North Korea leaves little time for talking
By John Feffer
Kim Jong-il must work for the American Enterprise Institute (AIE). Or maybe
it's the Heritage Foundation. The North Korean dictator doesn't talk much about
his non-resident fellowship at a right-wing United States think-tank. It might
not go over well with the politburo in Pyongyang.
But actions speak louder than words.
North Korea's apparent sinking of the Cheonan, a South Korean ship that
went down in March in the Yellow Sea near the maritime border between the two
countries, is just what the right-wing doctors have ordered. Japan was looking
a little squishy on the Okinawa base issue. China needed some reminders about
just
how rogue its erstwhile ally really is. And South Korea's conservative
President Lee Myung-bak wanted confirmation that his containment approach to
the north was justified.
Right on cue, according to a South Korean investigation, Kim Jong-il torpedoed
a South Korean ship, killing 46 sailors. The incident plays so much into the
hands of North Korea's adversaries that some analysts have looked for other
culprits, including friendly fire from either South Korea or the United States.
While such speculation is interesting, it seems rather farfetched. In this age
of WikiLeaks, it's hard to imagine a successful cover-up of such friendly fire.
And the evidence implicating other actors is circumstantial, to say the least.
Meanwhile, Pyongyang's fingerprints are all over this one. The South Koreans
have produced torpedo fragments from dredging the area where the ship sank.
There's Korean lettering on the propulsion shaft that matches the font used in
another North Korean torpedo the South Koreans have. And the South Koreans also
matched traces of propellant to an earlier North Korean torpedo. Skeptics have
challenged some of these findings, but the rebuttals in both news outlets and
blogs are rather convincing.
Perhaps the South Korean government fabricated the evidence? Maybe. But South
Korea was reluctant to point the finger at the North in the first place. A
successful North Korean strike embarrasses the South Korean military and casts
a shadow over the South Korean economy.
So, it looks as though AEI's overseas fellow is the most logical perp. As a
result of his bold move, South Korea is suspending all contact with the North.
Forget about trade (about a quarter of a billion dollars a year) and access to
South Korean shipping lanes. Washington is backing its South Korean ally 100%.
The hard right has been pushing for this kind of isolation policy against North
Korea for some time.
Even more timely is the role the Cheonan sinking plays in US-Japan
relations. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama was wavering on whether or not he
should accede to US pressure to build a new base in Okinawa to replace the
aging Futenma Marine Corps facility. But, according to a senior US official,
the Cheonan incident reminded the Japanese government "that this is
still a very dangerous neighborhood and that the US-Japan alliance and the
basing arrangements that are part of that are critical to Japan's security".
North Korea, in other words, has managed to torpedo all attempts to break the
isolation of the country and reduce military tensions in the region. If the
Dear Leader didn't receive under-the-table payments from US neo-conservatives
and friends, what on earth motivated such a self-destructive act? Perhaps Kim
wanted to rally nationalist sentiment in the country on the eve of his son's
succession to the top spot. Perhaps it was simple revenge for South Korea's
firing on a North Korean ship that passed into South Korean waters last
November. The maritime boundary between the two countries has been long
disputed, so trespass is truly in the eyes of the beholder.
Actually, the situation is even more complicated, as Mike Chinoy points out in
Forbes. When Lee took office, he backtracked on his predecessor's pledge to
work with North Korea to build confidence around the disputed maritime
boundary. "The North was infuriated by what it saw as a deliberate belittling
of accords signed by its all-powerful leader - what one Western analyst
described as 'sticking a finger in Kim Jong-il's eye'," writes Chinoy. "So
Pyongyang responded in a predictably belligerent fashion - by ratcheting up
tensions in the disputed waters."
So, like with the Maine and the Tonkin Gulf incident, are we going to war?
Fortunately, no one is calling for military retaliation against North Korea.
South Koreans oppose military action by two to one, and they even support the
maintenance of the South-managed Kaesong Industrial Complex, which employs
40,000 North Koreans (and would likely cost the South half a billion dollars to
close). [1]
Even the Heritage Foundation is going only so far as to recommend an economic
cutoff, further isolation of North Korea and a clear condemnation in the United
Nations Security Council. China remains lukewarm about any major challenge to
North Korea and will do its best to throw a wet blanket over the controversy.
Washington will still try as hard as it can to pressure China into taking as
hardline a stance as possible. Other than express legitimate outrage, what
would these stepped-up containment efforts achieve? About as much as Lee's
initial hardline posture.
The North Korean government doesn't apologize when pushed up against the wall -
it's content to fall back on its policy of self-reliance, or juche. And
the North Korean people haven't risen up against their rulers when pushed into
starvation. As Joel Wit points out in The New York Times, diplomacy remains our
most viable strategy: "In the aftermath of the Cheonan sinking, the
United States and South Korea must recognize that a return to dialogue would
serve our interests. It is the only realistic way to rein in North Korea's
objectionable activities."
This isn't a particularly palatable message right now in Seoul. And it probably
won't go down very well in Washington. But after a couple months of
denunciations and attempted arm-twisting, it would be best if the countries
involved in the six-party talks take this advice to heart. If we want to
prevent any future Cheonans, we need to sit down with North Korea. The
last thing we want is a regime with nothing to lose - and plenty of weapons -
to go out in a blaze of juche and take as many with them as possible.
Note
1. North Korea has severed communication links with South Korea after vowing to
cut all ties with the Seoul. In a statement early on Wednesday, the North shut
down communication lines between Red Cross authorities on either side of the
border and also lines connecting maritime officials. On Tuesday, Pyongyang said
"from now on it will put into force the resolute measures to totally freeze the
inter-Korean relations, totally abrogate the agreement on non-aggression
between the North and the South and completely halt the inter-Korean
cooperation", according to the official Korean Central News Agency.
John Feffer is co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus.
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
