 |
|
Kim Jin-ho, chairman of the Korean Veterans Association, in an interview with the Hankyoreh in Seoul on Nov. 22. (Kang Chang-kwang, staff photographer)
|
Former JCS chairman Kim Jin-ho stresses peace and conflict resolution over ideological battles
“Our military reached an agreement. If we can’t trust that, isn’t that the same as saying we need to dissolve our military?” Kim Jin-ho’s voice gradually calmed. The 77-year-old chairman of the Korean Veterans Association (KVA) was responding to a question asking for his thoughts on claims by some reserve generals that an inter-Korean military agreement reached on Sept. 19 represents a “disaster” that has “compromised South Korea’s security capabilities.” Kim seemed frustrated to hear such arguments coming from the people who once directed the armed forces. Taking place on Nov. 22 at the KVA building in Seoul, Kim’s interview started off with words of concern about the recent situation with differences between progressives and conservatives over the military agreement. “The Sept. 19 military agreement is a process with the ultimate aim of achieving North Korea’s denuclearization,” he said, adding that it was “not appropriate to view this as a matter of our military weakening its readiness posture.” “Denuclearization of North Korea is something that will require us to overcome a lot of difficulties,” he continued. “To get rid of North Korea’s nuclear weapons when we don’t have any of our own, we need to acknowledge the inevitability of a discussion process to reduce military tensions between South and North.” Kim a self-described “typical staunch conservative” The message was quite surprising coming from someone who leads South Korea’s largest security-related group with the KVA and describes himself as a “typical staunch conservative.” He experienced the First Battle of Yeonpyeong while serving as Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) chairman and called for South Korea’s independent nuclear armament in response to North Korean nuclear testing. Even now, he continues calling for a stronger South Korea-US alliance and a circumspect approach to the return of wartime operation control, while expressing concerns that an alternative service system for conscientious objectors to mandatory military service could lead soldiers to feel “cheated.” Kim attributed the differences over the military agreement to “differences of view between those who distrust North Korea and those who want to establish peace on the Korean Peninsula.” At the same time, he stressed that the current moment calls for “a national consensus on how to end the North Korean weapons that threaten our state and survival rights, not an ideological battle of ‘progressive vs. conservative.’” “We’re at a crossroads right now between eliminating North Korea’s nukes and proceeding toward a new future of peace and prosperity, or continuing on with the same oppositions that have persisted over the half-century since Korea’s division,” he said. “Security is a major issue that holds the public’s lives and the fate of the state in the balance, and it should not be the focus of political arguments,” he continued. Kim recalled an advertisement he recently saw in a daily newspaper that left him feeling disconcerted. “It was an ad about a debate on the inter-Korean military agreement, and it said, ‘In the ROK Army, we speak when we’re dead. While we’re alive, we act.’ It left be wondering what kind of ‘action’ the Army is suggesting.” “Before any question of the advantages and disadvantages of conventional elements, the inter-Korean military agreement exists to prevent unintended clashes from escalating into full-scale war,” he continued. Kim added, “I don’t think it’s appropriate to demand that the military repudiate an inter-Korean military agreement that it itself decided.” “I remember during my time as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff man when I issued directions for the West Sea Northern Limit Line (NLL) region. I told them, ‘Don’t fight, and don’t die.’ Once a maritime peace zone has been established on the West Sea, the conflict in the NLL area will go away and the soldiers will be safer.” The deeply entrenched ideological divide portrays military expert as a “commie” In a Nov. 19 statement titled “Our Position on the Administration’s Denuclearization Policy,” KVA stated its support for the Moon Jae-in administration’s efforts to establish peace on the peninsula. It also urged people to avoid accusing the military of “incompetence” as a group in connection with the military agreement, and to refrain from acts of incitement causing concern among the public. According to Kim, this resulted in him being denounced as the “errand boy” and “tool” of a “leftist administration.” It was at that moment that he realized just how deeply entrenched the ideological battle lines are in South Korean society, he said. In August, he even heard himself referred to as a “commie.” “I gave a talk on Korean Peninsula security policy for Korean-Americans at KVA’s North American chapter. I said I wanted Korean-Americans to actively support President [Donald] Trump to achieve North Korea’s denuclearization. When I returned to South Korea, I found the content of the talk posted on YouTube. I saw one of the replies that said, ‘Even this guy is a commie,’ which was a shock to me.” According to Kim, the kind of ideological mind-set that portrays even a military expert and former JCS chairman as a “commie” is getting in the way of an objective assessment of the military agreement. He went on to say the administration’s current North Korean denuclearization policy represents the best approach at the present time. “Both the [conservative] Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations made establishing peace between South and North their top goal and pursued inter-Korean exchange and cooperation,” he noted. “But there’s a difference with the Moon administration, in that they’ve demanded a resolution of the nuclear issue, which is where North Korea feels the strongest resistance,” he added. Kim stressed, “We need to make use of everything at our disposal to get North Korea to abandon its nukes at a time when the Republic of Korea does not possess nukes itself.” “Many experts claim North Korea is not going to readily abandon its nukes. But we can’t live with nuclear weapons hanging over our heads,” he continued. “We need to confront that reality.” Kim predicted that North Korea “will ultimately abandon its nukes once it obtains what it needs.” “Nobody can guarantee it, but that’s the path we need to take,” he said. By Yoo Kang-moon, senior staff writer Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]
