hankyoreh

The South Korean and US foreign ministers held their first bilateral meeting of the year on Jan. 7 in Washington. At the meeting, South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs Yun Byung-se and US Secretary of State John Kerry discussed the situation in North Korea in the wake of Jang Song-thaek’s execution, along with how they plan to respond. The two ministers agreed to coordinate their response to any North Korean threat within a framework of airtight alliance. The plan seemed to tie in with recent US announcements about rotating deployment of a US-based Armored Division mechanized battalion and heavy weapons in South Korea, although military authorities cautioned against reading too much into the connections. When a political environment is uncertain, solid security is of course crucial.

Another topic at the talks besides a stronger military readiness posture was the possibility of a “contingency situation” in North Korea. Though that specific expression was not used, the message was clear enough from the context. It was one of the most significant developments in the talks.

Afterwards, Yun told foreign correspondents in Washington that the two sides had agreed to step up discussions at different levels to collaborate closely on developments in North Korea. A senior official explained on condition of anonymity, “As far as what we mean by ‘in-depth discussions on the North Korean situation,’ it can be understood in connection with our policy approach of trying to elicit faster change from North Korea, based on an analysis of the situation as it unfolds.” The same official said the framework for discussions would be fundamentally different from the six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear issue. Some of the possibilities that were mentioned included China participating alongside South Korea and the US, a five-party framework (the members of the six-party talks minus North Korea), and discussions at the UN level.

The idea of creating a new bilateral or multilateral window for discussing North Korea outside of the six-party talks, which have been the traditional forum to discuss solving the nuclear issue and other North Korea concerns over the years, marks a major change - one that raises its own set of questions.

First among them is the relationship with the six-party talks. As of yet, it is not clear whether the plan is to put off the six-party talks in favor of discussions through the new framework or to hold them in tandem. It also appears inconsistent with the claim at the talks that denuclearization would be the top priority. China, which has taken the initiative in the six-party talks, may not go along with the new framework.

A second question concerns whether the aim of the policy is to actively hasten an upheaval in North Korea or passively respond to one if it happens. The official’s anonymous remarks hinted at the former possibility. If true, the approach would stand to raise inter-Korean tensions significantly.

North Korea’s political situation is fluid and requires a response from different angles. Still, there has to be substance to back up the statements. We also need to be aware of the potential for a new North Korea discussion framework to serve as a “back door listing” route for a South Korea-US-Japan security cooperation scheme that is under severe strain right now from disagreements over historical issues.

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]