Why South Should Isolate the North

By Deauwand Myers

The long, illustrious history of Korea is riddled with blood. The Mongolians, the Chinese, and the Japanese, for example, repeatedly sought to conquer and virtually enslave the Korean Peninsula.

Rolled over by war after war, this nation survived, only to endure several decades of brutal, quasi-dictatorial presidents, with the likes of Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan.

As a progressive, I affirm the peaceful pursuit of justice and equality. Though I respect the liberalizing, democratizing reforms of later presidents, especially Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun, I'm not a progressive on the North Korean issue.

As belligerent as former American Vice President Dick Cheney can be, and as much as I disagree with a great and many of his party's conservative philosophy, I must agree with my rightwing counterparts on this geopolitical issue: the best policy toward North Korea, for both the ROK and the United States, is cold and unequivocal isolation.

Kim Jong-il and his ilk are obviously ruthless and cruel; the Kim family and those of its inner circle live lavishly while the vast majority of North Koreans languish in abject poverty.

In the great North Korean famine from 1995-97, scholars estimate 600,000 people died of starvation (other scholarly estimates range from 200,000 to 3.5 million).

This peripheral genocide, caused by Kim's ``military first'' policy, wherein a majority of the impoverished country's resources were (and are) funneled to its armed forces, is an evil of the highest order.

President Kim Dae-jung's ``Sunshine Policy,'' as it was called, was a good idea on paper. (His creation of the said policy helped win him the Nobel Peace Prize). It attempted to recognize the humanity of the North.

But, as seen repeatedly, trying to treat the North as a good diplomatic actor is folly. It goes along to get along, doing just enough to acquire food or fuel and then reneging on past pledges.

Further, the international community rewards the North's bad behavior with attention and overtures for further talks.

Nationally, what did the Roh administration (which continued and enhanced the Sunshine Policy) and his progressive Millennium Democratic Party (MDP) get in return for its goodwill toward the North? They got a nuclear test conducted by Pyongyang.

One of the rationales behind the progressives' pursuit of North Korean engagement is an attempt to assuage the North's military brinkmanship and bellicosity. However, it's clear that the North plans to perfect its nuclear technology as both deterrent and bargaining chip.

Though Kim seems crazy, he's not stupid. Provoking a war on the Korean Peninsula would mean a quick and irrevocable annihilation of the Kim regime and the fascist political apparatus that sustains it.

Ignore the North. Increasing sanctions and inspecting North Korean ships seem to me to be a step in the right direction. Either the international community ignores the North, or seriously engages it with meaningful, military ultimatums.

This middle, muddy engagement with the North is fruitless. All the ROK, and the world at large, does when it gives the North resources is augment its large, but outdated, military. Why feed the enemy?

I understand some Koreans want a positive relationship with the North, as the Korean Peninsula's separation is painful and unjust. However, being kind to a habitually unkind partner is not the way.

When the chapter of human history finally closes on North Korea, it will surely be remembered as one of the worst regimes in modern time. We ought to employ the most effective means in hurrying its end.

Deauwand Myers holds a master's degree in English literature and literary theory and is currently an English professor at Shingu University. He has written novels and poetry. He can be reached at deauwand@gmail.com. The views expressed in the above article are those of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times.