[Analysis] N. Korea suspends nuclear disablement, raising new questions about its intentions

Posted on : 2008-08-27 13:14 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Move could be aimed at increasing North’s bargaining power or stalling until the next U.S. president takes office
 2008. Photo courtesy of AP=Yonhap News Agency.
2008. Photo courtesy of AP=Yonhap News Agency.

The core issue in an August 26 statement by the North Korean foreign ministry, which said it has suspended nuclear disablement efforts at its Yongbyon reactor, is that the United States should remove Pyongyang from its list of state sponsors of terrorism “as promised” because it had fulfilled its end of the bargain and submitted a declaration of its nuclear activities. The North’s argument is that the United States “clearly violated the agreement” with North Korea because Washington was trying to link North Korea’s removal from the terrorism list to verification of the declaration, even though the verification process is part of the next phase of the denuclearization process. If the North’s argument is taken as is, it would indicate that the North is not intending to go through the verification process at this stage, in which the U.S. has failed to remove Pyongyang from the terrorism list. This is in stark contrast to the view held by South Korea and the United States, both of which have characterized the declaration and its verification as “two sides of same coin.”

At this point, it is necessary to analyze why North Korea has taken such hostile action.

One thing has become crystal clear. North Korea’s motive is to pressure the U.S. government to remove Pyongyang from its list of terrorism sponsors.

However, it is unclear whether the North’s actions are aimed at increasing its bargaining power ahead of negotiations with the U.S. on the verification process or whether the North is digging in for a “long-term battle” that will extend past the forthcoming U.S. presidential election.

In response to the North Korean statement, a high-ranking South Korean government official said that he suspected the North was trying to gain the upper hand in negotiations by raising tensions, but that the South, after consulting with the United States and related countries, would not overreact and that they would build an atmosphere in which the second phase of the September 19 Joint Statement could be completed. The official added that South Korea has no plans to halt economic and energy aid to North Korea.

It is also notable that the statement was issued on the first day of the U.S. Democratic National Convention, during which the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate will officially be nominated. The North’s action, which includes suspension of removal of nuclear fuel rods from the Yongbyon reactor, could be viewed as a maneuver ahead of the U.S. presidential election.

There are two possible aspects here. One is that North Korea may be trying to tilt public opinion in its favor by influencing U.S. election politics. The other is that North Korea may be trying to control the speed of the six-party negotiations until a new U.S. administration takes office early next year. Kim Seong-bae, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Strategy, said, “The announcement by the North’s foreign ministry spokesman could be viewed as a measure aimed at the U.S. presidential election and domestic politics in the United States.”

The issue now is what the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, who only has a few more months in office, will do in response. Still, it is too early to tell whether the United States will compromise and step back from its demand that there be a strict verification process in place or slow the speed of the negotiations with North Korea, given the upcoming presidential election and the opinions of conservatives at home. Kim Yeon-cheol, the head of The Hankyoreh Peace Research Institute, said, “I can’t rule out the possibility that the six-party talks could be facing an impasse in the wake of the U.S. presidential election.”

If North Korea were to take additional action, and the United States were to counter that, both the six-party process and efforts to provide economic and energy aid to North Korea could be thrown into turmoil. The high-ranking South Korean government official said, however, that it would not be desirable to overreact at the point because North Korea appears to be trying to increase its bargaining power.

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