Jump off the "axis of evil"

Russia and the United States need new approaches in negotiations on Korea

In future history textbooks, October 2007 may be called a turning point both in resolving the DPRK nuclear problem and in national reconciliation between the North and the South . However, how winding will the road be around this bend?

The second summit of South and North Korea is, of course, an extraordinary event. But to what extent are the promises made by South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun on the fourth (by the way, not very lucky according to Korean beliefs) fulfilled, since in four months he will leave the Blue House, that is, the presidential post? The new leader may not be enthusiastic about his predecessor's promises. Especially if the opposition candidate, whom the United States sympathizes with, wins.

At a meeting of Korean leaders on October 2-4 in Pyongyang, the now traditional mantras of peace and common prosperity were heard, with the North emphasizing a mutual commitment to non-interference in internal affairs and that progress must be achieved “by the strength of the Korean nation.” That is, without the interference of foreigners. Kim Jong Il and Roh Moo Hyun also agreed to prepare a new peacekeeping regime with the participation of “leaders of three or four states.” Who from the “four” can fall out - China, the USA? What kind of agreement will this be and how will it affect relations between the North and the South?

In Washington, inter-Korean rapprochement is viewed without enthusiasm, believing that Roh Moo-hyun's actions weaken the position of the United States. Japan, under the pretext of lack of progress in solving the problem of Japanese abducted by North Koreans, takes an obstructionist position.

At the summit, it was decided to create a “peace zone” in the Yellow Sea area adjacent to the shores of the North and South, where it would be possible for fishermen from the North and South, but not from other countries, to conduct joint fishing. However, the specific regime, including the sensitive issue of the disputed maritime border, must be negotiated by the military - how controversial will this work be? Their discussion of the topic of reducing the armed forces so far seems generally unproductive.

The most significant result of the summit was agreements on expanding economic cooperation. Both sides are interested in this - the South also because of anxiety about Chinese expansion into the economy of the North. It is envisaged to create a zone of “peace and cooperation” in the “triangle” adjacent to the demilitarized zone in the DPRK near Hezhu, expand the Kaesong Industrial Zone, which has been operating for several years, build shipbuilding enterprises in Nampo and Anbyon, establish freight rail transport between the North and the South (in the future, up to Chinese border), modernization of the highway to Pyongyang...

Simply put, the territory of the DPRK adjacent to South Korea is becoming an attractive “reserve” for South Korean business. True, Kim Jong Il did not show enthusiasm for reforming the economy, without which business activity is unlikely to be successful, although the parties seemed to have agreed on measures to overcome legislative barriers to cooperation.

In these stories, Russia is especially interested in the fate of the project of railway transit transportation through Korea and the Trans-Siberian Railway across the joint border, previously agreed upon with the North and South - will attention be diverted from it? But the opportunity to promote Russian business in the DPRK is obvious. The question is who will give money for grandiose projects, because their commercial profitability is still questionable, and political will may change...

Despite the “inconvenient” questions, the significance of the summit is not in concrete results or even in the feasibility of the agreements. The main thing is that the formula for the coexistence of the two Korean states for the long term with the prospect of a leisurely rapprochement without pressure and interference is fixed (hopefully irreversibly). The possibility of a “landslide unification” with unpredictable military and economic consequences, which frightens the neighbors, has been postponed, and the chances of imposing it from the outside have seriously decreased. A new geopolitical picture is emerging, which sooner or later all countries will be forced to recognize. And at the same time, we need to protect our interests, which is also important for Russia, which has always called for peace on the Korean Peninsula.

The timing of the summit coincided with the agreement at the six-party talks in Beijing on a schedule for the North Koreans to dismantle their nuclear program in the second stage of implementing the agreements reached in February. This is symbolic: changes are also needed in the approaches of other participants. The DPRK pledged to decommission its nuclear facilities used to produce plutonium by the end of the year and provide full information about all its nuclear programs. This work is being financed by the United States, and Russian experts will also participate in it. In exchange, the United States promises to remove North Korea from the list of states supporting terrorism, stop applying the “enemy state” trade regime to it, and move towards normalizing relations.

Even rumors about North Korea’s involvement in the transfer of nuclear technology to Syria did not hinder success. This is encouraging, but also alarming at the same time: is American diplomacy in a hurry to report success, “sweeping serious problems under the rug”? One of them is Pyongyang’s recognition that it not only has a uranium nuclear program, but also, perhaps, what the United States suspects, of its nuclear explosive devices (the question of abandoning them is not yet on the table). Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Hill promised to return to this problem next year. Will North Korea and the United States manage to clear up the problems that have accumulated over almost six decades and find a way out in the time remaining before the elections in the United States?

The results of the peace process are still fragile. This has already happened - optimistic expectations in 2000-2002 were dashed by the unexpected and unmotivated decision of the new Bush administration to fight the DPRK as part of the “axis of evil.” However, the other day, while in Washington, South Korean ex-President Kim Dae-jung (he was the first to shake hands with Kim Jong Il in 2000 and received the Nobel Peace Prize for this) said that he sees “the dawn of peace on the Korean Peninsula.”

Georgy BULYCHEV, Director of the Center for the Study of Modern Korea at IMEMO RAS