[On Denuclearizing North Korea – Agenda for Action]
Q1. For the last 10 years, the regional order in East Asia has been changing, characterized by the power rivalry between the US and China. Is the Multilateral Security regime for East Asia still an effective policy measure? What would be an effective way of constructing a multilateral security regime for Korea that includes super power countries such as the US, China, Japan, and Russia?
I still believe in the viability of a multilateral security regime for East Asia. Currently there are two contending paradigms for security in the region. The first is a collective defense system based on alliances, which many states in the region support. An alternative, proposed by China and President Xi Jinping, is based on the concept of a community of common destiny or, to put it differently, a multilateral cooperation regime that seeks a security that is cooperative, comprehensive, common, and sustainable.
At present, the two paradigms seem to conflict with each other. In my opinion, ultimately we will need a multilateral security regime because the current system of alliances presumes the existence of common threats and common enemies and induces states to take sides rather than cooperate. This leads to perpetual insecurity in the region.
There are different ways this might be realized. During his time as president, Roh Moo-hyun had proposed a Northeast Asian Cooperation Initiative. Similarly, current President Park Geun-hye has proposed a Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative. These two proposals are based on a multilateral security regime. Another way would be to go back to the Six Party Talks and implement the September 19 Joint Statement, with particular focus on its provision that all parties would work to a multilateral security regime. This would not only make the Six Party Talks successful in resolving the North Korea nuclear issue but also in reviving a multilateral security regime.
[On Peace]
Q1. What is a concrete way of using the Jeju Forum to promote peace and prosperity in East Asia?
At the fifth Jeju Peace Forum in 2007, the Forum adopted the Jeju Peace Declaration. That declaration included what was called the Jeju Process, which recommended that Jeju become a hub to generate ideas for regional cooperation and a multilateral security regime. In this model, the Jeju Forum would serve as an incubator for peace in Northeast Asia. If the central government pays attention to this proposed process and elevates the role of the Jeju Peace Forum—which it has not under the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations—then the South Korean government can, after constructing a strong network throughout the region, promote viable ideas for multilateral security cooperation.
Q2. Do you have any ideas on promoting peace by educating the public and the next generations?
There are four items to keep in mind. First, we should promote the understanding of peace by isolating the Jeju Peace Institute as a site of peaceful activities. The second item is to focus on research related to peace. Third, the forum should serve as a hub for the exchange of ideas and policies among experts, policymakers, and civil society leaders.
Finally, the institute should help Jeju Island to become an island of world peace. The institute is supposed to cooperate with the Jeju April 3rd Peace Park to design and implement a peace education curriculum, particularly directed toward youth. However, I see no progress in this area. The Jeju Peace Institute should cooperate with the Jeju Provincial Government and the April 3rd Peace Park to make Jeju the most attractive and pioneering center for peace education in Korea.
Q3. What do you think is an effective measure regarding the role of Think-Tanks and their contribution and operation to promote peace?
Where do ideas for the promotion of peace come from? Think tanks. Sadly, think tanks [in Korea] have not fully played their role. These think tanks need to have a stronger role regarding the promotion and function of peace. The JPI should be further strengthened by hiring more researchers and making more international networks in order to play a central role in promoting and sharing ideas for peace promotion and peace theory.
Q4. Since the birth of the Jeju Forum in 2001, you have served as a key convener of the forum and contributed to upgrading it to world-class level. What direction do you think the Jeju Forum should take in the future?
I started the Jeju Peace Forum in cooperation with then–governor Woo Geun-min. We cannot deny the Forum has grown in quantity and quality, but having seen the Jeju Forum yesterday and today, it seems that there are too many tourists taking part. This forum must be a very elite forum, where policymakers and experts come together to discuss new ideas with a high level of detail.
I would suggest the Jeju Forum take a more focused approach. Jeju Governor Won Hee-ryong, chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Jeju Forum, has chosen to focus on four key areas: peace (including the nuclear issue), economic growth (including the innovative and creative economy), the environment, and culture. It’s better to focus on those four areas. The organizing committee should come up with an even focused agenda to more meaningful, impact-driven ideas and outcomes. This would mean a realignment of the Jeju Forum you cannot continue the Jeju Forum as it is.
* Prof. MOON Chung-in is the chair of Co-Convener APLN and a professor at Yonsei University.
Prof. Moon Chung-in’s vision for security and peace in Northeast Asia revolves around the idea of a security community. This community would be focused on cooperation and common security rather than alliances that bifurcate the region and force states to choose sides prematurely or unnecessarily. Existing Korean proposals (such as President Roh Moo-hyun’s Northeast Asian Cooperation Initiative or President Park Geun-hye’s Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative) or multilateral agreements (like the September 19 Joint Statement from the Six-Party Talks) could serve as foundations on which to build a future multilateral regime, he says.
The Jeju Peace Forum in particular has a role to play in generating ideas and promoting practicable steps toward creating such a multilateral security regime. Under the Jeju Process, an idea that came out of the Jeju Peace Forum in 2007, Jeju Island and the Forum would serve as incubators for peace research in Northeast Asia. However, to make this viable the central Korean government would have to pay greater attention to the ideas and efforts of the Forum participants, says Prof. Moon.
For their parts, the JPI and the Jeju Forum will need to narrow and focus their efforts. Jeju Governor Won Hee-ryong, chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Jeju Forum, has highlighted four key areas: peace (including the nuclear issue), economic growth (including the innovative and creative economies), the environment, and culture. Prof. Moon suggests that the organizing committee should come up with an even more focused agenda to meaningful, impact-driven ideas and outcomes. Moreover, the JPI should be further strengthened by hiring more researchers and making more international networks. These steps would elevate JPI’s role in promoting and sharing ideas for peace promotion and peace theory.
