Asia Times: Bush to Kim: Let's wait and see


	March 9, 2001	atimes.com

Editorials

Bush to Kim: Let's wait and see

US President George W Bush told visiting South Korean President Kim Dae-jung in Washington on Wednesday that the United States views North Korea as a threat and would not immediately resume negotiations with the

communist regime. "I ... told the president that we're looking forward to at some point in the future having a dialogue with the North Koreans, but any negotiations would require complete verification of the terms," Bush said at a question-and-answer session between meetings.

Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke even more bluntly about the US-North Korean relationship. Briefing reporters while the meetings between the two presidents were under way, he said new negotiations would wait until the new US administration completed its review of US-North Korean relations, adding pointedly that "He [Bush] understands the nature of that regime, and won't be fooled by the nature of that regime."

Does this mean that the Washington-Pyongyang dialogue which under the Clinton administration came close to normalizing relations in exchange for North Korea's ending its ballistic missile programs is now on hold? And if so, does that make sense? And where would that leave Kim's "sunshine" policy of Seoul-Pyongyang reconciliation? There is no reason to assume that Bush and Powell don't mean what they say: there is an ongoing review and they are in no great hurry to get back to the negotiating table before it's completed. Undertaking such a review and putting things on hold for a while also makes ample sense as not only the Washington-Pyongyang relation is at issue, but specifics of it must be assessed in the context of the Bush administration's overall foreign and security policy stance and priorities.

As for President Kim's sunshine policy, it's HIS and HIS government's policy and he should pursue it as he sees fit. Naturally, as South Korea is a close US ally, there should be policy coordination. But there is nothing wrong with differences in policy emphasis or timing. In advance of his meetings with Bush, Kim had signaled his intention to sign a peace "declaration" with his North Korean counterpart. The US does not see that as an urgent matter. Senior administration officials have said privately they are wary that Kim's peace efforts may be moving too quickly, with too few concessions from the North. They said Bush was making that point with Kim, much as another point, we suspect: a joint communique issued after Kim's meeting in Seoul last month with Russian President Vladimir Putin supported the "strengthening and preservation" of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which restricts the US from promoting its National Missile Defense (NMD) program. Bush will have explained to Kim that NMD is a cornerstone of his administration's security policy and that implementation of it will not be made dependent on Seoul's, Pyongyang's, Moscow's or Beijing's approval.

If Kim at this point - as was suggested by one of his senior security council officials last month - finds himself "between a rock and a hard place", given Pyongyang's opposition to NMD and Washington's determination to implement it, he should devise ways of getting out of that position. He can and should pursue his peace policy without seeing the need to please Putin, but also without the need for pleasing Washington at every turn of the way.

There is, in fact, no credible alternative to pursuit of Kim's basic policy. Washington knows that and Bush conceded as much when he praised Kim's efforts and said that though he had "some skepticism about the leader of North Korea ... that's not going to preclude us from trying to achieve the common objective". Achieving that objective - peace on the Korean peninsula and eventual reunification - has as one of its key ingredients economic policy change and economic transformation and reconstruction in the North. Kim has said he is persuaded that his northern namesake's trip to Beijing and Shanghai in mid-January and his praise for China's economic accomplishments signaled true determination by Kim Jong-il to institute economic reforms. While Washington tries to sort out its own stance toward North Korea, Kim Dae-jung may want to test his own belief in the North's willingness and ability to reform instead of getting entangled in the missile defense controversy.

((c)2001 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for information on our sales and syndication policies.)

back to the top

©2001 Asia Times Online Co., Ltd.

Asia Times Online is designed and produced by Multimedia Asia Co., Ltd.