[New Square 10] North Korea holds Supreme People's Assembly meeting, constitutional amendment...What's the difference?

■ Host: Anchor Park Seok-won
■ Starring: Senior Researcher at Hongmin Unification Research Institute

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN New Square 10AM] when quoting.

[Anchor]
North Korea will hold a Supreme People's Assembly today to revise the Constitution. After the constitutional amendment, attention was paid to North Korea's move, and in three days, it sent a garbage balloon again. Let's go over it with the experts. I'm connected to a senior researcher at the Hongmin Institute for Unification. You're out, right?

[Hongmin]
Hello?

[Anchor]
How are you? First of all, Chairman Kim Jong-un ordered the constitution to be revised at the North Korean Supreme People's Assembly today. Which is the biggest key?

[Hongmin]
A very significant revision is expected. First of all, the main concern is how the Constitution will define the two hostile warring states that North Korea has insisted on. Regarding that, it was included in the form of a constitutional document that how the predecessor tried to achieve the unification of the motherland, but this part was deleted or how the unification orientation itself would be deleted. In addition, when territorial provisions are newly established, provisions related to territorial, territorial, and airspace will emerge. Will this come out comprehensively or specifically? So, if it comes out concretely, there is a possibility that the tension between the two Koreas will rise quite rapidly. Another is how to express the status of a nuclear power in the preface to the Constitution in a way that reflects a more advanced state, although the word "a nuclear power" is included in the current constitution. In addition, the status of the leader and the ruling ideology, especially Kim Jong-un's revolutionary ideas, will be fully included in the Constitution. In addition, there is a possibility that a lot of contents, including regulations on the stage of the development of the socialist revolution and various principles of external activities, will reflect the changed reality. In particular, a treaty was signed after the last summit between North Korea and Russia, and whether the treaty will be approved this time and approved by the Supreme People's Assembly, and the contents will be reflected in the Constitution. For example, the decision to participate in war or provide military support is made by the Chairman of the State Affairs Commission alone in the current constitution, which goes through the parliament or the so-called Supreme People's Assembly. Whether to proceed through various conferences or reflecting these North Korea-Russia treaties in the Constitution is also a major concern.

[Anchor]
Let's narrow down the inter-Korean relationship and talk about it. When looking at inter-Korean relations, you pointed out whether to erase unification and clarify the contents of the territory in it. Regarding unification, isn't it possible to see it as an intention to erase the achievements that my father and grandfather put in the full text of the constitution? Wouldn't this be a burden?

[Hongmin] It's
right. It's something you have to be very careful and careful about. The preface to the current constitution specifies the names of Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il, and even contains the intention that they should pursue unification as an important achievement of their predecessors and aim for unification as a national task in the future. If this is excluded, it will be a logic that virtually denies the most important achievements of their predecessors. So, I think it's not the so-called incapacitation or nullification of Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il's unification feat itself, but it's possible that they will go to the process of separating their predecessors' achievements from the current situation by inductively recognizing their achievements in accordance with the changed reality or conditioning unification in a way that they cannot discuss it with Korea today.
Another thing is that this unity is also linked to national logic. In particular, it is connected to the special relationship of the nation. Perhaps this national logic also introduces a new concept. For example, Korea is of the same blood group, but not Kim Il Sung. That is why it may not be the object of our unification. In this way, the so-called nation itself is divided. The Kim Il-sung Nation is a national theory put forward in North Korea in 1998, and the so-called North Korean revolutionary ideology and the people who sympathize with it are the real people, and the people in the system contrary to it are only blood related and not the actual Kim Il-sung Nation. It is highly likely that such parts will be fully integrated and separated from these parts. In particular, I think there is a possibility that Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il's achievements and these parts may be virtually bypassed or avoided by at least using Kim Il-sung's logic.

[Anchor]
In terms of territory, there is the maritime border that Chairman Kim Jong-un mentioned earlier this year. Why is it getting so much attention?

[Hongmin]
This is the Northern Limit Line called the NLL. This is the main boundary between South Korea and the United States, and in fact, North Korea has been consistently tolerating it. In fact, when the basic agreement between the two Koreas was signed in 1991, the existing agreement did not clearly define the maritime boundary on the West Sea at the time of the signing of the armistice agreement, so the uncertainty about this is too high. Therefore, as there is a lot of uncertainty, it was decided to discuss this part later to prevent the current conflict, and North Korea has shown an attitude of tolerating the NLL itself to a large extent. However, as North Korea established a new territorial clause, there are several lines that North Korea has previously insisted on in this regard.

And to claim one of these lines as their own territorial waters and to claim that both sides are completely separate, it probably has the purpose of trying to dispute territories and more actively promoting the two-state theory internationally. North Korea claimed in 1999 that it was a maritime border in the West Sea. And then in 2000, we also argued for passageways for five provinces, and recently in 2007. In 2007, he insisted on improving expenses, but if there is a discrepancy with us by setting up one of them, I think it will actively make a framework to inform the international community that there are two hostile countries through it.

[Anchor]
And some worry that North Korea may use it as a justification for provocation, saying, "Don't cross the line in the West Sea."

[Hongmin]
There is a good chance, but it is still unknown whether North Korea will set its territorial provisions very comprehensively or very specifically in this constitution. Because setting it comprehensively does not clearly indicate where to where the physical domain distance is, but it is possible to mention it very comprehensively and then detail it through sub-law. Or, if you look at it in detail, the detailed boundary could immediately create considerable tension between the two Koreas.

For example, we might engage in a South Korea-U.S. joint exercise or our own training or fishing, where our fishing boats operate, and there might be some kind of invasion, and North Korea might arbitrarily claim such an invasion and engage in engagement or punitive action against it. So there can be a lot of tension. However, it is not very likely that this will immediately turn into a collision in the West Sea, as we have so far followed the NLL line well and not intruded as much as possible, especially on lines with high probability of conflict with North Korea. However, depending on how North Korea asserts this and takes action in the future, there is a possibility that tensions may suddenly rise.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, while revising the Constitution, it completely occupies, composes, and restores South Korea in the event of war, which is what Chairman Kim Jong-un ordered. Since there is such a content as
, there is a rule that South Korea will be incorporated into North Korean territory in the event of a war, or there is a possibility that this could be included. What do you think about this?

[Hongmin]
This is also a part that is highly likely to fit in. The Armistice Agreement itself is in a state of ceasefire. Regardless of the opponent, whether North Korea or South Korea comes first, if the war resumes, the ceasefire itself will actually be broken. So the system of the Armistice Agreement itself is completely changed back to the state of wartime. In this case, the goal was to take actions against each other before the signing of the armistice agreement, to occupy and restore the other area. So it becomes a concept of returning to that state. So, if North Korea recognizes it as the current Armistice Agreement and the constitution says that if the war resumes, the Armistice Agreement system will end, and from then on, it will completely change its direction to its original goal, occupation, or restoration. This is a way of reflecting the state of two hostile warring states that the Armistice Agreement itself has.

[Anchor]
In the middle of the Supreme People's Assembly, I also sent another trash balloon. Why do you keep sending this away?

[Hongmin]
If you look at the continuous flow that you've done so far, it's kind of seen as a routine, a routine. I think the main purpose is to harass the Korean government on a daily basis and to embarrass the Korean government. So, unless South Korea completely stops sending leaflets or loudspeakers to North Korea, it will continue to bully balloon-boosting as a daily routine. In fact, the balloons sent by North Korea continue to fall into the daily scene, causing public anxiety, and the South Korean government intentionally takes advantage of the fact that there are quite difficulties in responding to them. Therefore, it seems that it is taking the form of a psychological war and a non-military means of communication in a way that gives people anxiety and puts a kind of pressure on our government.

[Anchor]
They say that they are creating anxiety and pressure in a non-military way, but there are stories about how garbage balloons can be used as weapons as balloon technology evolves. What do you think about these observations?

[Hongmin]
From the beginning of this year, when North Korea started supporting this, that concern has been constant. So, at the time, the NSC in Korea also mentioned very importantly that this content could seriously threaten the safety of the people. So, this has a trash-type content right now, but if it completely changes the scale and content, it can be completely diverted as a military means. And the way North Korea is actually sending it right now might be how to run the timer, how to test it now in many ways, and the process of securing a record of testing.

Therefore, if you intentionally send various contents, such as biochemistry or viruses, not balloon contents, you can see that military means in a way that can cause great damage by changing timers, balloon sizes, and contents. [Anchor] Regardless of our military's response plan, it's not a way to explode in the air, is it? It's a method of collecting it after the drop is over, do you think this level of response is sufficient?

[Hongmin]
In fact, there's a way to intercept or drop it in time, and there's a way to stop it in the air or neutralize it in the air through an airplane, and using these military means, if it's near the city center, so to speak, if it's flying in the metropolitan area, there can be a lot of unpredictable situations. So, if you shoot, there is a possibility that actions related to interception may appear as damage to residents. And this may be the cost-effectiveness aspect, and the question of how effective it is to mobilize various military means seems to require various considerations. Therefore, it is difficult to find a customized response to this right now. Therefore, it is a garbage balloon situation where the damage to our people is very likely to be severe. Then, it can be stopped by military means, but in the current situation, it is difficult to customize the response itself.

[Anchor]
I see. Let's stop here. So far, I've been with Hong Min, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute for Unification. Thank you.