Military Agreement

[Anchor Lead]

At a parliamentary hearing on the Ministry of Defense, the spotlight was on the inter-Korean military agreement signed at the Pyongyang summit last month. The ruling party said that the agreement is tantamount to a peace treaty, whereas the opposition parties blasted the government for creating loopholes in national defense.

[Pkg]

As soon as the parliamentary hearing on the Ministry of Defense began, the ruling and opposition parties clashed over the inter-Korean military agreement that was signed at the Pyongyang summit last month. The ruling party said the agreement serves as a cornerstone for establishing a peace regime. Democratic Party Rep. Hong Young-pyo said the agreement is tantamount to a peace treaty. Justice Party Rep. Kim Jong-dae said that the creation of an inter-Korean joint military committee will serve as a Korean version of the Helsinki agreement.

[Soundbite] Rep. Kim Jong-dae(Justice Party) : "This represents arms control on the Korean Peninsula and a historic milestone in the history of Korea's national division."

The opposition parties rebutted with concerns over national security. Liberty Korea Party Rep. Seo Chung-won pointed out that the military agreement signifies South Korea's disarmament. Bareun Party Rep. Kim Jung-ro said that the no-fly zone will hamper the surveillance of unmanned aerial vehicles. Defense Minister Chung Kyung-doo responded by saying that the government has been discussing the matter with the U.N. Command. He added that the United Nations Command will likely approve the agreement. South Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command Deputy Commander Kim Byung-joo said that the removal of guard posts in the DMZ in line with the military agreement has been found to have no significant effect on national defense.