Why Seoul has called for peace talks to formally end the Korean War

South Korea's leader wants to sit down with North Korea and make peace.

North and South Korea are technically still at war as the agreement made to stop fighting on the Korean Peninsula in 1953 was an armistice, not a peace treaty.

Now South Korea has once again called for talks to formally end the Korean War.

So how significant is Seoul's offer and what could it mean for peace on the Korean Peninsula?

A wide breach to cross

Attempts have been made from both sides to formally end the war over the years, with sticking points including the US military presence in the South and more recently North Korea's nuclear program.

Since taking office last year, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung's administration has taken a more conciliatory approach than his hawkish predecessor impeached president Yoon Suk Yeol.

Yoon was sentenced to life in prison earlier this year on charges of rebellion over his attempt to put the country under military rule.

Jay Song, an associate professor from Australian National University, said the centre-left Lee government had a pro-engagement peace policy and had not given up on unification "one day".

"Ending the war first, peace building next and finally if conditions are met, try one Korea,"

she said.

On the other side of the demilitarised zone, North Korea has abandoned its official aim of unification in recent years, with leader Kim Jong Un declaring South Korea as the North's "most hostile state".

In 2024, the authoritarian dictatorship said it would permanently block its border with South Korea and boost its front-line defence posture to cope with "confrontational hysteria" by South Korean and US forces.

"The important thing here is that the nature of the inter-Korean relations remains hostile so that Pyongyang can continue to develop its nuclear weapons and missiles," Dr Song said.

North Korea expert Leonid Petrov said nuclear weapons were a non-negotiable for the North as they served as a guarantee of regime survival.

"Any contact, exchange, or cooperation with South Korea poses serious security risks to the North Korean political system because such engagement undermines its legitimacy and its myths of superiority," said Dr Petrov, who teaches Korean studies at the Australian National University.

How significant was the speech?

Mr Lee extended the most recent olive branch during a speech on Saturday to mark Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule.

Liberation Day is celebrated by both North and South Korea, though with diverging narratives.

"Let us put down our intentions to threaten each other and begin discussions to end the long-running war as the directly involved parties,"

Mr Lee said.

"Through this, it may also be possible to discuss effective measures to halt the advancement of North Korea's nuclear capabilities," he added.

Dr Song pointed out that without a formal peace treaty war could resume at any time.

"In fact, there have been many clashes and skirmishes at the land and maritime borders," she said.

"People living on the Korean Peninsula have internalised this unstable conflict situation for more than 70 years.

"Mistrust, surveillance and violence have been normalised.

"In this context, President Lee's call for ending the war and establishing a peace regime is significant."

Alexander Hynd, a lecturer at the University of Melbourne's Asia Institute, said some people saw the peace treaty talks as "unfinished business".

"For others, this is low-hanging fruit that can be helpful in kickstarting more meaningful inter-Korean talks and future cooperation," he said.

"North Korea has so far largely ignored South Korean President Lee's attempts to improve relations since he was elected last June," he added.

'We can achieve peace'

For some members of Australia's Korean diaspora, Mr Lee's calls for peace talks has been decades in the making.

Sun Jung from Werribee in Melbourne said she was "delighted" when she heard.

"This approach has been lacking for so many years," Ms Jung told the ABC.

"I really believe that through dialogue and communication, we can achieve peace."

Ms Jung said her family carries the war inside them. Her father was around 15 years old when it began — his brothers and his parents were affected too.

"They all went through the war. They suffered," she said.

"They've seen it all, from poverty to ashes from all the burning.

"People there have suffered enough."

But while Ms Jung welcomed the prospect of peace talks, she said a treaty was only the first step.

"To me, peace is not just about the absence of war or a formal paper that needs to be signed," she said.

"It is about respecting human life and every individual's right to live."

Ms Jung, who became a citizen in 2005, has lived in Australia longer than she has in South Korea.

While she said that she does not follow Korean current events "all the time", moments like Mr Lee's comments pull her back in.

"In my blood and in my heart is Korea,"

she said.

"So, I like to know what's happening there, and I want to contribute in any way."

A bid to restart diplomacy

Jenny Town, senior fellow and director of 38 North at the Stimson Center, told the ABC's The World South Korea had long been trying to figure out how to restart diplomacy with North Korea.

The North's decision to label South Korea a permanent hostile state meant the political infrastructure that had allowed negotiations had been severed.

"They keep trying to find ways to rebuild this relationship, knowing that they need to lower tensions … they don't want this constant pressure and tension," she said.

"With the Liberation Day speech, I think this was their way of saying that they don't have to be in a permanently hostile arrangement with each other."

Nonetheless, Dr Town said there still was not a consensus in South Korea on formally ending the war because it had become so tied to the relationship with the US.

"If you see the war as a function of maintaining the alliance, then the status quo is preferable over severing the alliance as a whole,"

she said.

"But technically the alliance is not contingent on the war continuing. It is a separate agreement … and should be dealt with separately than the actual formal ending of the war itself."

Could peace talks actually go ahead?

North Korea has yet to officially respond to Mr Lee's outreach.

Complicating matters, North Korea has in recent times formed increasingly close ties with Russia while the United States under President Donald Trump has been sowing doubt about his commitment to supporting South Korea.

Dr Petrov said Mr Lee's proposal was "falling on deaf ears" because Mr Kim had a better deal with Russia.

"These days, Moscow is offering cash, energy, and advanced military technology — effectively making international sanctions irrelevant — in exchange for North Korean troops and conventional weapons to be used against Ukraine," he said.

On Sunday, Mr Trump ordered the Pentagon to scale back planned joint military exercises with South Korea, saying it declined to help denuclearise Iran and citing his good relationship with Mr Kim.

The US on Tuesday local time confirmed the exercises would conclude on August 21, a week earlier than scheduled.

Dr Hynd said he did not view Mr Lee's offer as likely to lead to a major breakthrough in inter-Korean relations.

"If anything, it is more about steadying the ship and locking in the status quo, at a time when President Lee's major challenge is how to deal with President Trump's unpredictability and general ambivalence towards the US-South Korea alliance."

Dr Song said peace was not easy to achieve on the Korean Peninsula.

"It's not just the two Koreas' problem but intertwined with great powers around them: the US, China, Russia and Japan," she said.

"It appears the only party that desperately wants peace is South Korea at the moment.

"The others all want a flashpoint in that region to grow their own power and influence."