Policy Forum

John Parker, is a freelance writer based in Thailand, writes: “The nuclear cat is well and truly out of the bag, which means that the military option for reunification has slipped from Seoul’s fingers for good; and will only be possible for Pyongyang if the US pulls out of South Korea completely without leaving any nuclear weapons behind – still a very unlikely scenario, recent force cuts notwithstanding. That leaves the other option: restore nuclear weapons to the South in full awareness that this could start an arms race which might lead to the collapse of the DPRK.”

Adam Miles, staff member at the East Asia Policy Education Project for the Friends Committee on National Legislation, writes: “Concerns about North Korea’s nuclear proliferation and human rights abuses will be better addressed through policies that promote engagement. After years of resistance to negotiating with North Korea, it may be up to Congress to help get the situation back on track.”

Dr. Soyoung Kwon, post-doctorate fellow at the Asia-Pacific Research Centre of Stanford University, and Glyn Ford, member of the Korean Peninsula Delegation in the European Parliament, write: “Security and the economy are North Korea’s two top priorities. All of which seems to indicate that Kim Jong Il is firmly behind and committed to the economic reform process. For those who favor a changing regime rather than regime change the message is clear. Now is the time to engage.”

Ralph A. Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS, a Honolulu-based non-profit research institute affiliated with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, writes: “North Korea has effectively played a ‘divide and conquer’ game throughout the nuclear stand-off. If it receives conflicting signals from Washington, Seoul, Beijing, Tokyo, and Moscow in the face of this latest provocation, it will be encouraged to continue this tactic. The time has come for the other five finally to begin speaking with one voice to Pyongyang, to hold it accountable for its own words and actions.”

Go to the discussion.

Aidan Foster-Carter, honorary senior research fellow in sociology and modern Korea at Leeds University, writes: “the Dear Leader has trouble at home too. Six-party fixations have also distracted us from internal North Korean politics: a murky area, but one where hidden eruptions begin to ruffle the bland theatrical veneer. Last year Kim purged his brother-in-law and ex-right-hand man Chang Song-taek. Three sons vie to be dauphin, with rumors of murder plots (in Vienna, even). This struggle may be over policy – hawks versus doves – or simply power. Either way, stability can no longer be taken for granted.”

John Feffer, author of “North Korea, South Korea: U.S. Policy at a Time of Crisis“, writes: “The new team at the State Department should consider how a more flexible U.S. negotiating position which would deal with the plutonium program first and provide incentives throughout the dismantlement process rather than just at the end could solve one of the world’s most pressing problems and, improbable as it might seem at the moment, provide George W. Bush with a positive legacy when he retires.”

Leon V. Sigal, director of the Northeast Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council in New York and author of “Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea“, writes: “North Korea is the embodiment of evil to some Americans, who object to making a pact with the devil. Why they prefer to bluff and bluster while watching North Korea adds to its nuclear might instead of disarming it through give-and-take is a mystery of their faith.”

Ruediger Frank, Professor of East Asian Political Economy at the University of Vienna, writes: “Those who regard a strengthened market system in North Korea as beneficial are well advised to increase the total supply of food. Here, THEY can catch two birds with one stone: improve the humanitarian situation AND support a gradual transformation with the goal of regional security and stability, not regime change per se.”

Kosuke Takahashi, a former staff writer at the Asahi Shimbun and a freelance correspondent based in Tokyo, writes: “Chinese intellectuals suggest that North Korea is increasingly becoming a downright troublesome ally for China in its strategic and political relations. The more Pyongyang delays nuclear talks, the more Beijing loses face in the eyes of the international community as host nation, especially when China strives to promote proactive diplomacy in Asia and elsewhere as a rising economic and political power.”

Rebecca MacKinnon, Research Fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School and founder of “North Korea zone,” a weblog on North Korea, at: www.NKzone.org, writes: “Granted, many Koreans – on both sides of the Demilitarized Zone – have mixed feelings about China’s growing commercial and political power in the region. Still, commercial and technological trends point to the development of a Northeast Asian telecommunications landscape in which the United States and the rest of the West will play little role – and in which the Chinese role will be key. This telecommunications landscape, in turn, will shape the way in which Northeast Asians relate to each other and the rest of the world.”