 of Foreign Policy In Focus |
Korea Times Correspondent
BEIJING ― Why is a peace-loving America refusing to sign a peace-treaty with North Korea that would officially end the Korean War?
The North has been demanding a peace treaty with the U.S. and even made it a major condition for its returning to the six-party nuclear disarmament talks.
Washington seems unwilling to sign a peace treaty, less out of concern for tactical disadvantages in its negotiations with the intractable Pyongyang, but primarily out of domestic political considerations, an American analyst said.
What baffles the ordinary audience watching the North's ill-advised nuclear saga is why the U.S. ― a towering bastion for peace in the world ― has been unwilling to sign such a treaty, which is also expected to reduce tensions on the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea has repeatedly said a peace treaty is a precondition for its rejoining the six-party talks. Washington has shown little interest in this demand, countering that Pyongyang must first firmly commit itself to denuclearization and unconditionally return to the six-party talks.
The North argues that the nuclear issue fundamentally arose from the fact that the 1950-53 Korean War ended with an armistice, not a peace treaty, pitting the two against each other in a technically continuing state of war.
"On the face of it, it's a very easy decision to make," John Feffer, the co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus, a Washington-based think tank, told The Korea Times.
The proposition also appears commonsense because the U.S. and North Korea have not exchanged any significant gunfire since 1953.
Some observers correctly say that it's because U.S. negotiators see granting a peace treaty to the ill-behaving North as a "reward." But a deeper and even ultimate diagnosis may be that it's because the U.S. actually cannot afford to give it to North Korea. And the problem lies with its domestic political situation, according to Feffer.
"U.S. law stipulates that a peace treaty must obtain two-thirds of the votes in the Senate. The problem is that there are a number of Senators, mostly Republican, who are not willing to sign a peace treaty with North Korea. This domestic consideration has to be taken into account," said Feffer, adding that this is the "real reason" the U.S. administration is unwilling to offer a peace pact.
North Korea, therefore, should work hard with the American public because the U.S. lawmakers are elected officials who are compelled to serve the interests of their constituency.
This won't be an easy task.
In a survey last year by Rasmussen, a U.S. polling organization, North Korea topped the list of countries that American voters see as the biggest national security threat. A Gallup poll in February showed that the view hasn't changed. The North again topped the list of countries, together with Iran, in "critical threats to the U.S. vital interests."
The results show the predominantly negative perceptions the American public have toward North Korea. And given that their view on the North, not the U.S. administration, may be the ultimate decider on whether a peace treaty should be signed, Pyongyang is at a critical disadvantage.
In its peace treaty demand, North Korea may have neglected this factor. It's important for the secretive state to have "winning negotiations" with U.S. nuclear envoys, but behind them are lawmakers, and behind them the general public, who ultimately influences U.S. negotiations.
"There is a tendency in the U.S. that sees a peace treaty with North Korea as somehow a concession," said Feffer. "That's why it has been so difficult to push the issue forward domestically."
Perhaps, it's time for North Korea to engage in a charm offensive of public diplomacy to earn the hearts and minds of Americans first to see progress on its demand.
sunny.lee@koreatimes.co.kr
