“Xianlan 2,” a structure with a diameter of 70 meters and a height of 71 meters, installed by China in the Sino-Korean joint management zone. [Xinhua=Yonhap News]

Key security agendas such as denuclearization, North Korea's nuclear program, and illegal structures in the West Sea were entirely absent from the public remarks of the recent South Korea-China summit. President Lee Jae-myung made only principled statements about seeking feasible alternatives for peace on the Korean Peninsula, and President Xi Jinping did not mention the North Korean issue. 

The government stated in its post-summit briefing that it explained a three-phase solution for denuclearization, but this was merely an after-the-fact explanation of the closed-door meeting and was not recorded in the official remarks. By omitting the sensitive North Korean denuclearization agenda from the public statements, this summit appeared to condone North Korea's nuclear program. 

The issue of the Provisional Measures Zone (PMZ) in the West Sea was also absent from the summit's remarks. Matters such as joint management, the establishment of a median line, and the removal of Chinese structures were all announced by the government after the meeting. 

The government officially announced that both sides agreed on the importance of making the West Sea a "peaceful and prosperous sea" and decided to continue dialogue on the structure issue. This is a humiliating stance that seeks to institutionalize China's existing illegal and unilateral actions by first accepting them as a fait accompli and then framing them under the guise of joint management. The West Sea structure issue has become a matter of representing China's interests. 

Is Joint Management of the West Sea Management? Or Abandonment of Territory? 

Since 2018, China has unilaterally installed a total of 16 structures in and around the Provisional Measures Zone (PMZ) in the West Sea. Among these, three structures, including two fish farms (Xianlan 1 and 2) and one integrated management platform, have been illegally installed within our waters (inside the PMZ). 

This is a clear violation of the Sino-Korean Fishery Agreement, which prohibits the "installation of permanent facilities." Despite this, the government is making idle talk about making the West Sea a "peaceful and prosperous sea."

The Provisional Measures Zone was originally intended as a space to avoid conflict and manage shared resources, not as a space for joint territorial management. However, the outcome of this summit has led to a situation where South Korea effectively tolerates China's unilateral actions. While China builds structures, conducts drilling, and repeatedly engages in illegal fishing, accumulating evidence of effective control, the government cannot avoid criticism for weakening its response capabilities by cutting budgets for enforcement and surveillance. 

In international law, actions, not words, matter in disputes. The party that acts gains rights, and the party that stops loses rights. While the government repeatedly repeats phrases like "continue dialogue" and "under discussion," China is creating records, establishing faits accomplis, and accumulating evidence for the international community that "we are managing this area."

The framework of joint management in the West Sea restricts South Korea's maritime sovereignty and its ability to take unilateral action. If a joint management system is introduced, South Korea will need to seek China's consent even for basic sovereign acts such as enforcement, investigation, and demolition. Conversely, China will securely protect its interests by solidifying the existing fait accompli within the institutional framework. 

A Nation's Territory is Not Lost Only Through Defeat in War

A weak concept of territorial defense and a failure to respond in disputes lead to the loss of territory. Joseon lost its sovereignty not through a single war, but through diplomatic impotence and failed responses. Even without the sound of gunfire, invasions are proceeding silently. China is recreating the "gray zone tactics" used in the South China Sea in the West Sea, raising concerns about the risk of the West Sea becoming an inland sea for China and a violation of freedom of navigation. 

It has been reported that the demilitarized zone (DMZ) management guidelines transmitted to frontline units include the instruction, "If military maps and UN Command reference lines differ, make a judgment based on the southern line of the two." While this was presented under the guise of easing military tensions, it was in fact an act of conceding and abandoning territory defended with blood during the Korean War. 

The DMZ was created to prevent gunfire, not to abandon sovereignty. When surveillance decreases, records disappear, and access is restricted, it ceases to be a buffer zone and becomes a territory vacuum. Vacuums are always filled by the stronger party. The surveillance gap in the DMZ is not just a military measure but a failure of territorial management. 

The most dangerous thing in international disputes is inaction. Inaction is tacit acceptance, and tacit acceptance is the loss of rights. The current government is demonstrating that territory can be lost not only through war but also through apprehension and silence. 

Territorial Defense: The Most Basic and Absolute Duty Assigned by the Constitution

The defense of a nation's territory is the most basic and absolute duty assigned by the constitution. The concession of territory in the DMZ, the surveillance gap, and the passive response in the West Sea are read as a single message. 

The moment a nation stops defending its territory, that territory disappears. The nation must act now. It must record, monitor, protest, and prove its presence on the ground. Territory is not a bargaining chip but the root of national survival, and protecting that root is not an option but a duty. 

In international disputes, the world looks at actions, not words. Nations that do not act lose their rights. The DMZ is not a buffer zone for abandoning sovereignty, and the West Sea is not a space to be divided by population proportion, nor is it a space to be ceded under the name of joint management. The government has a responsibility to stably manage and protect the territory where its citizens and future generations will live. 

Simple explanations and statements of position after the summit cannot cover up a diplomatic disaster that has self-inflicted harm to national interests and security. Public and military sentiment demands that the government adopt a proactive stance to substantively improve and respond to security issues, and the military is urged to defend the territory of the Republic of Korea through continuous and effective responses to intrusions in the West Sea. 

Editorial Board Member, The Hankook Ilbo

◆ Park Pil-kyu, Member

Editorial Board Member, The Hankook Ilbo

40th graduating class, Korea Military Academy