Damage to Park's US visit

By Tong Kim

The positive side of President Park geun-hye’s visit to Washington was seriously marred by an embarrassing sexual assault case involving Blue House spokesman Yoon Chang-jung, who was accompanying the president. The alleged victim was a female intern at the Korean embassy in Washington, who was hired to assist the presidential delegation.

According to a complaint filed to the police, Yoon “grabbed her buttocks without her permission” in a hotel in Washington, D.C. The incident took place on the night of May 7, after Park had finished a summit meeting at the White House. Yoon flew back to Seoul the next day, while Park was delivering a speech to a joint session of the Congress.

Given the inflammatory nature of the story, the media is allocating more space and airtime to report and comment on Yoon’s case. This story instantly became a political issue ― with the opposition Democratic Party demanding Park’s accountability and the ruling Saenuri Party calling for a thorough investigation.

On Saturday, Yoon denied all charges of sexual abuse through a press conference. He said he did not flee from police investigation but he was told to return to Seoul by the presidential secretary for public relations. He also said he was cooperating with a Blue House investigation team, and he would accept the consequences of the investigation through due process of law.

Although unlikely, the Washington, D.C. police could seek his extradition through the Department of Justice if necessary to conclude the investigation. Yoon is being investigated under a misdemeanor charge, not a felony that applies to rape, under which he, if tried and convicted, can be sentenced to up to 180 days in prison.

It is ironic that Park’s spokesman got into this trouble on the same day of the joint press conference with President Barack Obama. Yoon attended and listened to Obama answering a question regarding sexual assaults in the U.S. military. Obama said, “Sexual assault is an outrage…a crime…. If we find out somebody is engaging in this stuff, they’ve got to be …prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged.”

This unfortunate incident nevertheless should not obscure the significant accomplishments of the first Park-Obama summit ― including a shared U.S.-South Korea policy toward North Korea ― to pursue denuclearization, to maintain a strong deterrent against threats and provocations from the North, and to keep the door open to dialogue.

Obama said his understanding of Park’s trust-building process is to prepare deterrence to aggression, to give no reward for provocative actions, but to maintain openness to an engagement process if North Korea takes a different path. He also made it clear that Pyongyang cannot drive a wedge between Seoul and Washington.

South Korea was reassured of the U.S. security commitment “through extended deterrence and the full range of U.S. military capabilities, both conventional and nuclear.” The alliance will “serve as a linchpin of peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific.” Through an enhanced alliance, the countries will work together in addressing global issues beyond the peninsula ― including Syria.

Transfer of wartime operational control is on track toward the end of 2015. However, Park said the transition plan should be carried out to strengthen the combined capabilities. Many South Koreans ― especially former generals ― believe the transition should be postponed indefinitely, as long as North Korea’s nuclear threats continue.

The summit also agreed to fully implement the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement, which is in its first year of implementation, showed a 10 percent increase in Korea’s exports to the U.S. and a 4 percent increase for U.S. exports to Korea. Total trade volume between the two countries for 2012 was $101 billion with an imbalance of $16 billion in favor of Korea. Obama hopes the FTA will boost U.S. exports by $10 billion.

On the issue of a new civilian nuclear agreement, the two leaders agreed to find a way that will meet South Korea’s energy and economic needs and, at the same time, address American concerns of proliferation. The existing agreement that bans reprocessing spent fuels has been extended by two years. It will not be easy to find a solution that will satisfy both sides.

Park laid out three proposals: to settle durable peace in Korea, to build a peace park in the DMZ and to launch an “East Asia peace and cooperation process” on transnational issues such as environment, disaster relief, nuclear safety and counter-terrorism. The first two of her proposals will move nowhere without the North’s cooperation.

In conclusion, Park’s Washington visit was a success to the extent that it further solidified the traditional bilateral relationship and adopted a “united front” in dealing with the North. However, in view of the unlikelihood that the North will make the right choice, despite intensified sanction implementation or the unified voice of the international community, the current U.S.-ROK policy of deterrence and dialogue is doubtful to be successful.

On Friday, Pyongyang denounced the Washington summit as a “prelude to war,” characterizing Park’s policy as “anti-North Korea,” but adding it would wait with patience for changes in Seoul’s policy. The summit offered no new incentives for the North: no bait to bite. Could unconditional dialogue be a starting point toward a peaceful resolution of the North Korean issue? What’s your take?

The writer is a research professor at the Illmin Institute of International Relations at Korea University and a visiting professor at the University of North Korean Studies. He is also an ICAS fellow. Reach him at tong.kim8@yahoo.com.