calendar>>July 27. 2011 Juch 100
Conclusion of Peace Agreement Called for: KCNA Commentary
Pyongyang, July 27 (KCNA) -- 58 years have passed since the Armistice Agreement (AA) was signed on July 27, 1953.

The fragile state of armistice has always barred the peaceful solution of the Korean issue and seriously hamstrung the efforts to realize the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula for several decades.

When a historic review is made of the agreements related to armistice, all the agreements concluded among countries during World War I were replaced by peace agreements in a matter of six months to two years and those signed as regards the end of World War II were also replaced by peace agreements (peace treaties) in a matter of several years or within ten years at the longest.

However, the AA, the leftover of the Korean War, has lasted for nearly six decades.

The state of armistice is like a time bomb threatening the security in East Asia and the rest of the Asia-Pacific region.

There is nowhere else in the world such region fraught with danger where huge strategic armed forces are deployed and military actions such as joint war exercises are daily occurrences.

The perilous nature of ceasefire on the peninsula is evidenced by hundreds of meetings of the Military Armistice Commission held to handle hundreds of thousands of cases of violation of the AA.

The touch-and-go situation always prevailing in the Asia-Pacific region, the strategic center in the new century, neither conforms with the trend of the era towards peace nor does anyone good.

This abnormal situation should not be allowed to go on in every aspect.

It is necessary to end the ceasefire between the DPRK and the U.S. and establish a peace-keeping mechanism in order to put an end to the confrontation and conflicts and ensure durable peace and security on the Korean Peninsula, the biggest hotspot of the region.

Concluding a peace agreement may be the first step for settling the Korean issue including the denuclearization.

A series of negotiations including the six-party talks for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula underwent twists and turns in the past due to the failure to properly understand that the establishment of a peace-keeping mechanism is essential for settling the Korean issue.

It is impossible to wipe out the mutual distrust nor is it possible to achieve a smooth solution of the issue of denuclearization as long as there persists the hostile relationship between the DPRK and the U.S., the signatories to the AA, the relationship in which they level their guns at each other. This is the lesson drawn from the process of the six-party talks.

It is the keynote of the DPRK's proposal for concluding a peace agreement to scrap the armistice mechanism which has systematically deteriorated the hostile relations between the two countries, build confidence and step up the process of denuclearization.

Being a curtain-raiser to confidence-building, the conclusion of a peace agreement will provide an institutional guarantee for wiping out the bilateral distrust and opening the relations of mutual respect and equality.

No country has heavier responsibility than the U.S. in replacing the AA by a peace agreement.

The AA is the leftover of the Cold War through which the U.S. sought to impose the American-style view on value and system on other countries. The U.S. has so far interfered in the internal affairs of Korea as the direct party concerned of the AA and exercised the right to military control over south Korea.

The U.S. should fulfill its historic responsibility for ensuring peace on the peninsula.

The peninsula is now standing at the crossroads of detente and vicious cycle of escalating tension. This situation requires the parties concerned not to miss the opportunity of dialogue but make a bold decision to deal with the fundamental issue.

The issue of ensuring peace on the peninsula will find a smooth solution if the U.S. properly judges the changed situation and the trend of developing history and make a bold political decision to bring about a switchover in its DPRK policy to meet its interests and the aspiration of the world peace-loving people.

Doing so is not an issue of one party giving any benefit to the other party or making reward to it. This would be a fruitful political issue of doing the DPRK and the U.S. and the international community good and making a substantial contribution to the development of peace in the world.

How to approach the issue of concluding a peace agreement will be a touchstone showing whether the U.S. styling itself an Asia-Pacific nation has the will to play a responsible role in solving urgent pending political problems in the region including the denuclearization of the peninsula or not.

Copyright (C) KOREA NEWS SERVICE(KNS) All Rights Reserved.