China's Perspective on the Discourse of Korean Reunification

Yong-beom Kang

Sejong KT&G China Fellow

Summary

■ Remarks

  ❍ Over the past 80 years, the Korean Peninsula has constantly been at a crossroads between "war and peace," "division and unification," with historical events such as the "Basic Agreement on Inter-Korean Relations," the "June 15 Joint Declaration," the "October 4 Joint Declaration," the "Panmunjom Declaration," and the "September 19 Joint Declaration" creating moments where peace seemed possible.

  ❍ However, as of early 2024, inter-Korean relations have deteriorated to their worst point. North Korea has labeled South Korea as its "absolute enemy, the unchanging primary adversary," adopting a path of military adventurism and blocking any route to unification. This move by North Korea has removed the psychological and political constraints that would have deterred attacking fellow Koreans. As a result, the crisis on the Korean Peninsula is escalating. This action by North Korea is reminiscent of the "two-nations, two-states" doctrine pursued by East Germany in the early 1970s against West Germany.

  ❍ Amidst this, on March 1, President Yoon Suk-yeol, in his speech commemorating the 105th anniversary of the March 1st Movement, outlined a new unification discourse based on liberal democracy. To further this, the Ministry of Unification established the "Unification Future Planning Committee" on March 15 as an advisory body. Then, on the 79th anniversary of the Liberation Day on August 15, 2024, President Yoon formally declared the "8.15 Unification Doctrine" and proclaimed 2024 as the "Year of Unification for a Free, Peaceful, and Prosperous Korea."

  ❍ Yoon's unification policy notably emphasizes freedom and human rights, which could provoke North Korea. This has been sharply criticized by opposition parties, calling it a "declaration of war," a "hollow unification doctrine full of contradictions," and "without consultation or inducement."

  ❍ Geopolitically, Korean unification would contribute to the stability of Northeast Asia and global peace. As Korea is geographically positioned between the power struggles of major nations, its unification must involve international cooperation and support.

  ❍ China holds critical national interests in the Korean Peninsula, and since the Cold War, it has consistently supported North Korea's position regarding unification. To understand China's perspective on the issue of Korean unification, it is essential to analyze the research on this topic within Chinese academic circles. In doing so, it is also meaningful to examine the concerns China has regarding unification.

  ❍ This brief will first review the new unification discourse proposed by the Yoon administration, specifically analyzing the "8.15 Unification Doctrine" to identify its problems and future challenges. Then, it will analyze the trends in Chinese academic research to present China's perspective on Korean unification. Finally, the brief will offer a brief overview of the implications and lessons for South Korea. Given that this analysis reflects the perspective of a third party (China), it will inevitably carry some bias and a somewhat critical tone.

■ New Discourse of Korean Unification

  ❍ The current international situation in Northeast Asia is more complex than ever before. As regional conflicts rise globally, the strategic confrontation and conflicts between the United States and China have led to a “new Cold War.” In particular, military alliances are forming in the Northeast Asian region, and this is reflected in the extreme hostile situation on the Korean Peninsula. The instability of the international situation, driven by global environmental changes, is negatively affecting the situation on the divided Korean Peninsula.

  ❍ Domestically, ideological conflicts within South Korea also pose structural difficulties in finding a future-oriented alternative for Korean unification. Despite changes in the times and South Korea’s enhanced international stature, the discourse on unification in South Korea seems to remain stuck 30 years in the past. This is why the need to break free from outdated concepts and form a new unification discourse that adapts to current realities has emerged.

  ❍ In this context, on May 14, 2024, the Ministry of Unification and the Korea Institute for National Unification hosted a symposium titled “30 Years of the Ethnic Community Unification Plan: Evaluation and Future Directions for Unification Discourse” in Seoul. On June 5, the Ministry of Unification also hosted a meeting to solicit opinions from global experts on the "New Unification Discourse" at the North-South Relations Management Hall. I deeply appreciate the efforts to gather opinions from both domestic and international experts, regardless of political affiliation.

  ❍ The participants at the meeting offered various perspectives. First, there was a call for a peace discourse rather than a unification discourse. Second, the continuity of the "Ethnic Community Unification Plan" from 30 years ago should be emphasized. Third, rather than being overly obsessed with unification itself, the process of how to achieve unification should be concretely defined. Fourth, to avoid remaining a short-term declaration, the unification vision must include a convincing framework for future generations. Fifth, a comprehensive new unification framework that includes dialogue resumption, nuclear disarmament, and the pursuit of peaceful unification is necessary.

  ❍ The “Ethnic Community Unification Plan,” presented in 1994, garnered bipartisan support in the National Assembly at the time due to national consensus and a favorable international environment. However, considering the current political landscape in South Korea, which is deeply divided, achieving national unity around a “new liberal democracy unification discourse” will not be easy.

  ❍ There is a saying that "crisis is opportunity." While preparing for potential accidental conflicts is important, it seems necessary to reflect on the crisis and use our imagination to seek peace from perspectives previously unconsidered.

■ 8.15 Unification Doctrine’, Key Points and Tasks

  ❍ The ‘8.15 Unification Doctrine’ is structured around three main visions for unification, three key strategies for unification, and seven action plans for unification, with the core focus being on the ‘three unification strategies’. A notable difference from previous administrations' unification plans is the emphasis on the ‘role of the North Korean people’. However, questions arise regarding whether unification discussions can even take place between the two Koreas, given Kim Jong-un’s stance of the ‘two nations, two states’ theory and the fact that North Korea’s constitution explicitly defines South Korea as the “primary and unchanging enemy.”

  ❍ Moreover, despite the ‘8.15 Unification Doctrine’ being based on the ‘National Community Unification Plan’, it does not once use the term ‘nation’ or refer to the concept of ‘national community’. This raises doubts about whether a unification theory, which omits the very concept of ‘nation’, can be established as a legitimate framework.

  ❍ Unification of the two Koreas is meant to form a national community, and ideally, it should be pursued in parallel with the creation of a broader Northeast Asian community. In this context, it is important for South Korea to harmonize and reconcile the interests of the countries within the Northeast Asian community, working within this larger framework for regional stability and cooperation.

■ China’s View on Korean Unification

  ❍ For the past 30 years, the Chinese government has consistently emphasized its principled stance of supporting the ‘independent and peaceful unification’ of the Korean Peninsula, while also underscoring that the unification of the peninsula is ultimately a matter for the North and South Koreas to resolve themselves. As a divided nation, China has no reason to reject the justification for unification on the Korean Peninsula.

  ❍ Through searches on China’s largest academic database, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) (http://www.cnki.net), as of November 2024, there are fewer than 100 academic papers in China that treat the issue of Korean unification in any significant way. There is also a tendency for the volume of research to decrease when inter-Korean relations are tense. This is due to the nature of academic research; when a deterioration in relations between the North and South occurs, academic interest in the ‘unrealistic’ aspects of unification also wanes.

  ❍ Thus far, the study of Korean unification in Chinese academic circles can be classified into three main categories. First, there is an evaluation of the unification policies, which suggests that both North and South Korea are insisting on ‘national selfishness’. Second, there is a focus on gradual and peaceful unification as the preferred method. Third, the international environment suggests that the future unified Korea will likely involve a great deal of uncertainty.

■ Implications and Suggestions for South Korea

  ❍ A vision for unification should be established based on broad national consensus, transcending political divides. It is essential to ensure that the majority of the population, regardless of political affiliation, agrees on the direction for the future of unification.

  ❍ South Korea needs to conduct a thorough review of policies regarding the potential for absorption-style unification, particularly in the event of a sudden regime change in North Korea. This includes preparing for various scenarios that may emerge from a sudden collapse or transition in the North.

  ❍ South Korea should actively push for international discussions on the neutralization of a unified Korean Peninsula. By engaging in diplomatic efforts to gain global support, South Korea can ensure that a unified Korea remains neutral in terms of military alliances and geopolitical alignments, benefiting regional peace and stability.

  ❍ A strong and constructive relationship with China is an essential factor for achieving peace and unification on the Korean Peninsula. Given China's significant role in regional stability, it is vital for South Korea to maintain cooperative and balanced ties with Beijing to ensure long-term peace and mutual understanding in the region.

  ❍ It is crucial to recognize that the primary driver of unification on the Korean Peninsula should be the Korean people themselves. South Korea must lead the unification process while considering the interests of both the South and the North, ensuring that the will of the Korean people is central to the direction of the unification process.​