| |
North Korea: Such a
nuisance
By Francesco Sisci
BEIJING - North Korea is staging its little play
at a strange time, before the opening of a grander drama
in which the United States will attack Iraq, or the
Iraqi generals will topple Saddam Hussein and open their
doors to US presence in their country.
North
Korea threatens nuclear disaster, rattles its nuclear
saber, hints at the possibility of firing missiles over
the heads of South Koreans or Japanese, all for no grand
political goal, but to obtain a few million dollars in
aid without losing face. North Korea does all this not
because it really wants a war, but because it wants
support for its weak economy and it wants to open a
dialogue with the United States. It could simply ask,
without all the posturing, but evidently for domestic
reasons it can't. A strong constituency in Pyongyang is
against asking for a dialogue, which it fears as some
kind of capitulation, so it makes up this act to show
that it is not asking for a dialogue but is in fact
threatening the US. The US then is expected to give in
to this "powerful North Korean blackmail" and the North
Korean leadership proves once more its global status.
But this policy is wrong because it is based on old Cold
War premises at a time when the Cold War is finished.
North Korea was once strategically important
because it had the Soviet Union and China behind it. Now
this is no longer the case; moreover, China and South
Korea, which fought against each other over North Korea
half a century ago, have an idyllic relationship and
both work in strong partnership for a peaceful
transition in North Korea. The mainstay of the Cold War
in East Asia, the confrontation between Beijing and
Seoul, has disappeared since the two countries
established diplomatic relations and even more so after
the launch of South Korea's Sunshine Policy toward the
North. With China having possibly a better relation with
the South than with the North, with Russia following
suit and much weaker than it was 50 years ago,
Pyongyang's threat can no longer be the trigger for a
global crisis, but is only a worrisome issue, strictly
localized.
There remains the issue that North
Korea is a bottleneck on the development of a land route
through the Eurasian continent. Once roads and railways
are open, goods from Japan and North Korea will be able
to move easily to Europe, and vice versa. At one time
the United States was concerned that this land route
would bypass the sea lanes it controlled. In that case,
China or Russia, providing the security for the land
route, would have an important card to play with the US.
However, since the war in Afghanistan the situation has
changed. The US has established a strong military and
political presence in Central Asia. So the land route
and the sea lanes are equally controlled by the United
States and nobody can play any cards against it. The
fact that North Korea opposes any passage through it is
certainly a nuisance, an economic stumbling block for
the region, but it is no longer a strategic piece in a
global game.
All in all, North Korea can't
kindle a world war, because it has no real friends. It
was included in the US "axis of evil" not because of its
importance but mainly because the United States wanted
to produce a list of enemies that were not all Muslims,
for fear of a clash of civilizations.
Moreover,
North Korea has no strategic resources, it has no
economy to be reckoned with, it has no global or even
real regional reach. In other words a war in North Korea
would not cause any global repercussions, hikes in the
price of oil or other strategic commodities; stock
exchanges around the world would not collapse. Life
would largely go on as ever.
The only problem is
that it has missiles, it is developing nuclear
capabilities, and its leadership is unreliable. In other
words there is major concern for public security, as its
missiles could terrorize the Japanese and cause a drop
in their economic activities. It is a serious and
pitiful humanitarian case, some 20 million people are
held hostage, as human shields, by their manipulative
leaders who have no scruples. But it is not a turf
anybody wants to take or defend, as during the Korean
War. On the contrary, it is possibly a piece of dirt
everybody would be happy to see disappear one way or
another.
The North Korean leaders need to
consider this when venting their threats, as they do not
have the leverage they once had. They have been too
greedy, and shortsighted. If they had built the railway
crossing Korea before the war in Afghanistan, and the
land route had supplanted the sea lanes then, they now
would have had a much more powerful instrument to
pressure the world than atomic bombs. They would hold
something possibly as important as the Suez Canal to
play against Japan, South Korea and China. But they
didn't open up the land route, and even now they seem
unable to understand the basic logic of the post-Cold
War world, where you have leverage only if you sit at
the table politely and take part in the game. If you are
out of the game you don't count. That is: if you are
part of the global economy you can make your demands, as
your contribution to the global economy affects
everybody. But if you have no contribution to the global
economy your demands are just a nuisance.
Now
the United States is preparing for a war in Iraq, where
there are no atomic bombs, and North Korea, also in the
axis of evil like Iraq, is saying it has an atomic bomb.
From a purely rhetorical point of view, the US should
then prepare for war in Korea as well, but it doesn't
want to, because Iraq is globally important for its oil
and North Korea isn't. The United States would prefer to
talk with North Korea. But as it has declared that war
in Iraq is part of war against terrorism and North Korea
is openly terrorizing everybody, it can't wage a war in
Baghdad (without nuclear weapons) and talk to Pyongyang
(with nuclear weapons). So the US can't accept being
pushed around by threats coming from a country wielding
its missiles like a bully in a saloon in a spaghetti
Western. But as President George W Bush said on New
Year's Eve, "I believe this is not a military showdown;
this is a diplomatic showdown. We can resolve this
peacefully."
Therefore, for its own good
Pyongyang has to recognize that threats will make the
situation worse, not better, and that objectively its
allies are South Korea and China and Japan, who have an
interest in the peace of the region. South Koreans
especially can play a pivotal role with their policy of
dialogue and engagement.
Bush argued that "there
is strong consensus ... that North Korea ought to comply
with international regulations. All options, of course,
are always on the table for any president, but by
working with these countries we can resolve this." And
among America's friends, South Korea is pivotal.
Bush said he believes the United States has made
"good progress in talking to our friends" about tensions
with Pyongyang. He said he had "a very good visit" with
South Korea's president-elect, Roh Moo-hyun.
But
it seems that to accept this engagement the North Korean
leaders have to reconsider their weight in global
affairs. North Korea has to learn the reality of
international engagement. It should not grossly
miscalculate the effect of the revelations on the
kidnapping of Japanese citizens and embarrass Japanese
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, who took a big risk in
going to Pyongyang.
In other words, Pyongyang
should stop this saber rattling, for its own good. But
can it? Can the domestic political balance allow the
leaders to drop all the nuclear-war nonsense and simply
ask for help? Could they have normal news conferences,
where the spokesman can take questions one by one, as in
the rest of the world? Could they stop the present
comical procedure where, once every two years, the North
Korean ambassador in Beijing or Moscow delivers a
speech, then has all the reporters ask all the questions
together and finally provides one cumulative, selective
answer?
The answer is in Pyongyang, and it
hinges on the strength and determination of the present
leadership. Contrary to what it may seem, if Kim Jong-il
is strong in his position and determined to get his
country out of its misery, he should quickly stop this
nuclear slide. If the saber-rattling goes on, it could
indicate deep weaknesses in the North Korean leadership,
strong rivalry, power struggles and a simple lack of
basic understanding of the world. And that would be a
nuisance.
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
