Anna Sakoyan: between Kims

Anna Sakoyan

The news of the death of Kim Jong Ira gave rise to a lot of gossip in the press and even some analytical remarks, although a more thorough discussion, apparently, will appear later. While the conversations are in three main directions: what was Kim Jong Ir, what were the circumstances of his death and - most importantly - what will happen now.

About Kim Jong Ira himself, Ny Times published a large material . There, the late North Korean leader is represented as an ominous and at the same time comic figure - a classic dictator, the actions of which are aimed at strengthening power to the detriment of starving citizens. His foreign policy activity is mainly described through relations with Washington. In particular, the negotiations that began during the presidency of Bill Clinton are mentioned, and that after George Bush Jr., the policy of interaction between the DPRK and South Korea, was replaced by a more isolationist one. Regarding the North Korean nuclear program, it is said that its development, most likely, was influenced by the US invasion of Iraq: Kim Jong Ir removed a lesson from the fate of Saddam Hussein and decided that it was impossible to abandon nuclear weapons. Since 2006 (after demonstratively conducted nuclear tests), Washington tried to agree on some compromises, but negotiations were sluggish.

Regarding the prospects for the transition of the authorities to Kim Jong -un, the most likely, although the very young and inexperienced successor Kim Jong Ira, the author of the article notes that in 1994, when Kim Il Saint died, the international community also expected a military coup and radical changes, but nothing of the kind happened.

South Korean The Korean Times about Kim Jong Ira himself writes dryly and concisely - there, close, are much more interested in the consequences in the short and long term. The editorial column dedicated to this topic emphasizes that it is now important for the South Korean leadership to act very carefully and carefully, so as not to repeat the mistake of 1994, when sharp official statements addressed to the deceased Kim Ir Sen led to an exacerbation of relations with the north.

Since the successor, unlike Kim Jong Ira, does not have a 20-year experience in preparation for management (he was officially appointed a successor only in 2010), as there is no established apparatus that would support him, to rule for him, at least at the beginning, there will be a certain team [1]. Most of all, the editorial office writes, now in the future it is necessary to fear unexpected actions from North Korea, which may become a consequence of the internal struggle for power and which are difficult to predict due to the general classification.

“Seoul,” the authors conclude, “will accept Pyongyang in a brow only when the North abandon nuclear weapons and takes the path of reform and openness. Seoul needs to cooperate with Washington, Beijing, Tokyo and Moscow to ensure a soft landing by the communist country. ”

In addition, Korean Times affect the topic of the possible murder of Kim Jong Ira. The opinion of the political scientist is given, who believes that the elite recently had grounds for reprisal against the leader - in particular, the political scientist refers to the fact that after the promotion of Kim Jong -un on the military line, many influential people were resigned, and also mentions the recent history ( dubious reliability , but nevertheless) about the execution of a large Korean official. Another opinion is given, according to which in the messages coming from the north there are no evidence that such a version is fair.

In another material, Korean Times again a reference to the probable murder as a factor defining the further development of events. If Kim Jong Ir died his death, as transmitted in the news, then the transition of the authorities will come true rather smoothly. If he was actually killed by supporters of a tough course, then in the country, as the author believes, chaos in the spirit of the "Arab Spring" may begin.

Experts from the analytical center Stratfor have formulated this easier. In the near future, the article says, the North Korean elite will be determined with the alignment of forces and engage, first of all, internal affairs. Then everything will depend on how much the military elite is interested in preserving the Kima dynasty. If interested, then changes in the foreseeable future should not be expected. The fact that there is no serious threat from North Korea now is also evidenced by the lack of military revitalization on the border with the south. Thus, external stability is expected with internal tension.

Finally, stratos analysts say, the death of Kim Jong Ira will not necessarily entail the termination of negotiations on the folding of the nuclear program. Now, due to the confrontation with the West, the country is increasingly dependent on China, and the continuation of negotiations and, perhaps, even some compromises will weaken this dependence.

In another, later published material of Stratfor, it is also said that at the moment the situation in North Korea is stable, and this is evidenced by the fact that the news of the death of Kim Jong Ira, who died on December 17, was received with a delay of 48 hours, that is, there were no leaks of information indicating a radical discord in circles of the elite. On the other hand, it took Kim Jong Iru for about three years so that the elite recognized his authority. Therefore, experts conclude quite abstractly, it should be expected that in the current situation a variety of perturbations are possible.

As for the Arab Spring, the author of the article in Washington Post also recalled it in connection with the news from North Korea. True, there is an association from the opposite. He says that in the absence of the Internet in North Korea (unlike the Arab world) and generally ties to the outside world, the development of events in this direction is technically impossible [2].

A certain primary resume about the news appeared on the non -conservative American resource American Enterprise Institute. The analyst Dan Blumenthal spoke briefly and weightily, laying his thought in three points. First: Kim Jong Ir was a terrible dictator, and “we are all” for almost 20 years he was indulged in, fearing, first of all, the collapse of North Korea, as well as a nuclear threat. Second: during the reign of Kim Jong Ira, the leadership of North Korea experimentally established that, waving a nuclear baton, it can easily exhaust subsidies. Third: it makes no sense to try to delve into what the successor is. He is a representative of the same dynasty and, therefore, the same course. Dialogue in this situation is impossible. Thus, the only true policy from the United States is to maximize the change in the regime and the implementation of radical reforms in the country.

At the same time, one blogger on the same resource tried to estimate , referring to expert data, what could have been about the unification of the north and south. As an example, he took the unification of Western and Eastern Germany, where $ 2 billion was spent on reunification in two decades. Given the fact that North Korea is 4 times more than eastern Germany, and the poverty level is much higher, it turned out that to create some (but far from complete) balance sheet would require 3 to 5 billion dollars for about the same period.

Michael Auslin, an expert from the same American Enterprise Institute, trying to predict North Korea’s behavior, says that Western and Asian governments need to prepare for indicative military maneuvers like those that were earlier, because the leadership of the country will definitely want to show the whole world that the death of Kim Jong Ira is not a pretense of The change of regime (note that North Korea has already conducted missile tests on Monday). Accordingly, the Obama administration and US allies represented by South Korea should make it clear that such actions will not remain unanswered. How exactly they can do this, the author, however, does not specify.

Notes

[1] The opinion that the North Korean heir will be a puppet in the hands of the regents, back in 2010, said Koreuchewed Andrei Lankov in his blog.

[2] The same Andrei Lankov wrote about the specifics of the reflection of Arab events in North Korean politics in the spring of this year.