The fisheries patrol vessel Mugunghwa 10, aboard which a public servant, shot dead by North Korean soldiers, was last seen before his disappearance. Yonhap News.

There is a 1995 American film called "Crimson Tide." A famous line from the movie has long lingered in my mind and heart, where I had learned that national supreme interest is security.

"A soldier is a defender of democracy, not a practitioner of democracy."

When a hardline military leader from the former Soviet Union, who had seized control of Russia amidst civil war, attempted to provoke World War III by activating nuclear missiles and threatening the U.S. mainland, the U.S. nuclear submarine Alabama, cruising near Russian waters, received orders to strike. As the captain was about to carry out the order, he uttered this single line, suppressing the first mate's plea to wait longer for the sake of world peace.

Many have likely seen this masterpiece, and they would have engaged in debates, divided into pro and con, regarding the clash between the captain and the first mate. Both sides would have valid points. However, while the captain's remark might sound extreme, any soldier or public official in a national security agency should naturally side with the captain.

A president would make strategic and comprehensive judgments to determine the direction of response in a national crisis, but the Minister of National Defense or the Director of the National Intelligence Service should naturally propose, recommend, and execute winning strategies for punishing the enemy.

Why am I suddenly bringing up this movie? It's because I encountered the heartfelt remarks of a former Director of the National Intelligence Service, identified as 'Park X,' on a YouTube program called "MBC News Outing: Political Experts" on November 6th, expressing a loss of identity in his past career.

It's utterly trivial. It's staggering to think that a person who was once the Director of the NIS, a role with significant weight, is now just a politician, a mere political opportunist, who should be ridiculed by the public as a 'national bird' (a derogatory term for lawmakers). This is in the past, but it's still unbelievable.

I haven't investigated the background and details of his statements, so I won't dwell on them individually. I will focus solely on his remarks from that day.

Regarding the case of the public servant killed by North Korean soldiers in the West Sea, he referred to it as the "so-called West Sea Killing Incident" and, concerning a 2-year sentence sought by the prosecution for his alleged involvement, he stated he had pork belly and soju with beer because it wasn't a 20-year sentence, thus hurting his pride.

He was given a 20-year sentence by the special prosecutor for alleged remittance to North Korea but was acquitted by the Supreme Court. He also mentioned that they tried to imprison him for receiving 30 million won from the Bohae Savings Bank during the MB administration, but he was acquitted. He added, "If they were going to give him 20 years, why not give him 20 years? I'll come through this time too." He seems to be taunting judicial authorities, saying they can seek whatever sentence they want, whether it's 20 years or 2 years. Is this a child's game? These are not remarks to be made on a public media platform watched by many, but rather in a conversation between close friends. It appears to be a mocking of the judicial system's duties. The phrase "come through" suggests that even if guilt is established and a sentence is sought, he will somehow get through it with political maneuvering.

The charges related to the West Sea public servant shooting incident stem from an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection, which accused him of ordering the deletion of related military intelligence collected as NIS Director. However, there are no witnesses who claim to have received such an order, nor any evidence. He argues that the directives were not given because the information remains on the NIS's main server.

While further evidence regarding the directive will be revealed, the claim that the absence of the order from the main server means it wasn't given is absurd. The preservation of information and data is paramount at the NIS, and it's entirely possible that subordinates may have delayed or postponed even a temporary director's order to fulfill their primary duties. Would a transient figure rashly delete information for political purposes?

He claims the deceased public servant from the West Sea fisheries patrol, who was shot by North Korea, was a resident of Wando, within his constituency of Mokpo, and that he had many debts and gambled, suggesting they (the NIS) believed he defected voluntarily.

He seems to be using hearsay as grounds for assuming voluntary defection. Isn't this rash?

As a former NIS Director, he should have prevented any instances where the lives and property of citizens were threatened by external forces. Those involved in national security and public order should anticipate the worst-case scenario even from the slightest abnormal sign, and respond accordingly. Even if it seems excessive.

He claims that if the public servant had defected, the Ministry of National Defense should be responsible, as if he were an bystander. Was the NIS Director at the time not involved, meaning he was outside the scope of responsibility?

He also stated he would go as a special envoy for the funeral of Kim Yong Nam, former Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly of North Korea, which took place on November 5th. He boasts of his friendship, claiming he drafted the April 8th agreement in Beijing as a North Korean envoy when the June 15th Joint Declaration was agreed upon during the 2000 inter-Korean summit. He describes Kim Yong Nam as tall, handsome, and soft-spoken.

He believes that due to such connections, he would be accepted as a special envoy and that this would create a breakthrough in the strained inter-Korean relations.

Even if that were the case at the time, is it truly appropriate for him, having served as NIS Director, to act in such a capacity now? While it's true that intelligence agencies have historically been involved in creating situations for new inter-Korean relations and in behind-the-scenes negotiations due to their various clandestine channels, this does not mean he should be at the forefront of inter-Korean relations advancement.

If his actions are motivated by a desire for improved inter-Korean relations, then the Ministry of Unification, as the responsible ministry, should be involved. Doesn't his boasting of personal friendships with North Korean leadership amount to admitting he is part of their clandestine network? He deserves to be called a spy with connections to North Korea.

The Ministry of National Defense conducts conventional warfare and, at times, unconventional warfare through special forces. The NIS, of course, engages in unconventional warfare such as intelligence and espionage, both in wartime and peacetime. It seeks to achieve gains in these areas even amidst inter-Korean dialogue. National security agencies are tasked with preserving freedom and democracy in situations where they are restricted, regardless of whether it is wartime or peacetime. The activities of such security agencies can never be solely democratic or peaceful. They are organizations that always keep the enemy in mind.

Park X, a politician from a political faction advocating for an inter-Korean policy that prioritizes only peace, stating that unification is all that matters regardless of ideology or system, should not have taken on such a role. If he did, he should have acted accordingly.

He claims that during the Moon Jae-in administration's inter-Korean summits, Kim Jong Un intended to bestow upon him the title of "People's Artist." Is this something to boast about, or even to mention as a side note? Are the "People's Artists" in North Korea truly those who have made significant contributions to nurturing the cultural sentiments of the people? Are they not merely propaganda tools for the idolization of the Kim Il Sung family to maintain their hereditary dictatorial regime? Is this something to say on public media, which is a medium for the public of the Republic of Korea? Is he trying to conduct political comedy for an election campaign?

Mr. Park X is a senior member of the ruling Democratic Party and has served as the Director of the NIS. He knows all there is to know.

While the NIS is an agency that protects the freedom and democracy of the liberal democratic Republic of Korea, its activities operate on a different plane. If he doesn't understand, he should study again and act with the gravitas befitting his position.

Kim Il-go (金一鼓), Former Head of North Korean Psychological Warfare Unit, Central Intelligence Agency; Retired Major, Special Warfare Command