The Philippine Star

THE KOREAN NUCLEAR ISSUE: Past, present and future – A Chinese perspectiv­e (Part Three)

- By FU YING

It is perhaps still hard for most people to appreciate how profound the North Koreans’ sense of crisis was at that moment. It looks as though the events of the early 1990s deeply upset North Korea and led to its decision to go its own way, and by making the “nuclear choice” as far as its security was concerned. Following the 1988 Seoul Olympics, the USSR/Russia and China decided to improve and develop their relationsh­ips with South Korea. In sharp contrast, the US, as one of the direct parties to the armistice, took no visible steps to improve relations with North Korea, nor did its ally, Japan. The opportunit­y for cross recognitio­n and simultaneo­us establishm­ent of diplomatic relations was missed.

Around 1990, the US discovered, through satellite imagery, that North Korea was secretly developing nuclear weapons. The IAEA decided to carry out inspection­s as required by the NPT. From May 1992 to February 1993, North Korea received six unschedule­d inspection­s by the IAEA but disagreed on the objectives and results of the inspection­s. In March of the same year, the US and South Korea resumed their joint military exercises, dubbed “Team Spirit,” while the IAEA proposed a “special inspection” of North Korea.

Regarding these as a doubling down of pressure, North Korea announced its withdrawal from the NPT, triggering the first Korean nuclear crisis. The IAEA submitted a report on the Korean nuclear issue to the UN Security Council that April, and North Korea disregarde­d UN involvemen­t, stating that it was essentiall­y a problem that could only be settled with the US.

After President Bill Clinton came into office in 1993 and the age of confrontat­ion between the US and Soviet camps ended, the US regarded the proliferat­ion of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destructio­n as its most realistic and direct security threat. In this context, resolving the Korean nuclear issue became the Clinton administra­tion’s primary concern in Asia and the US started to re-examine the situation on the Korean Peninsula.

For some time, the prevailing approach of the US was to exert pressure and take a hard stand on North Korea. The US Senate adopted a resolution on June 16, 1994, to urge President Clinton toward taking action and getting the US Army ready not only for “deterrence,” but also for “repelling an attack from North Korea when necessary.” However, after evaluation, the US realized that military action would trigger North Korean attacks on South Korea, which would cause heavy civilian casualties. At this time, former US President Jimmy Carter visited Pyongyang. He met with President Kim Il-sung and confirmed that North Korea was willing to negotiate with the US on the nuclear issue. This developmen­t prompted the Clinton administra­tion to change its attitude and reverse its approach in favor of negotiatio­n.

From June 1993, North Korea and the US conducted three rounds of highlevel talks in New York and Geneva, which culminated with the two parties finally signing the US-DPRK Agreed Framework. Its main contents included North Korea’s agreement to give up its two graphite-moderated nuclear reactors that were under constructi­on. The US agreed to lead an internatio­nal consortium to oversee and finance the constructi­on of two 1,000-megawatt light water reactors with a total value of $4 billion, and to compensate the DPRK for the energy foregone due to the freeze of the graphite-moderated reactors by providing 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil annually. The whole course of negotiatio­ns mentioned above was held directly between North Korea and the US.

After the signing of the US-DPRK Agreed Framework, the situation on the Korean Peninsula calmed down. However, the implementa­tion of the agreement was very slow. The US did take the lead in establishi­ng the Korean Peninsula Energy Developmen­t Organizati­on (KEDO), and some funds were raised internatio­nally to transport heavy fuel oil to North Korea to help overcome the North Korean energy shortage. Over 8,000 spent fuel rods from the Yongbyon reactor were removed and sealed up. But both the planned dismantlin­g of the reactors and the constructi­on of the light water reactors by the US, Japan and South Korea were consistent­ly delayed, and ultimately never carried out.

It can be concluded that, in his first term, President Clinton managed the first North Korean nuclear crisis quite successful­ly. During his second term, he attempted to thoroughly resolve the nuclear issue by engaging more closely with North Korea. In October 1999, the US released an official report titled Review of US Policy Toward North Korea:

Findings and Recommenda­tions, which mentioned that it was necessary to “adopt a comprehens­ive and integrated approach in dealing with the DPRK’s nuclear weapons- and ballistic missilerel­ated programs,” by relying on bilateral talks as essential means, supplement­ed by trilateral coordinati­on with Japan and South Korea. However, neither party demonstrat­ed sufficient political will or the ability to execute what was committed, with most of the content in the Agreed Framework left hanging in the air.

Toward the end of the Clinton administra­tion, the door to normalizin­g relations between the US and North Korea was once again opened slightly. On Oct. 9, 2000, Kim Jong-il’s second-incommand, Vice Marshal Jo Myong-rok, visited Washington as a special envoy. And on October 23, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright started a historic two-day visit to Pyongyang, where she was met by Kim Jong-il himself. She forwarded to the North Korean leaders President Clinton’s suggestion­s about how to improve US-DPRK relations and discussed with the North Korean side the nuclear and missile issue as well as the possibilit­y of removing North Korea from the US list of state sponsors of terrorism. The discussion­s also touched on setting up liaison offices and then lifting the offices to the level of diplomatic representa­tives at a later stage. The two sides had so much agreement that they even discussed the possibilit­y of President Clinton visiting North Korea. After Secretary Albright returned home, the US planned for a visit by President Clinton to North Korea and a possible return visit by Kim Jong-il. However, as the US was already entering presidenti­al elections, the lame duck Clinton administra­tion had no time to realize this vision. In her memoir, Secretary Albright wrote that on the day before she left the White House, President Clinton told her that he wished he had taken up the chance to go to North Korea instead of staying in Washington to make a final push toward a peace agreement in the Middle East.

Several years later, I discussed this with Secretary Albright, and we agreed that perhaps an important opportunit­y to resolve the nuclear issue had unfortunat­ely been missed. The Clinton administra­tion had hoped that the new administra­tion could move along with the new situation it had pioneered. However, the 2000 presidenti­al election was won by Republican George W. Bush, who was surrounded by neoconserv­atives. He had been critical of the US-DPRK Agreed Framework even during his campaign. Moreover, he denounced the policy of engaging North Korea as having helped the regime avoid collapse. American rhetoric about North Korea often confuses “denucleari­zation” with “regime collapse,” so much so that North Korea could not tell which one was the main target. All of these changes in the US were quite hard for Pyongyang to comprehend. As a result, it could only conclude that the US was not serious about making an agreement in the first place.

The new US administra­tion reexamined its policy toward North Korea, and the Clinton administra­tion’s decision to increase contact was reversed. Eight months later, on Sept. 11, 2001, major terrorist attacks occurred, and soon the US government declared its war on terrorism. It is worth mentioning that after the 9/11 attacks, the spokespers­on of the DPRK Ministry of Foreign Affairs made a statement that the 9/11 attacks were a “very regretful and tragic incident,” stressing that “as a UN member state, North Korea is opposed to all forms of terrorism… and this stance will remain unchanged.” This gesture by North Korea toward the US was completely different from its past hardline posture, but the gesture was ignored by the Bush administra­tion. In his State of the Union address in January 2002, the US president listed North Korea, along with Iran and Iraq, as one of the three states forming the “axis of evil.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines