WRITE for ATol ADVERTISE MEDIA KIT GET ATol BY EMAIL ABOUT ATol CONTACT US
Asia Time Online - Daily News
             
Asia Times Chinese
AT Chinese



    Korea
     Aug 29, 2008
If it ain't broke, don't fix it
By Hazel Smith

The current progress towards possible resolution of the long-lasting nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula is the result of the quite unlikely, somewhat unexpected, and very definitely unsung American foreign policy success that is the George W Bush administration's present strategy on North Korea.

After more than five decades of security crises, this bold new approach is unraveling tension and (hopefully) building peace in one of the world's most volatile hot spots.

So while both Senators Barack Obama and John McCain are running for president as "change" candidates eager to leave the Dubya years behind - particularly when it comes to salvaging America's position as global foreign policy leader - they would be

 

well advised not to toss out the baby with the bath water.

Why is the Bush administration's policy of engagement so unlikely? Quite simply because the US President has made no secret of the fact that he "loathes" Kim Jong-il, North Korea's autocratic leader. North Korea was after all one of the three "axis of evil" countries, along with Iran and Iraq.

It is also rather unexpected, because Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill's decision to dump the previous policy of non-diplomacy, and deal with the North Korean government as a party which could indeed be negotiated with, flew in the face of the dominant "wisdom" of the insular circles that comprise official Washington.

Also dumped was an out-of-date picture of North Korea that no longer represents - if it ever did - the reality of North Korean society and economy. The view, still presented by those who ought to know better, is that North Korea is socially and economically static, with a brainwashed population incapable of rational thinking.

North Korea perhaps came close to this sometime in the 1950s and 1960s, when the socialization process lauding the Kim family was at its most intense, and the government could afford to insulate most North Koreans from the non-communist world.

Today, North Korea is a different country. It is still poor and politically repressed, but its people no longer rely on the state, as it has been unable to feed them or provide a living wage for two decades. During and after the famine of the mid 1990s, which killed up to a million people, North Koreans increasingly engaged in private market transactions for survival purposes. Today, the myriad official and unofficial opportunities for private market transactions provide their primary, and usually only, way of obtaining food and goods.

The majority of North Korea's 23 million people have long given up on the government as an economic provider and equally abandoned any idea there anything worth preserving in the political system. As a result, the North Korean state is now far more motivated to seek security, and an economic deal, in order to help restore its legitimacy in the eyes of its own people

Thanks to an endemic poverty of analysis, the conventional wisdom in Washington failed to comprehend the scope of this socio-economic transformation, which is both the cause and the consequence of the wholesale, irreversible and embedded "marketization without [political] liberalization" of today's North Korea.

The basic function of diplomacy, the very essence of which is to negotiate agreements with adversaries, was almost forgotten until it was revived by Hill and his team. The crazy policy of seeing war as the only instrument of statecraft, and all diplomacy as "appeasement," shows an appalling ignorance of history and realpolitik.

This perspective became dominant, however, because it was shared by a rather unholy alliance founded on a neo-conservative agenda which supported regime change by any means because of human rights abuses. Under this doctrine dealing with North Korea was akin to supping with the devil.

The emergence of Hill's new approach is an unsung success story, because there are still many on Bush's side of the aisle who are privately - and publicly in the case of stalwarts like John Bolton - horrified at the thought of the United States doing any deal whatsoever with a regime they consider a reincarnation of Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia combined.

As a result, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice must strive in this election year to maintain Republican unity by downplaying the significance of how far negotiations have come. Neither is it in the interests of the Democrats to laud a Republican administration's success in any arena.

With a new president looking to distinguish himself from the previous administration, the temptation may be to shift towards a 'new' way of dealing with the issue. But a return to the failed policies of the past would mean more stalemate and more tension. North Korea would probably being producing more nuclear bombs, the North Korean people would continue to be denied the external investment they need for recovery, and the country would persist with rejecting human rights dialogue.

Some might find it uncomfortable to celebrate a Bush administration foreign policy success. If so, how about thinking about what is happening on the Korea front as a victory for American diplomacy?

So far it is Obama who seems to have the least problems operating a bipartisan foreign policy - his work with Senator Richard Lugar on controlling arms proliferation sets a useful precedent. Ironically, it is McCain who may likely want to renounce the Bush administration's success in foreign policy. He may think that "talking tough with dictators" might give him a campaign edge - no matter how much this has proved a failed policy in Korea for over half a century.

Not all change is good, and change for the sake of change is an empty policy. The message for Senators McCain and Obama? When it comes to North Korea policy - if it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Dr Hazel Smith (Hazel.Smith@warwick.ac.uk) is professor of international relations at the University of Warwick, UK. She spent nearly two years living in North Korea while working for the UN's World Food Programm and UNICEF. Currently a visiting fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii, her recent books on North Korea include Hungry for Peace; International Security, Humanitarian Assistance and Social Change in North Korea (USIP press, 2005) and Reconstituting Korean Security (UN University press, 2007). Opinions expressed are her own. Opposing viewpoints are welcome.

(Used by permission of Pacific Forum CSIS)


US 'terrorizes' Pyongyang
(Aug 14, '08)

Blunt Bush changes Korean tune (Aug 8, '08)

An elusive new face for North Korea
(Jul 19, '08)


1. Russia sets off alarm bells

2. The Biden factor in US-Iran relations

3. Victorious Anwar on the path to power

4. Let's talk about World War III

5. Foreign spigot off for US consumers

6. Politics hold Pakistan
economy hostage


7. Past presents problems for Tibet

8. Setback for Pakistan's terror drive

9. Turkey has a rough road ahead

10. Retirement wake-up call

(24 hours to 11:59pm ET, Aug 27, 2008)

 
 



All material on this website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written permission.
Copyright 1999 - 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd.
Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110