hankyoreh

center

The third South Korea-Japan-China summit, held Saturday and Sunday on Jeju Island. Attention focused on the summit as a test for the extent of support the South Korean government could elicit for international coordination in response to the Cheonan sinking, and cooperation from North Korea’s strong ally China in particular.

China, however, did not display the degree of change in its stance that Seoul had hoped for. Instead, the summit once again revealed the stark difference of opinion between South Korea and Japan, which emphasized “resolute measures against North Korea,” and China, with its emphasis on “a restrained response and the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.”

The Cheong Wa Dae (the presidential office in South Korea or Blue House) has recently stated that subtle changes have taken place with China.

“Since China is very reluctant to make public reference to North Korea, it is highly significant in itself that a formal reference was made to the Cheonan situation in the joint statement,” said senior secretary for public affairs Lee Dong-kwan during a briefing Sunday.

Lee also noted the remarks at the summit by Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, who said that China “is a responsible nation.”

“You can understand this as signifying that China also intends to fulfill its international responsibility,” Lee Dong-kwan said.

A key Cheong Wa Dae official also attributed significance to these remarks, saying, “You could say that while China took a half-step forward last time at the South Korea-China summit on Friday, it has now moved a full step closer.”

However, a closer examination of remarks made by the three countries’ leaders during the summit, and the content of their joint press conference and joint statement, shows that they moved on parallel tracks regarding the Cheonan issue, with South Korea and Japan on one side and China on the other.

“I will regard the result of the joint investigation of South Korea and the international fact-finding team as important and respect the responses of the different nations,” said Prime Minister Wen during the Summit. Wen also said, “I also oppose and denounce any act that destroys the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.”

During the press conference Sunday, Wen said that it was particularly important to avoid any clash and emphasized the need for the three nations to “consider one another’s positions regarding a momentous issue, deal appropriately with sensitive issues and strengthen political trust.”

Regarding the approach of South Korea and Japan, which maintain that a North Korean apology for the Cheonan incident and punishment of those responsible must come before any resumption of the six-party talks to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, Wen suggested another solution.

“Even so, in the long term we must pursue denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula through the six-party talks,” he said.

Analysts are interpreting this to indicate both opposition to a hardline response against North Korea that would heighten tension on the peninsula, as well discomfort with the international community’s diplomatic pressure on China, which maintains a special relationship with North Korea.

“I have no intention of having a war, but we cannot simply let this slide,” said President Lee Myung-bak meanwhile during the meeting. “North Korea must promise to prevent any recurrence of military provocations, acknowledge its fault, and take appropriate measures.”

References to the Cheonan in the joint statement that contained the results of the tripartite summit seemed to be diplomatic in nature bore no mention of the cause of the Cheonan’s sinking, North Korea’s responsibility, or referral of the matter to the UN Security Council. Though qualified with the expression “in the long term,” the statement’s reference to the three leaders having agreed to continue joint efforts through the six-party talks could be interpreted as reflecting China’s position more than those of the other two nations.

One section in the statement says, “The leaders of the three countries agreed to engage in continuous discussions and respond appropriately to maintain regional peace and stability.”

While the expression “continuous discussions” could be used as leverage by Seoul to elicit a change in the Chinese position, it also has the sense of a curb by Beijing, indicating the matter should not be unilaterally referred to the UN Security Council without China’s consent.

“Since the three countries pledged to engage in continuous discussions, the South Korean government will now have a hard time discussing taking the matter to the UN Security Council while disregarding China,” said former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun. “The Lee Myung-bak administration could find its hands tied.”

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