º¸°í¼ ¹× ÀÚ·á
Áö·ÚÇÇÇØÀÚ Áö¿ø Ưº°¹ý
Åõ°Ô´õ ´º½º
ÀÓÀçÈ« Æ÷Åä°¶·¯¸®
´ëÀÎÁö·Ú ¸¸ÈÀü
home > ÀÚ·á½Ç > º¸°í¼ ¹× ÀÚ·á
Çѱ¹ Á¤ºÎ´Â ±¹Á¦È¸ÀÇ ¼®»ó¿¡¼ °ø½ÄÀûÀ¸·Î Çѱ¹¿¡ ¸Å¼³µÇ¾î ÀÖ´Â Áö·Ú¿Í, ¼ö¸¹Àº Áö·ÚÇÇÇØÀÚµéÀ» ºÎÀÎÇß½À´Ï´Ù.
Çѱ¹¿¡´Â ´ëÀÎÁö·Ú·Î ÀÎÇÑ ¾î¶°ÇÑ Èñ»ýÀÚµµ Á¸ÀçÇÏÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù.
Çѱ¹Àº ¹Î°£ÀÎÀÇ ÇÇÇØ°¡ ¾øµµ·Ï öÀúÇÏ°Ô ´ëÀÎÁö·Ú°¡ ÅëÁ¦µÇ°í ÀÖ´Â ÀüÇüÀûÀÎ »ç·Ê¿¡ ÇØ´çÇÕ´Ï´Ù.
Çѱ¹Àº ºÏÇÑ°ú ´ëÄ¡¼±»ó¿¡ ÀÖ´Â 155¸¶ÀÏ ºñ¹«Àå Áö´ë¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÑ ±× ¾î¶² Áö¿ª¿¡µµ ´ëÀÎÁö·Ú¸¦ ¸Å¼³ÇØ ³õ°í ÀÖÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù.
The position paper, Speaker Lee Seong Joo, General of Depute Director, MOFA.Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Delegates,First of all, I would like to express our deep approciation to the Government of Norway for hosting this important Diplomatic Conference. I am pleased to take part in this important process, even though we are here as an observer delegation rather than a full participant.By now many delegates here may be aware of the Republic of Korea's views on this issue. But as an amendment has been proposed and is now under discussion, and as that particular amendment has a direct relevance to the security of my country, I wish to explain once more how we feel and how think about this important topic.At the outset I would like to make it quite clear that the Republic of Korea fully shares the concern of the international community over the scourge of anti-personnel landmines. The proliferation of APLs and their indiscriminate and irresponsible use have caused a great deal of sufferings and casualities, particularly among civilian population. We are aware of the seriousness of the problem and therefore we agree with the emerging consensus that the international community must stop this.It is precisely for this reason that my Government has taken a number of measures over the past several years. In 1995 itadopted a one-year export moratorium. The moratorium was extended last yaer, and this year it is going to be extended again. We made a voluntary contribution to the UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Clearance. Also, at present we are making preparations needed for our accesion to the CCW and its Amended Protocol ¥±.These steps by my Government are a good testimony to Korea's sympathy with the efforts of the international community to contain, minimize, and if possible to stop the tragichumanitarian consequences of APLs. We are here as an observer delegation, not because we are indifferent to the humanitarian cause, but rather because we have some serious problems that prevent us from fully subscribing to the complete ban on the use of APLs.Let me elaborate a little further on what are these problems and what are the reasons for our hesitation.My first point concerns the unique nature of our security situation. The Korean Peninsula is the only place in the world where the Cold War still lingers on. North Korea is quite unpredictable. North Korea continues to maintain its war machines in a high state of preparedness. In fact, Pyongyang has publicly stated for years its intention to use massively concentrated firepower in any forward advance against the Republic of Korea. With only 2.5 miles separating our capital from the Demilitarized Zone(DMZ), an outbreak of an all-out war is not a remote possibility for us. It is a clear and present danger. In fact, technically, my country has been at war with North Korea for nearly five decades. And, millions of men, women and children in my country live under a constant threat of another full-scale invasion.Let me now briefly touch upon what useful role the APLs have played so far and are expected to play in the future on the Korean peninsula.First, the use of APLs on the Korean Peninsula has been an essential element in deterring the possible aggression. It has helped prevent the recurrence of another devastating war. What North Korea has in mind is a blitzkrieg. They know that they will not succeed unless they could sweep through our capital and down to the southern tip of Korea in a matter if a few days. The first few days are therefore critical for North Korea to win and fir my country to repel the invasion. So our defense depends entirely upon our ability to delay or halt the advance of a highly mechanized and heavily armed North Korean Army. Minefields have been an indispensable component of our defensive barrier system, and are currently the solidly reliableinstruments available. APLs have thus served as a powerful deterrence to military adventurism in Korea and will continue to do so.Secondly, APL deployments in Korea save lives. By preventing outbreak of another devastating war, it saves a great number of human lives, which such a war might have inevitably cost. Even in the event of another war in Korea, it will save the lives, both civilians and soldiers. It has been demonstrated that proper and efficient APL deployments in the battlefield can reduce casualties. We estimate that, should the ROK be denied the use of APLs, death tolls fir soldiers would increase by thousands per day in a possible Second Korean War.Now, against this unquestionable utilities the APLs provide in Korea, let me stress that its use in Korea has not caused any civilian casualties and inflicted suffering on their lives. Korea's case is a classic example of a tightly controlled use of APLs. From the perspective of civilian safety, it differs from any other part of the world. The actual mined area on the Korean Peninsula is restricted to the 155-mile Demilitarized Zone(DMZ). The minefields there are fenced and clearly marked. They are thoroughly mapped and carefully documented. And they are also closely monitored by military personnel twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Civilian access is completely denied. What happened in Angola, Cambodia and some other places in the world has not happened and will not happen in Korea.In sum, in Korea, the use of APLs has not caused and is not likely to cause civilian suffering; it has prevented and will prevent a war; and thus has saved human lives and will save them in the event of another war. It is worth noting that, should another war break out in Korea, the civilian casualties in the first several days will outnumber the civilian casualties caused by APLs throughout the world during the past several years.If, for the sake of "universality" of the ban, the use of APLs is banned in my country, where not only their utility but also safe use have been proven for the past five decades, and if such a ban invites another war in Korea which will inevitably result in a loss of so many lives, the credibility of the admirable humanitarian cause behind the international efforts to ban APLs will be irreparably damaged, and the treaty we are discussing today cannot avoid a very strong criticism.Mr. Chairman,I wish to reiterate our full endorsement of the humanitarian cause behind the movement for a total ban on APLs. However, we strongly believe that, in order to assure the universality and enforceability of such a ban, efforts should ve made to understand why certain countries are cautious in joining this campaign, and determine which of the reasons offered by them may be recognized as valid and therefore accommodated.It is in this context that we welcome the amendment proposal dubmitted by the US delegation. We find it useful and believe that ir will serve as a good basis for our deliberation. We earnestly hope that the amendment could be acceptable to the other participants.In closing, I wish to express my sincere hope that thisConference will be successful in working out a more comprehensive and practical solution to the APL issue.Thank you.