This “sacred” topic for North and South Koreans is in the epicenter of international attention again.

There was a time when the northerners were more initiative on this issue, and the southerners were apprehensive about “communization” from the North. Now, in a radical shift of the economic power factor in favor of South Korea, according to many experts, North Korea is concerned more about self-preservation than about global projects of reunification.

However, in recent years this problem has sounded very loudly again. This time Seoul is playing a leading part.

Interested readers remember, that one of the stated priorities of South Korea’s current government has been the task of creating trust between North and South. However, three years later, analysts decided that this target has been replaced in practice by the policy of forcing the union through the acceleration of “collapse and regime change” in North Korea. Today, most of the discussion in South Korea centers has the topic what and how Seoul should do after the reunification: how to repair the destroyed economy, which principles (South Korean or international) should guide the legal aspect of the “attached” territories and how to carry out justice against the “criminal” leadership of the current North Korea.

Many researchers think this statement to be, at least, a premature attempt to “cook a hare before catching him”. However, this is the reality of the current discourse of the South Korean political elite.

Back in March, 2014 the President of South Korea, Park Geun-hye, being in Dresden, said in a keynote speech, where on the background of seemingly attractive proposals for Pyongyang the idea of reunification was gradually carried out and was based on “the German version”, so the reunification of Korea by absorption of the North by the South (and in the Korean language version of the speech the term “absorption” was clearly stated). Dresden itself, which is located in the absorbed the German Democratic Republic, was chosen to host a keynote speech by Park Geun-hye for a reason.

Another confirmation of this phenomenon is the global “Eurasian initiative”, announced by the President of South Korea, Ms. Park Geun-hye in November 2013. Obviously, this initiative is a new mega project, which is designed for a much wider area than just East Asia.

However, the analysis of the “Eurasian initiative” through the prism of this article’s topic makes it clear that the second main goal of this concept is the target – “Let’s achieve peace and prosperity of Eurasia by the opening up and nuclear disarmament of North Korea.”

According to the Speaker of the South Korean government, “the main purpose of the mega project is the creation of “a giant wave” of peace and prosperity in Eurasian societies, which will arise in Europe, Southwest Asia and the Middle East as a reason for the restructuring, opening up and renunciation of nuclear weapons by North Korea as well as the improvement of human rights in the North. We can use the Eurasian countries as a lever to persuade North Korea. However, if Pyongyang refuses, we will increase the pressure on North Korea – this is where the line of Eurasian prosperity breaks out – to connect the Eurasian line with North Korea by force. Can Pyongyang stop the “locomotive” of Eurasian society which is the fundamental revolution of world history?

It is not surprising that in Pyongyang, this proposal was met negatively. In September 2014, at the UN General Assembly in New York, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of North Korea, Lee Soo-young, gave a detailed response to the “peace” initiative of the South, recalling the concept of reunification of Korea formulated by Kim Il Sung – a union based on the creation of “the Federal Republic of Korea.”

Today, this debate between the officials of the two Koreas continues to gain momentum.

High-ranking South Korean officials constantly voice confidence in the inevitable reunification of Korea in the near future, under the terms of South Korea. The South Korean Reunification Minister, Ryu Gil-jae, speaking in Washington, D.C. at the end of 2014, stated: “… for the reunification of Korea, we need ‘three wheels’: one of them – improvement of inter-Korean relations; the second – formation of a consensus on reunification within South Korean society (because, as the minister admits, now, for many South Koreans, especially young people, the reunification is not the highest priority). “

But the most important ‘wheel’ is working closely with the international community, since its participation, and especially that of the United States in the preparation of reunification is necessary and even essential. It is thanks to their support that the reunification of Germany became possible. “I am convinced that if the United States will firmly support and assist in the reunification of Korea, our dreams of the reunification of Korea will become a reality.”

North Korean scientists also gave their response. In the February, 2015 report by the Institute for Disarmament and Peace of the Foreign Ministry of North Korea, the necessity of an objective evaluation of the realities that exist on the Korean peninsula is emphasized. And today they are such that “for 70 years, the two Koreas have been developing along different trajectories determined by opposing ideologies and political systems. At the same time, neither of the Korean sides is willing to give up their own ideology and political system. Therefore, the desire of one party to impose its system on the other is sure to lead to war and the involvement of neighboring states in it. Given the characteristics of the military capabilities of both the Koreas and their neighbors, the result of attempts to implement such a scenario would be a “catastrophic Armageddon”, with which the tragic consequences of the Korean War of the 1950s, the current military conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine would pale by comparison”.

On the basis of the conducted analysis the North Korean author concludes that the coexistence of the two systems is the only realistic way for the reunification of Korea. The differences between the systems are not an “Achilles heel”, but rather the reason for the necessity of their coexistence. If the two Korean sides were to reunite in one state and begin to respect the unique features of their respective political systems, then the inter-Korean cooperation could develop smoothly and achieving the ultimate goal of reunification would cease to be an issue.

At the same time, Pyongyang is convinced, that in the course of the integration process the two Korean sides “should not blindly copy the experience of other countries, but form the structure corresponding to the realities and specifics of Korea… then there will be no need to use other people’s brains, seek permission from external forces or their approval of our decision on how to merge.”

Here, we believe it is appropriate to pause and give the reader an opportunity to assess the current approaches of both Koreas to the actual problem.

Alexander Vorontsov, PhD in History, Head of the Korea and Mongolia Department at the Institute of Oriental Studies RAN, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

In this context, the North Koreans took unprecedented steps to demonstrate their intention to strengthen bilateral relations with Russia within the framework of the holiday events. The program of large scale athletic and artistic representations of “Arirang” began with a scene symbolizing friendship between our peoples, accompanied by a slogan on the “live” platform: “Korean-Russian friendship – From generation to generation”. Even more significant was the episode during the military parade, when (for the first time in history!) the North Koreans acknowledged the participation of Soviet troops in the Korean War with gratitude. A large banner with the image of a Korean soldier, a Chinese volunteer, and a pilot with a Slavic appearance in a helmet in profile was driven along the stands on a truck. The caption under the banner read: “Thanks to all who fought together with us”.

At a reception hosted on the same day, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK, Pak Ui-Chun, said directly to his Russian guest: “Did you see the symbol at the parade?… tell S.V. Lavrov, that we ‘aren’t hiding anything'”.

It appears that this message was heard in Moscow. Since 2014, there has been a flurry of bilateral contacts at a high level. In January, the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme People’s Assembly of the DPRK (second in command of the state), Kim Yong-Nam, traveled to Russia to participate in the opening of the Olympic Games in Sochi and had conversations with Russian President V.V. Putin and Russia’s other leaders. In March, Pyongyang was visited by president of Tatarstan, R.N Minnihanov, and Minister of Development for the Far East of the Russian Federation, A.S. Galushka. All these visits were very fruitful, and held in an unprecedentedly open and friendly atmosphere. At the end of April, a visit to Pyongyang is expected from the Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, the Plenipotentiary Representative of the Russian Federation, and the President in the Far Eastern Federal District of the Russian Federation, Yu. P. Trutneva.

Russia has specific plans to actively expand its economic presence in North Korea. And this is one of the reasons for Moscow’s genuine interest in reducing tensions on the peninsula, which it attempts to affect not only through words, but through deeds.

One of the vectors of intermediation efforts by Russia is the promotion of three major trilateral (RF-DPRK-RoK) infrastructure projects: unite the railroads in both Koreas with the Transiberian, construct gas pipelines and power lines from from Primorye to South Korea through North Korea, in which Russia has already invested significant funds. Moscow is not inclined to underestimate the serious interest of Pyongyang in broadening Russia’s economic presence, including as a means for reducing its one-sided over-reliance on China. In this regard, Moscow also realizes that this “window of opportunity for Russian business will not be open forever, and may quickly “slam” in the event of a change in the foreign policy situation and the large scale arrival of major economic players such as the USA, Japan, RoK, and EU in North Korea. After all, there is considerable evidence that even now during a time of harsh economic sanctions imposed by the governments of the above-mentioned countries against Pyongyang, the representatives of their business communities are aggressively seeking and finding diverse opportunities to implement their business projects in North Korea.

For this reason, we are pleased to note that one of the successful efforts of the Russian Federation in this area took place in February, 2014 when a group of businessmen from South Korea visited, representatives from major companies: Hyundai, the steel giant Posco, and the railroad company Korail at the North Korean port of Rajin, where it successfully operates the Russian – North Korean joint venture RasonKonTrans has completed the construction of a modern railway from the Russia – DPRK border to this port and the reconstruction of one of its piers. It is noteworthy that this visit by Southerners to the North was conducted while the law adopted by the previous South Korean administration of President Lee Myung-bak that forbids any trade or economic collaboration with the North was in effect. Regarding this unprecedented trip by Southerners to the North, the Ministry of Unification of the RoK issued a special comment that this contact did not represent a repeal of Lee Myung-bak’s law, but simply an exception to it. Nevertheless, the meeting in Rajin was fruitful, and this line of inter-Korean cooperation has gained serious prospects for development.

In this connection, we must not forget the important and constructive role played by Russia in promoting a dialog between North and South Korea. This was demonstrated during the visit by Russian President V.V. Putin to the RoK in November, 2013, when a memorandum of intent was signed by the above-mentioned champions of South Korean businesses wishing to join the activities of the Russian-North Korean joint enterprise in Rajin aimed at transforming this point into a powerful intermodal transshipment hub, a “Rotterdam in Eastern Asia”. This step, as we see, has continued and has good prospects for further development.

There is another area where Russia has been called to play an important role – the course for the revival of six-party negotiations on the nuclear issue in the Korean peninsula and the search for realistic solutions to existing challenges in this area. For the most pressing of these, read on.

As is well known, at this stage the DPRK decided to concentrate on the development of nuclear energy based on uranium enrichment and the use of light-water reactors. The construction of an experimental LWR is close to complete. In the opinion of domestic and western nuclear physicists, the qualifications of Korean specialists should allow them to complete these projects. Nevertheless, there is the problem of the technical precision and nuclear safety of these facilities.

The Northerners build them solely on the basis of their own intellectual and scientific-technical base, fully isolated from the outside world, without any professional consultation or observation

from abroad, i.e., essentially “reinventing the wheel”. As a result, the compliance of the constructed nuclear facilities with international standards of safety, the requirements of which have been substantially increased after the tragedy in Fukushima, cannot help but be held in serious doubt.

The prospect of new nuclear power facilities appearing in close proximity to their own borders, facilities at which the parameters and standards of nuclear safety are completely unknown and the degree of safety is highly questionable, inevitably invokes understandable and serious concern, especially in the states neighboring the DPRK, including Russia.

This challenge presents Moscow with the necessity of generating ideas and initiating appropriate action for the purpose of reformatting and “repackaging” the current system of international sanctions on the DPRK’s nuclear weapons program with the aim of achieving a resolution on cooperation of competent international organizations in the field of peaceful nuclear energy with this country. Similar precedents have been set in global practice. Pakistan, despite not being a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), successfully collaborated with the IAEA in the areas mentioned.

Russia is keenly interested in ensuring that the construction of a LWR in North Korea is done under international monitoring and in compliance with international norms of nuclear safety. As is well known, Rosatom is a recognized global leader in this area, and could play a fundamental role.

It seems that despite all the legal and ideological complexity of solving this problem in the UK Security Council, common sense and similar concerns for their own safety may help Russia to find a common ground with the other neighbors of the DPRK: China, Japan, and the RoK.

American scholars have also indicated that this problem is pertinent. One such scholar, the director of the Nautilus Institute, Peter Hayes, confirmed that the non-military nuclear potential of Pyongyang, namely this power facility, presents a real threat to regional security and demands the constructive attention of the international community.

Russia’s core interests, including the tasks of strengthening national security, especially in the Far East, require that Moscow continue its independent and active policy regarding the Korea issue, which raises the question about the integrity of the search for new unconventional solutions that facilitate a change of mindset by the international community, primarily the prevailing alarmist stance taken by Washington, and its current passive policy on Korea from the point of view of diplomacy.

Alexander Vorontsov, PhD in History, Head of the Korea and Mongolia Department at the Institute of Oriental Studies RAN, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.