North Korea’s shelling of Yeonpyeong
Island in the Yellow Sea is the third such incident since
last November. Then, the North Koreans exchanged gunfire with South
Korean naval forces resulting in two North Korean deaths. The
second was North Korea’s sinking of the South Korean destroyer
Cheonan in March.
As you read this, the USS George Washington and
its battle group are conducting exercises with South Korean forces
in the southern Yellow Sea, not too far from Yeonpyeong Island.
Both North Korea and China have condemned the exercises. China is
pushing for a high-level meeting of the parties to the “Six-Party
Talks” — the U.S., Japan, both Koreas, and Russia — to ease
tensions in the area. But those talks are aimed at North Korea’s
nuclear program and have nothing to do with their attacks in the
southern Yellow Sea.
The Yellow Sea is China’s Caribbean: it claims a 200-mile
exclusive economic zone that almost reaches Yeonpyeong Island, very
near the area in which the naval exercises are taking place. China
is North Korea’s biggest ally and trading partner. We often say
that North Korea is under China’s control, and that its aggressive
acts couldn’t be undertaken without Chinese acquiescence or
agreement. But it’s not at all clear that China — which clearly
has enormous leverage over the impoverished North Koreans — has
that level of day-to-day control of North Korea’s acts.
Calling North Korea impoverished is both a great
understatement and a misstatement. My favorite picture of the
Korean Peninsula was taken by a U.S. spy satellite on one night in
early 2006. It shows South Korea ablaze with lights in every city
and town. In the North, only the capital of Pyongyang is lit. The
rest of the country is pitch black. Most North Koreans live cold,
hungry, and in the dark, but their government lives
well.
So far, China is apparently trying to calm the situation.
While North Korea’s press blares more threats, China’s Xinhua News
Agency is publishing rather bland stories about the incident and
the U.S.-South Korea military exercises.
If North Korea wanted war, it could restart the Korean War
in a matter of minutes by attacking with missiles or other forces
across the demilitarized zone. If it sought only to provoke South
Korea and America, it could mount a smaller attack off its east
coast.
But the fact that the three incidents in the last year all
took place in the Yellow Sea means that the three attacks are meant
to draw China in as well. If the Chinese knew of the incidents
before they took place and approved North Korea’s actions, the
Chinese would be extending their protective military umbrella over
North Korea’s provocations.
So what does North Korea want? And how should we and South
Korea respond to its latest act of murderous aggression?
North Korea has accomplished much of what it wanted. It
waited eight months after sinking the Cheonan for a
response from South Korea, and didn’t see one. By the latest
attack, North Korea has already brought about the resignation of
South Korea’s defense minister and may have destabilized the South
Korean government. Massive protests in Seoul by South Korean
military veterans have demanded a forceful response, and at least
one South Korean general has vowed revenge.
South Korea has already had one prime minister fall this
year, and the new P.M., Lee Myung-bak, is perched precariously on
his seat. And the effects of the latest attack are being felt in
Tokyo. Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan has ordered his cabinet to
remain in Tokyo for the next several days, anticipating a greater
crisis.
What to do?
First, the United States should restore North Korea to its
proper place as a nation designated as a state sponsor of
terrorism. This would effectively interfere with — and probably
interdict — most financial transactions with North Korea. Given
North Korea’s proliferation activities — including construction of
the Syrian nuclear plant that Israeli jets destroyed three years
ago — there’s more than enough justification for that
action.
The Bush administration lifted the designation as an
incentive to North Korea in the Six-Party Talks. But those talks —
like the negotiations we’ve had with North Korea off and on for
about fifteen years — are an abject failure. There is no agreement
we’ve made — or will ever make — with North Korea that they will
abide by. Every time we receive their blood oaths to stop nuclear
development and proliferation, the North Koreans proceed at full
speed doing their best to conceal their actions.
Second, we should reject China’s call for urgent
consultations of the Six Party Talks participants, instead
convening a meeting of a core group of the nations that are a party
to the Proliferation Security Initiative. The PSI, begun in 2003,
is aimed at enforcement of proliferation bans on nuclear and other
weapons of mass destruction. It proved its worth several times,
intercepting — in one case — the shipment of nuclear materials to
Libya, which precipitated Libya’s surrender of its nuclear program
to the United States. The PSI began with sixteen nations and has
grown to ninety, an impossibly unproductive number. Let’s start
with a small group of six or seven and call it
“PSI-Korea.”
The PSI-Korea group should be called together to create
and implement a plan of action designed for the sole purpose of
preventing any further shipment of nuclear or missile materials
from North Korea to any nation or group.
Third, and not last in importance, we should urge a
regional alliance with Japan and South Korea to help them defend
themselves — and each other — against further North Korean
aggression. This would be a big step for Japan, but a necessary one
because a re-armed Japan — capable of ballistic missile defense
and other measures — would be a necessary predicate to any such
agreement. Were Japan to grow in military strength, North Korea
would be more effectively contained.
Will the Obama administration do any of this? Almost
certainly not. Which will leave North Korea undeterred. It is
probably the most dangerously unpredictable country in the world.
And its next act of aggression — and there will be one — may
result in a South Korean response that will kick off the Second
Korean War.
