The rapidly changing situation on the Korean Peninsula: The light and dark side of the ‘two nations theory’ and a new search for peace > News

North Korea's recent actions herald a fundamental paradigm shift in relations with South Korea. Through the Supreme People's Assembly held last March, North Korea strengthened the 'two foreign countries' aspect of defining South Korea as a clear 'foreign country' by establishing a new territorial clause in the Constitution and deleting existing unification-related phrases. This is interpreted as an intention to go beyond a simple rhetorical change and to constitutionally solidify the fact that we are now separate sovereign countries with bordering borders, going beyond the hostile tensions that existed at the time of the constitution, which specified Seoul as the capital. North Korea's constitutional transformation appears to be based on a strategic calculation to prioritize international legal inter-state relations over ethnic homogeneity in future exchanges and negotiations between North and South Korea.

Our government's diplomatic attempts in response are also noteworthy. The fact that Unification Minister Chung Dong-young proposed four-party dialogue by referring to North Korea by its official name ‘Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’ during the security dialogue in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, reveals the Lee Jae-myung administration’s pragmatic will to realistically acknowledge North Korea’s nationality and use it as a driving force for building a peace system. In particular, calling for North Korea's re-participation in the Greater Tuman Development Plan (GTI) and presenting an economic cooperation model that connects the railway network and the Arctic sea route is a high-level strategy that seeks to institutionalize peace by sharing practical interests beyond political confrontation. This approach is interpreted as a ploy to encourage North Korea to become a member of the international community instead of isolating itself and create a virtuous cycle of security and economy.

A cross-section of these changes can also be seen in the private sector and sports scene. The recent case of a joint cheering squad being organized during a match between North Korea's hometown women's soccer team and South Korea's Suwon FC in the Women's Soccer Champions League showed that peaceful exchanges at the private level are still effective even in a political crisis. The flexible attitude changes and joint cheering efforts shown by North Korean players during the game became a small spark of hope that could break the rigid framework of inter-Korean relations. Of course, some criticized the appropriateness of tax input or support for government control, but it can be evaluated as an important process that simultaneously tested the value and limitations of ‘private-led exchange’ in inter-Korean relations.

On the other hand, the international community's security structure and North Korea's hard-line attitude still make the path to peace difficult. When the ‘Quad’, which includes the United States, Japan, India, and Australia, repeatedly emphasized the denuclearization of North Korea, the North Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs defined this as a hostile act serving the United States’ unipolar domination strategy and reaffirmed that denuclearization is absolutely impossible. North Korea's opposition is not simply a will to advance its nuclear force, but is also a typical response mechanism to strengthen internal solidarity and secure the legitimacy of the regime through external pressure. Amid the deepening strategic competition between the U.S. and China and the weakening of international norms, North Korea is sticking to its own independent policy of prioritizing its own security values ​​and refusing to be used as a political or diplomatic tool by powerful countries.