YONHAP NEWS

N. Korea resists sanctions, diplomacy in Obama's first year

By Hwang Doo-hyong
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 (Yonhap) -- U.S. President Barack Obama still faces a reluctant North Korea after using both sanctions and diplomatic overtures for the North's denuclearization during the first year of his term.

   Obama's first year in office, as far as his Korea policy is concerned, also showed enhanced bilateral ties, with his active support for South Korea's hosting of the G-20 economic summit in November, and commitment to providing a nuclear umbrella for the defense of South Korea, although he has yet to move quickly for the ratification of a free trade deal between the U.S. and South Korea amid battles over health care reform and other pressing issues.

   "During his first year in office, President Obama consistently pursued the optimal policy toward North Korea: offering the DPRK a diplomatic settlement on reasonable terms, while pursuing international sanctions until the DPRK changes course," said David Straub, associate director of the Korean Studies Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. DPRK stands for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

   North Korea recently called for signing a peace treaty to replace the fragile armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War and lifting U.N. sanctions imposed after its nuclear and missile tests early last year as preconditions for the reopening of the six-party talks on its denuclearization, which it has boycotted for about a year.

   Stephen Bosworth, special representative for North Korea policy, visited Pyongyang last month in the first high-level contact with the North since Obama took office, but failed to secure a commitment from the North to return to the nuclear talks, which also involve South Korea, China, Japan and Russia.

   Bosworth and other U.S. officials have said that the U.S. will discuss the peace talks and consider removing sanctions only after Pyongyang returns to the multilateral nuclear talks.

   "Unfortunately, North Korea does not appear to be prepared to negotiate seriously about abandoning its nuclear weapons ambitions," Straub said. "However, the United States should, and will, I believe, continue to hold out the option to North Korea of negotiations, even as the United States implements international sanctions until North Korea accepts that option."

   John Feffer, co-director of the Foreign Policy in Focus program at the Institute for Policy Studies, is also pessimistic. "I do think that we will see substantial progress in the six-party talks over the next two to three years, but we may not see full denuclearization."

   Feffer lauded Obama for his effort to engage the North.

   "President Obama made the same mistakes as his predecessors. He failed to follow up immediately on engaging the country and then overreacted when North Korea made the predictable response to attract U.S. attention," he said. "What made Obama different from Bush, however, is that he waited six months rather than six years before he adjusted his policy."

   Denny Roy, senior fellow at the East-West Center, Honolulu, also gave Obama high marks.

   "I believe Obama's approach has been basically correct," Roy said. "Over the years, the U.S. and other governments have erred by encouraging North Korea's expectations that provocative behavior will be rewarded, and by treating North Korea as a bigger threat than it actually is."

   "Instead, the Obama administration has recognized the need to break the old pattern," he said. "At the same time, both Washington and Seoul offer Pyongyang the promise of an improved political relationship and economic benefits if North Korea chooses a different path. What they need to do now is stick to their position even when they get threats from Pyongyang to return to provocative behavior."

   Speaking to a forum here last week, Bosworth said he hopes the six-party talks will resume "sometime in the next few weeks or months," although he predicted a tough road ahead.
"I think we recognize merely reconvening talks, while important, only creates the opportunity for further challenges," he said. "I have no misgivings, no misunderstandings of about how difficult that might be."

   The North Korean nuclear issue, meanwhile, served as the catalyst for Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak to consolidate their strong bilateral alliance, as they have joined forces in not rewarding the North for provocations, and Obama has given an unprecedented written assurance of a nuclear umbrella to South Korea.

   "President Obama and President Lee have similar foreign policy views, especially regarding North Korea, and my understanding is that the two leaders like and respect each other," Straub said. "U.S.-ROK relations have continued to strengthen during President Obama's first year in office. The upturn in official bilateral relations began with President Lee's inauguration and his approach to the United States."

   Obama's development of strong personal relationship with Lee has quelled concerns that the ideological gap between conservative Lee and liberal Obama might revive the kind of difficulty that Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and George W. Bush had in coordinating their North Korea policy and realigning their decades-old alliance.

   Some had feared that an aggressive approach to North Korea by Obama, who had pledged while campaigning to meet with Kim Jong-il, would collide with Lee's pledge not to seek inter-Korean reconciliation unless the North abandons its nuclear weapons ambitions.

   The strong South Korea-U.S. alliance contrasts with the souring ties between Washington and Tokyo after the inauguration of the liberal Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, who has been seeking more independence from the U.S., just as in the case of Roh Moo-hyun.

   "U.S.-South Korean relations seem stable for the near future," Roy said. "From the U.S. point of view, the Lee government is relatively supportive of the alliance. The relationship looks even better when you compare it to what is happening to the U.S.-Japan relationship, with doubts about the strength of that relationship introduced by the new Democratic Party of Japan government. Right now Seoul looks like a loyal friend of the United States at a time when others are flocking to China."

   Feffer agreed.

   "In general, the alliance has survived the two political transitions in Seoul and Washington," he said. "Lee Myung-bak is certainly more invested in the traditional military alliance. And there might be some quiet maneuvering by South Korea to take advantage of the current tensions in the U.S.-Japan relationship, just as there was maneuvering previously by Japan when the U.S.-ROK relationship suffered under Roh Moo-hyun."

   Feffer expects the bilateral alliance to remain strong in the face of South Korea taking back wartime command control of its troops from the U.S. in 2012 and the U.S. government's redeployment of its troops in South Korea for strategic flexibility.

   "I don't think the shift of wartime command control, which was such a divisive issue a few years ago, will be problematic," he said. "The redeployment of U.S. troops will also be understood as part of the overall shift in U.S. military strategy rather than a covert criticism of South Korean alliance conduct. Finally, there has been relatively little friction around the North Korea issue. So, in general, the alliance seems quite healthy."

   Straub said it is natural for South Korea to take control of its defense as its economic and military power is growing.

   "The U.S.-ROK alliance is absolutely strong, but it is only natural that the Republic of Korea, with one of the biggest economies and most powerful militaries in the world, will have primary responsibility for its defense," said the former head of the Korea desk at the State Department.

   The only exception to the strong bilateral relationship is Obama's failure to bring a free trade agreement (FTA) between the countries, signed in 2007, to Congress for approval.
"The only sour note in bilateral relations during the past year was President Obama's unwillingness to present the KORUS FTA to Congress, but both governments managed that difference well, and there is still considerable hope that President Obama will eventually seek Congressional approval for the KORUS FTA," Straub said.

   The imbalance in the auto trade is the biggest hurdle, and Obama is also focusing on health care reform, economic recovery legislation, Afghanistan and other more urgent issues amid rising protectionist sentiment in the worst recession in decades.

   U.S. officials have said they want to address U.S. concerns about the auto industry and the restricted shipment of beef in side agreements without revising the text of the deal.

   South Korea is pressing the Obama administration to submit the deal by this summer, fearing that failure to do so would push ratification to at least 2011, after the elections in November.

   Emerging from meetings with Deputy Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis and other U.S. officials here, Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun of South Korea's ruling Grand National Party said last week that "it is highly unlikely that the Korea FTA will be ratified by the end of the year. My impression is that the Obama administration does not have a willingness to push ahead with the Korea FTA's ratification this year."

   Roy said the Korea FTA is "double-sidelined."

   "Not only is the U.S. government concentrating on what it considers to be more pressing issues, but ideologically, the current Congress is not enthusiastic about expanding free trade and is not convinced that more economic concessions by the United States will help restore prosperity."

   Obama has had a very complicated relationship with bilateral trade issues, Feffer said.

   "As a candidate, he was skeptical of them, including the KORUS FTA," he said. "But as a president he has been slightly more enthusiastic, though not nearly as much as Bill Clinton was about FTAs."

   "I think it's difficult to push FTAs at a time of economic hardship, and Obama is reluctant to fracture the Democratic Party on this issue when he needs party unity to pass health care, jobs legislation, and so on," he said.

   hdh@yna.co.kr
(END)