Park's one-two punch

• Published Feb 24, 2016 4:25 PM KST
• Updated Feb 24, 2016 4:25 PM KST

By John Burton

It might have seem a good idea at the time when President Park Geun-hye recently, but rashly, decided to deliver a one-two punch to North Korea and China, Pyongyang’s closest ally, by first closing the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and then agreed to start talks with the U.S. on the deployment of the THAAD anti-missile system, which Beijing opposes.

Both moves appeared meant to persuade China to agree to stricter international sanctions against North Korea as punishment for its recent nuclear test and missile launch. The real rationale for closing the Gaeseong would be to remove any appearance of hypocrisy of Seoul urging Beijing to reduce fuel and food supplies to Pyongyang while South Korea maintained an economic lifeline to North Korea with the joint industrial project.

Seoul’s expressed willingness to deploy THAAD was a more bare-knuckle move since it appeared to threaten Beijing with what China considers a hostile act if it did not accede to South Korea’s wishes on economic sanctions.

Many South Koreans, including President Park, may have seen the tough actions as emotionally liberating since it apparently puts an end to frustrations built up over the years about dealing with North Korea.

Unfortunately, these actions are unlikely to persuade China to increase pressure on North Korea to behave. Rather, they carry the risk of making the situation on the Korean peninsula more dangerous — perhaps reaching a point that was last seen with the 1994 nuclear crisis when the U.S. considered launching a pre-emptive air strike at the North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear facilities.

Indeed, the stage appears to be set for a new crisis over the next several months as a series of troubling events converge.

The shutdown of Gaeseong and the THAAD deployment precedes this year’s annual spring joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises, Key Resolve and Foal Eagle, which are set to last from March 7 to April 30 and are expected to be the largest ever held. The exercises normally draw a harsh reaction from Pyongyang, which alleges that they serve as a prelude to an invasion of North Korea.

But Pyongyang’s paranoia is likely to increase this year since the exercises are reported to include elements of the new U.S.-South Korean wartime operational plan, OPLAN 5015, which contemplates pre-emptive strikes against North Korean military facilities rather than the emphasis of previous plans on defending South Korea if it is attacked.

There is another reason for North Korea to increase its fierce war rhetoric this time as it seeks to persuade South Koreans to turn their back on President Park ahead of the April 13 parliamentary elections by portraying her as a reckless “warmonger.”

The increased tensions also put North Korea’s young and inexperienced leader Kim Jong-un in a difficult position since he needs to appear to be tough as he apparently struggles to put the armed forces under the firm control of the Korean Worker’s Party, whose first congress since 1980 is scheduled for May. There are clear signs of growing rifts in Pyongyang with the sudden death of the official in charge of inter-Korean relations and the reported execution of the army chief.

This creates a situation fraught with risks as Pyongyang might miscalculate with an act of brinkmanship, such as violating the Northern Limit Line in the East Sea, mounting cyberattacks or conducing more nuclear and missile tests. A clash along the DMZ would likely trigger retaliation by Seoul under its new tough rules of engagement.

Even if any type of armed conflict does not break out in the next several months, the combination of the Gaeseong closure and THAAD leaves President Park with egg on her face. She has ended the last remaining symbol of reconciliation with Pyongyang, while she has angered the Chinese after fervently courting them during her first three years in office.

It could also harden geostrategic positions in Northeast Asia with China possibly drawing closer to North Korea if THAAD deployment goes ahead, while South Korea seeking a closer embrace with the U.S. and Japan.

Defenders of the closure of Gaeseong make a moral argument that the decision was right in view of Pyongyang’s provocative actions since the industrial project provided significant funds to the regime. But that viewpoint intends to ignore the fact that the decision went against Park administration’s earlier stance that steps should be taken to prepare for eventual reunification.

Gaeseong played an important role in that regard by teaching modern market-based business and management skills to the North. Closing Gaeseong shuts off one road to reform, while further creating distrust between the two Koreas.

If the ultimate goal to avoid war and promote negotiations to denuclearize the Korean peninsula, we have just seen a giant step backward being taken.

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 johnburtonft@yahoo.com.