Korea's Cuba solution

By John Burton

"In Cuba, we are ending a policy that was long past its expiration date. When what you're doing doesn't work for 50 years, it's time to try something new," said President Obama last week in his State of the Union address to defend his decision to normalize relations with Havana and to relax the trade embargo against the communist-run island.

Could the same be said for North Korea? The answer would appear to be an emphatic "No" since the U.S. has recently imposed additional ― although largely symbolic ― sanctions on Pyongyang for its probable role in mounting a cyberattack against Sony Pictures.

But the question still needs to be asked since U.S. policy towards North Korea over the past 15 years had done nothing to weaken the rule of the Kim dynasty or deterred them from successfully developing nuclear weapons.

So would a Cuba-style move by the U.S. or at least a greater degree of engagement change the situation?

It should be remembered that North Korea has long sought some form of diplomatic recognition by Washington. The two countries discussed the establishment of liaison offices as part of the Framework Agreement that ended the 1994 nuclear crisis. But such efforts fell by wayside after the administration of George W. Bush adopted a tougher policy on North Korea, while the Obama administration has pursued a policy of inaction in the name of "strategic patience" in hopes that the Pyongyang regime would wither away.

The biggest stumbling block to U.S.-North Korea ties is Washington's demand that Pyongyang give up its nuclear weapons. This is a pipe dream. North Korea does not have any intention of doing so, particularly after it saw Libyan ruler Moammar Gaddafi abandon his nuclear program, only to be overthrown a few years later in a popular revolt supported by NATO.

So perhaps it is time for the U.S. to employ some political jujitsu by agreeing to ease at least some trade sanctions, similar to moves being discussed in South Korea. That would also mean unwinding some of the UN sanctions that U.S. pushed for to be adopted in response to North Korea's nuclear tests.

An infusion of Western investment would encourage the growth of the grass roots capitalism that has emerged in North Korea over the last several years as well providing momentum to economic reforms in agriculture and industry recently suggested by Kim Jong-un.

Critics would argue that any such economic support from the outside would only provide a lifeline to the Kim regime that they claim is in an increasingly precarious position. But the opposite argument could also be made that the growth of underground capitalism could prove unstoppable in promoting economic liberalization that would more effectively undermine the current Pyongyang government.

Western aid would be matched by the willingness of the U.S. to engage in talks with North Korea without preconditions. A similar strategy adopted by the Obama administration towards Iran has slowed down Tehran's progress towards acquiring nuclear weapons. New Washington-Pyongyang talks may persuade North Korea to halt further nuclear tests.

A more flexible stance by the U.S. would be welcomed by China, which is in the conflicted position of being the world's biggest-sanctions buster when it comes to North Korea while at the same time becoming increasingly impatient about Pyongyang's intransigence.

A more relaxed U.S. policy on North Korea could set the stage for closer Sino-American cooperation in pushing North Korea onto the path of liberalization, while at the same time depriving Pyongyang of its favorite pastime of playing off regional powers against each other. It would also ease Beijing's fears that Washington is using the North Korea nuclear issue as a pretext to bolster military forces in the region against China.

None of this will happen, however. The U.S. is reluctant to be seen rewarding North Korea for its bad behavior. President Obama at the weekend told YouTube interviewers that North Korea is "the most isolated, the most sanctioned, the most cut-off nation on earth" and predicted that eventually "you will see a regime like this collapse"as information from the outside world gradually spreads throughout the country.

So Washington has rejected the argument that openness is more likely to undermine the Kim dynasty than isolation, although openness will actually increase the information flow that Obama is betting will bring down the regime.

Perhaps it will be up to South Korea and President Park Geun-hye to get the ball moving. Even as she appears to be committed to finding "reds under beds" at home, President Park recently suggested a summit meeting her North Korean counterpart without preconditions. She should keep to her word and focus on finding ways to re-engage with North Korea in incremental steps rather than tackling the big issue of denuclearization from the start. In that way, Seoul could serve as a successful mediator between Pyongyang and Washington.

John Burton, a former Korea correspondent for the Financial Times, is now a Seoul-based independent journalist and media consultant. He can be reached at john. burton@insightcomms.com.

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