Stagnant US policy on Korea

By Tong Kim

During his visit to Seoul last week, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken very much summed up what the current U.S. policy is toward the Korean Peninsula and the East Asian region and how it is being carried out. Nothing new, but an update of where the things are after the visits to Washington by the leaders of Japan and China and before the visit by the South Korean president.

From his statements given at the Asan Institute Oct. 7 and a joint press conference with Vice Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yong Oct. 6, it is clear that the Obama administration is sticking to the same stance on North Korea: the U.S. is open to “credible and authentic talks” with Pyongyang if they are serious about denuclearization. Washington will not remove the preconditions to talks.

When a U.S. official says, “If North Korea chooses a different path,” it means if the North gives up its nuclear programs, if it stops provocations to threaten its neighbors and the United States, if it changes its repressive system of government, if it respects human rights, and if it chooses to abide by international law and the rule of law and behave in accordance with international norm. North Korea will never change its behavior, not to mention its system, unless it is convinced of the assurance of its independence and survivability.

It is interesting to note though that Blinken was conscious of the existence of skeptics of U.S. policy in Seoul and elsewhere. He cited the negotiated settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue, the normalization of relations with Cuba, and the improved relations with Vietnam as proof of U.S. willingness to engage. The only commonality between North Korea and Iran, Cuba and Vietnam is that the U.S. had long differences with these countries.

Whereas Iran was in the stage of developing a nuclear weapon, North Korea has become a nuclear weapons state and Pyongyang does not really care if it is or is not recognized as such, knowing that they possess its nuclear capability to threaten its “hostile” forces. Cuba and Vietnam never threatened the United States with nuclear weapons.

Even Donald Trump, the frontrunner Republican presidential candidate, who is yet to articulate what his foreign policy will be like, is a skeptic, who complains about the administration’s insensibility and inaction on a nuclear North Korea that threatens the U.S. “every two weeks”. On a broader regional perspective, the deputy secretary of state stressed the important roles of the alliances with South Korea and Japan for the U.S. rebalance to Asia, welcoming Japan’s expanded security role. He also explained U.S. relations with China in terms of security cooperation and narrowing or managing differences on such issues as human rights, the South China Sea, and cyber theft.

It is a good thing to hear again that Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to President Obama that China would guarantee the freedom of navigation and overflights in the South China Sea; China will not militarize the reclaimed islands; and China will resolve its territorial disputes with the parties concerned peacefully and by international law, and that China will not “knowingly” allow or support Chinese cyber-attacks on the U.S. for theft of business secrets or intelligence gathering. Washington, according to Blinken, welcomes good relationships among China, South Korea, and Japan as they will “complement the alliance system” and a trilateral summit among the three to take place in Seoul the next three weeks or so.

The U.S. has repeatedly said that it welcomes a peaceful rise of China but it expects China to carry its share of burden proportionate to its economic growth in meeting the global challenges. Beijing and Washington cooperated constructively in negotiating the Iranian deal and on climate change, but they have not made any progress in their common goal of denuclearizing North Korea.

Although Blinken said Japan’s expanded security role, with the recent security legislation and the updated defense guidelines, would prepare the allied forces better to meet such challenges as search and rescue, peacekeeping operations and disaster responses, the Chinese and Koreans ― North and South ― are more concerned about how this enhanced military arrangement between Japan and the U.S. will play out in the event of a conflict in the peninsula or in the region.

Would the Japanese military be allowed to land on the peninsula in case of a renewed North Korean attack, to fulfill its commitment to support the U.S.? The South Korean defense minister has said that would not happen without South Korean agreement.

Blinken also previewed a likely agenda for discussion for the upcoming summit between President Obama and President Park later this week. The agenda appears to go beyond the issue of the peninsula and to look forward to the potential areas of global cooperation including climate change, assistance to development, pandemics, natural disaster, and so on.

North Korea didn’t launch another missile or nuclear test ahead of the 70th anniversary of its founding of the Korean Workers Party on Oct. 10. This does not mean the North would not conduct such a provocative test.

Pyongyang has said they will do it at a time of their choice and as ordered by their leader Kim Jong-Un. Under these circumstances, Obama and Park are likely to issue a joint warning against such provocations as a matter of principles of international order, as they are prohibited by UN Security Council.

Blinken did not discuss the exclusion of South Korea from the just concluded TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) among 12-nations including the U.S. and Japan or the prospect of South Korean participation in the pact. Seoul still seems to be pondering what to do about it. What’s your take?

Tong Kim is a Washington correspondent and columnist

for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow at the Institute of

Korean-American Studies.