ed Proactive diplomacy

Seoul must try to positively ease tension on peninsula

In early January, it seemed as if 2015 would be the year of inter-Korean rapprochement, if not a major breakthrough. A month later, however, tension on the Korean Peninsula is even higher than the last few years with Pyongyang and Washington exchanging barbed words and the two Koreas shifting blame to each other for their failure to resume talks.

If the sides waste away one more month and step into March ― the month for South Korea-U.S. joint military exercises ― the tension could reach a peak with a slight accident touching off deadly clashes.

On Saturday, North Korea’s official media quoted Kim Jong-un as saying, ``We are no longer willing to sit face to face with mad dogs (the U.S.),” after watching his military’s exercises to sink a U.S. aircraft carrier. It was a preemptive demonstration of the North’s armed forces aimed directly at an imaginary American target. Pyongyang must know however, it will be the biggest victim of this eye-for-an-eye tactic and consequent escalation of tension.

Yet it is not hard to know what triggered this temperamental response from the isolationist regime ― U.S. President Barack Obama’s recent sharp criticism of the reclusive state and his prediction of the North’s eventual collapse.

The U.S. leader’s verbal attacks, probably the harshest language about the impoverished state since George W. Bush’s "axis of evil” labeling, were not untrue. But the remarks reflected Obama’s frustration and his own sense of helplessness in dealing with Pyongyang, and failure to stop the latter’s nuclear development programs. In fact, the comment was a declaration of abandonment, just wishing the North would crumble from within.

Obama’s foreign policy, unlike his domestic accomplishments, has received falling marks and nowhere else might this be clearer than in North Korea.

Americans may give little attention to this diplomatic failure, but Koreans can ill afford to do the same. And that explains why Korean diplomats need to move more actively to revive the dying ember of inter-Korean reconciliation, and, as a result, serve as a bridge between Washington and Pyongyang, which are becoming increasingly estranged from each other. This will be a daunting task, given the North’s recalcitrance, putting forth preconditions to almost every dialogue proposal from the South.

For example, Pyongyang demands Seoul lift the May 24, 2010 sanctions to resume the reunions of dispersed families, stop leaflet campaigns to hold high-level talks, and discontinue the joint military drill with the U.S. to prevent the North’s fourth nuclear test. All these preconditions may be aimed at taking the initiatives in resumed talks, but the North Korean leadership should realize if they let this year go away without noticeable progress in inter-Korean ties, they will have to wait for another several years as there will be major elections in both the South and the U.S. next year. Time is hardly on Pyongyang’s side.

This notwithstanding, it is South Korea that can and should sever this vicious cycle and keep the tension from rising further, by making some concessions. The best place to start would be resuming tours to Mt. Geumgang. Not doing what it can ― even if it requires persuasion of both its ally and adversary ― would be a dereliction of duty.

Needless to say, this is because it would be Koreans themselves who suffer most if something goes wrong on the peninsula.