The spokesman said removal of the mines is not part of any effort to clear the way for reunification of the peninsula, nor an indication of improving relations with North Korea.
.
.
.
The spokesman pointed out that the South Korean military has never removed land mines inside the DMZ and in its adjacent areas immediately to the south.

A couple of months ago, a South Korean managed to defect to the North through the DMZ. He was able to do this, I think I remember reading, because he had done his military service in the same area where he crossed the border. I presume others could do the same thing.

They cannot defect there anyway. They need travel permits to go to that region, and there is not exactly a convenient public transport link to the border. They don’t have cars. I have been there and I can tell you that anybody other than a soldier would be picked up in about five second of showing his face near the border. The whole area is literally empty of civilians.

Every bit of this is equally true of the North Korea-Chinese border, so that adds nothing to your argument. Certainly it would take time to make the DMZ porous, but that process begins with the removal of the mines. Without the mines, Borders are difficult to control. Just ask anyone in Arizona. The better argument is that the North Koreans would only emplace more mines on their own side of the DMZ, which might also require them to shift their border defenses. But then, why didn’t they do that on the Chinese border?

South Korea doesn’t WANT a big flood of DPRK refugees anymore than Scandinavia wanted Soviet “refugees” in the 80s or 90s.

No doubt, true of many South Koreans. But what about President Lee? I don’t claim to know that answer. Maybe this is, as you suggest, merely about “less risk for Southern farmers and hikers.” Then again, there have been some defections through the DMZ recently, mostly by soldiers. Those soldiers will be in the best position to observe where the mines are being removed, and the word will get around. Whether this is being done to allow a more gradual, soft-landing integration or not, refugee flows may be an unintended consequence.

Even if they could get around all these problems there are still plenty of military units on both sides, and still mines left in the south and on the Northern side.

South Korea doesn’t WANT a big flood of DPRK refugees anymore than Scandinavia wanted Soviet “refugees” in the 80s or 90s.

This means nothing other than less risk for Southern farmers and hikers who move around in the areas concerned.

And it’s not exactly like this piece of news is going to be in the news in North Korea.

Not sure what happened to my post above, but the original said that in 1999 there were less than 1,000 defectors in the ROK. Today there are 17,000 including these intrepid balloon launchers hurling the prophetic smooth stone at Goliath’s head.

Either way, I hope they’re ready. With the Hanawon system already completely overwhelmed, something tells me that they’re not. Putting large numbers of people in refugee camps with no long term solution is a sure way to give yourself a migraine. Just ask the Thais what they think of North Koreans in detention centres.

Did South Korea remove all the mines that North Korea placed also or did NK not place any?

Even with the mines removed is it still possible that North Koreans could now cross the DMZ? Isn’t the DMZ, unlike the Chinese border, highly monitored?