Diplomacy the only path to real security

Videos
Photos

By Walter L. Hixson (China Daily)
Updated: 2009-04-21 07:45

The recent statements emanating from Beijing and Moscow show that China and Russia want to help restart the Six-Party Talks on the now dangerously stalemated Korean nuclear issue.

But ultimately, whether these or other talks go forward to achieve resolution of the issue depends on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the United States.

Myriad opportunities to come to terms on denuclearization of the Korean peninsula have been squandered over the years. Reviving diplomacy has now become a major challenge with emotions running high in the wake of the DPRK launch and the unanimous UN Security Council resolution condemning it.

A cooling-off period will be required but negotiations must go forward at some point because there is no rational alternative if the goal is to increase East Asian security and move the world toward complete nuclear disarmament.

For the DPRK, increasingly isolated and facing myriad domestic challenges, a continuing showdown with the US, Japan, and the Republic of Korea (ROK) carries no long-term benefits.

For US President Barack Obama, his emphasis on engagement, disarmament and diplomatic "resets" will suffer if he is perceived as conducting the same diplomacy toward the DPRK as his predecessor in the White House. For Japan and the ROK, continuing confrontation with the DPRK only invites insecurity and heightened risk of potentially catastrophic escalation. For China and Russia, the impasse undermines progress on nuclear de-escalation and the desire for stability to promote trade and investment throughout the region.

The DPRK, the US, Japan, and the ROK face significant domestic impediments that must be overcome to advance international politics. As a liberal and relatively inexperienced in foreign affairs, Obama will be scrutinized and readily criticized by hawks in Washington if he appears to be weak or conciliatory toward the DPRK.

There is perhaps even more pressure on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who as a woman will constantly be confronted with the need to show toughness.

Noting that Clinton visited the ROK on her Asian tour, and condemned the DPRK for confrontational policies while she was in the country, Kim Jong-il and other DPRK officials appear to believe that the Obama administration just represents more of the same.

Obama clearly is not the same as George W. Bush, however, as he has already demonstrated by reversing a number of Bush policies, including his efforts to improve relations with perennial adversaries Cuba and Iran. Whereas Bush branded other nations as "evil" and went on a "crusade", Obama has used his "bully pulpit" to make the idea of a world free of nuclear weapons appear as more than a mere pipedream.

Unfortunately, in part because of the DPRK's impatience and its own internal dynamics, US diplomacy has suffered a setback with the breakdown of the Six-Party Talks.

Obama has the potential to recast diplomacy and to once again inspire hope in US global leadership, but the Korean nuclear issue will test all of his political skills, both at home and abroad.

It seems that at some point the Obama administration is going to have to offer the DPRK the legitimacy it seeks.

The US can offer security guarantees sufficient to convince the DPRK that Washington and its allies in Tokyo and Seoul do not pose an aggressive threat to Pyongyang. Such assurances, which could be delivered by Clinton or Obama's special envoy, Stephen Bosworth, could revive the Six-Party framework or come through bilateral talks if necessary.

Security assurances combined with further initiatives promoting demilitarization in East Asia and the promise of substantial economic assistance could be brokered with Pyongyang in return for verifiable denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

The current situation serves the national interests of no one and poses serious dangers for all concerned. At some point the realization must dawn that diplomacy rather than posturing and fulmination offers the only path to real security.

The author is a specialist in the history of US foreign policy and is currently teaching as a visiting Fulbright scholar at the China Foreign Affairs Institute in Beijing.

(China Daily 04/21/2009 page9)