NK’s ongoing survival calls for ’realpolitik’

Bernhard Seliger

By Kim Young-jin

The decades-old debate over whether North Korea will survive or collapse is reheating, stoked by hints that change is brewing in the isolated country.

Those who predict collapse cite greater information permeating its borders, an increasingly tech-savvy populace and a tricky power transfer underway from leader Kim Jong-il to his youngest son.

In contrast, Bernhard Seliger, a Korea-based expert on German unification and Korean affairs, believes that while the situation remains unpredictable there is a strong possibility of regime survival.

The prospect, he says, makes it imperative that the international community continue to engage Pyongyang whether it wants to or not.

“The elements of statehood are in place so there is a realistic possibility that (the regime) goes on,” said Seliger, who heads the Korea office of the Hanns Seidel Foundation that promotes peace-building.

“In this sense the idea of realpolitik is important. Though we might not like it, it is better to engage North Korea and make changes where we can.”

Realpolitik refers to diplomacy based on practical factors rather than ideological or moral ones.

The analysis falls in line with the recent release of “The Survival of North Korea,” a book co-edited by Seliger that explains how Pyongyang has been able to persist despite a deteriorating economy and famine, and why dialogue is the best path forward.

Though North Korea regularly appears high on indices of failed states, he said such diagnoses overestimate the level to which its economy affects survivability.

“It is a disastrous economy but the state works well, including the secret service and military. It’s very orderly,” said the German, who visits the North with the foundation for cooperation projects.

“They don’t need a prosperous state. They need resources for the elite and neighbors to blame its problems on.”

Pyongyang’s tightening economic bond with Beijing, a growing middle-class running semi-private businesses and its nuclear deterrent are helping the regime build stability.

China shielded the North from U.N. censure for its two deadly provocations last year and is suspected of looking the other way when Pyongyang evades sanctions for its nuclear program.

Engagement by Washington and Seoul has plummeted in recent years after a string of provocative acts, including the sinking of the warship Cheonan and shelling of Yeonpyeong Island last year.

Seliger said the tough response was necessary but that their stances should soften over time.

Fresh efforts to resume six-party denuclearization talks seem to follow that principle as most agree Pyongyang will never give up its greatest bargaining chip.

Another example of realpolitik is that of European countries engaging the North despite the tensions through programs involving collaboration such as those of Hanns Seidel.

The government-affiliated foundation facilitates training on economic exchange, agriculture and forestry in the North.

Due to its rigid state structure, Seliger admitted the programs yield little development but hoped they made North Koreans ponder their system and contributed to fostering trust.

“We want to show them that the outside world is not hostile to North Korea as sometimes they are made to believe. It is the only strategy we have. The strategy of sealing it off certainly will not work.”

Seliger said the approach is trickiest for Seoul, which walks a fine line between realism and pressing domestic and inter-Korean factors. He applauded the Lee administration for slowly softening its stance while not rushing to summit talks or other over-eager shows of reconciliation. But he added that other creative approaches were still out there.

He said some restrictions on South Korean citizens in regards to the North such as not being able to access North Korean media could be relaxed, reflecting on the time when his own country was divided.

“In (West) Germany we were allowed to, but no one did because it was very boring and stupid. The same would happen here. It would be a great gesture to show where the problem lies,” he said.

The country could also make the border area more approachable to citizens as it was in West Germany, he suggested.

Despite the prospect of the regime continuing rather than collapsing, he stressed the unpredictable nature of the situation, recalling enthusiastic East German celebrations in 1989 for its 40th anniversary.

“Nobody dreamt that there would be a massive change within that year,” he said.

“On the other hand, the regime may be in power for a long time. So we have to deal with it as it is. But this doesn’t mean we accept it morally.”

Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn
Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn