By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter
The slated second inter-Korean summit is sparking both hopes and concerns over cross-border relations and North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
Most North Korea watchers here anticipate the meeting between President Roh Moo-hyun and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang could serve as a catalyst for resolving the nuclear impasse with the six-party disarmament talks recently on solid track, as well as further upgrading inter-Korean relations.
But skepticism is also high that the meeting will likely end up as merely a ``political show'' for the liberal-minded Roh administration to garner public support ahead of the December presidential election, without tangible results for denuclearization on the peninsula.
``The summit should be used to push North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions and agenda items should be related to that issue. That's the bottom line,'' Nam Sung-wook, a professor of North Korean studies at Korea University in Seoul, told The Korea Times.
``It should not be one where the North reiterates its decades-long demands such as the abolishment of South Korea's (anti-communist) National Security Law, the pullout of U.S. troops from South Korea and the redrawing of the western Northern Limit Line (NLL),'' he said.
The professor said Pyongyang appears to have agreed on the summit as part of a political calculation aimed at stopping the conservative Grand National Party (GNP) from winning the Dec. 19 presidential election.
``Pyongyang has nothing to lose through the summit, and in fact, the summit is necessary to fan anti-GNP sentiment in the South and support for presidential hopefuls from the governing camp who advocate engagement with the North,'' Nam said. ``The North is also likely to use the summit and inter-Korean relations as leverage to gain more in the six-party talks.''
He said the meeting is expected to help improve cross-border relations to a certain level but would likely fall short of dealing with the nuclear issue seriously as the United States has the de facto key to solving the problem under a February disarmament-for-assistance deal, such as the removal of North Korea from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism.
Other critics raise suspicion if there was an under-the-table deal between the two Koreas over the summit as they did for the first inter-Korean summit in 2000. The then Kim Dae-jung government was later found to have paid the Kim Jong-il regime hundreds of billions won for the summit.
Professor Kim Yong-hyun of Dongguk University in Seoul was optimistic. He said the summit is likely to give fresh momentum to the ongoing denuclearization process and the discussion of replacing the armistice on the peninsula with a permanent peace treaty as well, in line with the relatively smooth implementation of the Feb. 13 nuclear deal.
``The security conditions on the peninsula and in Northeast Asia have changed much since 2000,'' Kim said. ``The two Koreas seem to have shared views on the need for establishing a new inter-Korean formula to replace the June 15 inter-Korean declaration,'' Kim said.
The February accord requires Pyongyang to shut down and seal its main nuclear reactor in Yongbyon and submit a complete list of its nuclear programs this year, in return for economic aid and political concessions.
North Korea recently closed the plutonium-producing reactor and allowed international nuclear inspectors to conduct onsite inspections to verify the shutdown under the first phase of the ``action-for-action'' deal.
In return, South Korea has shipped the first 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil to the North, and participating nations are discussing additional economic assistance equivalent to 950,000 tons of heavy oil corresponding to North's next denuclearization steps.
Kim said the summit could help reduce military tensions between the two Koreas, and furthermore serve as a stepping-stone to hold a four-way summit among the leaders from the two Koreas, the United States and China this year for talks on ending the 1950-53 Korean War and signing a peace treaty on the peninsula as agreed under the February accord.
The two Koreas are technically still at war as the Korean war ended with an armistice signed by the U.S.-led United Nations Command, North Korea and China.
The Seoul government has been trying to take the initiative in future talks on the establishment of a peace treaty, while the North is reluctant to address the issue as the South did not sign the armistice.
Cheong Wa Dae said it has yet to iron out agenda items for the summit, but officials expect the meeting will help revive the rapprochement of the 2000 meeting that led to reduced military tension and unprecedented political, economic and social exchanges.
``Like the 2000 summit, after which the South-North relations developed to a different level, we expect the fresh summit to produce big opportunities in many areas that have been stalled, particularly political and military areas,'' said Kim Nam-shik, spokesman of the Unification Ministry.
A wide range of economic cooperation projects, beyond the current inter-Korean industrial complex in Gaeseong and the Mount Geumgang tourism program, will be addressed during the three-day meeting, officials said.
Critics, however, say Roh may not be able to offer what North Korea wants since the summit comes about six months before his term ends.
Among items on the agenda is South Korea's offer to provide two million kilowatts of electricity to the North, they said. Former Unification Minister Chung Dong-young made the proposal in June last year.