[오늘과 내일/김승련]The North Korean government, which neglected explanations, must reduce arms donations | Dong-A Ilbo

Editorial Writer Kim Seung-ryeon: North Korea will seek to obtain dollars, food, and oil through the dispatch of troops to Russia, as well as military reconnaissance satellite technology and fighter jets to replace the outdated Soviet model. Due to its seriousness, the Yoon Seok-yeol government is drawing up a scenario on what kind of weapons to provide to Ukraine and how to lower the level of military technology transfer between North Korea and Russia. A dangerous battle of brains and spirit against the threats of a military power like Russia has begun. In our modern history, there have been few decisions that involved taking on military risks of this magnitude.

A dangerous battle of brains and spirit with Russia

To conclude, the government believes that it is difficult to increase the level of support for defensive weapons, let alone the ‘lethal weapons’ that the President suddenly brought out last week. Our people do not agree to providing weapons. Last week, public opinion opposing arms support reached 80%. Whether it is the 155mm artillery shells, of which Korea diverted about 500,000 rounds through the United States over two years, or the defensive Cheongung-1 and 2 missiles, which only attack Russian missiles and fighter jets that flew into Ukraine’s airspace, it does not seem easy to expand public opinion support. It is very difficult for President Yoon’s leadership, which has bottomed out, to turn the situation around due to divided politics and weak public opinion formation structure.

After taking office, President Yoon declared ‘global pivotal country diplomacy’. The plan was to engage in diplomacy that went beyond North Korea’s nuclear weapons and the Korean Peninsula in keeping with the country’s status, but the dark reality behind this wonderful slogan meant that even direct support of lethal weapons would have to be provided if necessary. Although President Yoon would have explained the general outlines of diplomacy through his Liberation Day congratulatory speech, it is surprising that not many memories were left in his memory. Both the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Defense were lazy in their efforts to stabilize public opinion.

Koreans have rarely thought about why they should provide weapons to wars with third countries. It is possible to ask questions such as “During the Korean War, we saved our country with the help of 16 participating countries,” or “What will we do when our security is threatened in the future?” However, these questions are only discussed in private and have never been properly raised in the public forum.

Any country is vulnerable to the argument, ‘Why do we help a country on the other side of the world when it is difficult to make a living?’ The United States has a strong tradition of being a global police state, but Trump, who has taken the lead in minimizing foreign military intervention, is a sensation. The essence of Britain’s departure from the European Union (Brexit) is the same. The idea that ‘when the UK is part of Europe is only good for highly educated people in London’s financial districts, what help is it for workers in the northern industrial area like us?’ Even countries that are 100 years ahead in terms of global presence are insensitive to global integration and responsibility, except for a few elites. In Korea, “Why is there a need for diplomatic or military cooperation that follows the example of a powerful country? There is no way to avoid the argument, “What does this have to do with our lives other than the fact that a small number of elites, such as presidents, ministers, diplomats, executives of large corporations, and professors, are treated well abroad?” The opposition leader’s comments such as “Do you decide to go to war after tasting chicken blood?” or “Do you want to export torture technology?” were substandard, but they do not seem to be unrelated to this trend.

Trump Phenomenon-Brexit… all the same story

Can our strategy of determining the scope of weapons provision in stages in accordance with the North Korean military’s combat activities in Russia really reduce North Korea-Russia cooperation? Although inaction and non-involvement are not an option even out of national pride, we cannot avoid asking this question due to the expected military unpredictability. If a kidnapping or terrorism related to Russia occurs, chaos is expected.

The Yoon Seok-yeol government is in a politically awkward situation. Han Ki-ho and Shin Won-sik’s text was also something that could be misinterpreted. If you have a hard-line drive that will cause unnecessary misunderstanding, wouldn’t it be wiser to sort it out from the beginning? In the scenario you’re envisioning, you may need to lower the intensity a notch or two. Instead, we need to start now to explain to the public both the sweetness (receiving diplomatic treatment) and the bitterness (conflicts with rogue countries) that come with diplomacy in a global pivotal country.

Today and tomorrow >

SubscribeSubscribe

I also recommend these subscriptions!

• 

  game industry

• 

  children’s book

• 

  Reporter Lee Ho’s Market ON

Editorial Writer Kim Seung-ryeon [email protected]

• great
  0dog

• I’m sad
  0dog

• I’m angry
  0dog

• I recommend it
  dog