09-151.pdf

Mohn (1961) records, although without giving any details, that
hundreds of violations of the Armistice Agreement, almost exclusively
flights over the other side’s territory, took place during his time in
office in July 1953-May 1954 but hardly any were admitted. The
absence of an impartial referee in the MAC contributed to this pattern.
The retired South Korean General Lee Sanghee (2007) points out the
absence of an institutional mechanism in the Armistice Agreement to
determine violations and to deter or rectify them as a limitation of the
agreement. Yet Mohn emphasizes in the first evaluation the author has
seen of the MAC that it has succeeded better than expected in maintaining
peace, mainly thanks to the DMZ that reduced the possibilities
for frictions and misunderstandings. 34
Unlike Mohn, studies by the South Korean Defence Intelligence
Headquarters (1993) and Joint Intelligence Headquarters (1999) record
that other kinds of violations also took place. Already at the second
MAC meeting called by the KPA/CPV held on July 29, the North protested
that immediately after the armistice had entered into force on
July 27, the South had fired automatic weapons and cannons against
the North. On July 28, military airplanes had intruded into the North’s
airspace three times. At the third meeting convened on July 30, the
North protested that a military airplane had violated its airspace and
pursued reconnaissance activities on July 29. Also when the fourth
meeting was held on July 31, the North complained about the South’s
34_ Columbia University, ibid., Paragraph 13(a); Hapch’am chôngbo ponbu, op. cit.,
1999, p. 9; Jhe, ibid., 2000, pp. 79-80, 82: “Chôngjôn hyôpchông-e kwanhan
yôn’gu - kinûng chôngsanghwa-mith silhyosông hwakbo pangan-ûl chungsim-ûro,”
Chôllyak yôn’gu 11, no. 1 (2004), p. 100; Lee, op. cit., 2001(b), p. 100; Lee, op. cit.,
May 2, 2007, p. 6; Mohn, op. cit., p. 328.
42 Peace-keeping in the Korean Peninsula