By George H. Wittman on 2.21.07 @ 12:07AM
North Korea may think its latest agreement with the U.S. is a repeat of 1994 -- but China and Japan may have other ideas.
Dealing with North Korea can be compared to playing the Japanese
strategic board game of Hikaru No Go, but in three
dimensions and within a maze. The tendency is to want to knock the
board off the table.
Negotiations with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK) cannot be viewed through the same logic set that governs
international negotiations in general. To begin with debate is an
end in itself for North Korea. In this respect any accord that is
reached is merely a part of the overall dynamic of the ongoing
negotiations.
This sense of continuum tends to be hard for the Western mind to
accept because it disrupts the traditional logic in settling
disputes; that of a contractual mentality where matters agreed upon
are set aside as finished products. What is the point of an
agreement if every aspect continues to be vulnerable to
reinterpretation, disregard, and even denial? Ultimately, however,
unless an opposing party is willing and able to smash the North
Koreans into submission -- or at least ignore them at one's peril
-- the only alternative is to proceed with negotiation by their
rules.
Asst. Secretary of State Christopher Hill accepted this
restriction and pursued negotiations accordingly. The result has
been attacked as simply a repeat of the agreement reached by the
Clinton Administration in 1994 that ended in futility with
Pyongyang covertly creating a small number of nuclear weapons after
pursuing a secret uranium enrichment program. How, therefore, is
the new accord, albeit with a broader strategic context, going to
result in something different from the earlier one?
This answer may reside in the altered role of China during the
thirteen interim years. China, already politically dominant, is now
recognized as the major regional economic power -- competing only
with Japan. Ironically this strength has been gained through the
PRC veering away from its commitment to strict socialist economic
principles. The North Korean leadership cannot admit it openly, but
it no longer can consider China as the same fraternal partner it
once was. Pyongyang, from its continued Stalinist perspective,
certainly views Beijing's eroding Communist dogma as giving impetus
to China's emergence as a nascent capitalist state.
For its part Beijing perceives the ongoing contest of wills
between Washington and Pyongyang as now having a new formidable
component in Tokyo's intense reaction against the DPRK's nuclear
armament. Japan is no longer relatively passive in the face of
North Korea's aggressive behavior. In other words, the overall
dynamic has been altered.
The North Koreans, in turn, recognize this change in the
environment of the negotiations at hand. Under this new set of
parameters is a host of economic, political and military
considerations that did not exist thirteen years ago. What does
remain, however, is the technique the North Koreans use within the
context of agreement negotiations.
THE BREAKTHROUGH, SUCH AS IT IS, occurred through private
unofficial meetings held between the U.S. and the DPRK, proving
once again the importance of secret diplomacy. Later Pyongyang
signaled at the formal six-power conference that they were willing
-- for the moment -- to accept the specific offers of energy
assistance in the context of future broad considerations of
strategic matters. These included, among other things, full
diplomatic relations with the United States and the intention to
negotiate a separate peace agreement on the Korean peninsula.
China expects success in the next two months in the shutting
down of the North Korean nuclear facilities at Yongbyon, as does
most, though not all, of the Bush Administration. The Japanese are
not nearly as sanguine, but have their fingers crossed. The
Russians act as if they are just going along for the ride. And the
South Koreans are cheering in hopes their enthusiasm will have a
positive effect on their northern brother.
The DPRK desperately needed the proffered energy assistance and
the Bush Administration needed this political win. But that
accomplishment has come at the cost of ignoring the existence of
Pyongyang's nuclear mini- arsenal and advanced missile program.
For the deeply self-reliant North Koreans to give up their
nuclear-armed status after having sacrificed so much to get it
would be tantamount to national surrender and contrary to their
historical character. The choice that the United States and China
will have to make is whether they can afford to allow the DPRK to
continue with its ploy of pretense. So far it appears they have
agreed that there is no alternative in this potentially deadly game
of Go.
topics:
Environment, Military, Russia, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, Energy