Policy Forum

Rudiger Frank, Professor of East Asian Economy and Society at the University of Vienna, writes, “In comparison with the 2007 issue, the return to old postures (socialism, Party, domestic resources) is the most striking difference. IT, standing at the core of the 2007 editorial, has not been mentioned in 2008; neither has the status as a nuclear power. Improving the standard of living is again an issue, but its coverage was less intense in 2008.”

Stephan Haggard, Lawrence and Sallye Krause Professor of Korea-Pacific Studies and Director of the Korea-Pacific Program (KPP) at the University of California, San Diego School of International Relations and Pacific Studies, and Marcus Noland, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, writes, “A primary, though not exclusive, objective of NEAPSM should be the integration of North Korea into the Asian and global economies. Such an opening is a prerequisite to the country’s economic renewal and resolution of its chronic humanitarian problems. Deepened economic interdependence would also embed North Korea in relations that could reduce the likelihood of disruptive behavior.”

Scott Snyder, Senior Associate with The Asia Foundation and Pacific Forum CSIS, writes, “One key test of whether or not this is a new starting point will be whether China can meet its diplomatic objectives by influencing South Korean government policies not only in the context of the Sino-South Korean bilateral relationship, but also whether China can cast its shadow to the east sufficiently that South Korean administrations are required to take into account China’s preferences in formulating not only inter-Korean policy, but also South Korea’s management of relations with Japan and the United States.”

Rudiger Frank, Professor of East Asian Political Economy at the University of Vienna, writes, “As soon as the usual two strong years in office of the new administration in Seoul are over, the Blue House, facing renewed pressure from its voters, will have to return to the engagement policy anyway. On the balance sheet we will see nothing but a loss of time and of influence. Confidence, contacts, access that have been destroyed during this period will have to be rebuilt, if this is possible at all.”

The National Committee on North Korea published this newsletter which detailed how college students from the DPRK, with assistance from Syracuse University and The Korea Society, competed in an international computer programming competition. The report concludes, “Several lessons seem clear. First, at least in several areas involving science cooperation, the DPRK is quite willing and able to engage international standards. Second, their best students are able to compete effectively with top students world-wide. Third, sincere cooperation begets trust and more cooperation.”

Axel Berkofsky, Adjunct Professor at the University Milan and Advisor on Asian Affairs at the European Policy Centre (EPC) in Brussels, notes, “North Korea will not be ‘decisive and to try to make a deal with Bush while he is a lame duck ultimately, the Six-Party talks will break down under a McCain presidency or be replaced by a new process under a Democratic administration.’”

Leonid Petrov, Research Associate in the Division of Pacific and Asian History at Australian National University, writes, “During the last decade, the dynamics of inter-Korean cooperation have made unprecedented progress. It would be unforgivable to slow down this process only because someone may find a peaceful compromise excessively expensive. Let us not forget that this matter is about the future of the Korean people, and attempts to economize on the future of the people sooner or later leads to political bankruptcy.”

Karin J. Lee, Executive Director of the national Committee on North Korea, writes, “The concert itself did not resolve deeply held national security concerns on either side -nor should anyone expect a concert to have such an impact What may have changed, incrementally, is that a few words have been added to a common cultural vocabulary. Now each country has an additional image of the other country, a new cultural point of reference to add to the customary images of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Ultimately, exchanges such as these prepare the people in both countries to sustain the peace that we hope will be brokered by our respective governments.”

Katharine H.S. Moon, Professor in the Department of Political Science at Wellesley College and Associate Fellow at the Asia Society in New York, writes, “The US government has kept a long arm’s distance from the musical overtures between Pyongyang and the Philharmonic, but it also has missed a unique opportunity to assert one of the best examples of its “soft power” not only to North Korea but to the rest of the world.”

Mark J. Valencia, Maritime Policy Analyst in Kaneohe, Hawaii and a Nautilus Institute Senior Associate, writes, “The publication of an article critical of the Philippine government’s agreements with China in 2004 and with China and Vietnam in 2005 to undertake joint seismic surveys in the South China Sea has unleashed a fusillade of allegations that have rocked the government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo… in approving this arrangement, the Philippine government undermined its political relations within ASEAN and its own legal claims to islands, waters and continental shelf in the South China Sea.”