By Kang Hyun-kyung
Staff Reporter
Liberals and some North Korea experts have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the comprehensive strategic alliance that President Lee Myung-bak and his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama agreed at their summit this week over the Stalinist regime's nuclear ambitions.
A local North Korea watcher told The Korea Times on condition of anonymity that South Korea and the United States would have been better off if they had not included the phrase ``peaceful reunification on the principles of free democracy and market economy'' in the joint vision.
He said the description would only agitate the North because it sent a clear message that reunification will only be achieved through the South's absorption of the North.
His remark reflects the worry that ``a cornered dog sometimes bites.''
In the joint statement, Lee and Obama agreed reunification based on democracy and a market economy and the U.S. government's provision of extended deterrence, including its nuclear umbrella, to South Korea.
Doves in Seoul expressed worries about the ramifications of the two leaders' commitments on North Korea.
Yonsei University Professor Moon Chung-in, a former special attache to the inter-Korean summit in 2000, said Friday that hardening its stance toward the North and sending a signal of a South-led absorption reunification would be no help to the two Koreas' building confidence.
In a speech at a seminar, Moon said that deterrence would not necessarily lead to peace, noting it is part of an approach designed to manage peace.
Rep. Lee Kang-rae, floor leader of the largest opposition Democratic Party (DP), said South Korea's absorption-based reunification is the worst case scenario that the North has in mind.
``The window of opportunity for South-North dialogue will be closed as long as Lee sticks to the approach,'' said Lee.
Former Unification Minister Lim Dong-won, meanwhile, speculated that U.S. commitment to the provision of a nuclear umbrella to South Korea would help the North justify its nuclear program for self-defense.
``The North has set 2012 as the year to achieve the goal of becoming a great power state in terms of ideology, military and economy. For South Korea, buying time would only help the North make more nuclear bombs,'' claimed Lim.
Seoul National University Professor Ha Young-sun said in a column that Seoul and Washington failed to catch the core message on the North's motive of building nuclear weapons and this led to the wrong policy remedy to the North Korean nuclear program.
``North Korea made it clear repeatedly that its intention to make nuclear bombs is neither to normalize relations with the United States nor to gain economic assistance from other countries. The North said it developed the nuclear programs for self-defense,'' said Ha.
He proposed Seoul and Washington scrap the traditional carrot and stick approach and find an alternative option that can convince the North to give up its military-first principle and to look to the benefits it could receive if it takes an economy-first stance.
hkang@koreatimes.co.kr
|
경찰, 이태원 등 외국인 밀집지역 특별관리
