Seoul Should Catch New Signals in Regional Diplomacy
Though not certain yet, subtle signs are being detected, heralding a new diplomatic climate around the Korean Peninsula these days.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, while meeting with a senior Chinese official last week, reiterated his commitment to removing nuclear weapons from the peninsula while maintaining peace with his neighbors.
Kim seems to have wanted to convey a couple of messages through this act. Most of all, the 67-year-old, who reportedly suffered a stroke around August, tried to demonstrate he is well enough and ready to discuss the issues of denuclearization and normalization with U.S. President Barack Obama, or the latter's special envoy. If Washington remains aloof and detached, however, Pyongyang could rely more on Beijing as a regional leader, he seemed to be saying.
But the North Korean leader's signal of appeasement contradicts the isolationist regime's earlier calls for ``denuclearization through diplomatic normalization'' with the United States, let alone its hostile rhetoric of an ``all-out confrontation posture against South Korea."
This is a vintage North Korean diplomatic offensive on the basis of a two-fronts tactic, aimed at driving a wedge between Seoul and Washington and between hawks and doves in both capitals.
A U.S. State Department spokesman just said Kim's remarks were a ``good thing,'' and the six-party framework ``has merit.'' Nor did Hillary Clinton's first official comment on North Korea as secretary of state Tuesday go much further than reaffirming the previous U.S. commitment to ``existing multilateral talks and bilateral talks within the current six-nation arrangement.''
But Clinton did not forget to say, ``We're going to pursue steps that we think are effective.'' This, along with the fact she left room for bilateral talks with North Korea, suggests there could be some form of direct communication between Washington and Pyongyang. It also is line with President Obama's inaugural address, in which he said, ``We will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.''
Diplomatic analysts say the new Democratic administration would remain unchanged in its diplomatic goal of nonproliferation as well as in its principle of clear, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization, but far more flexible and reasonable in the process toward reaching that objective, meaning both carrots and sticks could be far bolder than before and their mix would be far more diverse.
This is a far cry from the denuclearization-first policy of the former George Bush administration, to which President Lee Myung-bak and his government still stick to. President Lee, by naming a professor who formulated his North Korea policy based on demanding Pyongyang's concessions as new unification minister, showed his will to maintain a consumptive tug-of-war, which has been dragging on since he took office a year ago.
To the eyes of third-country observers, both South and North Korea can hardly be free from blame for being mired in petty one-upmanship diplomacy, while commonly begging for Washington to be on their respective sides.
Pyongyang should put what it says into action, while Seoul ought to show some magnanimity and tolerance toward what it thinks as its inferior rival in both political and economic terms.
If things continue like now, Koreas could soon turn away from each other in multilateral forums, becoming the laughing stock of other participants. Seoul is far better positioned to change this situation and it should do so while it can.
