Joachim wrote:There is no peace treaty between North and South Korea. There is a temporal truce and technically the sides are in the state of war. You pretend to be an expert but it seems not familiar with basic facts.
If you believe I have visited Korea so many times and not been aware that South Korea was not a party to the armistice agreement, you are sadly mistaken. In the early 1980s, with strict curfews in place - as I already stated - it was hard to avoid being aware of that very fact when you could be shot on the streets after midnight. It has also been repeated a vast number of times in endless media articles since the end of hostilities.
I suppose you realise that the US also does not have a peace treaty with North Korea. Or perhaps you don't? The 1953 armistice agreement was signed by the United Nations, not by the USA. That armistice was always intended to be a temporary measure, a ceasefire before a final treaty could be signed. It was between armed forces. The only governments to sign the armistice were North Korea and China - although the UN hoped all parties would abide by the armistice provisions. Accordingly the United States as a party to the conflict still remains technically in a state of war with North Korea.
The armistice had three objectives -
1. the suspension of open hostilities;
2. the exchange of prisoners of war;
3. the redrawing of the line between North and South and the establishment of the DMZ.
I note you have not answered my question. You came to a rather radical conclusion based it seems on a plane change at incheon Airport. Perhaps I was wrong. Even so, can you now kindly inform readers how many times you have visited Seoul over the years and how many nights you have spent in the city in order to come to your judgement?