'Enemy' North Korea: Do labels help?

By Sandip Kumar Mishra

South Korea in its Defense White Paper released on Feb. 16 again referred to North Korea and its military as an enemy. The label hardly surprised anyone and it was quite expected. Actually, after coming to power, the Yoon Suk Yeol administration adopted a tit-for-tat approach toward North Korea and his policies, statements and behavior clearly indicate that South Korea considers North Korea as an enemy country.

The Defense White Paper just appears to be formal recognition of the fact. Furthermore, it's not the first time that South Korea has labeled North Korea as an enemy or the main enemy. It started in 1995 and South Korea's conservative administrations have used the term in official documents and progressive administrations have generally withdrawn such labels.

There is no proof that putting the label enemy for North Korea has helped South Korea in dealing with it. However, some may say that even if it has not helped, it is a statement of fact and not using it would be appeasement to North Korea. But it must be remembered that formally, the Korean War has not ended yet and both Koreas are technically at war with each other and this fact is more fundamental than the inclusion or exclusion of the word enemy in an official South Korean document. The question remains that by reiterating the fact by using the word enemy, does South Korea acquire any benefits in its dealings with North Korea?

On the contrary, such reiterations create obstacles for South Korea in dealing with North Korea. First, such inclusions are largely populist and largely they are political moves rather than strategic. Moreover, they are meant more for the domestic politics of South Korea. It garners support from a section of South Koreans who feel that North Korea is an 'evil' state and it must be dealt with strictly. It also gives some solace to people who are frustrated with North Korea's dangerous and provocative behavior.

These people feel better that at least their government is bold and doing something to deal with North Korea. However, a more composed reflection would make them realize that such labels do not have any substance and they just deflect people's expectations to have an effective North Korea policy, which could resolve or at least manage the problem.

Second, using such labels by South Korea annoys North Korea and it gives them excuses to overtly and aggressively pursue weapons of mass destruction. Actually, two days after the release of South Korea's Defense White Paper, North Korea had an ICBM launch. There are going to be many such provocative acts by North Korea as it feels annoyed or deliberately portrays itself to be annoyed. North Korean missile and nuclear programs have been getting more advanced and sophisticated and there must be moves to decelerate the process rather than doing the opposite with the reintroduction of the label of enemy.

Third, even though the current South Korean administration wants to have a strict policy toward North Korea, it must have space to make backward-forward moves. It means that putting pressure on North Korea must be pursued with flexibility so that if and when North Korea shows a positive response, South Korea must be ready to diplomatically engage with it. Labeling North Korea as the enemy restricts such flexibility.

Fourth, South Korea must also be aware that through its miraculous economic success, democratic transformation and developmental approach, the image of the country has been enhanced in the community of nations. South Korea is considered to be a country, which provides developmental aid and cultural content and leads by working for green technologies.

It is contrary to North Korea which has become a highly problematic state because of its domestic mismanagement and dangerous obsession with weapons of mass destruction. Even though both Koreas have the same origin, both countries are considered polar opposites. By using the term enemy, South Korea has apparently responded to North Korea which called South Korea an "obvious enemy," a few weeks prior.

South Korea's current administration talks about a "preemptive strike," its "own nukes," "revenge of a hundred or thousand times" or having missile tests in response to North Korea's missile tests. It is well understood in the world that South Korea is a responsible country, which has been dealing with an irresponsible country. However, similar tactics and metaphors/labels have the potential to be counterproductive to South Korea's image.

Overall, it appears that labeling North Korea and its military as an enemy has hardly any benefit except self-deception and false solace, but it has several unintended negative consequences. The South Korean administration, therefore, must be more creative and cool-headed in its dealings with North Korea. Not because North Korea is a lesser evil, but because it is a serious problem and it must be dealt with by going beyond semantics.

The author (sandipmishra10@gmail.com) is an associate professor at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.