Poet & Columnist I have no intention of denigrating Silla's unification of the Three Kingdoms. However, I believe we must not forget the lessons learned from Silla's unification. This is perhaps because it can offer wisdom to help the Republic of Korea overcome its current crisis.

Silla was a nation adept at utilizing external help. It could not defeat Baekje on its own, and Goguryeo was a formidable power that had repelled the Sui and Tang dynasties. Silla could only maintain its existence by forming an alliance with Baekje and borrowing its strength.

Therefore, Silla was not a nation that insisted on "defense alone." Silla's strategy of leveraging the superpower Tang Dynasty to overcome national hardship was a "stroke of genius" from Silla's perspective.

It was the power of diplomacy. Kim Chunchu was a master of diplomacy. He sought out Goguryeo and then Tang China to attack Baekje. With the help of Tang, he finally destroyed Baekje in 660.

Tang China's objective was the destruction of Goguryeo. A Sui army of 1.13 million troops was nearly annihilated, and later even Emperor Taizong of Tang was forced to retreat from Ansi Fortress, losing an eye. Tang needed Silla's strength to avenge this defeat. Ultimately, the Silla-Tang alliance destroyed Goguryeo in 668.

However, without Silla's attack from the rear, there would have been no reason for Goguryeo to fall to a power like Tang. The Battle of Ansi Fortress was in 645, and Goguryeo then controlled Manchuria, including the Malgal tribes. It was only eight years after Baekje's fall. Therefore, the fall of Goguryeo would have been impossible if Silla had not attacked Goguryeo's capital, Pyongyang, from the rear.

It is regrettable, however, that if Goguryeo had recognized the crisis, as it should have after witnessing Baekje's fall, and had actively pursued alliances with neighboring countries to strengthen its diplomacy with Tang China, history might have unfolded quite differently.

Unlike Goguryeo, Silla once again relied on the strength of others. It used the Tang army to suppress Goguryeo and Baekje restorationist forces. However, the situation took a turn for the worse for Silla. Tang established the Ungjin Commandery, revealing its ambition to control all of Baekje's former territory. Silla then began to resist again, enlisting the help of Baekje and Goguryeo refugees. Kim Yu-shin confronted the Tang forces, even assassinating So Jeongbang.

If you believe that Tang's withdrawal from the Korean peninsula was solely due to Silla's resistance, you misunderstand history. Who would believe that Tang, capable of mobilizing a million troops, withdrew its forces after being defeated by Silla, which could only muster 50,000 soldiers?

In reality, it was because the Tufan (Tibet) attacked Tang around that time. At that point, Tang forces had advanced as far as the Gimpo area of Gyeonggi Province.

The reason the Silla-Tang War entered a stalemate for 14 months, from 674 to February 675, was the Tufan's attack on the northern Tian Shan route with the Western Turkic Khaganate in December 673. Tang, having already lost the southern Tian Shan route, had no choice but to commit a large contingent to the Tufan front to defend the last remaining northern route.

Ultimately, Tang abandoned the Silla-Tang War when its homeland was threatened. This was a stroke of immense luck for Silla. It was impossible for Silla to have allied with Tufan, located so far away.

Tufan was beyond Silla's diplomatic reach. Tufan was growing stronger under the rule of a wise king named Songtsen Gampo. Consequently, Tang withdrew its troops, and Silla, by absorbing parts of Goguryeo's former territory and Baekje's land, achieved a partial unification of the Three Kingdoms.

Had it not been for Tufan, Silla would have perished at the hands of Tang at that time. Therefore, when we look at Silla's unification of the Three Kingdoms, we must once again emphasize the importance of diplomatic power. And we must deeply engrave the lesson that "defense alone" is impossible.

Recently, Lee Jae-myung stated that the idea that "the nation cannot be defended without the US is a subservient mindset." This is a notion and idea worse than that of an ignorant lowborn.

That national defense begins with diplomacy is a fundamental principle of military science. And any man who has served in the military knows that the Republic of Korea also needs the US military.

The overcoming of the Korean War crisis was a victory of diplomatic efforts involving 16 UN member states. It is thanks to diplomacy that we have enjoyed peace and prosperity for over 70 years, despite communist threats, since President Syngman Rhee requested the stationing of US troops in return for the armistice.

Diplomacy is cooperation, not subservience. Since national defense follows diplomacy, we must realize that "defense alone" is impossible. Even Hitler began World War II after forming an alliance called the "Axis powers" with Japan and Italy.

Stalin permitted the invasion of South Korea because China was there. Therefore, Lee Jae-myung, an anti-American, might be planning to abandon the United States and join hands with the Chinese Communist Party. This is typical behavior for a pro-North Korean and pro-China ideologue.

It is extremely dangerous for someone who has not served in the military to perceive national defense and security in such a manner. It makes one wonder about the true intentions of someone who calls the presence of US Forces Korea, which protects peace on the Korean peninsula, at the Pyeongtaek base, a "subservient mindset."

And within that closed-minded perspective, we cannot expect the Republic of Korea to become prosperous and strong. This very point can be a significant reason to remove the pro-communist collaborator Lee Jae-myung from the presidency.

For reference, after the Silla army was defeated at the Battle of Baeksu Mountain in December 672, and Kim Yu-shin passed away in July 673, Silla faced a crisis. During this period, when the Silla-Tang War brought Silla to the brink of defeat, here is the content of a letter sent by King Munmu of Silla to Tang.

Perhaps anyone with a proper sense of humanity would have many thoughts. Therefore, Lee Jae-myung, take a moment to reflect on what constitutes subservience and what constitutes diplomatic strategy.

"I, who have committed a grave sin, humbly submit my words. In the past, when I was as if hanging upside down, I received grace and was spared a death by tearing. Even if my body were ground to powder and my bones scorched, how could I ever repay such immense grace? Even if my head were shattered and I turned to ashes, how could I ever repay such benevolence?

Now, having been branded with the name of a heinous traitor, I have become a sinner deserving of no forgiveness. I fear that if I receive punishment and die, I will be a subject who defied the Emperor's command in life and a ghost who betrayed grace in death.

With tears of blood, I await the court's judgment. I bow my head, and bow again, to confess that I have committed a sin worthy of death."

King Munmu sent letters like this multiple times to appease Emperor Gaozong. This was in 672, four years after the fall of Goguryeo.

Jeong Jae-hak Poet & Columnist