By Kim Hyo-jin
All presidential candidates said Thursday that they are opposed to a possible pre-emptive strike by the United States on North Korea amid escalating tension on the Korean Peninsula.
In their first televised debate, the contenders stated they would actively discourage President Donald Trump’s administration from using a military option to halt the North’s nuclear weapons and missile development.
When asked about what his response would be if the U.S. informed him that a strike was imminent, Moon Jae-in of the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) said, “I would tell the U.S. President that a pre-emptive attack without South Korea’s consent is not an option and stop him from doing so.”
He continued: “I would follow this by putting our armed forces on emergency alert, declaring a state of emergency, and persuading Pyongyang to cease provocations through a hot line while asking for Beijing’s cooperation.”
Moon’s rival Ahn Cheol-soo of the People’s Party agreed on reaching out to both the U.S. and China. “I would prioritize calling leaders of the U.S. and China. I’d say there should be no war to Trump, my Wharton School alumni, and ask Xi Jinping to pressure the North,” he said.
Ahn said he would also issue a statement urging the North to halt its military threats immediately while enhancing combat readiness.
Hong Joon-pyo of the conservative Liberty Korea Party (LKP) said, “What is most important is deterring the U.S. from launching an attack through close consultation. And the same goes for China.” But he also stressed the need to put the armed forces on immediate alert in readiness for a possible battle.
Sim Sang-jung of the progressive Justice Party said she would release a statement to the nation first, and if needed, send special envoys to the U.S. and China while seeking emergency countermeasures for public safety. Yoo Seong-min of the Bareun Party said a U.S. pre-emptive attack could only occur after South Korea had fully prepared its military; though it should be prevented in the first place.
The debate, hosted by local broadcaster SBS and the Journalists Association of Korea, drew much attention as it was one of the few chances to learn the candidates’ policies in the build-up to the May 9 presidential election.
With no clear winner in the presidential race so far, the candidates of the five political parties engaged in a heated face-to-face showdown.
Minor contenders repeatedly attacked frontrunners Moon and Ahn over their shifting positions on the deployment of a U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery here.
Ahn, who had remained skeptical of the anti-missile system, said recently it would be “irresponsible” for any presidential candidate to talk about the withdrawal of the battery as it is being deployed based on a pledge between the U.S. and Korean governments.
Yoo and Sim accused Ahn of not being qualified to be a presidential candidate for his flip-flopping on a critical security issue.
Ahn responded by saying: “Since early this year, I have argued our position should change according to the situation. I changed mine as the situation has changed with the THAAD battery now being deployed, China launching economic retaliations, and the North engaging in increased provocations.”
Yoo also pushed Moon on being ambiguous over THAAD, arguing it had allowed room for Beijing to roll out economic retaliations against Korean businesses.
Though Moon earlier said he would push ahead with the installation of the system if the North’s military threats continued to escalate, he reiterated his original stance that the issue should be handed over to the new administration.
“I believe in the possibility of either deployment or withdrawal, but we should let the next government deal with it,” Moon said. “It is a defensive weapon with limitations. A more ideal approach is necessary to terminate the North’s nuclear programs. Such efforts should come first.”
More televised debates are scheduled for April 19 on KBS, April 21 on JTBC, and April 23, 28 and May 2 organized by the National Election Commission.