(EDITORIAL from the Korea Times on Sept. 22)

Protracted impasse
Both Koreas should try to find points of contact
Relations between the two Koreas hit a new low Sunday when Pyongyang's official propaganda machine called President Lee Myung-bak names ??? again.

The Rodong Shinmun, commenting on President Lee's call for prudence in building
dormitories for North Korean workers in Gaeseong Industrial Complex, described it
as an "anti-unification quibble, which can be uttered only by traitors opposing
reconciliation and unity between the two Koreas."
The isolationist regime began to use abusive language regarding the South Korean
President when it became clear the new, conservative leader was unlikely to
follow the policies and agreements made by his two liberal predecessors.
Lee's remarks, which expressed concerns about conflicts between labor and
management regarding mass lodging and boarding, can sound to North Koreans as
being both anti-labor and anti-North. Moreover, the construction of dormitories
and new roads for North Korean workers was one of the key agreements between two
Koreas last year to finish the first phase of the joint industrial park project.
Still the North's harsh rhetoric, which also described President Lee as "the main
culprit driving inter-Korean relationship into a breakdown," makes one recall the
Cold War years of the 1970s and '80s.
It may also be Pyongyang's well-calculated move to demonstrate its inner unity
despite the ill health of its "Dear Leader," with the reclusive regime recently
claiming it "no longer wished to be removed from the U.S. terrorism blacklist."
What's happening in North Korea is hard to know for outsiders, let alone what's
occurring in the minds of the North Korean leadership. The communist regime can
either continue forever in the same state or collapse. In any case, South Korea's
inaction is the least desirable state imaginable, as it only keeps Seoul in a
perennial tug-of-war at best or at worst throws it into total chaos.
It is natural for a newly elected government to review a predecessor's policies
and even change priorities. But throwing away all old policies and principles
like scraps of papers, particularly when they are promises with other governments
is problematic in terms of diplomatic continuity.
The Lee administration might have found it hard to continue with all of the
summit agreements made between former President Roh Moo-hyun and North Korean
leader Kim Jong-il, both because of the North's nuclear programs and because of
the enormous cost needed to put the accords into action.
Still, President Lee and his aides didn't even bother to select what was feasible
and what not, simply discarding the entire document, as U.S. President George W.
Bush did eight years ago in his "anything- but-Clinton" turnaround, and in doing
so wasted most of his tenure by allowing Pyongyang to make several nuclear bombs.

It was regrettable in this regard that the Unification Ministry's latest report,
which said it would cost 14 trillion won to implement the "Oct. 4 agreement"
seemed to seek excuses for not respecting the inter-Korean accord made a year
ago. The problem is Seoul made the decision to ignore summit accords first, and
only belatedly told why.
South and North Korea cannot restore their relationship without trust, and trust
cannot be made without cooperation and exchange. From the most objective point of
view, it has been the situation in South Korea that has changed, therefore, Seoul
needs to be more positive in breaking the impasse.
It's regrettable the prospects appear not so bright, however, particularly if Lee
revealed part of his real intentions with his comment on the Gaeseong dormitory.
(END)