[Editorial] Are we too humble toward Pyongyang?

Wednesday, the day before the scheduled reunions of separated families, Seoul's Red Cross Society president, Chang Choong-Sik, suddenly departed for Japan. This gives us a deep sense of frustration and shame because Chang's departure is a clear indication that Seoul is unduly sensitive to Pyongyang's responses as to be dragged by the North's inclinations in carrying out inter-Korean affairs.

Chang is the man in charge of all the events for separated family reunions in Seoul. To his disgrace, however, he had to vacate his office during the reunions, apparently to avoid embarrassing encounters with the North's accompanying officials. Has Chang, then, done anything terribly wrong against the North so that Seoul had to arrange his overseas trip during the event?

That hardly is the case. Pyongyang recently took issue with Chang's interview in Seoul's Monthly Chosun by taking its fractional accounts out of context. This newspaper has already pointed out that this was misguided criticism on the part of the North. Besides, we were suspicious about Pyongyang's motives as to why it belatedly decided to complain about the interview as late as one and a half months after the circulation of the Monthly.

Chang apparently expressed his regrets to the North in response to its complaint, but Chang and the government's relevant ministry denied his expression of regret at the parliamentary committee. That they tried to hide it, we pointed out, was something beyond our comprehension.

Such a trifle quibbling between the South and the North is not only a waste of time but goes against the true intent and humanitarian spirit of the separated family reunions. Forsaking such a spirit, Pyongyang apparently warned Seoul of its strong stance that Chang's appearance at the reunion events may create unfortunate encounters, together with its boycotting of any dinner meetings hosted by Chang. Obviously, this warning by the North was the reason for Chang's sudden departure for Japan.

Some people may take the view that Chang's overseas trip was inevitable not to ruin the nationalistic agenda for the reunion of separated families. Seoul's Red Cross Society stated that Chang left the country on his own accord because he came to the judgment that his absence during the event would be conducive to the successful undertaking of the reunions.

Although Chang is the man to preside over the reunions, he had to stay overseas during the events because his presence could be a stumbling block for the meeting. The situation he is in is indeed lamentable. His resignation, altogether, from the Red Cross presidency may be the right choice for him in order to preserve the integrity of his honor.

By far the important consideration here is the government's unduly submissive posture toward Pyongyang. There are some unconfirmed views that Chang's expression of regret to the North and overseas trip were what the government compelled him to do against his will. If this is a true account of the story, this is tantamount to our government's abandonment of a sense of pride and decency in order to please and follow Pyongyang's inclinations.

We repeat our emphasis here that the government should be able to say to the North what it ought to say no matter how meticulous and precarious it is to maintain the South-North relations. This will in the end help Pyongyang eventually come around with an openness and a mind to better understand us. This points to a viable way for the sound development of inter-Korean relations.