hankyoreh

the head of U.S. affairs at the North Korean Foreign Ministry

The North Korean nuclear issue as it enters 2009 stands atop the heritage of the six-party talks of 2008, that heritage being the failure to produce a verification agreement and the subsequent failure to bring disablement of North Korea’s nuclear facilities to completion. At the same time, approaching the issue has a new point of departure, that of the changed political landscape brought about by the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Barack Obama. The Hankyoreh talked to 32 experts who provided interpretations of what both these premises mean for the North Korean nuclear issue and for U.S.-North Korean relations and gave predictions as to what directions both will take in the new year. Most predicted that there would be progress, but they differed in terms of how wide-ranging it will be and at what pace it will come.

Thirteen of the 23 experts who responded to this question, a slight majority, predicted that the denuclearization process might be able to enter the dismantlement stage in 2009. Kim Chang-su of the Korean Council for Reconciliation and Cooperation (KCRC, Min Hwa Hyeop) said he expects the United States will go about a reevaluation of its North Korea policy in the first half of the year.

Dongguk University Professor Kim Yong-hyun said that in the second half of the year, “it will be possible to agree on the details of the third phase, that of dismantlement, and to begin preparing for carrying it out.”

University of North Korean Studies Professor Yang Mu-jin, and some others we interviewed, spoke in terms of separate processes for facilities and equipment dismantlement and the dismantlement of nuclear weapons, and predicted that the dismantlement of the Yongbyon nuclear facility and its equipment could commence in 2009.

Ten experts, however, said it is unlikely that the process will enter the dismantlement phase this year. In the words of former Unification Minister Kang In-duk, the North Korean nuclear issue “will fall behind the financial crisis, Iran and Afghanistan in the Obama administration’s priorities.”

Some doubted that dismantlement can begin in the year ahead, based on doubts about whether Pyongyang is going to be willing to give up its nuclear arms. “North Korea has no fundamental willingness to (go through with) dismantlement,” said Lee In-ho of the Institute for National Security Strategy.

For the process to move to the next phase, that of dismantlement, there first needs to be a breakthrough on the matter of verification, the last step in the disablement phase, with progress on that currently being held back by the issue of sample collection. A considerable number of experts suggested the solution to the question of samples might have to be a political compromise between a North Korea that does not want to reveal all its nuclear cards and a United States that wants positive verification. Kyunghee University Professor Kwon Man-hak, Kyungnam University Professor Kim Keun-sik, and Sejong Institute researcher Hong Hyun-ik, all suggested a compromise in which North Korea would publicly pledge to allow for partial verification of the Yongbyon facility at the disablement stage and then allow total verification of all nuclear matter at the dismantlement stage. Meanwhile, a former high-ranking foreign policy expert during the Kim Young-sam administration, who demanded anonymity, insisted that there has to be a written guarantee on sample collection on Pyongyang’s part. Korea University Professor Yoo Ho-yeol said that “disablement verification without sample collection would not be very meaningful, and the North needs to make the right decision and allow the taking of samples.”

Many of the experts we interviewed were of the view that hope for high-level dialogue between the United States and North Korea in 2009 would be premature. Hong Hyun-ik, the Sejong Institute researcher, said a summit meeting between the leaders of Pyongyang and Washington would be possible only when negotiations on dismantlement are in the final stages of being concluded, not before or during the negotiation process.

Chun Bong Geun of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security said there is “very little possibility” of a U.S.-North Korea summit, but that “if the North Korean nuclear negotiations proceed smoothly,” there does exist the possibility that Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme People’s Assembly Kim Yong-nam and U.S. Vice President-elect Joseph Biden might take the opportunity to meet at the United Nations General Assembly in October.

Others, meanwhile, thought some bargaining for summit talk could actually take place. One expert, an individual who had once been Seoul’s vice unification minister, said that summit talks might be possible in a situation in which disablement is complete and it becomes time to enter third phase of the process: dismantlement.

Sogang University Professor Kim Young-soo said there “could be high-level dialogue to talk about getting things moving” but that “the possibility is decreasing a lot because of Kim Jong-il’s ill-health.”

Chung Wook-sik of The Peace Network said a summit could happen “in the context of a package deal on the North Korean nuclear issue and improving U.S.-North Korean relations.”

Few argued against the suggestion that the Obama administration could send an emissary to Pyongyang regardless of whether or not there is a summit. Dongguk University Professor Koh Yu-hwan suggested that the sending of a special emissary “could be the most effective way of resolving” the North Korean nuclear issue “given the character” of North Korea’s system of government.

University of North Korean Studies Professor Koo Kap-woo said that if U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill continues to play a role in the Obama administration, “a visit on his part would come before other things.”

Many , like Yonsei University Professor Kim Myung-sup, suggested that someone with experience in visiting North Korea, like former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, might be called on to act as a special emissary.

Former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun, however, said that if the Obama administration “wants to finish any one thing about the North Korean nuclear issue,” it needs to send a “prominent figure with authority and responsibility like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or National Security Advisor James Jones.”

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