The Blue House NSC finally decided to end the tight dispute over GSOMIA, the ROK-Japan military security agreement, at 12:00 pm on November 22. We shouldn't look back on the decision we made, but the controversy over the utility of Jisomia has not subsided.

A day or two after the decision was made on Monday, senior Blue House officials say, "The information received from Japan through Jisomia was not useful." Just one day before the decision was made, Security Secretary Chung Kyung-du said the National Defense Commission had "strategic value."

It's an embarrassing situation where some senior government officials in the same government say, "The value of Gisomia is high," while others say it's "no value." Someone is lying. The government is producing and disseminating fake news that the government is calling for eradication.

● Chung Kyung-Doo Defense "Strategic value is enough"

At the National Assembly's plenary session, which was broadcast live on the morning of the National Assembly on Monday, opposition lawmakers intensively asked Defense Minister Chung Kyung-du about the value of Jisomi. The highlight was the answer of Justice Kim Jong-dae and Minister Chung, who were classified as criminal rights.

Kim Jong-dae: Japan has such a great intelligence, does it provide us with sensitive information such as Aegisham and military satellites to Korea as much as Japan has?

Kyung-Doo Jung: It's all about different cases, for example, when we have a nuclear test in the past, or when we have received information that we can't catch. I don't think evaluating is right. In complex terms, we have to look at it from an integrated perspective.

Kim Jong-dae: I don't understand the views of lawmakers who ask questions about Gisomia from other conservative perspectives. What I want to know is the strategic value of this agreement.

Kyung Doo Jung: I think there is enough strategic value.

Jongdae Kim: Strategic Values Well… good.
Lawmaker Kim Jong-dae might have expected the words, "There is no strategic value for Gisomia." However, he did not bend the "belief" about Jisomia, saying, "There are plenty of strategic values," and "we have received information that we cannot capture in North Korea's nuclear test." Senator Kim was embarrassed.

Chung's view of Gisomi is similar to the military's overall view. When the issue of Jisomia first arose, a key Pentagon official told the reporter, "It's better for me to dig up Jisomia first, whether it's Korea or Japan." It means that the one who shakes Jisomia first is responsible for this because it becomes the party that weakened the security cooperation.

Just before the opening of the NSC, which decided to end Jisomia on the 22nd, the Pentagon's position was "let's keep Jisomia but share information passively." If it helps to identify North Korea's nuclear and missiles, it's frank to the military that there's no reason to be shy about information tagged with "from Japan." Moreover, once the agreement was broken, it was difficult to restore it even if Korea-Japan relations were normalized one day.

● "I have never received meaningful information in Japan so far!"

On the other hand, senior Blue House officials asking for anonymity have spoken similar words to reporters, emphasizing the fruitfulness of Gisomia. Some officials asserted that "I have never received meaningful information about North Korean missiles from Japan until now." "Information of Japan is not useful in a word."

Other officials said, "I have never received information from Japan before using it for analysis." "No information provided by Japan was meaningful." It is argued that the decision to end is right because it is strong and secure even without Gisomia.

No one knows the value of Japanese information received from the current government as well as Minister Chung Kyung-du. Chung served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from August 2017 to September 2018, three months after the Moon Jae-in administration followed the Air Force Chief of Staff. "She received some information we couldn't catch," he said. "Strategic value is good enough." Is it a lie between an anonymous Blue House senior official and a representative of the people and a Defense Minister in front of a TV camera?

The senior officials speak 180 degrees of different words, and the listeners are very confused. What is the strategic tactical value of Jisomia, or is there no security value at all, whether it ends the agreement by means of extreme Japan, leaving the security value? The government needs to clarify the benefits and values ​​of Gisomia and publicly disclose it.