[ad_1]
On the 24th, the Blue House and the government issued a statement condemning North Korea’s shooting at the Korean people at sea and burning their bodies, apologizing and calling for the punishment of the person in charge. However, there were only words and no specific measures such as sanctions. There were also comments that seemed to prevail over North Korea, saying that this incident was not a violation of the 9-19 military agreement that prohibited the act of increasing tension in the border area.
The Ministry of National Defense issued a statement this morning, saying: “I strongly condemn the atrocities in North Korea” and “I strongly urge North Korea to clarify and punish the person in charge.” In the afternoon, Secretary Seo Wook attended a general meeting of the National Assembly National Defense Committee and said, “I am sorry that our people suffered such a disaster in North Korean waters.” “We will try to prevent it from happening again.” In a statement two days after his death from the attack, criticism of “procrastination” emerged.
Until the morning of the day, the Unification Ministry, which said: “We will observe the situation and review the necessary measures,” issued a statement saying: “We strictly protest against the peace aspirations of our people on the Korean peninsula.” However, a similar perspective was published on the social networks (SNS) of the Ministry of Unification, which says “Let’s prepare for peace.
Although the Blue House and the military condemned North Korea, they repeatedly insisted that it was not a violation of the 9-19 military agreement. Seo Joo-seok, Secretary General of the National Security Council (NSC), said: “It is true that the agreement and the military spirit of 9-19 were damaged to ease military tensions and build trust.” A military officer said: “In the 9/19 military agreement, it is the artillery that restricts (firing) within the buffer zone,” and said: “It did not include the content of not firing at personnel passing (from South Korea). A senior official from the Blue House said: “Is the spirit of the above statement valid?”
Meanwhile, the Foreign Ministry only responded to the question about the position in this case in the form of “there is an ongoing discussion of related ministries” and “we are in close communication with the major countries.” In general, if a civilian from his own country is unjustly killed abroad, he is subject to international law. It is common to raise an issue with the organization or make a statement of condemnation to ask for the support of neighboring countries, and an official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs met with reporters that day and said: “We will have to review several things related to the international law, and this is not a matter to be briefly stated. “
