The article said:

One cannot but observe that the north-south military working talks that opened in Panmunjom on Feb. 8 were a great turning point in the efforts of both sides to switch to dialogue from confrontation.

These talks, however, failed to narrow down the differences over the "Cheonan" warship incident and the Yonphyong Island incident. The working talks ended up getting familiar with each other's stands, failing to fix the specific date for the next round of talks.

Shortly ago, there was a reception between media of China and south Korea. On way home, a friend of mine put the following question to me: "At present both the north and the south of Korea call for dialogue. One side asserts unconditional dialogue while the other calls for conditional dialogue. Which side's assertion do you agree with?"

I told him a story about the contradictions between the two neighbors.

The two neighbors which were in the harmonious relationship quarreled over the issue of profits. Their trade of bitter accusations led to striking blows at each other. If both of them wish to get reconciled, they should let bygones be bygones.

The friend had nothing to say.

Generally speaking, if both sides hold contacts for the high-level military talks and make a switchover to an unconditional contact from conditional dialogue, people will regard this as a positive signal and a development helpful to stabilizing the situation on the Korean Peninsula.

In order to solve this big problem, there should be great wisdom. There was a precedent in which both sides displayed such great wisdom in settling their relations.

The north-south summit clearly showed such high level of wisdom on the part of the two sides.

Such wisdom finds a vivid expression in the attitudes of both sides looking into the future called national reunification and showing the will for reconciliation and cooperation, putting aside differences before them.

The DPRK launched a strong offensive for north-south dialogue. Its government, political parties and public organizations proposed having various talks at an early date on the resumption of tour of Mt. Kumgang and the Kaesong industrial zone including the talks between authorities. The precondition was "unconditional."

This term of "unconditional" showed the urgent intention of the DPRK to have dialogue.

South Korea stood on the defensive, unable to cope with the above-said strong offensive for dialogue, and reacted to it with "conditional" dialogue. Meanwhile, it tried hard to overpower the other side in dialogue by bolstering up the military capability, while paying attention to expanding arms and intensifying military exercises.

If the north and the south of Korea treat each other as compatriots, this will bring about a phase of appeasement to bring back or prolong what used to be good in the past under new conditions.