently the economic gap between ROK and DPRK are considered as high, because in the past they both have different priorities. However, it is a well-known fact that a lot of people in DPRK died during the Korean War and move to the ROK, hence DPRK was still lacking in people and DPRK is having a difficulty to achieve those programs. Therefore, DPRK government set up new policies which include the following: 1. Rapid industrialization was to be the main goal. 2. Raise specially-trained professionals. 3. Women’s labor force was to better utilized. 4. Infant mortality rate had to be reduced by new, more effective health program.79

77 Savada, A. M. (1994, June 29). North Korea - the post-war economy. Retrieved from http://countrystudies.us/north-korea/16.htm 78 Ibid. 79 Yee Shin, S. Y. (2001, December). No longer forgotten: North Korea-South Korea relations since the Korean War. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/North%20Kores- %20South%20Kores%20Relations%20Since%20the%20Korean%20War

34

In 1970s, the world suffered from oil crisis, leaving DPRK with huge debts and creating a crisis to its people. At that time, DPRK is unable to provide a high welfare to its people, making them living in a poor condition. Due to this crisis, DPRK could not pay the debts and halted almost all repayments in 1985, making them unable to buy the technology things that they needed the most.80 This was the time where DPRK fell behind ROK’s development. DPRK could not keep the pace with other industrialized states, where the other states are developing their industry sectors with advanced and sophisticated technology, it proved that DPRK was lacking in the development.81

III. 2.2. Republic of Korea ROK was also devastated after the Korean War in 1950 – 1953 ended. During that time, ROK was one of the world’s poorest countries, with only US$64 per capita income.82 After the war ended, around 900 factories and 600,000 houses were destroyed, and countless civilians died and lived in despair.83 Since ROK was the first one who got attacked during the war, ROK was in total shambles property damage even a very accurate estimations were impossible. Thousands of homeless citizens struggled to survive in the terrible destruction and tried to reassemble their shattered lives. Not only DPRK who got the help from the other states, ROK also got help from the United States. During that time, without the United States’ participation to help ROK in rehabilitation and reconstruction, it would be impossible. The United States helped ROK in rebuilding the devastating post-war of ROK. Roads and bridges were repaired as quickly as possible to catch up with other states’ development. Other than that, transportation and communications things were re- established. The United States’ army played an important role in this situation, by working closely with the ROK people.

80 Bluth, C. (2008). Korea (Cambridge, UK. Polity, 22. 81 Cumings, B. (2011). North Korea: another country. The New Press. 82 Tran, M. (2011, November 28). South Korea: a model of development? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/nov/28/south-korea-development- model 83 Yee Shin, S. Y. (2001, December). No longer forgotten: North Korea-South Korea relations since the Korean War. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/North%20Kores- %20South%20Kores%20Relations%20Since%20the%20Korean%20War 35

The sudden attack from DPRK during the Korean War was leaving a deep mark in ROK. Therefore, they learned from that experience and created a brand new ROK army under the United States’ supervision which was and still is available for ROK’s defense. Thousands of unskillful and inexperienced young men in ROK have been trained by skillful and experienced soldiers from the United States as well as ROK itself. Those young men turned into a well-skilled army equipped with weapons from the United States. Besides all of those helps, ROK also obtain donation from the United States, with US$ 60 billion in grants and loans.84 In 1960s, the President of ROK, Park Chung Hee took control of ROK and created a five-year reconstruction and development plans. The United States wanted ROK to focus on small and medium-sized companies, however Park Chung Hee ignored that advice and he focused on creating large economy with business conglomerates (or known as chaebols in Korean). Because of that, well-known worldwide brands from ROK were created, such as Samsung and LG. Put aside the United States’ advice, Park Chung Hee started to create a cooperation with Japan as he thought that the United States were not going to help them as much as they wanted to. Leaving the past behind, Park Chung Hee seems not really care about ROK and Japan relations previously as he signed a Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea along with the Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims between Japan and the Republic of Korea.85 With the agreements, Japan provided ROK with US$ 300 million in economic aid through products and services and US$ 200 million in loans with products and services over the next ten years (1965 - 1975), together with US$ 300 million in loans for private trust.86

84 Tran, M. (2011, November 28). South Korea: a model of development? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/nov/28/south-korea-development- model 85 AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA CONCERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF PROBLEMS IN REGARD TO PROPERTY AND CLAIMS AND ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION. (1966). International Legal Materials, 5(1), 111-117. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20690013 86 Ishikida, M. Y. (2005). Toward peace: war responsibility, postwar compensation, and peace movements and education in Japan. iUniverse.

36

With the help from the United States and Japan, ROK could create their economic development with the technology. Even though the ROK fell behind DPRK’s development, they keep implementing new strategies and could overtake the DPRK. It is a well-known fact that ROK with its growing prosperity has improved their economic status significantly and the nation underwent rapid industrialization.87 It proved that the ROK today is very different from the ROK many years ago. ROK has grown much faster than many other states in the world, they came from developing country to a highly developed country.

III. 3. The Idea of Possible Reunification The divided Korea due to the conditions explained above make the idea of potential or possible reunification seems too complicated and difficult to be achieved in the Korean peninsula. However, looking at the past efforts made by both ROK and DPRK, the potential of reunification seems possible. Both ROK and DPRK were making efforts in Korean reunification, however ROK was the one who has been developing the idea of reunification since the beginning. ROK has huge differences in state power and international status between 1970s and 2010s, and it gained them a lot of confidence in achieving the Korean reunification.88 Before Park Geun Hye’s era, there were a lof of plans, activities, approaches and policies regarding the Korean reunification which made the idea of possible reunification happened.

87 Yee Shin, S. Y. (2001, December). No longer forgotten: North Korea-South Korea relations since the Korean War. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/North%20Kores- %20South%20Kores%20Relations%20Since%20the%20Korean%20War 88 Ibid. 37

The ROK government wanted the reunification to be realized through general elections based on and the market economy, and this wish has been there since Rhee Syngman government which also included unification by the ‘use of armed forces’ as a possible means.89 It proved that ROK has a huge enthusiasm and hope on reunification. Various efforts are made to achieve reunification, include the creation of domestic policies to improve the relations between ROK and DPRK through dialogue and exchange.

III. 3.1. Declaration of 8.15 Park Chung Hee was Park Geun Hye’s father. In Park Chung Hee government, the 8.15 Declaration (the name was because it was created on 15th August 1970) was made with the main statement “methods to build a foundation for peaceful unification.”. Hence, ROK has planned the reunification since long time ago and was a part of their diplomacy guidelines. ROK planned to encourage change in DPRK’s system, as their system is very different and it does not sync with ROK’s system. ROK wanted the change to happen peacefully, however obviously it was an almost impossible dream of ROK. The foundation of ROK’s reunification approach is included in a three-phase unification approach, which goes as follows:

1. A phase of reconciliation and cooperation; 2. A phase of the Korean Commonwealth; 3. The final phase of unified Korea of one-nation and one-state.90

ROK wanted the Korean reunification to happen slowly but sure. First, they would build cooperation with DPRK before going into creating Korean Commonwealth while also unite Korea into one nation. The ROK government has embraced various alternatives strategy under different administrations, yet none of them led to sustained improvement in relations. Yet, every ROK leader hoped they could create a miracle in his or her legacy by achieving reunification. “Sunshine Policy” (1998 – 2003) was first

89 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte pré senté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21). 90Ibid.

38 proposed by Kim Dae Jung, former President of Republic of Korea in 1998, to promote reconciliation with the DPRK. 91

III. 3.2 July 4th North-South Joint Statement After Korean War and Korean DMZ Conflict ended, both ROK and DPRK tried to discuss regarding the reunification issue by having the July 4th North-South Joint Statement on 4th July 1972. Both ROK and DPRK have met and exchanged their views on the mutual desire for the early peaceful reunification of Korea and made progress in mutual understanding of the other side’s points of views, and they both realized and agreed to reduce the tensions between ROK and DPRK caused by the lack of mutual communication for so long, and for promoting the reunification of the fatherland.92 Both ROK and DPRK have agreed upon the following principles for the reunification, which mainly goes as follows: 1. The reunification must be achieved with no reliance on external forces or interference. It must be achieved internally. 2. The reunification must be achieved peacefully without the use of military forces against the other side. 3. Both parties must promote national unity as united people over any differences of our ideological and political systems93 The first principle means that both ROK and DPRK agreed the reunification should be achieved by themselves only and not with the participations of other parties. The next principle is the reunification must be achieved peacefully without the use of militar forces agains the other side, meaning no violence is allowed during the reunification process. The last principle is important since they both agreed to put aside the ideological and political differences between them and prioritize the unity of Korea for the sake of reunification.

91 Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21). 92 Rak, L. H., & Ju, K. Y. (1972). July 4th north-south joint statement. Retrieved from Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea Government website: http://www.archives.go.kr/next/search/listSubjectDescription.do?id=003345 93 Ibid. 39

Those three principles have details to emphasize and explain the agreed principles. The details of the principles include: 1. The parties agree to implement appropriate measures to stop military provocation which may lead to unintended armed conflicts, to cultivate an atmosphere of mutual trust between Norh and South by refraining from vilifying the other side. 2. The parties agree to restore the severed national lineage and promote mutual understanding by implementing multi-faceted North-South exchange of information. 3. The parties agree to expedite the North-South Red Cross meetings, currently under negotiation, ardently longed for by the Korean people. 4. The parties agree to establish direct phone contacts between Seoul and Pyongyang in order to prevent accidental military clashes by prompt and accurate resolution of any urgent potential problems. 5. The parties agree to establish the North-South Coordinating Comission, co- chaired by Director Lee Hu Rak and Director Kim Young Ju, in order to implement the items agreed upon above, to resolve North-South issues, and to promote the reunification of our fatherland. 6. The parties solemnly swear to faithfully abide by the agreement, as desired by all of our countrymen.94 The agreement was a part of both ROK and DPRK in the effort of achieving One Korea for the first time since the Korean DMZ Conflict ended. Other than the agreement, the North-South Coordinating Comission was made to promote the reunification to both ROK and DPRK people. However, in the next year the North-South Coordination Comission was disbanded without any progress in implementing the agreement. It indirectly stated that both ROK and DPRK were not that serious in achieving reunification of Korea. They might meet with each other and had a serious discussion regarding the reunification, however it was all only a theory or a written plan without any

94 Rak, L. H., & Ju, K. Y. (1972). July 4th north-south joint statement. Retrieved from Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea Government website: http://www.archives.go.kr/next/search/listSubjectDescription.do?id=003345

40 action that had been made. It was such a shame that both ROK and DPRK could not implement the agreement fully.

III. 3.3. Sunshine Policy Sunshine Policy was the the first policy proposed by Kim Dae Jung in 1998 to promote reunification with DPRK to achieve a peaceful Korean peninsula.95 It was a new type of diplomatic approach of ROK towards a better relation with DPRK by using cooperative system. To get a better understanding regarding this policy, the definition and the basis of the Sunshine Policy is explained below:

“The Sunshine Policy can be seen as proactive policy to induce incremental and voluntary changes in North Korea or peace, opening, and reform through the patient pursuit of reconciliation, exchanges, and cooperation. In the forthcoming discussion, however, the Sunshine Policy goes beyond simple engagement. It comprises several components such as military deterrence, international collaboration, and domestic consensus. Nevertheless, its objective is crystal clear: to lay the foundation for peaceful Korean reunification by breaking the vicious cycle of negative, hostile actions and reactions through and peaceful exchanges and cooperation. The Sunshine policy is based on three fundamental principles as outlined in President Kim Daejung’s inaugural speech. The first principle is non-tolerance of military threat or armed provocation by North Korea. The second is the official abandonment of the idea of unification by absorption and the negotation of any other measures to undermine or threaten North Korea, and the third is the promotion of exchanges and cooperation through resumption of the 1991 Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-aggression and Exchanges and Cooperation.” 96

The principles of the Sunshine Policy could reduce the tension between ROK and DPRK as well as improve the relations. It was a starting point towards a peaceful Korean reunification. Because of this policy, the DPRK gained a lot of benefits from ROK as they are provided with rice, fertilizer, and more without setting conditions or demanding immediate reciprocity, as well as allowing the ROK businesses, NGOs and others to go to

95 Kwon, P. J. (2014). The re-evaluation of the sunshine policy: failure or success. The Public Sphere, 13. 96 Moon, C.I. (2000). The Sunshine Policy and the Korean Summit: assessments and prospects. East Asian Review, 12(4), 3-36. 41 the DPRK, and creating the Gaeseong City Industrial Complex in DPRK, which currently has more than 50,000 employees from DPRK.97 With 40 different types of agreements between ROK and DPRK, the Sunshine Policy actually gave a huge contribution to improve the relations between ROK and DPRK as well as to achieve Korean reunification.

III. 3.4. 2000 Inter-Korean Summit After the Sunshine Policy was created in 1998, one of the most memorable moment of Korean reunification efforts was Inter-Korean Summit which was held for the first time in year 2000. Kim Dae Jung was also the one who initiated this encounter, to implement his Sunshine Policy. The leaders of DPRK and ROK during that time, Kim Jong Il and Kim Dae Jung, signed an agreement at their historic summit to work toward reuniting thousands of families who were separated by the Korean war, to provide desperately needed South Korean investment for the North’s failing economy, and eventually to reunify the peninsula.98 The encounter between the two leaders created a fuss to the world, because unexpectedly the meeting was full with warmth. Kim Dae Jung thanked Kim Il Sung for agreeing to this encounter and creating a historic dialogue. He also said that both ROK and DPRK should walk together hand-in-hand in the process of reunification by cooperating together. The leaders of the ROK and DPRK, recognizing that the meeting and the summit talks were of great significance in promoting mutual understanding, developing ROK and DPRK relations and realizing peaceful reunification, declared as follows: 1. The South and the North have agreed to resolve the question of reunification independently and through the joint efforts of the Korean people, who are masters of the country. 2. For the achievement of reunification, we have agreed that there is a common element in the South’s concept of a confederation and the

97 Kwon, P. J. (2014). The re-evaluation of the sunshine policy: failure or success. The Public Sphere, 13. 98 Staff and agencies. (2000, June 14). Historic deal at North-South Korea summit. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/14/northkorea3

42

North’s formula for a loose form of federation. The South and the North agreed to promote reunification in that direction. 3. The South and the North have agreed to promptly resolve humanitarian issues such as exchange visits by separated family members and relatives on the occasion of the August 15 National Liberation Day and the question of unswerving Communists serving prison sentences in the South. 4. The South and the North have agreed to consolidate mutual trust by promoting balanced development of the national economy through economic cooperation and by stimulating cooperation and exchanges in civic, cultural, sports, health, environmental and all other fields. 5. The South and the North have agreed to hold a dialogue between relevant authorities in the near future to implement the above agreements expeditiously.99 The declaration is named The June 15th North-South Joint Declaration which also stated that Kim Dae Jung of ROK invited Kim Jong Il to have a formal visit to Seoul and Kim Jong Il will visit Seoul at an appropriate time.100 By looking at the declaration, the potential of Korean reunification seemed very high.

III. 3.5. The Policy for Peace and Prosperity After being inaugurated in year 2003, the following President of ROK after Kim Dae Jung, President Roh Moo Hyun expanded the Sunshine Policy to create a better peace in Korean peninsula, therefore he created Policy for Peace and Prosperity. The Policy for Peace and Prosperity has four basic principles: 101 1. All issues should be resolved through dialogue. 2. Priorities should be placed on building mutual trust and “upholding reciprocity”. 3. The inter-Korean issues should be resolved by South and North Korea in cooperation with the international community.

99 Declaration, S. N. J. (15). June 2000. 100 Ibid. 101 The policy for peace and prosperity. (2004). Seoul: Ministry of Unification (ROK).

43

Seoul will strive to ensure transparency, expand citizen participaion, and secure “bipartisan support” in implementing North Korea policy. The first principle of Roh Moo Hyun, which is all issues should be resolved through dialogue, arise through the potential of warfare in Korean peninsula due to the instability of DPRK military issue and the unfinished armistice between both ROK and DPRK.102 Therefore, a peaceful talks or dialogue between both countries should be done rather than conducting a warfare. Establishing a healthy mutual cooperation was a part of the second principle to improve the relations and cooperation which was supposed to be mutually beneficial for both countries.103 The third principle is created to promote international cooperation based on the principle of parties directly concerned, the establishment of a peace regime in the Korean peninsula and the creation of South-North Korean economic community, because of this community, DPRK will naturally cooperate with the international community and contribute for peace and prosperity in East Asia. The last principle is the expansion of community participation. In the process of implementing the Policy for Peace and Prosperity, ROK ensures external transparency in the policy-making process. Other than four main principles, Roh Moo Hyun also created three stages of strategy for establishment of peace. The three stages of strategy are shown on the table below.

102 Nam, K. J. (2004). The Policy of Peace and Prosperity and South Korea-Russia Cooperation, 16(3). 103 Ibid. 44

Figure 4: Implementation Strategy by Stages for Establishment of a Peace Regime on the Korean Peninsula

\\

The Policy for Peace and Prosperity by Roh Moo Hyun built a trust between ROK and DPRK as well as increased international cooperation.104 Peace regime was also created on the Korean Peninsula.

104 Nam, K. J. (2004). The Policy of Peace and Prosperity and South Korea-Russia Cooperation, 16(3).

45

III. 3. 6. 2007 Inter-Korean Summit The Policy for Peace and Prosperity also created the next Inter-Korean Summit in year 2007. Because there was no implementation of the June 15th Joint Declaration at the 2007 Inter-Korean Summit, both ROK and DPRK have reaffirmed the spirit of the June 15th Joint Declaration and had frank discussions on various issues related to realizing the advancement of ROK - DPRK relations, peace on the Korean Peninsula, common prosperity of the Korean people and reunification of Korea.105 There are eight points mentioned during the encounter, which goes as follows:

1. The South and the North shall uphold and endeavor actively to realize the June 15 Declaration. 2. The South and the North have agreed to firmly transform inter-Korean relations into ties of mutual respect and trust, transcending the differences in ideology and systems. 3. The South and the North have agreed to closely work together to put an end to military hostilities, mitigate tensions and guarantee peace on the Korean Peninsula. 4. The South and the North both recognize the need to end the current armistice regime and build a permanent peace regime. The South and the North have also agreed to work together to advance the matter of having the leaders of the three or four parties directly concerned to convene on the Peninsula and declare an end to the war.

105 Declaration on the advancement of south-north korean relations, peace and prosperity. (2007). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification of the Republic of Korea website: https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/KP%20KR_071004_Declaration%20on%20Advan cement%20of%20South-North%20Korean%20Relations.pdf

46

5. The South and the North have agreed to facilitate, expand, and further develop inter-Korean economic cooperation projects on a continual basis for balanced economic development and co-prosperity on the Korean Peninsula in accordance with the principles of common interests, co-prosperity and mutual aid. 6. The South and the North have agreed to boost exchanges and cooperation in the social areas covering history, language, education, science and technology, culture and arts, and sports to highlight the long history and excellent culture of the Korean people. 7. The South and the North have agreed to actively promote humanitarian cooperation projects. 8. The South and the North have agreed to increase cooperation to promote the interests of the Korean people and the rights and interests of overseas Koreans on the international stage.106

President Roh Moo Hyun has a high commitment in cooperating with DPRK, one of the realistic implementation of his efforts was the establishment of the Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC). Both in terms of visibility and significance, the KIC overshadows all the other joint projects between ROK and DPRK, located about 37 miles (or 60 kilometers) north of Seoul, the industrial complex covers an area of about 66 square kilometers in Kaesong, DPRK.107

106 Declaration on the advancement of south-north korean relations, peace and prosperity. (2007). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification of the Republic of Korea website: https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/KP%20KR_071004_Declaration%20on%20Advan cement%20of%20South-North%20Korean%20Relations.pdf 107 Kim, H. N. (2006). South-North Korean relations under the Roh Moo-hyun government. International Journal of Korean Studies, 10(1), 37-59.

47

III. 4. Overview of ROK-DPRK Relations

The division of Korea left a huge question mark on what kind of relations that ROK and DPRK have. ROK and DPRK have been in conflict, even until today the conflict is still going on and both of them could not achieve the reunification. Even though both ROK and DPRK have participated in various negotitions, mainly on nuclear issues, and when ROK gave supply aid to DPRK, the relations and situation between the two Koreas remained fairly static.108 In 1973, the Korean Red Cross proposed an inter-Korean Red Cross meeting which discussed the exchange of business people and goods through the South-North Coordinating Committee. The relations between the two Koreas were not that tense because in 1970s until 1980s, the inter-Korean economic talks were held and they were trying the create the possibility of ROK-DPRK exchange and cooperation. Policies and declarations were created to find the middle ground between ROK and DPRK. When Kim Dae Jung declared his Sunshine Policy, he even visited DPRK in June 2000, and that was the first time the ROK President visited DPRK. And it opened the opportunity of ROK and DPRK to reunite. In Sydney Summer Olympic Games 2000, the athletes from ROK and DPRK marched together under a single flag showing a silhouette of the Korean peninsula, even though they competed as separate teams. It proved that actually ROK and DPRK have a chance to unite again. The hope for both ROK and DPRK to reunite rise up again in May 2007 when the trains from both ROK and DPRK crossed the DMZ to the other side.109 And in the same year in October, ROK and DPRK held their second summit with Roh Moo Hyun visited DPRK to meet with Kim Jong Il personally. The meeting was the evidence that the encounter between the leaders of two Koreas were the proof that impossible is nothing.

108 Lee, J. H. North Korea | Facts, Map, & History - Relations with the South. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/place/North-Korea/Relations-with-the-South 109 Ibid. 48

However, in May 2009 DPRK cancel the business contracts that they have with ROK inside Kaesong Industrial Complex. Kaesong Industrial Complex was the proof and the cooperation in the economic sector of both ROK and DPRK which was hoped it would grow together. And the explosion in Cheonan, ROK, caused by DPRK made ROK to cut all of their trade relations with DPRK. After all the cooperations that have been made, the tension remain high again due to the nuclear provocations conducted by DPRK which created a distrust between ROK and DPRK. Trade between ROK and DPRK increased from USD19 million in 1989 to USD 2.714 billion in 2014, however due to the unconsistent situation in inter-Korean relations, the trade plummeted to USD 333 million in 2016.110 Through the years, the cooperation and exchange between the two Koreas were and still are difficult to achieve due to the various conflicts happened between ROK and DPRK. However, the social and cultural exchanges between ROK and DPRK including in humanitarian and sports sectors, which increased the sense of unity for the two Koreas.111 The poll results showed that both ROK and DPRK want reunification to happen. DPRK wants ROK to follow their system, however ROK wants DPRK to be capitalist.112

110 Inter-Korean Exchange and Cooperation< What We Do< 통일부_영문. (2013). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification, Republic of Korea website: http://www.unikorea.go.kr/eng_unikorea/whatwedo/cooperation/ 111 Ibid. 112 Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report. 49

III. 5. Responses from the Public of ROK Toward Reunification

The responses from the public of ROK will affect the Korean reunification. The progress of Korean reunification will depend on the public itself, whether they wanted a reunification or not. The opinion from the public will affect the implementation of the Korean reunification itself. The efforts by the government for Korean reunification will be possible if the public support them. DPRK has a bitter image problem in ROK due to their nuclear tests, missile launches and human rights issues. Therefore, the public of ROK did not seen DPRK as their friend.

Figure 5: Image of DPRK from the view of ROK people.113

Source: Asan Daily Poll. Survey conducted September 4-6, 2014.

113 Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report. 50

Most of the public of ROK remains unconvinced toward DPRK due to DPRK’s aggression and huge differences in culture. However, according to Asan Daily Poll in January 2015 for reunification itself, their interest still counted as very high with over 80 percent of them wanted the reunification to happen.114 This number is considered as high since ROK and DPRK have lot of differences in culture, the public of ROK still wanted the reunification. Despite both ROK and DPRK have living their lives in their own ways and the ROK have a growing economic sector, the public of ROK hope the reunification to happen.

Figure 6: Interest in Korean Reunification from the view of ROK people.115

Source: Asan Annual Survey: 2010-2014.

114 Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report. 115 Ibid. 51

There are various reasons in increasing number in people who wanted the reunification to happen. The main reason was because of the culture factor. The majority of ROK people wanted the ethnicity of ROK and DPRK to be united again. And the other main reason was because the economic factor. The economic sector in both ROK and DPRK could accelerate if both states unite. They will combine their economic sectors and may create the strongest economic allies in the world.

Figure 7: Reasons for Necessity of Reunification.116

Source: Asan Daily Poll. Survey conducted September 4-6, 2014.

116 Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report. 52

CHAPTER IV THE PROGRAMS AND ROK’S EFFORTS DURING PARK GEUN HYE ERA IN SUPPORTING THE PROCESS OF

KOREAN REUNIFICATION (2014-2017)

ROK actually has made a lot of efforts to achieve Korean reunification, even though the results may look not too significant to both parties. It is because the reunification has not reached any concrete agreement and has not been achieved since years ago. In the process of Korean reunification, it has passed a lot of ups and downs which were quite complicated. Previously, the former leader or President of ROK has created various plans and even policies to achieve reunification in Korea. The implementations also have been done even though the result were not perfect and was not as they have expected before. ROK keeps making the efforts intensively to reduce the tension or conflict between the two Koreas. Positively, ROK keep developing its ideas and diplomatic policy regarding this reunification issue.117 However, of all former Presidents in ROK, Park Geun Hye was one of the Presidents who had the most efforts to achieve One Korea. In accordance with the topic of this thesis, this chapter will be focusing on Korean reunification during Park Geun Hye era, specifically from year 2014 until 2017.

IV. 1. The Implementations of Park Geun Hye’s Programs in Supporting the Process of Korean Reunification

IV. 1. 1. A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision Long before Park Geun Hye became the President of ROK, she visited Pyongyang in year 2002 and had a private meeting with the leader of DPRK during that time, who

117 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 53

was Kim Jong Il. It proved that Park Geun Hye has shown a strong interest in Korean reunification and was one of her main concerns.118 On 25th February 2013, during her inauguration speech, Park Geun Hye stated that she wanted a new era of hope and happiness which has become her dream since long time ago. Park Geun Hye wanted a new era full with hope and happiness in Korean Peninsula while both directly and indirectly could become an era of hope and happiness to the world.119 With this new vision, Park Geun Hye is committed to create a happiness and hope in Korean Peninsula. Figure 8: A New Era of Hope and Happiness.

VISION A New Era of Hope and Happiness Four Major Objectives

Building a ROK Citizen's Economic Revival Thriving Culture Foundation for Welfare Unification

THREE TASKS

1. Normalizing inter-Korean relations through a trust-building process 2. Embarking on small-scale unification projects that will ultimately lead to a complete integration of the two Koreas 3. Taking pratical measures to prepare for unification by strengthening unification capabilities

Source: Ministry of Unification (ROK)

118 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 119 Yonhap News Agency. (2013, February 25). Full text of President Park's inauguration speech. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/02/25/95/0301000000AEN20130225001500315F.HTML

54

With this one big vision from Park Geun Hye, she showed that she has prepared for this since long time ago. Reunification is a result from integration of the people itself, therefore Park Geun Hye wanted to unite the people’s hearts and accept the differences between the two Koreas. The people of ROK and DPRK need to come to their sense to have more tolerance, trust and care to each other. Peace is Park Geun Hye’s main concern in Korean reunification. Looking at the table III. V. I, Park Geun Hye had four major objectives under A New Era of Hope and Happiness main vision, which are economic revival, ROK citizen’s welfare, thriving culture and building a foundation for unification. In the last objective, Park Geun Hye has planned the reunification by creating small steps first. She wanted a small-scale reunification and followed by combining the heart of ROK and DPRK people where they could unite as one economically and culturally. Creating a space for small reunification where all Koreans could be brought within the DMZ, the greatest symbol of inter-Korean division and conflict, will provide ROK and DPRK people with opportunities to bridge cultural differences and open their minds to each other, thereby serving as a starting point towards big reunification.120 She planned to make DMZ where Koreans from both ROK and DPRK could interact with each other, named international park. She once stated during her speech to the United States Congress: “It will be a park that sends a message of peace to all of humanity. There, I believe we could start to grow peace, to grow trust. It would be a zone of peace bringing together not just Koreans separated by a military line, but also the citizens of the world.”121 Park Geun Hye also believed that if ROK and DPRK united, both economic will grow significantly and they both could contribute to the world economic development. The major three tasks under building a foundation for unification objective were planned carefully by Park Geun Hye toward a peaceful Korean reunification. Trust is the main foundation of this objective. She emphasized a unified Korea by ensuring the people’s happiness and creating economy as well as green communities. Green community is

120 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 121 Keck, Z. (2013, May 9). The Three Faces of Park’s “Trustpolitik”. The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2013/05/the-three-faces-of-parks-trustpolitik/

55 considered very important since DPRK has a strong interest in nuclear section. Hence, Park Geun Hye created a green community through a Green Détente, which is a denucle arization process by ROK government to the DPRK with the purpose of building a joint environment community. The aim of this green community was to promote green economy, searching for the ecology available inside the DMZ area, as well as creating a new renewable energy area within the Gaeseong Industrial Complex. Park Geun Hye realized that enhancing renewable energy in the globalization era is highly important as sooner or later the world might rely on renewable energy. Since the beginning, Park Geun Hye always emphasized to ensure people’s happiness both in ROK and DPRK. Therefore, her governance will create a beneficial condition for DPRK Human Rights Law, since it has been well-known that the life of DPRK people are different from others and they need to improve their life. Cooperation with civil organizations and the international community will be made to achieve the human rights for DPRK people. Vision Korea Project also created the trust between ROK and DPRK restored. ROK government planned to develop Korea (as one) infrastructure, including roads, railways and electricity. Park Geun Hye also believed that the voices or opinions of her people in ROK are very important to the development of Korean reunification, therefore in her administration, she promoted a public opinion on how to improve the relations between the two Koreas and achieving One Korea. Her governance will hear and respect people’s opinion and voices regarding this matter through public hearings or academic papers, therefore the opinions only could be heard from capable or eligible people. Raising awareness to the public regarding Korean reunification is very important to reinforce reunification capabilities, therefore the ROK government focuses on building a national consensus on unification and North Korean policy, and obtaining support from the international community, as well as strives to expand the scope of human resources, finances, and institutions.122

122 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 56

To strengthen the reunification capabilities, Park Geun Hye had three main projects which included: 1. Improving the customized program for DPRK defectors’ resettlement. 2. Reinforcing capabilities for pratical unification preparation. 3. Forming a consensus on unification in the international community through unification diplomacy. Improving the quality of life of DPRK refugees, expanding the channel for cooperation and raising the awareness of Korean reunification to the ROK expatriates are Park Geun Hye’s pratical measures to prepare for reunification by strengthening reunification capabilities.123

IV. 1.2. Trustpolitik Policy In Park Geun Hye government, she provided the Trust-building Process as her reunification main policy. She realized the importance of reunification and made the reunification one of the four major objectives of her government. It was the first time since Kim Dae Jung era that the implementation of reunification went beyond efforts to achieve One Korea. Park Geun Hye is committeed to create a peaceful reunification with specific policies, therefore the plan of achieving One Korea will be implemented without any significant obstacle. It has been well-known that trustpolitik is Park Geun Hye’s signature policy in achieving Korean reunification. This is a brand new strategy from previous President of ROK, Lee Myung Bak. This grand strategy of Park Geun Hye aims to build trust in resolving the conflict inside Korean peninsula. She wanted to change Korea from the conflict zone into the zone of hope and happiness. Trustpolitik policy is based on ‘build trust with each other’ as well as to prevent the threat from DPRK since they were (and still are) very aggresive with their nuclear and military sector.124 DPRK’s nuclear development has threatened ROK. This brand new policy is implemented by Park Geun Hye by looking at some factors such as growing

123 Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf 124 Byung-se, Y. (2013). Park Geun-hye’s Trustpolitik. Global Asia, 8(3), 8-14. 57 threats from DPRK, developed international support for South Korea, UN sanctions against DPRK and also because the strengthening ROK- United States alliance. Trust according to Park Geun Hye is a core value to the basic political philosophy that became the principal needed to assist the development of cooperation, not only between individuals but also between nations.125 In addition, trust is defined as a primary foundation of international cooperation and as a main factor in creating the real peace.126 Peace without the concept of trust is impossible to be realized and achieved, since the sincerity in the trust process takes a lot of time and need consistency and step-by-step approaches.127 Therefore, Trustpolitik policy has three major objectives, which are Trust- building Process on the Korean Peninsula, Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative, and Eurasia Initiative.128 The first objective aimed to build trust between ROK and DPRK based on strong foundation of safety under international order to achieve the concrete peace on the Korean Peninsula and reunification. The trustpolitik policy was first mentioned by Park Geun Hye during her Presidential inaugural speech on 25th February 2013 which stated: “Through a trust-building process on the Korean peninsula, I intend to lay the groundwork for an era of harmonious unification where all Koreans can lead more prosperous and freer lives and where their dreams can come true. I will move forward step-by-step on the basis of credible deterrence to build trust between the South and the North. Trust can be built through dialogue and by honoring promises that have already been made. It is my hope that DPRK will abide by international norms and make the right choice so that the trust-building process on the Korean peninsula can move forward.”129 Based on the Park Geun Hye’s inauguration speech above, through the trust- building process or trustpolitik policy in the Korean Peninsula, Park Geun Hye wanted to set the foundation for a harmonious reunification era with the dream that all Koreans as

125 Sheen, S. H. (2014). Dilemma of South Korea’s Trust Diplomacy and Unification Policy. International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 23(2), 97-122. 126 Byung-se, Y. (2013). Park Geun-hye’s Trustpolitik. Global Asia, 8(3), 8-14. 127 Ibid. 128 Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative: Moving beyond the Asian Paradox Toward Peace and Cooperation Initiative. 129 Yonhap News Agency. (2013, February 25). Full text of President Park's inauguration speech. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/02/25/95/0301000000AEN20130225001500315F.HTML

58 one could live prosperously and freely, therefore they could achieve their own dreams unconfined. Other than that, Park Geun Hye wanted to build trust in the Korean Peninsula to prevent any provocative action by DPRK. According to Park Geun Hye during her inauguration speech, trust could be built through existing dialogues and agreements, therefore DPRK could accept international norms and could make the right choice in their government. Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative also created to build trust between nations in Northeast Asia by having dialogue constantly and cooperation. This plan was proposed by ROK because there was no effective efforts in finding the source of conflict in regional sectors, such as territorial issue and the threats on environmental and energy issues, which prevent them from maximizing the full potential for their regional development.130 Besides increasing institutionalism among Korea, Japan, and China, ROK’s Foreign Ministry has said this initiative will aim to turn mistrust and confrontation in Northeast Asia into trust and cooperation.131 The last objective in Trustpolitik policy is Eurasia Initiative. Just like its name, Eurasia Initiative is a form of cooperation and national strategy proposed by ROK in order to achieve sustainable prosperity and peace in Europe and Asia.132 Based on this objective, a threat on peace became a huge obstacle in building cooperation. Therefore, Korean reunification is important not only for ROK and DPRK, but also for Europe and Asia region in order to create an easiness in cooperation.

130 Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative: Moving beyond the Asian Paradox Toward Peace and Cooperation Initiative. 131 Keck, Z. (2013, May 9). The Three Faces of Park’s “Trustpolitik”. The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2013/05/the-three-faces-of-parks-trustpolitik/ 132 Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Eurasia Initiative. 59

IV. 1.3. Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation Park Geun Hye administration officially launched a Unification Preparatory Committee or Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation on 15th July 2017 to map out a blueprint to become one nation with its neighbor country, DPRK.133 The Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation was created to support Park Geun Hye government’s reunification jackpot theory.134 The Presidential Committee for Unification has three main tasks shown on the table below.

Figure 9: Three Main Tasks of Presidential Committee for Unification

Three Main Tasks of Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation

Establish a system of cooperation among Set out a blueprint and Build a national consensus government agencies and roadmap for unification Non-governmental Organization

Source: Noland, M. (2015, November 19). The Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation.

133 Soon, C. J. (2014, February 25). (LEAD) Park to launch unification preparatory committee. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co 134 Wuk, A. H. (2014, July 17). Preparatory Committee for Reunification Launches with Its Limitations. Retrieved from http://english.khan.co.kr/khan_art_view.html?artid=201407171915397&code=710100

60

Based on the three main tasks of the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation, it seems they wanted to establish a strong foundation first rather than doing the action directly. Patience was the key in this committee as they realized that building a cooperation with DPRK regarding the reunification issue was very difficult. Park Geun Hye served as the chair of the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation, with her two vice chairmen (one for the government and one for the private sector) and four subcommittees, which include diplomacy and security, economy, society and culture, and politics and legal institutions.135 Through a lot of discussions and meetings, the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation has various plans which go as follow: 1. The Committee will recover homogeneity of the ROK and DPRK people by expanding non-governmental exchanges and cooperation such as holding soccer matches, cultural events for peace and world peace conferences. 2. The Committee will resolve humanitarian issues by verifying the fate of the separated families and regularizing the family reunions. 3. The Committee will create the DMZ World Peace Park and conduct joint research on the DMZ ecosystem with DPRK. 4. The Committee will promote projects that are beneficial to both ROK and DPRK, including projects on improving public health and nutrition and protecting the environment. 5. The Committee will prepare the basis for laws needed for a unified Korea in cooperation with the government. The Committee will closely work with the government to promote economic cooperation projects, in which the two Koreas as well as the international community can work together. 136

135 Noland, M. (2015, November 19). The Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation. Retrieved from https://piie.com/blogs/north-korea-witness-transformation/presidential-committee-unification- preparation 136 Presidential Preparatory Committee for Unification announces its new year plans. (2014). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification website: http://www.unikorea.go.kr/eng_unikorea/news/news/?boardId=bbs_0000000000000033&mode=view&cntI d=42049&category=MOU+News&pageIdx=8

61

Based on the plans above, the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation wanted to involve DPRK in creating reunification. Hence, both ROK and DPRK could gain the benefits.

IV. 2. International Support for Reunification

Park Geun Hye has a strong determination to prepare for Korean reunification. Other than creating policies and agreement, she sought an international support to achieve Korean reunification. ROK has a difficulty in approaching DPRK, therefore Park Geun Hye realized that and seek help to other states. The United States has always been there for ROK, helping them since the Korean War started. The United States helped ROK to prevent the external attack from DPRK and help them to increase ROK’s peace and stability. China, Russia, Japan and the United States hold a key role in helping Korean reunification to happen, hence Park Geun Hye believed that those states along with the international community could help to guarantee the costs of reunification, reconstruction and integration of ROK and DPRK.137 The United States has a strong interest in Korean reunification as they will ensuring a peaceful and stable region, preventing the emergence of new security threats and supporting ROK to achieve One Korea with unified, democratic, market-oriented society and economy that benefits to all the Korean people.138 Park Geun Hye tried to captivate the international community to get their support for her vision of a reunified Korea.

137 Helvey, D. F. (2016, February). Korean Unification and the Future of the US-ROK Alliance. In Strategic Forum (No. 291, p. 1). National Defense University Press. 138 R. Revere, E. J. (2015, January 20). Korean Reunification and U.S. Interests: Preparing for One Korea. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/korean-reunification-and-u-s-interests-preparing- for-one-korea/ 62

IV. 3. The Impact of Park Geun Hye’s Impeachment to Korean Reunification

The scandal caused by Park Geun Hye in the late 2016 until early 2017 created a big question whether it has affected Korean reunification efforts made by her or not. Park Geun Hye has been impeached from her President position due to the scandal. The scandal was first started on 20th November 2016, when the prosecutors indicted Choi Soon Sil, a close-friend of Park Geun Hye who she has known for 40 years, the charges include extortion and abuse of power. Prosecutors indicated that she also involved in the crimes. Park Geun Hye was accused that Park Geun Hye allegedly had been taking ‘private counsel’ from Choi Soon Sil. Choi Soon Sil was accused of exerting undue influence of the President and state affairs as well as suspected using her ties to raise USD70 million from big Korean companies for two non-profit foundations under her control and then siphoning off the money, Samsung was one of the well-known huge companies that gave the donation.139 Choi Soon Sil is the daughter of a cult leader, Choi Tae Min who was a close- friend of Park Chung Hee (ROK’s former President and Park Geun Hye’s father), with no power to control the state and access to official or legal document of ROK. Choi Soon Sil took control of Park Geun Hye based on her experience in the world of shamanism. Park Geun Hye admitted that in 2016, the presidential speeches were edited by Choi Soon Sil. She was caught giving legal documents to Choi Soon Sil and asked her recommendations.140

139 Klug, F. (2017, March 10). Explainer: What's behind the impeachment of South Korean President Park Geun-hye. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-south- korean-president-impeached-explainer-20170310-story.html 140 Ibid.

63

A total of 234 out of 300 voted for impeachment, the vote was by secret ballot, however the results indicated that nearly half of 128 lawmakers in Park Geun Hye’s party, Saenuri, has joined the opposition in impeaching her, it clearly stated that Park Geun Hye has lost all of her supporters.141 The Constitutional Court unanimously upheld a parliamentary vote to eject Park Geun Hye from office, and officially removed Park Geun Hye from the office on 10th March 2017. This impeachment has created a question to Korean reunification, as Park Geun Hye had strongly emphasized the importance of Korean reunification and made a lot of efforts in achieving One Korea. Compared to the other former Presidents of ROK, Park Geun Hye has made relatively huge efforts in achieving Korean reunification and she cared about human rights in DPRK. DPRK people have been thinking that Park Geun Hye, who has personally visited DPRK, was a reliable and cool-headed leader, and is regarded by many DPRK people as having a dogged resolve. Park Geun Hye was seen positively by DPRK people before the scandal happened. However, contradictory with its own people, DPRK government tend to believe that the efforts made by ROK government during Park Geun Hye era was an invasion plot. This impeachment actually has shocked the DPRK government, particularly Kim Jong Un. During the scandal, ROK people worked together by making peaceful demonstrations to express their wish to remove the President. Kim Jong Un began to fear the opinions of DPRK people after learning of the mass protests in ROK, therefore Kim Jong Un will be more worried than pleased by the news of Park Geun Hye’s impeachment.142

141 Hun, C. S. (2016, December 9). South Korea Enters Period of Uncertainty With President’s Impeachment. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/world/asia/south-korea-president-park-geun-hye-impeached.html 142 Min, C. S. (2017, March 16). How will the impeachment of Park Geun Hye affect North Korea? DailyNK. Retrieved from http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?num=14419&cataId=nk00400 64

ROK’s Ministry of Unification has stated that they will keep pursuing their policy to DPRK to achieve peaceful Korean reunification regardless of Park Geun Hye impeachment. An official at the Ministry of Unification stated that:

“The Ministry of Unification will maintain its solid preparedness against DPRK in close teamwork with the foreign ministry and other ministries in charge of security, as national security issues should be pursued stedily regardless of local politics.”143

It clearly shows that the efforts made for Korean reunification would continue despite the impeachment of Park Geun Hye, because the scandal has nothing to do with Korean reunification. Before the scandal happened, Park Geun Hye had carefully planned the Korean reunification with Ministry of Unification, and even created a new Presidential Committee for Unification which will help them in creating a peaceful Korean reunification. The government will not remove Park Geun Hye’s policies completely, but rather they would review her policies and discuss possible ways for improvement.

143 Yeon S. (2017, March 10). Park's ouster will not affect inter-Korean policy: ministry. Yonhap News. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/03/10/72/0200000000AEN20170310004453315F.html

65

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION

The relations between ROK and DPRK seems to have a lot of ups and downs. The ideological differences in the two Koreas created a huge barrier which is very difficult to be torn apart. The barrier created a DMZ which still exist up until now. The tension between the two Koreas was getting worse as it led them to Korean War which caused a huge amount of costs. The Korean War may pause because of the truce agreement, however it was not fully ended since the agreement was only a ‘symbol’ to pause the war, therefore the Korean War actually was never really ended. The tension between the two Koreas was causing huge disadvantages to both of them. However, ROK tried really hard to recover from losses and retardation, meanwhile DPRK was too focused on developing its nuclear sector which caused them to fall behind ROK’s economy. Hence, ROK could develop rapidly and could compete as a strong nation in the world, while DPRK is known as a country with its nuclear power and is known as a rogue state. Looking at the tension between the two Koreas, the ROK came up with the idea of reunification that has been implemented since long time ago. Various policies, approaches and plans have been implemented to create a harmonious One Korea. However, since they have differences in terms of idelogy, politic, economy and even social, those efforts did not work too well to be applied in the Korean peninsula. Park Geun Hye, as the first female President in ROK has a strong commitment in creating Korean reunification. She finally created different types of policy, plan, and approach to build a better relations with DPRK. A New Era of Hope and Happiness Vision was her main vision in creating Korean reunification with Trustpolitik policy and Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation as her main strategies. To answer the question of this research, the writer analyzes the implementation of ROK’s efforts in creating Korean reunification during Park Geun Hye era as well as the history and the progress of Korean reunification until it reached Park Geun Hye as the President of ROK. The main difficulty for ROK to achieve Korean reunification was not about convincing DPRK and the international community that reunification is beneficial,

66 however the difference in ideology that makes it difficult to achieve One Korea. At first, DPRK also believed that reunification was good for them, however back to the main issue, they did not trust the ROK since the beginning. Lack of trust was also the issue in Korean reunification. The three core approaches in Park Geun Hye leadership to achieve One Korea offer trust, peace, mutual benefits, prosperity, hope and happiness. Trustpolitik policy aimed to create a trust between the two Koreas who have a huge difference in background. With trust, Park Geun Hye believed both ROK and DPRK could have a dialogue without any pressure or tension. Meanwhile the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation was created so that they could focus on creating and implementing the plans and efforts for Korean reunification. The Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation was created not only to be beneficial to the ROK, but also the DPRK as the target. Park Geun Hye has difficulties in achieving Korean reunification, from the significant differences between the two Koreas, security or nuclear threat from DPRK, and DPRK negative response to the ROK’s efforts. However, the result of her approaches or plans were quite good and beneficial for the people of ROK and DPRK. The world also feel that the Korean reunification seems possible since Park Geun Hye created unique and different approaches and plans in achieving Korean reunification. Due to her impeachment, the Korean reunification seems to come back to being seen as impossible to be achieved. However, the Ministry of Unification ensured that the efforts for Korean reunification will continue and they will work as hard as they could to achieve peaceful One Korea. Other than that, 2018 Winter Olympics which will be held on 9th until 25th February 2018 in Pyeongchang, ROK, make the relations between the two Koreas seems better. Both ROK and DPRK continue to make direct talks, and DPRK’s reclusive regime has decided to participate in the Olympics and has elected to send a team to the games, meanwhile ROK, as the host country, is expected to propose that the two squads march together in the opening and closing ceremonies behind a “United Korea” flag. 144 If the

144 Large, D. C. (2018, January 16). The Olympics Will Only Make the Korea Crisis Worse. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/16/the-olympics-will-only-make-the-korea-crisis- worse/

67 proposal is accepted and happen, the possibility of Korean reunification will be increasing again and the people of both ROK and DPRK will have high hopes on this matter. The possibility of ROK and DPRK using the same flag for Olympics later seems high since both ROK and DPRK have agreed to march under a unified flag and combine their women’s hockey teams at the Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, ROK.145 DPRK has always been persistent with its nuclear sector and has been firing nuclear to scare the ROK, however the fact that DPRK has announced that they will participate in the Olympics create a huge fuss since it is expected that their participation will make the Olympics safe and incident-free. The dream of Park Geun Hye to achieve Korean reunification seems possible. Long before she became the President of ROK, she has dreamed about One Korea and when she had the opportunity to achieve that, she worked hard. Despite her scandal and her impeachment, the efforts made by her should not have been ignored just like that. Well-planned policies were made to build a strong foundation for Korean reunification. However, even though Park Geun Hye has made various policies and approaches, Kim Jong Un regime, who has a huge difference in political and ideological views with Park Geun Hye has created various challenges to Korean reunification. It was difficult to build up a cooperation with DPRK, since they have different background.

145 Borden, S. (2018, January 25). An Illusion Of Unity. ESPN. Retrieved from http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/22199655/north-south-korea-look-unified-olympics-there- harsh-reality

68

In order to accomplish Korean reunification, ROK should play a significant role and overcome the challenges created by DPRK. The Ministry of Unification and the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation was established under a direct government body to focus in contributing to normalization and development of ROK and DPRK relations, to achieve that the committee should show the DPRK their capability in contributing to ROK and DPRK cooperation and peaceful reunification.146 Various divisions under the committee should prepare for a wide range of issues regarding Korean reunification and prove their existence by creating an active interaction forum and discussion resulted in breakthrough plans. Plans will be made and should be implemented in way that DPRK will believe the ROK that their efforts are not the part of invasion plot. The specific plans need to be well-prepared and shared to the nation, in other words be transparent. Furthermore, schemes to continually improve the unification readiness capability need to be created thrugh constant checking and evaluating whether the policies and guidelines are being properly implemented and complied with.147 Public opinion also matters in this issue, since the people of both ROK and DPRK are the victims in the division of Korea. A lot of separated families never had the chance to meet with their relatives, even though they speak the same language and has once lived together. Therefore, the discussion with the society and non-governmental organizations also should be made and encourage them to participate in the process of Korean reunification. Public opinion will increase the hope and urge the government to create the efforts for Korean reunification.

146 Hong, H. I. (n.d.). Jackpot Unification and the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation. Retrieved from http://www.sejong.org/boad/bd_news/22/egofiledn.php?conf_seq=23&bd_seq=2183&file_seq=3944 147 Son, G. W. (2014). The Unification Preparatory Committee: How to Prepare for Unification. Journal of Peace and Unification, 4(2), 113-116. 69

The ROK should make the DPRK to open their eyes, ears and hearts to see at the society in ROK. Freedom of speech, developing economy, entertainment, and other happinesses and hopes that have happened in ROK should be known by the people in DPRK. The trustpolitik policy by Park Geun Hye also need to be implemented persistently, since lack of trust was, still is, and will be the main issue in Korean reunification. To build a stronger relation with DPRK, trust should be there. Without trust, both states will keep doubting each other and the efforts for Korean reunification will be wasted. It is a fact that Park Geun Hye left the office in such a messy way. She left the office with various and challenging homeworks that are still on going and have not even finished yet. It makes the next President of ROK, Moon Jae In, have a lot of things that need to be finished. Other than that, Park Geun Hye impeachment created a doubt in people of ROK and DPRK. Despite all of her efforts, people seem to forgot all of her well-made plans, policies and approaches in achieving Korean reunification. The scandal caused by Park Geun Hye will not affect the whole process of Korean reunification. Putting her scandal aside, the process of Korean reunification during her era was significantly increasing.

The hope for Korea to become one again seems possible during Park Geun Hye era. Even though Park Geun Hye only lead the ROK for less than four years, the impact of her policies toward Korean reunification was positive. Park Geun Hye might not achieve her priority goal even before she became the President, which is a Korean reunification, however all of her efforts to achieve Korean reunification that have been implemented should not just be ignored. The Korean reunification is still the task for the next President of ROK after Park Geun Hye.

70

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Abell, P. (1991). Homo sociologicus: Do we need him/her?. Sociological Theory, 9(2), 195-198.

Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis (No. 327.5 (729.1)). Little, Brown and Company,.

Almond, G. A. (1990). A discipline divided: Schools and sects in political science (Vol. 175). Sage.

Amstutz, M. R. (1999). International conflict and cooperation: An introduction to world politics. McGraw-Hill Humanities, Social Sciences & World Languages.

Bluth, C. (2008). Korea (Cambridge, UK. Polity, 22.

Evans, G., & Newnham, J. (1998). Dictionary of international relations. Penguin.

Evans J.R. Revere, “Park Geun-hye’s Electoral Victory: A Sigh of Relief from Washington?” Brookings Institution, Up Front blog, December 19, 2012. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up- front/posts/2012/12/19-south-korea-president-revere

Brown, C., & Ainley, K. (2009). Understanding international relations. Palgrave Macmillan

Goodin, R. E. (2010). The Oxford handbook of international relations.

Martin, H., & Steve, S. (1990). Explaining and understanding international relations.

Morgenthau, H. J. (1950). Politics among nations. New York: Knopf. Quackenbush, S. L., & Zagare, F. C. (2006). Game Theory: Modeling Interstate Conflict. Making Sense of IR Theory.

Oh, K., & Hassig, R. C. (2002). Korea Briefing 2000-2001: First Steps Toward Reconciliation and Reunification. ME Sharpe.

Walt, S. M. (1999). Rigor or rigor mortis? Rational choice and security studies. International Security, 23(4), 5-48.

Wilson III, E. J. (2008). Hard power, soft power, smart power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 110-124.

Selden, M., & So, A. Y. (Eds.). (2004). War and state terrorism: the United States, Japan, and the Asia- Pacific in the long twentieth century. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

71

JOURNALS ARTICLES, REPORTS AND PRESENTATION

Jae-Bong, L. (2009). US Deployment of Nuclear Weapons in 1950s South Korea & North Korea's Nuclear Development: Toward Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The Asia-Pacific Journal, 8, 3-09.

Dimyati, T. T., & Dimyati, A. (1992). Operations Research Model-Model Pengambilan Keputusan. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algensindo.

Park, Y. H. (2014, January). South and North Korea’s Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. In Texte présenté lors d’une conférence KRIS-Brookings (Vol. 21).

Mas’oed, M. (1998). Teori dan Metodologi Hubungan Internasional. Yogyakarta: Pauss Universitas Gajahmada.

Moon, C. I. (2000). The Sunshine Policy and the Korean Summit: assessments and prospects. East Asian Review, 12(4), 3-36.

Jackson, R., & Sørensen, G. (2016). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press.

Ji, Y. S. (2001). Conflicting visions for Korean reunification (Doctoral dissertation, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University).

Kim, J., Friedhoff, K., Kang, C., & Lee, E. (2015). South Korean attitudes toward North Korea and Reunification. Asan Public Opinion Report.

Levin, N. D., & Han, Y. S. (2003). Sunshine in Korea: the South Korean Debate Over Policies Toward North Korea. Rand Corporation.

Weathersby, K. (2002). “Should we fear this?”: Stalin and the danger of war with America (Vol. 39). Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Lacina, B., & Gleditsch, N. P. (2005). Monitoring trends in global combat: A new dataset of battle deaths. European Journal of Population/Revue européenne de Démographie, 21(2), 145-166.

Khang, Y. H. (2013). Two Koreas, war and health.

Lerner, M. (2010). ‘Mostly Propaganda in Nature’: Kim Il Sung, the Juche Ideology, and the Second Korean War. North Korea International Documentation Project Working Paper, 3.

Lee, C. (2014). In utero exposure to the Korean War and its long-term effects on socioeconomic and health outcomes. Journal of health economics, 33, 76-93.

Kuark, J. Y. T. (1967). A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN NORTH AND SOUTH KOREA DURING THE POST KOREAN WAR PERIOD.

Armstrong, C.K. (2010). The Destruction and Reconstruction of North Korea, 1950-1960. The Asia- Pacific Journal, 8(51).

Yee Shin, S. Y. (2001, December). No longer forgotten: North Korea-South Korea relations since the Korean War. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/North%20Kores- %20South%20Kores%20Relations%20Since%20the%20Korean%20War

72

Ishikida, M. Y. (2005). Toward peace: war responsibility, postwar compensation, and peace movements and education in Japan. iUniverse.

Moon, C.I. (2000). The Sunshine Policy and the Korean Summit: assessments and prospects. East Asian Review, 12(4), 3-36.

Kwon, P. J. (2014). The re-evaluation of the sunshine policy: failure or success. The Public Sphere, 13.

Nam, K. J. (2004). The Policy of Peace and Prosperity and South Korea-Russia Cooperation, 16(3).

Kim, H. N. (2006). South-North Korean relations under the Roh Moo-hyun government. International Journal of Korean Studies, 10(1), 37-59.

Sheen, S. H. (2014). Dilemma of South Korea’s Trust Diplomacy and Unification Policy. International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 23(2), 97-122.

R. Revere, E. J. (2015, January 20). Korean Reunification and U.S. Interests: Preparing for One Korea. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/korean-reunification-and-u-s-interests- preparing-for-one-korea/

Byung-se, Y. (2013). Park Geun-hye’s Trustpolitik. Global Asia, 8(3), 8-14.

OFFICIAL STATEMENTS/DOCUMENTS

Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President Park Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf

Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative: Moving beyond the Asian Paradox Toward Peace and Cooperation Initiative.

Rak, L. H., & Ju, K. Y. (1972). July 4th north-south joint statement. Retrieved from Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea Government website: http://www.archives.go.kr/next/search/listSubjectDescription.do?id=003345

Conference on Korea Reunification Opens with Release of The Korean Dream | Global Peace Foundation. (2014, October 2). Retrieved from http://www.globalpeace.org/news/conference-korea-reunification-opens- release-korean-dream

Geun-Hye, P. (2011). A New Kind of Korea: Building Trust Between Seoul and Pyongyang. Foreing Affairs, 90, 13.

Security Council Resolution 83 - UNSCR. (1950). Retrieved from http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/83

United Nations Command. (1953). The korean war armistice agreement. Retrieved from United Nations Command website: http://www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/G_Armistice_Agreement.pdf

AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA CONCERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF PROBLEMS IN REGARD TO PROPERTY AND CLAIMS AND ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION. (1966). International Legal Materials, 5(1), 111-117. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20690013

The policy for peace and prosperity. (2004). Seoul: Ministry of Unification (ROK).

73

Declaration, S. N. J. (15). June 2000.

1 Declaration on the advancement of south-north korean relations, peace and prosperity. (2007). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification of the Republic of Korea website: https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/KP%20KR_071004_Declaration%20on%20Ad vancement%20of%20South-North%20Korean%20Relations.pdf

Inter-Korean Exchange and Cooperation< What We Do< 통일부_영문. (2013). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification, Republic of Korea website: http://www.unikorea.go.kr/eng_unikorea/whatwedo/cooperation/

Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative: Moving beyond the Asian Paradox Toward Peace and Cooperation Initiative.

Republic Of Korea’s Ministy of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Eurasia Initiative.

PRESS RELEASE

Helvey, D. F. (2016, February). Korean Unification and the Future of the US-ROK Alliance. In Strategic Forum (No. 291, p. 1). National Defense University Press.

Dongho, J. (2015). Korea's economy. President P ark Geun-hye's Unification Vision and Policy, 30, 101. Retrieved from http://keia.org/sites/default/files/publications/kei_koreaseconomy _dongho_0.pdf

Inter-Korean Relations. (2017, April 11). Retrieved 13 October 2017, from https://www.ncnk.org/resources/briefing-papers/all-briefing-papers/inter-korean-relations

Korean Cultural Center. President-elect Lee Myung-bak Seeks Pro-Business Policies, Pragmatic Diplomacy. Korea Policy Review, Vol. 4, No. 1 (January 2008), 6. http://www.kccla.org/download_/download_.asp?filename=2008165113-1.pdf

Presidential Preparatory Committee for Unification announces its new year plans. (2014). Retrieved from Ministry of Unification website: http://www.unikorea.go.kr/eng_unikorea/news/news/?boardId=bbs_0000000000000033&mode=view& cntId=42049&category=MOU+News&pageIdx=8

NEWS ARTICLES

Kim, S., & Yeob, J. W. (2014, July 16). Unification committee launched. Retrieved from http://meng news.joins.com/view.aspx?aId=2992086

Staff and agencies. (2000, June 14). Historic deal at North-South Korea summit. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/14/northkorea3

Soon, C. J. (2014, February 25). (LEAD) Park to launch unification preparatory committee. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co .kr/national/2014/02/25/63/0301000000AEN20140225005151315F.html

CNN Library. (2017, June 10). Korean war fast facts. CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/28/world/asia/korean-war-fast-facts/index.html

74

Haan, P. D. (2002, May). 50 Years and counting: the impact of the Korean war on the people of the peninsula. Retrieved from http://www.calvin.edu/news/2001-02/korea.htm?dotcmsredir=1

Cumings, B. (2011). North Korea: another country. The New Press.

Tran, M. (2011, November 28). South Korea: a model of development? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/nov/28/south-korea- development-model

Keck, Z. (2013, May 9). The Three Faces of Park’s “Trustpolitik”. The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2013/05/the-three-faces-of-parks-trustpolitik/

Yonhap News Agency. (2013, February 25). Full text of President Park's inauguration speech. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/02/25/95/0301000000AEN20130225001500315F.HTM L

Soon, C. J. (2014, February 25). (LEAD) Park to launch unification preparatory committee. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co

Wuk, A. H. (2014, July 17). Preparatory Committee for Reunification Launches with Its Limitations. Retrieved from http://english.khan.co.kr/khan_art_view.html?artid=201407171915397&code=710100

Klug, F. (2017, March 10). Explainer: What's behind the impeachment of South Korean President Park Geun-hye. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct- south-korean-president-impeached-explainer-20170310-story.html

Hun, C. S. (2016, December 9). South Korea Enters Period of Uncertainty With President’s Impeachment. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/world/asia/south-korea-president-park-geun-hye-impeached.html

Min, C. S. (2017, March 16). How will the impeachment of Park Geun Hye affect North Korea? DailyNK. Retrieved from http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?num=14419&cataId=nk00400

Yeon S. (2017, March 10). Park's ouster will not affect inter-Korean policy: ministry. Yonhap News. Retrieved from http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/03/10/72/0200000000AEN20170310004453315F.html

75

INTERNET SOURCES

The Korean War, 1950 – 1953. Retrieved 13 October 2017 from https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945- 1952/korean-war-2

Noland, M. (2015, November 19). The Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation. Retrieved from https://piie.com/blogs/north-korea-witness-transformation/presidential-committee-unification- preparation

Korean War - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war

Realism in International Relations. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://internationalrelations.org/realism_in_international_relations/ reunification | Definition of reunification in English by Oxford Dictionaries. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/reunification

Savada, A. M. (1994, June 29). North Korea - the post-war economy. Retrieved from http://countrystudies.us/north-korea/16.htm

/rielcano_en/contenido?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/elcano_in/zonas_in/asia-pacific/ari60-2015- chinas-growing-assertiveness-in-the-south-china-sea

Lee, J. H. North Korea | Facts, Map, & History - Relations with the South. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/place/North-Korea/Relations-with-the-South

76

77