Recently, South and North Korea reached an agreement to hold the second high-level meeting in late October or early November. However, shortly after North and South decided to pursue bilateral talks, the level of military tension intensified. This occurred after North and South Korean ships exchanged warning shots near the NLL—Northern Limit Line or the disputed maritime border between the North and the South—and also across the land border as the North’s military tried to short down anti-Pyongyang leaflets launched by South Korean activists. This is making a close coordination through the high-level talks even more essential. South Korean government proposed on October 13 to hold the second high-level talks on October 30 at Panmunjom. President Park Geun-hye emphasized the importance of the second round of high-level talks. At the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation on October 14, President Park said, “Just like the saying that dialogue is needed even during a war, talks must continue in order to ease tensions and to establish peace on the Korean peninsula.” President Park also emphasized the need for high-level talks as an opportunity to improve inter-Korean relations and said, “Resolving the May 24 measures, which are currently a hot issue, must involve North and South Korean authorities sitting down to hold sincere talks with a responsible attitude.” North Korea, through Rodong Sinmun, also made a statement that; “political and military hostilities must end immediately,” highlighting the need to find a lesson from the past unsuccessful attempts to improve inter-Korean relations that failed to create an atmosphere suitable for a dialogue. These events are somewhat indicative that despite the tensions between the two Koreas, it may be approaching the dialogue phase.

   The second round of high-level talks can be an important turning point to improve the inter-Korean relations. If the dialogue and exchange is cut off again at the second high-level contact without setting the new ground for compromise and create ways to continue discussions for cooperation, the two Koreas may be faced with a very difficult situation. This is a burden that the Park administration faces at its third year. Next year will mark the 70 years of division of the Korean peninsula. Therefore, it is necessary to provide at least the basic stance of maintaining the momentum of inter-Korean dialogue in the second high-level talks. As the history provides, it is difficult to make progress in negotiations, but it is easy to break off the negotiation. At the inter-Korean military talks on October 15, both sides participated in the negotiation in a sincere manner despite failing to narrow their differences on basic positions. This may be attributable to the expectations for the second round of the high-level talks. However, North Korea is carrying out the psychological warfare by unilaterally disclosing the progress and contents of inter-Korean military talks through the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on the night of October 16. Such behavior can be interpreted as the “wiggle tactic” to achieve their goal in the negotiation. South Korean government should not be swayed by the patterns of Pyongyang’s behavior but instead handle situations tactfully, standing firmly on its ground.

   Nevertheless, the second round of the high-level talks will be a difficult negotiation. Pyongyang is most likely to bring up the political and military issues as main agendas such as resolving the NLL and West (Yellow) Sea confrontations and proposal for a mutual moratorium on verbal attacks. The North proposed similar issues at the first round of inter-Korean military talks. Also, North Korea is very likely to bring up the issues that are directly related to its national interests, such as the lifting of the May 24 measures and reopening of the Mount Kumgang Tour at the second high-level contact.

   It is highly likely for the South Korean government to raise issues considered most critical at the moment, such as resuming the family reunions, construction of the DMZ (demilitarized zone) Peace Park, and agricultural complex. On the other hand, it also has to reiterate to the North that it must comply with the NLL and that it will not be able to restrain South Korean activist groups from launching leaflets or media news. The South Korean government will not be able to change its stance on these basic agendas easily. Recently, senior military officials from both sides met and exchanged positions on various issues. What is more important now is to reach an agreement and coordinate ways to reduce the differences and find alternatives. Otherwise, the talks will only repeat the deadlocked inter-Korean relations and close the inter-Korean dialogue once again.

   If both sides are determined to work through the differences and find a common ground to compromise on varying positions, dialogue can be continued. One way to do this is to separate North and South’s priority issues on a separate track but pursue them simultaneously. For North, this is political and military issue while for the South it is humanitarian aid, infrastructure development, and recovering a sense of common identity between the people of North and South. For the North, military and political issues that it is raising are time-consuming and challenging in nature, which will take a lot of time and effort to resolve such as the armistice system, the US-ROK alliance, and the North Korean nuclear issue. These issues need to proceed in a step-by-step manner, and with ample time. On the other hand, the issues raised by the South are relatively easier to resolve. Thus, the political and military matters should be handled separately from humanitarian, social and cultural exchanges and cooperation projects, which could be promoted under a subcommittee or working-level groups. 

   In the meantime, political and military issues that South remained rather passively on should be pursued with more vigor than the past and at the time seek ways to promote the more practical and applicable matters first. If this is pushed forward along with the “small-scale unification” projects, North Korea may stop evading the negotiations. Negotiation is a give-and-take process. You may have to give the North what they want, in order to get what we want. If negotiation is conducted where one pursue only its own interests, the opponent is likely to abandon the negotiation table. Of course, successful negotiation is one where you get the most of the deal in your favor, as much as possible. However, it does not necessary have to be exactly equivalent. Sometimes you get less than you give, and at other times, you get more than you give – that is negotiation. Considering there will be many more negotiations in the years to come, it will be more tactful to prepare for the high-level meetings, with long haul in mind. The year 2015 marks the 70 years of national division. Now it is time to realign the previous North-South relations in order to find a new milestone, before it is too late.