Following North Korea's claim that the recent landmine explosion in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) was a "self-made drama" by Seoul, military authorities have strongly urged Pyongyang to apologize and take responsible actions. The United Nations Command also determined that a violation of the armistice agreement occurred, but specific corresponding measures have not been disclosed. Unlike the 2015 incident involving landmines, where loudspeaker broadcasts were resumed in response, the current situation requires the government to consider both its policy of easing tensions and effective responses, leading to deeper deliberations within the military.
On September 30, Kang Hyun-woo, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Operations Division, stated, "On September 21, an incident occurred where our soldiers conducting a normal search operation south of the Military Demarcation Line were seriously injured by a North Korean landmine."
Kang pointed out that North Korea continues to escalate tensions in border areas by laying landmines near the Military Demarcation Line (MDL), undermining the spirit of existing inter-Korean agreements and violating the armistice. He emphasized, "This is a clear violation of the armistice agreement and must be stopped immediately."
He demanded that North Korea immediately cease its activities that heighten tensions, apologize, and take responsible actions, warning, "We make it clear that North Korea bears full responsibility for any future incidents that may occur."
On the same day, the UN Command announced the results of a joint field investigation with South Korean forces, revealing the discovery of one North Korean anti-personnel mine south of the MDL. Based on this, they concluded that a violation of the armistice agreement had occurred and stated that they are taking action in accordance with the established armistice framework.
Previously, on September 29, South Korean and UN forces found one North Korean Sugi-type anti-personnel mine near the explosion site. The Joint Chiefs of Staff assessed that this mine was different from the one reported by soldiers who witnessed the incident.
In contrast, Kim Yo-jong, deputy director of the North Korean Workers' Party, claimed in a statement that the incident was a "self-made drama" by Seoul, denying any responsibility on North Korea's part.
As North Korea denies responsibility, attention is shifting to the South Korean military's follow-up actions. While the military has clarified the injuries to soldiers caused by North Korean mines and the violation of the armistice agreement, their statement did not include specific response measures or timelines.
During the 2015 landmine incident, loudspeaker broadcasts were resumed six days after the incident. At that time, two South Korean soldiers were seriously injured by a landmine explosion on August 4, and the military resumed loudspeaker broadcasts to North Korea on August 10 for the first time in 11 years, employing actual pressure measures alongside condemnation.
Currently, opposition parties are calling for the resumption of loudspeaker broadcasts. Jeong Jeom-sik, the floor leader of the People Power Party, referenced the response during the 2015 landmine incident, urging the reinstallation of the dismantled loudspeakers and the resumption of broadcasts.
However, considering the current government's stance toward North Korea, it may not be easy to choose to resume loudspeaker broadcasts immediately. The Lee Jae-myung administration halted loudspeaker broadcasts to North Korea in June of last year and began dismantling them in August. The Defense Ministry explained that these measures were intended to help ease tensions between the two Koreas without affecting military readiness.
Resuming loudspeaker broadcasts would reverse the government's efforts to ease tensions with North Korea and could increase military tensions in border areas.
The military faces the challenge of holding North Korea accountable while preventing further clashes. Increasing the level of response could conflict with the government's North Korea policy, while lowering it could lead to criticism of a "passive response," indicating that the military's deliberations on the level of corresponding measures are likely to deepen.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.