hankyoreh

Moon Chung-in, the chairman of the Hankyoreh Foundation for Reunification and Culture, speaks with Dan Smith, the director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, following Smith’s keynote presentation via videoconference at the 2023 Hankyoreh-Busan International Symposium on Oct. 25. (Shin So-young/The Hankyoreh)

“Just before the Russian reinvasion in February last year, the view was put forward that the big picture was Russia takes Ukraine, and then China takes Taiwan, and then North Korea takes South Korea. [. . .] But I think that the answer at the moment is that it is not very likely that China would make a big move against Taiwan or indeed that the North would make a big move against the South.”

Dan Smith, the director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), made these remarks during a talk that followed his keynote address at the 2023 Hankyoreh-Busan International Symposium, which kicked off on Wednesday at the Nurimaru APEC House in Busan’s Haeundae District.

Smith provided various grounds for that prognosis through a comparative analysis of the international community’s responses to the war between Russia and Ukraine and that between Israel and Hamas.

To begin with, he recalled how the EU’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was “unified, fast and decisive,” sending the unanimous message that the invasion of a sovereign state was unacceptable.

He went to observe the contrast between this situation and the recent failure of the EU to present a united response to the horrors taking place in Gaza.

The reaction of many allies of the US and EU, including South Korea and Japan, to Russia’s invasion being all in line means that the political leaders in China and North Korea are well aware of how Western countries and their allies would respond to an attack on Taiwan.

A second basis that Smith shared concerned the developments in the war in Ukraine, which he said was very unlikely to end any time soon or finish with either side victorious.

Commenting that neither side shows any intention of respecting the other, he predicted that the war was unlikely to end within the next year or two — or even in the next three to four years. He also said that while Russia is paying a price for its invasion in the form of economic sanctions, the situation so far has not been catastrophic for it.

The event’s moderator, Hankyoreh Foundation for Reunification and Culture chairperson Moon Chung-in, asked Smith about predictions by some experts that the Korean Peninsula’s past of political division could end up becoming Ukraine’s future. In response, Smith said Ukraine’s future was likely to be someone different from Korea’s experience, noting that the EU has expressed its unwillingness to accept Russia occupying Ukrainian territory by force.

He also said that in light of the way the war in Ukraine has dragged on with no signs of ending, as well as the resolution response from the US, any rational expert on Chinese issues would view an invasion of Taiwan as unlikely.

Smith voiced particular concerns about the war between Israel and Hamas, stressing the need to tell the “whole story” rather than only one side.

Observing that one side has emphasized only the violent actions by Hamas while the other side has only addressed the horrific results of Israel’s aerial attacks on Gaza, he emphasized that the only escape from the grim situation lies in an effort to view the entirety of the situation.

Smith said that while Hamas’ attack on Israel may have come as a shock, it was not a surprise in light of the things that have transpired between Israel and Palestine over the past 10 to 15 years. He stressed that neither the complete elimination of Hamas nor the expulsion of Palestine from Gaza is a realistic solution, explaining that the only practicable way out is through pursuing a future of coexistence.

He also warned that answering force with force will only make the situation worse.

Recalling the response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, he said that while the US waged a “war on terror,” terrorism only increased. Smith predicted that peace would not be achieved without Israel accepting a “two-state solution” of coexistence of Palestine, although he said it was unlikely to be realized any time soon.

While the majority of Israelis and Palestinians hold favorable attitudes toward the two-state solution, the political foundation for achieving it has not been put in place, he explained.

Smith was not entirely optimistic in his analysis and predictions for an early conclusion to the two wars that are currently unsettling the world, or for the reestablishment of peace. At the same time, he stressed that “the key element of security is cooperation,” calling for the replacement of the vicious cycle of conflict with a “virtuous cycle.”

His appeal sent a particularly powerful message in coming from an authority on peace issues who has chaired the world’s top two peace research institutions, the Peace Research Institute Oslo (1993–2001) and SIPRI (2015–present).

By Lee Je-hun, senior staff writer

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