July 6, 2006

As millions of Americans gathered July 4th to celebrate 230 years of independence with barbecues, fireworks and the launch of the U.S. space shuttle Discovery, North Korea lit up the skies by testing up to seven missiles, including a long-range Taepodong-2 multistage missile some say is capable of threatening U.S. territories.  The tests, which were universally condemned almost immediately, represent the latest challenge from what analysts agree is the most neglected member of the so-called “Axis of Evil,” named by the Bush administration in 2002.  Will North Korea's provocation draw the U.S. into direct talks with the reclusive regime, or will this week's events strengthen the resolve of Japan, China, South Korea, Russia and the U.S. in dealing with the threat cooperatively?

A History of Failed Policy

For years, North Korea has been engaged in a game of cat-and-mouse with the international community, and particularly the U.S., regarding its nuclear program.  While the American response to North Korean provocation has varied throughout the past two administrations, most observers agree neither approach has yielded what has been a consistent goal – a nuclear-free Korean peninsula that is not a threat to its East Asian neighbors. 

“Despite more than a decade of efforts, neither the United States nor its principal allies in the region have found any sure way to prevent or even slow North Korea's nuclear development,” writes Carl Leubsdorf in a Dallas Morning News opinion piece.  “The failure to cope with North Korea is especially striking in view of the fact that the Bush and Clinton administrations have pursued two very different strategies.”

Indeed, the Clinton initiative of offering economic incentives and civilian nuclear reactors in exchange for a renewed North Korean commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and access for inspectors was sidetracked when Pyongyang successfully tested a long-range missile over Japan in 1998.  Many also suspect North Korea was secretly continuing nuclear developments during direct U.S. engagement culminating with a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright in 2000, as well as a promised follow-up visit from Clinton that never happened.

Observing what it saw as the failures of the Clinton administration in dealing with North Korea, President George W. Bush later sought a different tract, seeking instead to isolate and demonize the regime of Kim Jong Il.  Labeling North Korea part of an “axis of evil” in his now famous 2002 State of the Union speech, Bush refused to engage bi-laterally with North Korea, agreeing only later to take part in “six party” talks involving China, Japan, Russia and South Korea.  A number of sanctions removed as part of the Clinton deal North Korea were re-imposed, and talks in recent months have come to a screeching halt.

All the while, North Korea is said to have made significant gains in nuclear capabilities, including what many believe to be the development of a small arsenal of nuclear-capable missiles.   Following this week's tests, analysts point out the U.S. has still not articulated an effective policy towards the ongoing problem.  “The only thing worse than watching a charter member of President Bush's “Axis of Evil” thumb its nose at the international community is not having an effective means to respond,” writes TIME's Tony Karon.  “And despite all the tough talk coming out of Washington, the U.S. has few good options for responding to the latest bit of saber-rattling from the Stalinist regime in Pyongyang, this time involving an all-too-real saber: A Taepodong- 2 long-range missile.”

It is saber-rattling that could continue based on recent North Korean announcements.  “Our military will continue with missile launch drills in the future as part of efforts to strengthen self-defense deterrent,” said a statement from the foreign ministry this week.  “If anyone intends to dispute or add pressure about this, we will have to take stronger physical action in other forms.”

A Call for Cooperation

Aside from the occasional reference to the controversial and largely unsuccessful American missile defense system that could potentially intercept a North Korean missile, the U.S. response has been to call for cooperation with its allies in the six-party talks.  U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and President Bush, have called the threat a provocation, meanwhile insisting the tests will not draw the U.S. into bi-lateral discussions.  Rice reiterated the Bush administration's support for a multilateral approach to the situation, noting the international community “does have at its disposal a number of tools to make it more difficult for the North Koreans to engage in this kind of brinkmanship.”

Immediate steps are being channeled through allies at the United Nations.  Standing beside his colleagues from Japan and Britain, U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton called for the Security Council to take up the matter “in a deliberate fashion” that will send “a clear signal to Pyongyang” in upcoming days.   Spearheaded by Japan, a draft UN resolution gaining momentum would forbid the transfer of funding, materials or technology that could contribute in any way to North Koreas missile, weapons or nuclear advancement.  It also encourages Pyongyang to rejoin six-party talks, according to the Washington Post.  North Korea's missile program alone is thought to bring in roughly $1.5 billion in sales annually, a critical revenue stream for a country subsisting primarily on food aid and foreign assistance.

Japan itself has said it will consider imposing “every type of sanction possible against North Korea,” and the tests have also produced a backlash in South Korea, where efforts at reunification have been undermined in recent weeks.  “The means by which the government has tried to bring North Korea out into the world of peace and common sense was wrong,” said an editorial in South Korea's Chosun Ilbo.  “If the government remains attached to its fantasy of a well-meaning North and refuses to wake up from its daydream of playing mediator between Washington and Pyongyang while continuing to provide aid to the North, the missile crisis will escalate and the country's security will be jeopardized further.”

The China Factor

While this week's events have elicited a strong response from Washington, Tokyo and Seoul, Beijing and Moscow – two capitals that have perhaps the most influence over Pyongyang -- have been less vocal.  The global spotlight, however, remains on China, the regional powerhouse that holds the most sway over North Korea.  China has publicly expressed hope that “all sides will maintain calm and restraint, and do things conducive to the peace and stability of the Korean peninsula and Northeast.” 

For some, including U.S. Ambassador to the UN Bolton, such lofty rhetoric is not enough.  “I think there are countries that have leverage over North Korea and I think those countries bear the responsibility for trying to use that to bring the North Koreans back into compliance with their own stated policies, the moratorium on launches from the Korean peninsula and their expressed desire to continue in the six-party talks,” said Bolton at a press conference.  “I would think one way to keep the situation in Northeast Asia stable and peaceful would be to tell the North Koreans to stop launching missiles into the Sea of Japan. That would be a good place to start and I hope the Russians and the Chinese are conveying that message.”

Others, however, continue to downplay China's role, insisting it is a problem that can only be solved by the U.S. and North Korea alone.  “I don't think China will take at this moment stronger political or economic action against North Korea,” said Chu Shulong, a Chinese political science professor, in a Washington Post report.  “We Chinese believe, basically, fundamentally, it is not our problem, the missile launch problem.  It is a problem between North Korea and the U.S., it's a problem between the DPK and Japan. It might be a problem between North Korea and South Korea.  But basically it's not a China problem.”

While others believe a hostile North Korea is a Chinese problem, they still advocate greater direct engagement from the U.S. – a goal many believe is the driving force between Pyongyang's missile tests.  “The United States' posture is that it will not [deal directly with North Korea] because it would downgrade the six-party talks.  But all the other parties have engaged in direct talks with and want the United States to engage in direct talks,” said Dan Oberdorfer, journalist and author of The Two Koreas, in an interview with Foreign Policy Magazine.  “And while engaging North Korea is not likely to solve all the problems or to be some magic solution that's going to change the relationship, it is a first step.”
Others still say an immediate return to six-party talks remains the best option for all parties involved.  “Everyone's long-term interest lies in reanimating the diplomacy that has sputtered to a halt,” for a variety of reasons says a New York Times editorial.  “But now it is North Korea that has clearly put itself in the wrong. Washington should obviously not reward that bad faith by abruptly rushing back to the bargaining table. But reviving those talks in a more considered way would serve America's own best interests.”