[Editorial] ASEM summit comes to a close

The 2-day ASEM summit has completed its scheduled agenda without any major mishaps. Seoul's ASEM meeting may be assessed as a success because it produced some concrete directions for the future. The Seoul forum was able to overcome the limitations of the previous rounds of ASEM, which were nothing more than events for the sake of holding a meeting for heads of state with no substantial results.

Especially meaningful and timely for us here is ASEM's unanimous adoption, on Friday in its first session, of the Seoul Declaration on peace on the Korean peninsula because this is a time for us to open a historic new era for inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation.

Some critics argue that the Declaration made no reference to North Korea's obligations and responsibilities and that ASEM should have demanded a forthright change in Pyongyang's attitude. Nevertheless, it is of enormous diplomatic significance that 26 heads of state from Asia and Europe came out in support of progress in inter-Korean relations. The very fact that some European states expressed their eagerness to establish diplomatic relations with North Korea speaks loudly for the ASEM summit's enormous influence.

The Asia Europe Cooperation Framework (AECF), which was adopted by ASEM on Saturday prior to the closing of the event, deserves our special attention. For, unlike the previous rounds, it suggested specific ways for multilateral cooperation between Asia and Europe.

Critics had made devastating criticism of ASEM's first and second rounds by pointing out that the events were only sloganeering without any concrete substance, but this ASEM summit clearly delineated future projects for cooperation between the two regions. Now ASEM embodies the proper features of a regional cooperative body both in name and reality.

Closer ties and greater mutual cooperation between the member states appear imperative for ASEM to make further advances in the future. To be sure, ASEM lacks any powers to enforce any action on its member states owing to its very nature. It is a consultative body. Consequently, it is most important that the member states have their own determination and commitment to translate any agreements and resolutions into action. Programs to provide incentives in order to stimulate their voluntary participation must be developed.

As the country presiding over this ASEM, we have good reason to be proud that ASEM's Seoul forum has been very productive. For one thing, it is a great feat on our part that we have hosted a major international summit in which 26 heads of state participated. In addition, we staged the event with no major disturbances, although there were some protests by NGOs against the meeting.

At the same time, we should take notice of criticisms about our preparations and management of the event. Granted, some inconvenience was anticipated during the period of the ASEM summit because of the traffic regulations that banned the use of half of Seoul's automobiles; but no efforts were made by officials to try and minimize the people's inconvenience.

There were also criticisms that foreign guests were accorded with excessive courtesy, while they slighted the efforts made to show to them what is uniquely ours or ¡°things Korean¡±. Some people made sarcastic comments about those officials as people who earned full marks for their generosity and kindness to foreigners, but a zero grade for their public relations work for our nation.

In addition, critics also complain that there was no central coordination center for the event's preparation and overall management. The guidebooks for the ASEM summit are littered with many errors, which created difficulties for the foreign participants. These criticisms must be heeded in order to prevent their recurrence in our preparations of other big events in future.