Skip to main content

Edge's News: South, North Korea Restore Cross-Border Communication

The communication line between Seoul and Pyongyang was cut off last year in June in a North Korean move made against what it claimed were activists sending anti-Pyongyang leaflets across the border.


According to the South Korean Yonhap News Agency, citing the South Korean presidential office, Cheong Wa Dae, cross-border communication between the countries was restored at 10 a.m., local time, on Tuesday after it had been cut off last year.


The leaders of the two Koreas have been exchanging personal letters since April that were aimed to improve the relations between the countries and eventually agreed to restore the hotline communication, the report said, citing the statement from Park Soo-hyun, senior Cheong Wa Dae secretary for public communication.


According to Yonhap, North Korea said that the restoration of the official communication links will play a positive role in improving inter-Korean relations.


Now, the whole Korean nation desires to see the North-South relations recovered from setback and stagnation as early as possible," the Korean Central News Agency said. "The top leaders of the North and the South agreed to make a big stride in recovering the mutual trust and promoting reconciliation by restoring the cutoff inter-Korean communication liaison lines through the recent several exchanges of personal letters."


The communication line between the two countries was severed in June 2020, with Pyongyang protesting against what it described as Seoul's failure to stop activists from sending anti-North Korea leaflets across the border. On 16 June, an inter-Korean liaison office was destroyed in an explosion carried out by Pyongyang.


In response to the North's condemnation, Seoul imposed an anti-leaflet ban in the country to defuse tensions between the countries. However, reports said that the ban saw violations, prompting more criticism from Pyongyang.


The relations between the two Koreas have remained strained, with tensions continuing after no peace treaty being signed following the 1953 Korean War. Some progress was made in resolving the bilateral issues during Donald Trump's presidential tenure, with the two leaders, Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong Un, even meeting for summits.


However, tensions later escalated again, with the US and South Korea particularly urging Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program, and the latter consistently refusing to do so.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The FCT Minister–Soldier Standoff: A Test of Civil Authority and the Rule of Law

On November 11, 2025, Nigerians watched in disbelief as a video surfaced showing a tense confrontation between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, and a group of armed soldiers who blocked his convoy from accessing a disputed piece of land in Gaduwa, Abuja. The incident, brief but dramatic, was more than a moment of political theatre. It struck at the heart of a much bigger issue — the place of the military in a democracy, and the sanctity of civilian authority under the Nigerian Constitution. The Legal Position: Who Was Right? The Minister’s Authority Under Section 302 of the 1999 Constitution and the FCT Act , the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory exercises the executive powers of the President within Abuja. That means the Minister is not just a political appointee — he represents federal executive authority . His duties include overseeing land allocation, urban planning, and the enforcement of development control through the Federal Capital T...

Nigeria: On the Right of Self-Defence and Protection of National Sovereignty

The Federal Republic of Nigeria reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular the maintenance of international peace and security, the respect for the sovereignty and political independence of all States, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Nigeria is a sovereign and independent nation. Our Constitution vests sovereignty in the people of Nigeria and mandates the Government to protect the territorial integrity and independence of our country. This sovereignty—recognised under international law and reaffirmed by our membership in the United Nations, the African Union, and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)—is inviolable. The Government of Nigeria has observed with grave concern recent statements and actions that amount to a threat of aggression and possible violation of our territorial integrity. We remind all States that any such threat or use of force contravenes Article 2(4) of the Ch...

Kebbi’s 3 a.m. Withdrawal Shows Why President Tinubu’s Security Reforms Can’t Wait

When Governor Nasir Idris of Kebbi State revealed that security personnel deployed to vulnerable communities were withdrawn at 3:00 a.m.—just 45 minutes before an attack—Nigerians reacted with shock, anger, and a single question that refuses to disappear: Who gave the withdrawal order? It is a fair question. It is also one that may take time, investigation, and institutional honesty to answer. But the Kebbi incident exposes a deeper truth about security management in Nigeria: our command structure is too fragmented for a country battling multi-layered threats. And this, more than anything, validates President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s push for a centralised, technology-driven, and accountable security coordination model. Nigeria’s security agencies—military, police, DSS, civil defence, intelligence units—operate in parallel lanes with overlapping mandates. State governors, despite bearing the title “Chief Security Officer,” have no legal authority over federal forces. This incoheren...