Experts say N. Korea issues need “sophisticated management”

Posted on : 2009-05-05 11:38 KST Modified on : 2009-05-05 11:38 KST
They recommend re-examining lessons learned from 2006 inter-Korea train link failure
 April 29.
April 29.

Following the April 21 inter-Korean meeting in Kaesong (Gaeseong) and in advance of any future contact, experts are pointing out that a sophisticated level of management is required and are recommending a re-examination of the lessons learned from the sudden cancellation of inter-Korean train service in 2006.

Experts believe today’s situation is similar to that of 2006, when North Korea unilaterally informed South Korea it was canceling a trial run of the train service on the Gyeongui (Seoul-Sinuiju) and Donghae (East Sea) lines just one day prior to their scheduled May 25 launch. At the time, North Korea-US tensions were building and the six-party talks had been stalled for six months due to the U.S. dollar counterfeiting controversy and U.S. financial sanctions. After the cancellation of the trial train service, North Korea invited Christopher Hill, then assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs and the chief U.S. negotiator for the six-party talks, to Pyongyang on June 1. When the U.S. refused the invitation, North Korea elevated tensions, first by launching a Taepodong 2 missile on July 5 and then by conducting a nuclear test on Oct 9.

The current situation, too, is similar. Following its launch of a long-range rocket on April 5, North Korea has been raising tension levels with a statement from their foreign ministry on April 29 indicating it may conduct a nuclear test or test fire an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Experts advise that South Korea needs careful measures to address pending inter-Korean issues that are worsening due to the broader geopolitical situation, and should make efforts to mediate between North Korea and the U.S. They say South Korea should carefully analyze the power relationship between North Korea’s “cooperation faction,” which calls for inter-Korean exchanges, and the hardliners centered on military leadership. It should also avoid, as much as possible, adding “fuel” to the fodder for North Korean hardliners.

One North Korea specialist said Monday for example, that in the case that Seoul announces full-scale participation in the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), the North Korean military leadership would immediately intervene. As a direct result, he said the Kaesong Industrial Complex would take a hit since closing of communications with or travel to the complex falls within the jurisdiction of the North Korean military leadership.

Lending strength to this advice is analysis that the notification given during the April 21 Kaesong talks demanding the reconsideration of privileges given to South Korea in Kaesong Industrial Complex contracts was the result of a compromise between North Korea’s cooperation faction and military leadership. A South Korean government official with considerable experience in inter-Korean talks said that if one looks at the content of North Korea’s announcements, it appears to be a sort of compromise between the North Korean military leadership, which does not favor the Kaesong Industrial Complex project, and moderates who claim it is necessary to maintain the complex.

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