Paik Nak-chung, a professor emeritus of English literature at Seoul National University and a well-known pro-unification figure, said although he believes the unification minister should refrain from making comments about the North’s human rights issues so as not to strain inter-Korean ties, he believes there is no need for the nation’s human rights watchdog and other government departments to hesitate from addressing these issues themselves. Paik said, “Our goal is peace on the Korean Peninsula. Unification is a just means to attain that goal.” The best way to achieve it is to pursue unification gradually in steps, in accordance with the June 15 Joint Declaration, he said. As the first step, he suggested the two Koreas need to work on establishing a “federal republic.” 

PAIK had a press interview on March 25 with Joins as below.

Q. It seems division and confrontation define today’s Korean society. Confrontation between progressive and conservative groups has become so intense and violent. What is your view on this issue?

A. You’re right. But one thing we need to be mindful of is that conflict is part of our life cycle. It’s a natural phenomenon. Only dead societies do not have conflict. Problems arise when conflicts exhaust society. While some deplore confrontation and division, there are others who tend to enjoy this atmosphere at the same time. People who value their private interests over that of the public fear the emergence of a moderate group that will try to put the public interest first. I believe the reality of division on the Korean Peninsula causes wasteful confrontation and division. In the North and South, there are people who take advantage of the division of the peninsula.

Could you specify who they are?

It is not appropriate to judge a person by saying, “You are a separatist and I am a unificationist.” We need to look at what consequences our actions bring, and adopt a case-by-case approach on each issue.

The government can play a role in maintaining the division of the peninsula, but its role can change because we are a democracy.

We need to evaluate the North Korean regime’s motives, too. Do the North’s actions actually help the two countries get closer to reuniting, or are its moves intended to ensure the survival of its system? We need to be more objective in looking at these matters. 

The younger generation says they don’t want to sacrifice for the sake of unification.

The idea of making unification the [nation’s] supreme task and forcing people to follow is not appropriate. Telling people, “If you don’t follow us, you are anti-nationalist,” or “The North and South are one ethnic group, so we need to live together,” is undesirable. Forceful and unilateral pushes for unification may be unwelcome to the public. Our goal is to live a peaceful, comfortable and eco-friendly life on the peninsula. Unification is a means to achieve that goal.

For a long time you have asserted unification is in the “present progressive tense.” When and in what time frame will it be completed? 

In the June 15 Joint Declaration, the two Koreas agreed to pursue unification gradually in steps. As an initial step to implement the accord, they agreed to create a loose format of a union such as a federal republic. When they reach that point, the two Koreas have taken the first step toward unification. How to proceed with the second and the third steps will be discussed when the two sides reach that point.

Critics say the progressives are too lenient on North Korea. They say the groups kept their mouths shut on the North’s human rights violations, concentration camps, public executions by firing squad and hereditary power succession, while being too critical of their own government.

The progressives don’t act in one monolithic way. There are basically three different groups.

The first is overgenerous to North Korea. They basically defend the North’s side or become the North’s advocates after severely criticizing the United States.

The second group does not accept the North in their hearts, but they believe at this point the best way to tackle inter-Korean relations is to ease the animosity between the two Koreas and focus on “human security” by providing food aid to North Koreans. They believe raising the issue of the North’s human rights problems will not lead to substantive improvement of human rights conditions in the North.

Lastly, there are people who severely criticize the North on human rights. Though I believe the unification minister should refrain from making comments about the North’s human rights issues, I believe there is no need for the National Human Rights Commission and other government departments to keep silent.

Are you against nuclear weapons?

Yes. Nuclear weapons indiscriminately wipe out people including women and children.

Last year, most civic groups joined the protests against the government’s decision to resume importing U.S. beef, citing the danger of transmission of mad cow disease. Do you think the assertions at that time had a scientific basis? What do you think about protesters who swung steel pipes and attacked the police in attempts to overrun to the Blue House?

The scientific evidence presented by the two sides [the government and the protesters] was not sufficient. There was some exaggeration [about the threat from U.S. beef] by the protesters, but at the same time we couldn’t say that U.S. beef is safe. If the issue was the scientific dispute over mad cow disease, it was a very low-level debate.

But I think the key point was not the science. People took to the streets to express dismay and discontent over the government’s unilateral decision to lift the ban on U.S. beef without seeking public consensus.

You have said President Park Chung Hee was a man of merit, but who could not bring sustainable development in the country. How do you evaluate him?

As CEO of the Republic of Korea, he was a competent and devoted leader. But Korea is not a corporation. He governed the country like a CEO, and there were deaths of innocent people, damage to democracy and confrontation between the two Koreas.

Professor PAIK Nak-chung is..
PAIK was born in North Korea in 1938 before Korean War. He grew up in South Korea and flew to the United States right after he finished his high school education. In US he earned B.A. from Brown University, and went on to Harvard University, where he received his M.A. in 1960 and Ph.D. in 1972 in English literature with a dissertation on D.H. Lawrence. He served as SNU professor of English literature until he resigned himself protesting against corrupted government. 
PAIK earned praise from young Korean intellectuals and activists for his ceaseless efforts to move South Korea, which had been under a succession of authoritarian and dictatorial regimes, toward democracy and to encourage the reunification of the two Koreas. But he has also been criticized by conservatives, who call him “a unification supremacist who reflects more North Korea’s stance.” He has remained a well-known figure since the democracy movement of the 1970s and 1980s. Park chairs the All-Korean Committee for Implementation of the June 15 Joint Declaration, which was signed by the leaders of the two countries - then-South Korean President Kim Dae-jung and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il - in 2000 at the first inter-Korean summit to improve inter-Korean ties. Paik is also the chief editor of the magazine The Quarterly Changbi, which he founded in 1966 to encourage democracy and the reunification of the Korean Peninsula.