SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
korean war
Forget the World Cup—the Most Important Soccer Match Is Happening in Korea This Week
A rare inter-Korean women’s soccer match offers something the Korean Peninsula desperately needs: hope.
May 18, 2026
As the world begins turning its attention toward this summer’s FIFA World Cup, an even more meaningful soccer event is taking place this week in Korea.
Pyongyang-based Naegohyang Women’s Football Club faces Suwon FC Women in the semifinals of the Asian Football Confederation Women’s Champions League in South Korea—marking the first time North Korea has sent athletes to South Korea to compete since 2018. Some 200 South Korean civic groups have formed a 3,000-strong cheering squad for the historic inter-Korean match, and South Korea’s government set aside 300 million won ($202,000) in government funds to support the cheering squad.
For many, this may sound like a niche sports story. But Korea peace activists recognize this as one of the most hopeful openings in years.
For decades, inter-Korean relations have been defined internationally through the language of crisis: missile tests, nuclear threats, military drills, and sanctions. Diplomacy, meanwhile, has too often been treated as politically risky or naïve.
As Korean peace advocates, we know that openings are few and far between, and we cannot afford to miss this window of opportunity. Soccer may be a spectator sport, but people-led peacebuilding efforts require us all to participate.
But history tells a different story.
Time and again, engagement between North and South Korea has succeeded in reducing tensions and creating opportunities for dialogue. The last major period of inter-Korean diplomacy began not with weapons negotiations, but with athletes marching together.
At the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, athletes from North and South Korea entered the opening ceremony side by side under the Korean Unification Flag after a series of talks between then-South Korean President Moon Jae-in and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The image captured global attention and helped catalyze one of the most diplomatically active periods on the peninsula in years, including inter-Korean summits at Panmunjom and unprecedented US-North Korea diplomacy.
Soccer, in particular, has long served as a bridge. North and South Korean men’s and women’s teams have faced each other numerous times since 1946—even before the Korean War officially began. North Korea also sent women footballers to compete in South Korea during the 2014 Asian Games, and North Korean athletes last traveled south in 2018 for an inter-Korean table tennis event. In their 1996 World Cup run, North Korea men’s team challenged Cold War stereotypes as they made a stunning upset victory over Italy’s team, an episode explored in the documentary The Game of Their Lives.
These exchanges allow ordinary Koreans to encounter one another—and the global community—outside the framework of hostility and forever war. Moments like this have the power to catalyze efforts for change.
As Korean American women advocating for peace in Korea, we have seen firsthand how engagement efforts can break through where militarized approaches have failed us repeatedly.
The Korean War never officially ended. Americans are often shocked to learn that the war was only temporarily suspended with a ceasefire armistice in 1953, making it the United States’ longest-running overseas conflict. For over 70 years, divided families and everyday people have borne the costs of ongoing conflict.
Relentless sanctions and isolation have failed to produce denuclearization, reconciliation, or lasting stability. Instead, they have entrenched mistrust, division, and forever war. In recent years, discussion about North Korea in the United States has become trapped between cynicism and alarmism.
This has all culminated in today’s bleak political landscape: Inter-Korean relations are deeply frozen. North Korea has renounced reunification, and under South Korea’s former administration, Seoul increasingly labeled the North a principal enemy. Communication has stalled, tensions have escalated, and diplomacy has all but disappeared.
But political landscapes can change quickly. Following the impeachment of far-right leader Yoon Suk Yeol and the election of Lee Jae-myung, Seoul has increasingly called for renewed inter-Korean dialogue with Pyeongyang, and Pyeongyang has indicated some willingness to engage.
That is why this week’s soccer match matters.
Of course, no single game or summit will solve the security crisis in Korea. But the game demonstrates the importance of engagement—especially during periods of deep political freeze. And importantly, this moment comes through women. Women have consistently been at the forefront of peacebuilding efforts on the peninsula—from family reunification advocacy to feminist peace movements calling for a formal end to the Korean War.
These developments raise the question: Will Washington continue defaulting to the same failed approach of maximum pressure and isolation, or will it support the growing desire among US voters who want an end to forever war and peace with North Korea?
As Korean peace advocates, we know that openings are few and far between, and we cannot afford to miss this window of opportunity. Soccer may be a spectator sport, but people-led peacebuilding efforts require us all to participate.
Policymakers should build upon this moment to support initiatives that lower tensions, remove the threat of nuclear war, and expand opportunities for contact between ordinary people—including cultural exchanges, athletic competitions, humanitarian cooperation, and renewed inter-Korean dialogue. This includes ending the US travel ban to North Korea, which is up for renewal this August.
Peace is not built in a single summit or event, but gradually through relationships, trust building, and repeated acts of engagement. While this week’s match in Suwon will last only 90 minutes, if we are wise enough to recognize its significance, its meaning could endure far longer.
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Navy SEALs 'Slaughtered' Civilians During Botched 2019 North Korea Mission
Congress was reportedly never informed about the covert attempt by the first Trump administration to plant a listening device in North Korea during high-stakes nuclear negotiations.
Sep 05, 2025
US Navy SEALs shot dead a number of civilians during a botched secret mission to plant a listening device inside North Korea during tense nuclear negotiations between the first Trump administration and the government of Kim Jong Un in 2019, The New York Times reported Friday.
Dave Philipps and Matthew Cole reported for the Times that President Donald Trump personally approved the covert operation, which was tasked to SEAL Team 6's Red Squadron, the same unit that assassinated Osama bin Laden. Although the elite sailors rehearsed the nighttime mission for months, things fell apart when a small fishing boat appeared out of the dark in what the SEALs thought was a deserted area.
"Flashlights from the bow swept over the water. Fearing that they had been spotted, the SEALs opened fire," wrote Philipps and Cole. "Within seconds, everyone on the North Korean boat was dead. The SEALs retreated into the sea without planting the listening device."
Officials familiar with the mission told the Times that the SEALs then pulled two or three bodies from the boat, punctured the victims' lungs with knives so their bodies would sink, and threw the dead fishers into the sea.
It didn’t “leave them dead.” Navy SEALs slaughtered three innocent people.
[image or embed]
— Daniel Malmer (@malmer.com) September 5, 2025 at 6:10 AM
According to the Times:
The 2019 operation has never been publicly acknowledged, or even hinted at, by the United States or North Korea. The details remain classified and are being reported here for the first time. The Trump administration did not notify key members of Congress who oversee intelligence operations, before or after the mission. The lack of notification may have violated the law...
The aborted SEAL mission prompted a series of military reviews during Mr. Trump's first term. They found that the killing of civilians was justified under the rules of engagement, and that the mission was undone by a collision of unfortunate occurrences that could not have been foreseen or avoided. The findings were classified.
It is not known whether or how much North Korea's government knew about the mission. While Trump's erstwhile untried tactic of direct negotiations with Kim averted escalation of the 2018-19 standoff, the high-profile summits between the two leaders yielded no substantial progress toward denuclearization or a peace treaty.
The US and North Korea are technically still at war. Between 1950-53 US forces killed an estimated 20% of all North Koreans—around 1.9 million men, women, and children—according to Gen. Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay, who served as strategic air commander during the war after overseeing World War II firebombing raids on Japanese cities that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Keep ReadingShow Less
This New Dawn for Korean Democracy Must Center Feminist Peace
As the rising far-right threatens peace, stability, and democracy around the world, Lee Jae-myung and South Korea’s leadership must prioritize and support women’s leadership and peace building.
Jun 04, 2025
This week marks a new dawn for democracy in South Korea. South Koreans have successfully held a snap election, electing Lee Jae-myung as their new president.
The Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung represents a marked shift from former President Yoon Suk Yeol whose surprise martial law declaration last December beset the country with weeks of “insurrection insomnia.” Yoon’s actions upended politics in South Korea with multiple leaders cycled through office in the span of a few weeks. Yoon also fanned the flames of a far right surge in South Korea and exacerbated tensions with North Korea.
In contrast, Lee Jae-myung has pushed for a new approach to North Korea, calling for pragmatic diplomacy and a gradual shift toward peace. Lee’s election offers an opening not only for peace but also for restoring democracy and advancing women’s rights in the country.
As feminist peace activists working in international solidarity, we know that all Korean people deserve to reunite with their family members and live in lands free from landmines and pollution and violence from military bases.
While we celebrate this new dawn for South Korea’s democracy and successful election of a progressive president, feminists recognize that, for the first time in 18 years, none of South Korea’s presidential candidates in this snap election were women, and none—including Lee—placed gender equality at the forefront of their campaigns. Indeed, Lee largely avoided any explicit discussion of gender equality, despite the leadership of young women in ousting Yoon.
If Lee is really to mark a new start to South Korea’s democracy, he must uplift women’s leadership and peace building. No democracy can thrive under toxic patriarchy and militarism. Policies rooted in militarism often shift resources away from policy areas that are critical to the advancement of women and girls. Attacks on democracy and the expansion of militarism threaten women’s rights, and women are more likely to be exposed to gender-based violence during wartime.
That is why, in the week leading up to the snap election, and on the 10-year anniversary of Women Cross DMZ’s founding crossing, I brought a delegation of feminist delegates to march with hundreds of Korean and international women outside the largest overseas U.S. military base in Pyeongtaek, South Korea to call for an end to the 75-year-old Korean War.
Our international delegation included diasporic peace leaders, including Afghan American, Indigenous, Korean American, and South Asian feminists—a powerful act of solidarity recognizing that the ongoing Korean War is a global war. (The U.S.-led United Nations command in Korea is a multinational force with combat forces and contributions from over 20 countries worldwide.)
Our solidarity trek was more timely than ever—and showed how war, militarism, democracy, and women’s rights are deeply intertwined.
Many people don’t know that the Korean War never technically ended but was only halted by the signing of an armistice in 1953. This unresolved state of war has not only kept Korean families separated but has resulted in the buildup of troops and weaponry on both sides of the Demilitarized Zone that separates North and South Korea, ready to reengage in conflict at a moment’s notice. Militarism, war, and division of the peninsula have especially impacted women, who have been leading calls for peace.
The state of war has also shaped South Korean politics throughout history, threatening democracy. Politicians—often backed by the United States—have used the Korean War as justification to maintain power and squash dissent, labeling those who call for peace and democracy “communists” and threats to national security. In December, former President Yoon, who rose to power by courting men who are anti-feminist, declared martial law, accusing the Democratic Party of conducting “anti-state activities” and collaborating with “North Korean communists” to destroy the country. Later, it was revealed that Yoon attempted to bait North Korea into conflict as a pretext for his martial law declaration.
Yoon’s actions were exceptionally brazen, but he was also part of a long line of South Korean authoritarian militaristic leaders. Our international delegation bore witness to this legacy, visiting major sites of South Korean and U.S. militarism: the DMZ, the Civilian Control Zone, Pyeongtaek, Dongducheon, Jeju.
In each place, we learned about the deep scars stemming from decades of war and militarism—including the struggles of Daechuri farmers horrifically brutalized and displaced by state authorities during the expansion of U.S. military base Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek. We also met with Gangjeong villagers protesting the South Korean naval base destroying their ways of life, Dongducheon organizers preventing the destruction of “Monkey House,” and sex worker organizers in Yongjugol fighting for their livelihoods and homes.
While each struggle differed, what was striking was how at each place, people described that state authorities spent millions policing them, surveilling them, wiping out histories, and destroying their homes. They remarked that instead, government officials could have just as easily spent those resources and time on providing social services, healthcare, recognition of history—all the things that actually keep us all safe and secure.
As feminist peace activists working in international solidarity, we know that all Korean people deserve to reunite with their family members and live in lands free from landmines and pollution and violence from military bases.
Given the current attacks on democracy in the United States and across the globe, transnational acts of solidarity are more important than ever. The next generation of South Korean feminist activists say that political leaders must recognize and honor the diversity of the population—including across gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, and racial backgrounds. It is time to imagine a “new democracy”—“not going back to the democracy we used to have.”
Women play crucial roles in changing society from one rooted in militarism to one rooted in peace. Research shows that when women are involved in peace processes, outcomes are more likely to be reached and to last. As the rising far-right threatens peace, stability, and democracy around the world, Lee Jae-myung and South Korea’s leadership must prioritize and support women’s leadership in building sustainable peace.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Return to Diplomacy to Reduce Nuclear Risk in Korea
The U.S. must redirect its focus away from “complete denuclearization” toward first creating an environment in which North Korea will not perceive nuclear weapons as an appropriate response or precaution.
Jul 28, 2023
After seven decades of a state of armistice between the United States and North Korea, tensions remain high on the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea has continued to strengthen its nuclear deterrent, and the United States and South Korea have insisted on pressure-based tactics that have failed for decades to achieve progress toward denuclearization. Because of these failures, North Korea is building up a substantial deterrent that doctrinally prioritizes nuclear warfighting and South Korea’s political discourse is moving pro-nuclear.
The status quo is only escalating tensions and incurring steep fiscal costs, and it must change before things get worse. A step-by-step approach to de-escalation and risk reduction based on mutual trust and transparency will create a more stable environment and forge a path toward peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.
Intensifying Tensions and Arms Race in East Asia
While the exact capabilities of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal are not well known, the nation has made a concerted effort to demonstrate that it possesses both the will and the capability to use nuclear weapons in response to—or in some cases to preempt—aggression from its perceived enemies.
North Korea has shown recent advancements in its nuclear weapons program by testing a new solid-fuel ICBM, the Hwasong-18, and displaying a new warhead, the Hwasan-31. While the exact capabilities and readiness level of this warhead are still unclear, images released by state media suggest this new warhead is meant to be mated with a variety of short-range delivery systems, including cruise missiles and “underwater nuclear-capable attack drones.”
North Korea has also been prioritizing the continued development of its launch platforms, satellite technology, and post-boost vehicle deployment. While there is still much unknown, it is clear that North Korea is improving its nuclear deterrent.
Because North Korea views joint military exercises as rehearsals for war, some researchers compellingly argue that the exercises do not actually deter North Korea.
The heightened number of North Korean missile tests comes against the backdrop of deepening militarization by the United States and South Korea. In March 2023, the United States and South Korean militaries held their largest joint field exercises in five years. In May and June, the two countries conducted live-fire drills near the demilitarized zone border, called “combined annihilation firepower drills,” the largest of their kind. Because North Korea views joint military exercises as rehearsals for war, some researchers compellingly argue that the exercises do not actually deter North Korea. Conversely, North Korea heavily criticizes these exercises and often responds with more missile testing and provocations, which repeats the escalatory cycle.
Additionally, concerns about North Korea’s provocations have led to growing conversations around South Korea’s need for a nuclear arsenal. Recent polling shows more than 70% of the South Korean public support developing nuclear weapons or the United States returning nuclear weapons to South Korea. As South Korean public opinion tends to follow the tone of U.S. policy in the region, we’re seeing a deterrence-first approach from South Korea in reaction to the worsening tensions with North Korea.
The 2023 Washington Declaration between the U.S. and South Korea is an example of this continued focus on deterrence-based actions. The United States agreed to regularly send bombers, aircraft carriers, and other assets to the region, in exchange for South Korea agreeing to not pursue its own nuclear weapons program.
Recently, the USS Kentucky SSBN arrived in Busan, South Korea, marking the first SSBN visit since 1981 and the first time the United States has placed nuclear weapons in South Korea since 1991. These moves eliminate the possibility that North Korea will return to the negotiation table and instead perpetuate the cycle of tit-for-tat military provocations that increase the possibility of escalation—evidenced by the satellite launches and ballistic missile tests North Korea has conducted since the signing of the declaration.
The Status Quo is Not Working
In order to de-escalate rising tensions, the United States should reconsider the status quo policies it has pursued for decades. The current goal of “complete denuclearization” is based on the phrase “complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization,” or CVID, which dates back to the six-party talks that began in 2003. North Korea at the time threatened to cease engagement with the United States if it insisted on pursuing a CVID stance. Nevertheless, the Bush administration demanded “nothing less” than CVID, and efforts at diplomacy and arms control consistently failed to achieve progress.
This insistence (and misunderstanding) on the goal of CVID has continuously prevented the United States from making any progress on deterring or dismantling North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.
North Korea’s nuclear weapons program as it stands today is complex and established—“complete denuclearization” two decades ago meant something very different than it does today, and remains a non-starter for Kim Jong Un.
Today, the United States insists on the two-decades-old stance that was implemented in a context where North Korea had no nuclear weapons and had not even conducted its first nuclear test. Since 2003, North Korea has survived economic hardship and a major leadership transition—contrary to what many thought would happen—while simultaneously pursuing a capable nuclear weapons program that has become an integral aspect of the nation’s culture, economics, and politics. North Korea’s nuclear weapons program as it stands today is complex and established—“complete denuclearization” two decades ago meant something very different than it does today, and remains a non-starter for Kim Jong Un.
After all, Kim Jong Un has made statements specifically about the “irreversibility” of North Korea’s nuclear program and commitment to “never give up its nukes.”
Risk Reduction Must Come First
In September 2022, North Korea codified a new nuclear doctrine that alluded to the potential for delegated launch authority and claimed that its nuclear weapons are prepared to be launched “automatically and immediately” if need be. Because of North Korea’s legitimate security concerns and its significantly inferior conventional capabilities, Kim may view the escalation to nuclear first use—whether preemptive or retaliatory—as a viable strategic option. Prioritizing risk reduction is in the immediate best interest of the United States and its allies.
The United States must redirect its focus away from “complete denuclearization” toward first creating an environment in which North Korea will not perceive nuclear weapons as an appropriate response or precaution. Without approving or accepting North Korea as a nuclear-armed state, the United States can recognize the deterrence dynamic that already exists, which will open the door for engaging in risk-reduction measures that stem from a shared interest in ensuring stability and preventing war. Persisting with the status quo leaves no room for diplomatic pathways that may foster stability and help de-escalate tensions in an imminent security crisis.
De-escalatory measures could also be key steps toward eventual denuclearization. Implementing regularly-used communications channels could help mitigate the potential for misunderstanding or mishap while also being an initial action for re-engagement in arms control discussions. Focusing on confidence-building measures and dialogue could help to build up some level of trust upon which more conversations about transparency can be based.
If the United States can focus on mutual transparency measures and consider North Korea’s security concerns, this would open up space for discussions around loosening North Korea’s grip on its nuclear weapons.
Eventually, regular conversations and exchanges of information could lead to freezing the production of fissile materials or implementing a missile launch moratorium will mitigate the risks of nuclear use while providing momentum for the dismantlement of certain systems or even a no-first-use agreement.
If the United States can focus on mutual transparency measures and consider North Korea’s security concerns, this would open up space for discussions around loosening North Korea’s grip on its nuclear weapons and pulling back the throttle on its weapons testing and deployments.
History has shown that diplomatic approaches decrease provocations on the Korean Peninsula, while pressure-based tactics narrow the space for a viable solution. Both sides have to address mutual security concerns and gain each other’s trust in order to have any hope of moving toward peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.
Keep ReadingShow Less
We Must Finally End the Korean War
While much attention is paid to North Korea’s nuclear program and aggressive rhetoric, Americans also need to understand how the U.S. government’s actions exacerbate tensions—and why we have a critical role to play in ending this war.
Jul 27, 2023
July 27 marked 70 years since the signing of the armistice that halted—but did not end—the Korean War. Since then, the divided Peninsula has been locked in a perpetual state of war that grows ever more dangerous.
In recent weeks, the U.S. has flown nuclear-capable bombers, launched nuclear war planning talks with South Korean officials, and sent a nuclear-capable submarine to South Korea for the first time in 42 years.
This followed the largest-ever live-fire military drills near the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that divides Korea. North Korea has responded with missile tests—and recently threatened nuclear retaliation.
To avert nuclear war and protect our environment, Americans must demand an end to the growing U.S. military presence around the world and rein in our nearly $900 billion military budget.
As a Korean American with family ties to both sides of the DMZ, I know that as long as this war continues, everyday people—Americans as well as Koreans—pay the steepest price. The Korean War inaugurated the U.S. military industrial complex, quadrupled U.S. defense spending, and set the U.S. on a course to become the world’s military police.
While much attention is paid to North Korea’s nuclear program and aggressive rhetoric, Americans also need to understand how the U.S. government’s actions exacerbate tensions—and why we have a critical role to play in ending this war.
To start, we must remember the central role of the U.S. in the Korean War—and just how destructive the fighting was.
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has described the war as an example of what a “successful” U.S. war can “achieve.” Other talking heads have made similar claims, offering the war as a model for how to proceed in Ukraine. This revisionism is dangerous.
The Korean War killed over 4 million people, more than half of them civilians. From 1950 to 1953, the U.S. dropped 32,000 tons of napalm and 635,000 tons of bombs—more than were dropped in the Pacific theater in World War II. The U.S. military showed “next to no concern for civilian casualties,” historian Bruce Cummings notes, burning 80% of North Korea’s cities to the ground.
Even after this mass destruction, the Peninsula is still at war today—with ongoing consequences for Koreans on both sides of the DMZ.
The U.S. has evicted families from their homes in South Korea to build military bases, while chemicals leaking from bases have poisoned local environments and contaminated drinking water. The Biden administration continues to enforce a Trump-era travel ban keeping Korean Americans separated from their loved ones in North Korea, while sanctions hinder the delivery of essential aid to the country.
U.S. taxpayers bankroll this devastation, spending $13.4 billion to maintain 28,500 troops in South Korea between 2016 and 2019.
Unless we act, our communities and environment will suffer devastating consequences as our military presence expands across the Pacific.
For example, the Defense Department recently announced a missile-defense system to be built on Guam, comprising up to 20 sites across the island and billed as a response to “perceived threats from potential adversaries like China and North Korea.” This plan, like many in the past, will destroy precious landscapes.
In Hawai’i, leaking jet fuel from Navy storage tanks has contaminated drinking water for thousands of families. And next year, the U.S. will hold the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC), the largest annual maritime warfare exercise, in the state. Past exercises killed untold scores of marine life.
To avert nuclear war and protect our environment, Americans must demand an end to the growing U.S. military presence around the world and rein in our nearly $900 billion military budget. Our grassroots peace movement continues to grow, leading to the introduction of the Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act (H.R. 1369), which now has nearly 40 co-sponsors.
To end the Korean War, we need individuals with all skill sets—storytellers, community builders, healers, and more—working in concert. We must educate our communities, fight for change, and together build peace in Korea and across the world.
Keep ReadingShow Less
We Must Work for a Ukraine-Russia Cease-Fire ASAP
If history is our guide, negotiations for peace will take weeks, months, or perhaps years just to get Ukraine and its allies to agree on a negotiating strategy.
Jun 14, 2023
Negotiations, cease-fires, armistices, and peace agreements are as old as wars themselves.
Every war ends with some version of one of them.
Wars have been studied endlessly, but lessons learned on how to end those wars have generally been ignored by those conducting the world’s latest conflicts.
To stop the killing in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, people of conscience must do everything we can to make negotiations for a cease-fire become a reality.
To stop the killing in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, people of conscience must do everything we can to make negotiations for a cease-fire become a reality—and that was the purpose of the International Summit for Peace in Ukraine held in Vienna, Austria, June 10-11, 2023. Over 300 persons from 32 countries attended the conference and participated in the robust program to discuss how to create conditions for a cease-fire and ultimately an agreement to stop the killing. (The websites for the International Peace Bureau and the Peace in Ukraine summit were hacked the day after the conference but should be up and running soon.)
History Reveals That Negotiations for a Cease-Fire, Armistice, and Peace Take a Long Time
If history is our guide, negotiations for peace will take weeks, months, or perhaps years, to get Ukraine and its allies to agree on a negotiating strategy—and even longer to come to an agreement with Russia after negotiations begin.
Even if all parties—Ukraine, Russia, and the U.S. and NATO—would agree to negotiations tomorrow, and if the talks would ultimately succeed, it could possibly be months or years before the killing would end. That’s why negotiations must begin NOW!
History gives us an important insight into negotiations during a war and what we might expect to end today’s extremely dangerous international violence.
Negotiations for Peace on the Korean Peninsula and in Vietnam
In the case of the Korean armistice finally signed 70 years ago on July 27, 1953, 575 meetings between North Korea, China, the U.S., and South Korea were required over two years from 1951 to 1953 to finalize the nearly 40 pages of the agreement. During those two years, millions of Koreans, 500,000 Chinese, 35,000 U.S., and tens of thousands of U.N. Command soldiers were killed.
Fifteen years later, U.S. and North Vietnamese representatives met in Paris on May 10, 1968 to begin peace negotiations, the first time negotiators from both nations met face-to-face. Formal negotiations opened three days later, but immediately came to a standstill.
Five years after the 1968 meeting, on January 27, 1973, the “Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam,” otherwise known the Paris Peace Accords, was signed by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the Republic of Vietnam, the Provisional Revolutionary Government (Viet Cong), and the United States.
The Paris Peace Accords officially ended U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, although the majority of U.S. troops would not leave until August 1973 and the fighting between North and South Vietnam continued until April 30, 1975.
The Paris Peace Accords officially ended U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, although the majority of U.S. troops would not leave until August 1973 and the fighting between North and South Vietnam continued until April 30, 1975, when North Vietnamese Army (NVA) tanks rolled through the gate of the Presidential Palace in Saigon, South Vietnam, effectively ending the war. Millions of Vietnamese and tens of thousands of U.S. military were killed during the years of negotiations.
We know much about the lead-up to negotiations to end the U.S. war on Vietnam.
In a nationally televised speech on March 31,1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that he was “taking the first step to de-escalate the conflict” by halting the bombing of North Vietnam (except in the areas near the DMZ) and that the United States was prepared to send representatives to any forum to seek a negotiated end to the war.
Johnson followed this declaration with the surprising news that he did not intend to seek reelection that year.
Three days later Hanoi announced that it was prepared to talk to the Americans. Discussions began in Paris on May 13 but led nowhere. Hanoi insisted that, before serious negotiations could begin, the United States would have to halt its bombing of the rest of Vietnam.
However, fierce fighting continued. The North Vietnamese high command followed the Tet attacks with two more waves in May and August 1968. At the same time, U.S. General William Westmoreland ordered his commanders to “keep maximum pressure” on the communist forces in the South, which he believed had been seriously weakened by their losses at Tet. The result was the fiercest fighting of the war.
In the eight weeks following Johnson’s speech, 3,700 Americans were killed in Vietnam and 18,000 wounded. Westmoreland’s headquarters, which was notorious for inflated body counts, reported 43,000 North Vietnamese and Viet Cong killed. The South Vietnamese military’s (ARVN) losses were not recorded, but they were usually twice that of the U.S. forces.
After winning the 1968 election, President Richard Nixon, with his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, decided to follow the Tet offensive with a “maximum pressure” campaign with increased U.S. bombing of North Vietnam and Cambodia which ended up with large death counts of North Vietnamese, South Vietnamese, and Cambodians, as well as U.S. milita+ry.
“Maximum pressure” is already a part of the U.S. and NATO approach to Russia with its extensive sanctions regime and its provision of a massive number of weapons to Ukraine.
48 Cease-Fires Between 1946 and 1997
We can look to many more examples of how negotiations ultimately have brought killing to an end in other conflicts.
Using data from 48 conflicts between 1946 and 1997, political scientist Virginia Page Fortna has shown that strong agreements that arrange for demilitarized zones, third-party guarantees, peacekeeping, or joint commissions for dispute resolution and contain specific (versus vague) language produced more lasting cease-fires that provided conditions for dialogue for an armistice or agreement.
Figuring out how to make the cease-fire be effective will be the key task. Despite its less than stellar track record, the U.S. as a co-belligerent should work with the Ukrainian government to figure out effective cease-fire measures.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has already described any new negotiations as “Minsk 3,” a reference to the two cease-fire deals that were brokered with Russia in the Belarusian capital in 2014 and 2015, after its annexation of Crimea and fighting in the Donbas region. The Minsk 1 and 2 agreements included no effective mechanisms for ensuring the parties’ compliance and failed to end the violence. Minsk 1 and 2 were later acknowledged by NATO and the European Union as a ploy for “buying time” for the West’s buildup of Ukrainian forces and equipment.
Studies of Wars and Lessons Learned Have Been IGNORED by Those Conducting Wars
Having been in the U.S. Army and Army Reserves for 29 years and working as a U.S. diplomat for 16 years, I can testify to the results of endless studies of the consequences of war, for example the year-long U.S. Department of State Iraq Study Group, being ignored by U.S. politicians and policymakers, and lessons learned on how to end deadly conflicts being ignored by U.S. military and national security experts.
Guide to Do’s and Don’ts of Cease-Fire Agreements
I suspect that few Ukrainian, Russian, U.S., and NATO policymakers know of the United Nations’ 18 page guide to the Do’s and Don’ts of Cease-Fire Agreements, based on their experience in conflicts.
Therefore, for the record, I want to mention the main points of the “Do’s and Don’ts of Cease-Fire Agreements,” so no one can say, “We didn’t know.” Such work has been done already, and the pitfalls of cease-fire agreements well identified.
Each of the following elements has an entire section written about it in the 18-page guide.
PART A: Who, When, and Where
1. No room for ‘creative’ ambiguity;
2. The need for precision in regard to the geography of the cease-fire;
3. The need for a precise specification of the dates and times on which the obligations imposed by the cease-fire fall due;
4. Designating or qualifying permitted activities;
5. Application of the provisions of the agreement to all members of all armed forces.
PART B: Monitoring and Enforcement
6. Provision for monitoring;
7. Verification;
8. Complaints mechanism;
9. Enforcement;
10. Providing for the political resolution of disputes by the parties.
PART C: Organization and Conduct of Armed Forces
11. Military mission and mandate;
12. Codes of conduct;
13. Confidence-building measures;
14. Long-term treatment of combatants and casualties;
15. Command & Control;
16. Liaison and Information Exchange;
17. Integration;
18. Disarmament, demobilization, and downsizing.
PART D: Humanitarian Matters
19. Demining and civilian protection generally;
20. POW’s and other political prisoners;
21. Free movement of goods, people, and aid;
22. Dealing with the past.
PART E: Implementation
23. Funding;
24. Information to rank and file and to civilians;
25. Verification of size of forces;
26. Amendment of the agreement;
27. Anticipating lead times;
28. Avoiding media warfare;
29.Collateral agreements and legislation;
30. Civil security;
31. Buy-in by regional powers.
What Else Can Be Done? U.S. Should Appoint a Conflict Diplomacy Special Presidential Envoy
To show how militarized is the U.S. government’s thinking, while an entire new U.S. military command element—the Security Assistance Group-Ukraine, led by a three-star general with a staff of 300—has been set up by the U.S. government, currently, there is not a single official in the U.S. government whose full-time job is conflict diplomacy to end the killing in the Russia-Ukraine war.
If the U.S. becomes serious about the loss of life in Ukraine, which it currently appears not to be, President Joe Biden should appoint a special presidential envoy who can begin informal discussions with Ukraine and among its allies in the G7 and NATO about the endgame of negotiations.
Additionally, the United States must establish a regular channel of communication regarding the war that includes Ukraine, U.S. allies, and Russia to allow participants to interact continually, instead of in one-off encounters.
This would be similar to the contact group model used during the Balkan wars, when an informal grouping of representatives from key states and international institutions met regularly and privately.
Will All Parties to a Cease-Fire, Armistice, Peace Agreement Be Pleased? NO Is the Answer!
We must acknowledge that even if negotiations did produce a cease-fire and then an agreement of some sort, neither Ukraine, Russia, or the U.S.and NATO would be fully satisfied.
In spite of recent history in Afghanistan and Iraq, many politicians, especially in the U.S., and now in Ukraine and Russia, want absolute victories, not long wars without a clear resolution.
But look to the Korean armistice, which was not viewed as the best U.S. foreign policy at the time it was signed. In the nearly 70 years after, the armistice has held and there has not been another war on the peninsula. However, converting the armistice to a peace treaty has been one step too far for the U.S. while the North Koreans continue to ask for a peace declaration from the U.S and South Korea before they will abandon their nuclear and missile programs.
A cease-fire followed by an armistice would give Ukraine the opportunity to end the destruction of more of its infrastructure, to begin recovering economically, and, most importantly, to end the death of more Ukrainians and facilitate the return of millions of Ukrainians to their homes.
In the case of the U.S. war on Vietnam, 60 years later, after the 1973 peace agreement, the country has now become a trading partner of the U.S. and the West.
How the negotiations for a cease-fire would work out is anyone’s guess.
But a cease-fire followed by an armistice would give Ukraine the opportunity to end the destruction of more of its infrastructure, to begin recovering economically, and, most importantly, to end the death of more Ukrainians and facilitate the return of millions of Ukrainians to their homes.
An armistice would give the Russian Federation an opportunity to possibly come out from some of the sanctions the West has imposed, to work within the international community on common issues, and end its military mobilization and the death of more Russians.
For the entire world, a Russian-Ukrainian armistice would reduce the risks of a direct military clash with the U.S. and NATO that could include the use of nuclear weapons, with terrible global consequences for all of us on this planet.
Campaign for a Global Ban on Weaponized Drones
At the International Summit for Peace in Ukraine, the “Campaign for a Global Ban on Weaponized Drones” was launched. This campaign reflects the opinion of many in the world that the use of this weapons system should be ended by all countries.
We know it is an uphill battle to call for an end to types of military weapons and, even if there are treaties enacted by the United Nations—such as on cluster munitions, land mines, and nuclear weapons—some countries, lead by the United States, will not abide by the treaties. But, as people of conscience, we must continue to act on what our conscience tells us is wrong.
People of Conscience Must Work for Peace and Non-Violent Resolution of International Issues
Likewise, for people of conscience in this world, we must continue to work for peace and non-violent resolution of international issues despite our politicians’ seemingly endless thirst for the continuation of violence in the name of peace.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Congress Once Again Calls for End of Korean War, It's Time for Biden to Listen
Formally ending the Korean War with a peace agreement provides an opportunity for cooperation between all parties and could act as a stepping stone to reversing the militarization in the Asia-Pacific region and healing historic wounds.
Mar 17, 2023
This week, the United States and South Korea kicked off their springtime joint military drills—the largest in five years. North Korea has long protested these war drills, calling them a rehearsal for invasion. Not surprisingly, then, North Korea conducted submarine-fired cruise missiles tests on Sunday.
We can expect these tit-for-tat provocations to continue as long as everyone continues to go by the same playbook. While the United States cannot control North Korea's behavior, the Biden administration can take steps to end the tensions that have permeated the Korean Peninsula for more than 70 years—chiefly, by pivoting its strategy toward getting back to the table with North Korea and negotiating a peace agreement. The Biden administration should follow the lead of Congress, which is once again calling for a peace-first approach to formally end the Korean War.
On March 1, Congressman Brad Sherman and 20 original cosponsors re-introduced the Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act, the first time that legislation on peace in Korea has been re-introduced in Congress. The bill calls for diplomacy with North Korea to formally end the Korean War, a review of travel restrictions to North Korea, and the establishment of liaison offices in the US and North Korea. First introduced in 2021, it was the first bill calling for an end to the Korean War, following the success of the first House Resolution, H.Res.152, in the 116th Congress, which also called for ending the war.
Officially ending the Korean War is important because the unresolved war is the root cause of tensions in Korea. While the armistice agreement signed in 1953 ended active fighting of the Korean War, it was always meant to be replaced with a peace agreement. To this day, it has not been, and there are no guardrails preventing a resumption of active fighting. Thus, replacing the armistice with a formal peace agreement would go a long way toward building peace and stability in Korea.
While the President could formally end the Korean War through executive powers alone, Congressional support is important to building the political will for a long-lasting peace agreement
As Congressman Sherman stated at his press conference announcing the re-introduction of the bill, "The continued state of war on the Korean Peninsula does not serve the interests of the United States nor our constituents with relatives in North and South Korea." The re-introduction of the Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act provides an opportunity to reinvigorate diplomacy and end this war once and for all.
This opportunity comes at a time of heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula. In 2022, North Korea conducted an unprecedented number of missile tests, including testing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that could in theory strike the US mainland. Both the US and North Korea maintain dangerous nuclear postures and first-strike capabilities, and in September 2022 North Korea passed a law lowering the threshold for a nuclear first strike. The US has also doubled down on its nuclear first-use policy, despite support for a no-first-use policy from President Joe Biden as a candidate. In a further raising of tensions, earlier this year President Yoon Suk Yeol declared South Korea may build its own nuclear arsenal. Meanwhile, the US, South Korea, and Japan continue to strengthen their conventional capabilities to deter North Korea, ramping up bilateral and trilateral exercises.
Compounding the danger of these developments are the larger geopolitical forces at play in the region. The US-China great-power competition continues to grow more dangerous, with provocations that could escalate into a military conflict. Additionally, Japan recently announced its largest military build-up since World War 2, including doubling defense spending by 2028 and developing new counter-strike capabilities aimed at China.
Formally ending the Korean War with a peace agreement provides an opportunity for cooperation between all parties and could act as a stepping stone to reversing the militarization in the Asia-Pacific region and healing historic wounds from the last century's wars. Approaches of previous US administrations across partisan lines have failed to improve the security crisis in Korea. The Biden administration has an opportunity to change course and restart negotiations with North Korea. Instead of saying that they are ready to meet North Korean anywhere and anytime, they should try a new peace-first approach that has the potential to address the root cause of tensions.
Congress has an especially important role to play in calling on the administration to take a different approach to North Korea policy. While the President could formally end the Korean War through executive powers alone, Congressional support is important to building the political will for a long-lasting peace agreement and demonstrating that multiple branches of the US government support a new relationship with North Korea and an end to the war. And Congressional support is growing.
In the last Congress, 46 members of Congress representing both sides of the aisle cosponsored the Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act, including several members of the Foreign Affairs Committee. To have this much support for ending the Korean War in the midst of a stalemate in US-North Korea talks and the escalating arms race should not be downplayed.
This is a particularly important year to build support for a new US approach; July 27, 2023 marks the 70th anniversary of the signing of the Korean War armistice, and it's long past time to replace the 1953 ceasefire with a peace agreement to formally end the war. For the sake of the Korean people, and people around the world, we need to end the state of war that has persisted for more than 70 years. It is time to close this chapter of war and open the door to a transformed, peaceful US-North Korea relationship.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Stitching Korea Back Together
Jun 16, 2015
Thirty peace activists from 15 countries arrived in Beijing on May 17th. I knew 11 of the women before arriving but most of the women knew maybe one or two others and a few knew no one. Our work for peace and justice had taken very different paths and it was striking that many of those paths had not crossed. We spent the first day in the hotel conference room meeting each other and learning what we could about the Koreas.
Deann Borshay Liem introduced her crew who followed us for the next 10 days for the film she is making about the walk called "Crossings." As part of our education she screened her latest film, "Memory of Forgotten War," a painful look at the separated families inNorth and South Korea. We were all in tears at the end, with a deeper insight into the price of the war and the DMZ. Many of the delegation members had been working much of their lives on reuniting Korea. Now I realize what we learned then only scratched the surface about our role in Korea as American citizens.
The first day in Beijing ended with a delicious banquet a few blocks from the hotel at the Yunnan Restaurant which gave us a chance to walk in the streets of Beijing -- a bustling city, full of smells, noise, cars, taxis, horns, people, endless lights and signs. The streets were filled with young people as we walked back from the restaurant. This was a stark difference to what we found in Pyongyang.
Tuesday our journey to North Korea began with a press conference at the hotel. UN Nobel Laureates Leymah Gbowee and Mairead Maguire, with the visionary and leader of our walk, Christine Ahn, shared our story and purpose. They took questions from the room full of reporters as we had to race to the airport on a bus. (By the end of the trip, film producer Abby Disney could be heard humming, "The wheels on the bus go round and round.") The North Korean airline was full, and I appreciated that the overhead bins were the largest I had ever seen. Checking our bags at the airport reminded me of flying to Cuba, with fellow travelers rolling in piles of large boxes covered in plastic.
From the time we landed in Pyongyang it felt as if we were back in the '50's. We walked down the stairs to the tarmac and across the airfield to a simple two-story gray building with little signage or bustle.
We had heard horror stories about going through immigration at the airport, threats of them taking our computers and phones, so I brought a totally stripped computer and Gay Dillingham had left her phone and computer at home. They only looked at a few computers and mostly to see if we had "bad" (whatever that meant) movies on them. They didn't really look at the phones, making me regret stripping mine of everything.
Again we boarded buses, and began our first ride through the streets of Pyongyang. I was shocked by all the tall apartment buildings and wide boulevards but more shocked by how empty it was; it felt like a ghost town. There were people but not enough to match all the buildings. And they walked with a purpose, mostly lone walkers and others on their bikes. So few cars for the 2 million I was told live in this city. It felt more like being in a small town. Sometimes all that was on a boulevard was our bus. A huge street for as far as you could see, the width every city planner longs for and few cars. There were more buses, and they seemed to always be packed, standing room only. The people on the buses were serious, focused, and I didn't see a lot of talking or laughing.
My translator pointed out a street that had been built in one year with beautiful high rises with a more modern, Soviet-style flair. They had been built for the University professors and included swimming pools, restaurants and gyms. She pointed at another building and said it is the highest building in the world. It didn't look like it to me, but I didn't argue. Later we drove under an arch that looked much like the Arc de Triomphe and I suggested that to her, she answered it was 10 meters taller.
Our hotel was on an island in the middle of the river that runs through Pyongyang, an ugly gray building with smallish windows, weather-damaged and desolate-feeling, with very few cars in the parking lot. We walked into a vast entry hall but we were the only ones there, again that uncanny sense of being in a ghost town. Check-in was fast and easy but it was hard to give up my passport, which they kept hostage until we got to the DMZ. I am sure it helped keep our behavior in check, even if it was not their intention. We were taking it all in with wonder and curiosity. Every detail was interesting. What was this place of the dark secrets?
We had a few minutes to run to our rooms and change for our welcome banquet, hosted by the Korean Committee for the Solidarity with the World's Peoples, part of the Cultural Foreign Relations Committee. We arrived at the hallway outside the banquet hall and were startled by the bright and formal dresses of our hosts. The ages ranged from over 80 to early 20's. We fell easily into relationship with the North Korean women, taking pictures and introducing ourselves. I got very excited by all the pink dresses; the waitresses were also in pink.
The banquet hall was madly formal. An enormous pastoral landscape mural filled the largest wall, marble floors, and a very elegantly set table,a huge room for the 6 tables of guests. Medea Benjamin sat at the exceptionally large head table with the director of the Cultural Foreign Relations Committee who had spent a lot of time in South America and so they were able to talk in Spanish. I sat with her deputy who had excellent English. The younger they were, the better their English. I learned they all take it in school, and there is more English than Chinese taught in North Korea. Medea's table was painfully formal, as was the entire room. Speeches were given, and it was all very polite. The dinner was amazing, too much but was excellent. The courses felt like they would never end: chicken, beef, duck, noodles and rice at the end along with the excellent kimchi that came with every meal, including breakfast. The young women at my table were in awe that I was so proficient at chopsticks; their chopsticks are thin and metal. I think everything about us was surprising them that night. None of them had met an American, and we were nice, funny, playful and interested in them. We were less afraid of them than I think they were initially of us. They were slower to open, it wasn't until the last two days they really opened up to me about their lives.
Our rooms were on the 31st and 38th floors and we discovered there actually were others in the hotel, not many, mostly businessmen from China and tourists from Hong Kong or Japan, but on the lower floors. They were a bit rundown and the smell of cigarettes filled the halls. The elevators were sketchy and stopped at your floor when they felt like it, and during the occasional blackout you were stuck in them for awhile. Coleen Baik walked up the 38 flights a few times, starting with the first blackout.
The next day we had a full schedule of things to see in and around Pyongyang. We started at Mangyongdae, the birthplace of Kim Il Sung, founder of the DPRK. We arrived along with thousands of school-age kids in uniforms with red scarves around their necks. They didn't seem as interested in us as we were in them. The line was longer than the eye could see, in a rough formation, they seemed to fall into formation like a dance when needed, and relax in it while waiting to move. There was an adult to every about 30 kids. They were very well-behaved and orderly but would relax into being kids.
The tour guide was hyper-serious and all of them had a way of speaking that was theatrical, lots of passion and uplifted sentences with heightened meaning. Kim Il Sung was the Che Guevara of Korea, he had fought for many years to free Korea from the Japanese occupation.
We were told over and over about the HUMBLE beginnings of the great leader, Kim Il Sung, and how he came to visit his parents who just wanted to stay in the humble small house and not follow him in the city. He continued to visit them until they died. It was all quite serious and included the laying of flowers at the doorway by the head of the Women's Union. Cameras were following us constantly from the North Korean media in addition to the two reporters, David Guttenfelder of NatGeo and Eric Talmadge of AP, who were connected to our delegation.
My interpreter had to keep telling me to pay attention, to quit taking photos and be quiet. I was not behaving as she felt I should. Didn't I understand this was the most sacred place in the country and I was to be in reverence? I told her I didn't share her reverence. The next day I had a new, older interpreter and I saw that the younger interpreter had been re-assigned to someone more well-behaved.
The park just outside the city where the house was situated was beautiful, green and well-cared-for. The grounds were lovely and the flowers were in bloom. We filed back in the buses and traveled to Kyongsang Kindergarten, which is known for training musical children. They have to compete to get in, so the level of mastery at a very young age was extraordinary. The children all performed at everything: Playing, drawing, dancing... it was all a performance and was painful to witness. Again they had little curiosity about us, which seemed strange for kids, no outreach to question us in anyway, or even to make eye contact. They were repetitive about their behaviors, they were performing at playing and not really 'playing' in the sense of freedom and exploration. The musical performances were pitch-perfect, adorable and awe-inspiring.
We left a bit disturbed as it was hard to see these young kids so rigidly formalized and performing at such a young age. I felt myself longing for them to have a childhood, yet they seemed perfectly happy.
Lunch was at Okryu, the most famous noodle restaurant in Pyongyang. The line to get in was long, but we were whisked up stairs to a huge room with lines and lines of tables. Our section was cordoned off with barriers and large gold bowls with cold noodles were placed before us with lots of delicious things to stir into the noodles, including sauces to spice it even more.
We were scheduled to go to a Breast Cancer Research Institute, a maternity and children's hospital and a textile mill, but those of us on the communication team had to get back to the hotel to work on getting across the DMZ, talking to the South Korean organizing team, putting out a press release, doing a press conference and finding out how to get online. It was a wild afternoon; the press conference was in the cramped room of Christine Ahn, but it went well. Gloria Steinem and Christine answered all the questions about where we were going to cross, which was still a mystery, but we knew we would cross, we just needed the South Koreans to talk to the North Koreans. The North Koreans said "we can't let you cross at Panmunjomwithout an OK from the South Korean government, because if anything happens it is our responsibility and they want us to mess up." We were deep inside the relationship between North and South, or rather the non-relationship. We were told the two governments don't talk to each other. There had once been a phone line but it was now dead.
Gloria, Coleen and I went off with Mr. O (our hero and organizer) to see if we could get SIM cards for our phones. It was $250 for a very small amount of time. We all opted for the $250 card, as the next offering was $650 and we assumed we could manage on what felt already like too much money. On the way back to the hotel I watched my usage eat up as I just downloaded email. Oops. We continued to work on the crossing situation through dinner and then went to Christine's room (the only one with a DSL line) to see if could communicate with the South Korean women who were as unhappy as we were with the lack of clarity for Saturday's crossing. Each crossing presented problems and there needed to be clarity for planning. This is when I learned that the South Koreans weren't even signers on the 1953 Armistice and cease fire. It was the US representing the UN Command that signed on behalf of South Korea and 14 other nations. We think this was all about North and South Korea, but the signers were the US and North Korea, which signed on behalf of the Chinese People's Voluntary Army. It was a constant reminder how little people in the U.S. know about Korea and the war.
I had no luck with my computer and the DSL as Gmail, Twitter and Facebook were all blocked. I returned to my room to write a CODEPINK alert to put pressure on the US and finished by the time Alli McCracken got to the CODEPINK office in DC. Alli and I, with a spotty phone connection, finished an alert by the time we were to leave for the morning events, which meant I had about an hour of sleep. A New York Times reporter had called at 3:00 AM with angry questions about whether we were confronting North Korea on their Human Rights abuses. I replied that I have worked for 13 years to get the US to close Gitmo and to stop other human rights abuses in the US. The only way I knew to affect human rights abuses in North Korea was to do all I could to bring peace and reunification.
We left the hotel at 8:30 AM for the People's Cultural Palace where we met with about 100 North Korean women from different sectors and regions for the first session of the International Women's Peace Symposium on "women and peacebuilding." The speakers were potent. It was story after story of what they experienced in the Korean War, including a woman with no arms who told of how US Soldiers had chopped them off. They told these experiences powerfully, with emotion, memories and clarity. It felt like they had happened last month. Another told the story of the bombs dropping on her village. The head of a baby was blown off while her mother was in the fields. When she returned, the mother carried the headless baby all through the town, looking for her head and wailing. Each story felt more horrific than the last, all of us had tears streaming down our faces and shame rising in our hearts. I wanted to go hold each of them and say I was sorry. When they all finished, for almost 30 minutes we held each other, shared our shame and our sorrow, and hugged.
Hyung-Kyung Chung and the North Korean women brought out parts of a quilt made by North Korean women, South Korean women, Korean diaspora women, and international women. We turned to the sewing of the sides of the quilt together, the North Korean women eagerly sewing, each of them serious in the task, their desire for unification so palpable in that moment. I could feel it with each stitch. We were all helping to stitch Korea back together. Then spontaneously, the North Korean women started to sing "Tongil", a beautiful song of reunification that movements in North and South Korea sing and which we had been practicing on the bus and had become the anthem of our journey. It rang loud in the huge room of the Symposium, and the united voices of the delegation and the Korean women again brought tears and this time, joy and possibility.
It was a love fest by lunch time, we each went our separate ways to be reunited for our delegation presentations in the afternoon. Ours was to take place at the hotel with the great leaders' photos looking over us. Mairead, Gloria, Leymah, Suzuyo and Medea were the afternoon speakers. The North Korean women listened intently and were impressed with their work for peace. The questions that followed from the North Korean women were smart and informative to both them and our delegation. It was really impressive to feel their confidence and willingness to ask uncomfortable questions. They were cut too short as we had to race off to a performance with dancing, singing and live orchestra. Our group was impressed with the artistry and skill of all the performance, but no one was more impressed than the North Korean audience. The North Koreans LOVED it; they were a fantastic audience and left chatting away. None of them left in a car. It was a vast parking lot with not one car. I watched as they walked across it to an opening onto a street and as the bus went around the corner you saw women in their traditional colorful long dresses, the men in their black suits with their children walking down the long boulevards to where they lived. They melted away into the neighborhood very quickly and again the streets were almost empty.
Friday we again boarded the buses, this time for a long ride to Mt Myohang, 95 miles west of Pyongyang for a picnic, stopping at the International Friendship Exhibition House on the way.
The Friendship House did me in. It is an 80,000-square-foot mausoleum, housing gifts presented to former leaders Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il since the '50's from a broad range of international leaders, from at least 100 countries. It was tiring, intimidating, endless and psychologically uncomfortable. The tour included a stop in a wing of the building with giant candelabras and inlaid marble floors as a waiting room to enter the most sacred sanctuary. Inside each room that led off the vast waiting area were the great leaders done in wax. The wax figures stood in pastoral landscapes; calm, peaceful, with gentle smiles on their faces. The crowd advanced and all bowed, I was told by my translator we were in a sacred room. We did this in 3 rooms, which included a wax figure of the wife of Kim Il Sung who had also been a revolutionary against the Japanese occupation for Korean freedom and mother of Kim Il Jong. My head was pounding by the time we exited through the gift shop. They served free tea at the gift shop so we would all stay and shop. The largest space in each gift shop seemed to be for the hundreds of book titles, many translated into English,written by Kim Il Sung.
The picnic helped to relieve the overwhelm from the Friendship house and we were surrounded by the beauty of nature. We were right on the bank of a gentle moving river. On the landing above us was a table beautifully set and reserved for the Russian businessmen who arrived about 30 minutes after us. My only concern was too much of the natural world had been paved over in roads and paths.
It was a relief to arrive at the home of King Tangun, the founder of the first Korean kingdom and a 2009 UNESCO designation biosphere reserve. The beauty was unencumbered and vast. As was the beauty and dignity at the Buddhist temple dating back a thousand years we also visited on the way home. We arrived back too late to do the scheduled craft shopping as the day had emotionally exhausted all of us, and it was time for our evening meeting and dinner, which usually took until 9:30 or 10:00. There was much to discuss about the next day's march and Sunday's crossing of the DMZ. We had just learned that South Korea had finally officiallyanswered North Korea through the South Korean Ministry of Defense to the Korean People's Army. They clarified that we would not be allowed to cross at Panmunjom, that we would need to cross at Kaesong, and that they would send a South Korean bus for us so we would not have to walk across with our bags. But there was still all the negative press we were getting globally to address, and details we still needed to confirm with the South Korean groups and how we were going to fit it all in.
Again we had to wake early and be ready to leave by 7:30 in the morning to march with the women of North Korea. Rumor had it that there were going to be 5,000 women.
We did arrive to at least 5,000 North Korean women in their Korean Princess dresses with an all-women marching band of about 100 that even included a few majorettes. It took my breath away and was a bit overwhelming as we stood below the 150 foot high women carved in marble holding a unified Korea. They really knew how to produce a march - I experienced march envy. Gloria, Leymah and Mairead delivered beautiful speeches as did the North Korean women. We took our places in rows of 5 behind our banners and marched to the end of Pyongyang and the rice fields. Instead of marching with us the women lined the march as we followed the marching band. It was beautiful. The women held wands with flowers at the top and they never stopped waving them and often waved at us with joy and hope with the other hand. We waved back. I suspended judgment and surrendered into the beauty and possibility of the moment.
The march ended at the buses and we were back on and off to a restaurant with a table full of gold dishes and an air of celebration and toasts, followed by the bus ride to Kaesong. Maybe it was the wine at lunch or maybe it was that there was only a day left together, but it was this bus ride where my translator began to really open up to me. She told me about meeting her future husband at college, how she didn't like him at first and his continued courting of her which took two years before she introduced him to her parents. She mentioned that they were very 'progressive' so didn't expect to have any sway on her choice, but in meeting him they told her to continue her work for a few more years before deciding and she listened to them. He is also a translator but for businesses. They finally married and she told me how happy they were and that even though they both have jobs that take them away from each other a lot, their times together are sweet and if they both have to travel her mom takes care of their daughter. All the young women had a self-confidence and unflappability. They knew their jobs and took responsibility but also didn't feel like they had failed when I didn't behave. The answers to my questions revealed a deep commitment to the collective but an emphasis on self-reliance. They each asked me questions including what did I think about or what stories had I been told about North Korea before I came. What did I think of them now? Over the next two days I spent the bus time with one of my three translators, we could feel the end coming and wanted more of each other. I asked one of them what they longed for in the re-unification and she said for the sadness of the separation to end so her country would be happier. I asked her about her dreams for herself and she said she just wanted to live 'happily ever after.' I looked forward on the bus to Abby Disney and her daughter Olivia, and how funny it was that North Korea is full of Disney movies and here Walt Disney's relatives were on this trip with us. When I asked the younger of the women who she talked to, who she shared her deepest thoughts with, she said her mother. She told me she often got very sad and her mother was able to help her through the sadness, but sometimes she had to take her to the doctor, a doctor who talked with her and helped even more. Their stories were about the immediate, about the joy of their work, their need to be better with their English, time with friends having picnics, cooking, time with family and lots and lots of work. They said they normally work 8 hours a day but with us it was at least 12. All three told me our visit had changed their lives and they wanted us to come back with more friends.
Because North Korea had been carpet-bombed by the US between 1950-1953, all the buildings were from then or later. I learned from Suzy Kim, the Korean historian on our delegation from Rutgers University that a U.S. General testified in Congress during the Korean War that there is NOTHING left to bomb in North Korea. Kaesong had been part of South Korea during the war but when the final lines were drawn for the Armistice, it was moved to North Korea. We arrived at a taste of what Korea was like before the war. The inn we stayed at was eighteenth century with small rooms on courtyards. It was pleasant, beautiful and human scale, which was a stark difference to Pyongyang. We arrived just in time for dinner served on low tables with cushions on the floor. The evening gathering was quick as all we really needed was to run through the next day which was tight, we had to arrive in South Korea by noon to be on time for the event the South Korean women had produced.
It was another early morning, but we were all a buzz, it was really going to happen, we were going to cross the DMZ. Christine's dream was going to come true. It was more than two years ago when Christine Ahn dreamt of lights coming down the river that unites Korea, she followed the lights up the river to a circle of women stirring a pot and pouring the contents into bowls, lighting them and sending them down the river. She woke knowing it was going to be the women who could reunite Korea and had worked since then for this moment. She was already in tears as we boarded the buses.
Our first stop was the center of Kaesong for another march with the women, a bit smaller without the marching band but the women were also in their colorful traditional Korean best and they lined the road as we walked to the end of town 5 in a row behind our banners. It all went too fast as we were rushed back into the buses for P'anmunjom and the building where the Armistice was signed and where the original is on display. There had been much discussion about unfurling the quilt and singing here but once we were inside and could feel the end of our time in North Korea and South Korea so near, we couldn't help ourselves. We circled the quilt and sang. The soldiers didn't try to stop us, they listened and then joined us in our buses, thanking us and asking us to do all we could for reunification. As we stood outside I realized the building on the South Korean side was just a few hundred feet away and there was no wall, just two guards on the side. It was tempting. We went to the top of the visitors' center and onto a balcony where we looked across at the South Korean visitors building, it was so close you could see their soldiers looking at the North Korean soldiers. This had gone on for 63 years, it was more than time to end this madness with a peace treaty and allow the 10 million Korean family members to be reunited. Standing there at that moment, the insanity of that many years of separation by something so meaningless came over me like a wave and I wept. Crying for all those who had already died and never seen their family members, crying for all those who still longed for and all those who had felt forgotten. It was really a crime scene. Why had this gone on so long?
The short trip to the Kaesong border crossing was full of tears. It became very real that we were leaving and we might not see each other again. When we arrived at the border crossing a South Korean bus was indeed waiting for us, a big one so we were brought back together at the crossing after being separated into two buses for the entire time in North Korea. Hugging, more tears, more hugging and waves of goodbye as we passed through the immigration station and into the waiting bus. The wave of sadness was quickly replaced by the excitement of arriving in South Korea and accomplishing what everyone had thought impossible. Soon after our crossing, we learned that Ban Ki Moon finally came out in support of our walk. The impossible has become possible to those in power because a woman had a dream and others joined her in it.
At CODEPINK we plan to launch a campaign to continue to educate and put pressure on Congress with a Congressional briefing in late Julyfor the Korea caucus and a campaign to end the sanctions on things like cosmetics by calling for the Koreas and US to Make Up!
Our Mission
On May 24, 2015, thirty international women peacemakers from around the world walked with Korean women, north and south, to call for an end to the Korean War and for a new beginning for a reunified Korea. We held international peace symposiums in Pyongyang and Seoul where we listened to Korean women and shared our experiences and ideas of mobilizing women to bring an end to violent conflict. We successfully crossed the 2-mile wide De-Militarized Zone (DMZ) that separates millions of Korean families as a symbolic act of peace.
2015 marks the 70th anniversary of Korea's division into two separate states by Cold War powers, which precipitated the 1950-53 Korean War. After nearly 4 million people were killed, mostly Korean civilians, fighting was halted when North Korea, China, and the United States representing the UN Command signed a ceasefire agreement. They promised within three months to sign a peace treaty; over 60 years later, we're still waiting.
Meanwhile, thousands of Korean elders die every year waiting on a government list to see their children or siblings after being separated by the DMZ. In North Korea, crippling sanctions against the government make it difficult for ordinary people to access the basics needed for survival. The unresolved Korean conflict gives all governments in the region justification to further militarize and prepare for war, depriving funds for schools, hospitals, and the welfare of the people and the environment. That's why women are walking for peace, to reunite families, and end the state of war in Korea.
Facts
- 4M people died in the Korean War of 1950-53, most of them Korean civilians.
- 10M families are still separated by the DMZ.
- 70M Koreans live in a state of war due to unresolved conflict.
- 60+ YRS after the war ended with a temporary cease-fire agreement, we're still waiting for a peace treaty.
- $1T is spent by USA, China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea on militarization, fueled by unresolved conflicts.
Honorary co-chairs
Mairead Maguire is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate for her peaceful, nonviolent work on the ethnic/political conflict in Northern Ireland
Gloria Steinem is a writer, lecturer, editor, feminist activist, and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Organizing committee
Christine Ahn is a columnist and organizer for peace and justice in the U.S., Korea, and Asia Pacific.
Medea Benjamin is the co-founder of CODEPINK, a women-led peace organization with 250 chapters across the USA.
Hyung-Kyung Chungis a professor of Interfaith engagement at Union Theological Seminary in New York City.
Gay Dillingham traveled with Governor Richardson on a peace-keeping mission to North Korea in 2010.
Suzy Kim isa professor of Korean history at Rutgers University, Suzy has advocated for human rights and peace in Korea and wrote Everyday Life in the North Korean Revolution, 1945-1950.
Vana Kim Hansen is a spiritual teacher with a PhD in education from Harvard, on a mission to create peace and love in the world.
Gwyn Kirk is a writer, teacher, and organizer. She is a founder member of Women for Genuine Security, and the International Women's Network Against Militarism.
Sung-Ok Lee is the assistant general secretary of United Methodist Women, the largest denominational faith organization for women with 800,000 members.
Ann Wright is a retired US Army Reserve Colonel and a former US diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the US war on Iraq. She now works globally with peace and social justice groups.
Delegation members
Jean Chung is a social activist based in Los Angeles working for peace and reconciliation of two Koreas and has leads Action for One Korea (AOK), a grass-root movement to spread the passion for reunified.
Abigail Disney is a filmmaker and philanthropist, Abigail produced Pray the Devil Back to Hell and the PBS mini-series Women, War & Peace.
Jodie Evans is a longtime peace, environmental, women's rights and social justice activist. She co-founded CODEPINK.
Leymah Gbowee is the 2011 Nobel Peace Laureate and a Liberian peace activist, trained social worker and women's rights advocate. She uses her platform to advocate for human rights, peace, and security.
Erika Guevara is a feminist, Mexican-American human rights lawyer and Director for the Americas at the International Secretariat of Amnesty International.
Patricia Guerrero is a human rights lawyer and founder of Liga de Mujeres Desplazadas, which advocates for women displaced by Colombia's armed conflict and reparations in Colombia's transitional justice process.
Jane Jin Kaisen is a visual artist and filmmaker based in Copenhagen. She has dealt extensively with legacies of colonialism, war, militarism, transnational adoption and gender.
Deann Borshay Liem is a director, producer and distributor of independent documentaries, including First Person Plural, In the Matter of Cha Jung Hee, and Geographies of Kinship - The Korean Adoption Story. She recently produced with Ramsay Liem Memory of Forgotten War.
M. Brinton Lykes is Professor of Community-Cultural Psychology and Associate Director of the Center for Human Rights and International Justice at Boston College.
Liza Maza is a former Philippine congresswoman who co-authored laws on women, including the Anti-Violence against Women and Children Act and the Magna Carta of Women. Liza is Chair Emerita of GABRIELA Women's Alliance and the International Women's Alliance, a global coalition of grassroots women's organizations.
Ann Patterson is a renowned peace activist from Northern Ireland and a member of Peace People.
Suzuyo Takazato founded Okinawa Women Act Against Military Violence and helped create Okinawa's first rape crisis center to provide hotline and face-to-face counseling to victims of sexual violence. In 1995, her activism led to a large-scale protest by people of Okinawa against US military bases.
Kozue Akibayashi is a feminist researcher/activist and has worked on issues of gender and peace. She is a professor at Graduate School of Global Studies, Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan, and a member of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.
Lisa Linda Natividad is an Associate Professor in the Division of Social Work at the University of Guam. She is also the President of the Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice. She has delivered interventions to the United Nations on issues of militarization, colonization, and indigenous peoples' rights.
Ewa Eriksson Fortier has engaged in international humanitarian work for 40 years, beginning in 1976 by the end of the Vietnam War. For the past decade, Eva has focused on the consequences of the Korean War. She was the head of an international humanitarian organisation based in Pyongyang.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy