This week in
Beijing, on April 23-25, U.S. officials meet and talk with their
North Korean and Chinese counterparts, ostensibly to resolve the
current standoff over the North Korean regime's nuclear
proliferation. This meeting can be an important initial step toward
a peaceful solution to a serious global threat. The Bush
Administration should use these meetings as a short-term
opportunity to communicate clearly and unequivocally its principled
stance that North Korea must act to reduce its full array of
threats, both conventional and nuclear. In the long term, North
Korea must agree to return to its previous nuclear status, adopt a
multilateral framework to verify its compliance with international
agreements, initiate a comprehensive plan to reduce or reposition
its forces, curtail its missile and arms sales, and pursue domestic
reforms to alleviate the hardships suffered by the North Korean
people.
The Bush
Administration should back this position with a comprehensive plan
that combines muscular diplomacy, security measures, and economic
sanctions and inducements that are well-coordinated with regional
players.
Recent North Korean
Provocations
The trilateral meeting in Beijing
will be the first meeting between the United States and North Korea
since October 2002, when North Korea admitted that it had been
conducting a major clandestine nuclear weapons development program
for the past several years. North Korea then violated several
international agreements in
quick succession by unfreezing its plutonium facility in Yongbyon,
expelling International Atomic Energy Agency monitors, and pulling
out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Since initiating
these provocative actions, North Korea has consistently demanded
face-to-face meetings with the United States, despite the Bush
Administration's principled stance that it would address North
Korea only within a multilateral setting and not give in to nuclear
blackmail. Now, in an about-face, North Korea has agreed to meet
the United States in a non-bilateral setting. Entering these
meetings, the United States has retained its negotiating strength
because it did not cave in to North Korean threats and demands.
More important,
U.S. insistence on a multilateral resolution to North Korea's
nuclear proliferation is necessary because it is not a
bilateral issue; North Korea's provocations threaten the stability
not only of the region and countries in the region, but also of the
entire global community. Any framework to address the North's
nuclear program will require, at a minimum, the participation and
cooperation of regional neighbors to ensure Pyongyang's compliance
in the future.
Goals for the Bush Administration
in Beijing
As officials from
the Bush Administration work through this and any subsequent
meetings, they should consider the following goals:
-
Ensure that
any formal negotiations that may ensue from these talks extend
beyond nuclear weapons to address North Korea's comprehensive
security threats to the region. North Korea maintains over 1.1
million active duty personnel, with a reserve force of 6 million.
Currently, 70 percent of its military forces are deployed within 90
miles of the demilitarized zone (DMZ) between North and South
Korea. The United States and its allies should urge North Korea to
withdraw significant portions of its conventional forces from the
vicinity of the DMZ. In return, the United States and its allies
could agree to similar confidence-building measures by reducing
commensurate capabilities for surprise, first-strike attacks.
-
Prevent North
Korea from dividing the interests of America and its allies, South
Korea and Japan. Although representatives from South Korea,
Japan, and Russia-the other major powers in the region with direct
interests in reducing tensions with North Korea-are not included in
these meetings, the United States should make clear to North Korea
and China that any permanent solution must include the active
participation of the other regional players. No country has a
greater interest in a peaceful resolution to tensions on the Korean
peninsula than South Korea, and it must take the lead on issues
that relate to inter-Korean reconciliation. One of the great flaws
of the 1994 Agreed Framework was the exclusion of South Korea from
the negotiation process despite the instrumental responsibility
that both South Korea and Japan were required to bear in its
implementation. Indeed, this fact is now often cited as an example
of American indifference and disrespect in anti-American rhetoric
in South Korea. Russia, an ally of North Korea, also has strong
interests in a peaceful outcome.
-
Encourage
North Korea to reverse its "military first" policy and institute
substantive domestic reforms that include economic and political
liberalization. Kim Jong Il's brutal domestic policies are
conditioned by his fear that his regime will lose control if he
relaxes his totalitarian grip on his society. He should be made to
understand that such policies are ultimately unsustainable. As
economic failure, mass starvation, and dependence on outside
sources for food and energy reveal, the only viable solution for
his regime is to begin reforms. Further isolation from the
international economy and community will only lead to greater
instability and illegitimacy.
Conclusion
This week's
meetings in Beijing are an important but preliminary step toward
resolving North Korea's nuclear problem peacefully. The United
States should approach the road ahead with cautious optimism. If
history is any indicator of the future, North Korea will continue
its provocations while simultaneously making conciliatory gestures.
Such behavior is to be expected and should not be used as the
short-term measure of the Bush Administration's steadfast approach
to North Korea. Regardless of Pyongyang's machinations to obfuscate
and confuse the issues, the Bush Administration should remain
focused on the long-term goal of peace and stability on the Korean
peninsula and the region.
- Balbina Y.
Hwang is Policy Analyst for Northeast Asia in the Asian
Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation.