The United States and China are the most important parties
in establishing a strong framework in which a multilateral approach to peace
and cooperation in Northeast Asia can take place. This is mere speculation, but
if the United States and China had reached a substantial level of cooperation
in tackling the North Korean nuclearization, the 2005 Joint Statement of the
Fourth Round of the Six-Party Talks could have provided a firm foundation for a
multilateral effort to take place in Northeast Asia similar to the one that
exists in Europe.
China began to take a more advanced role in the affairs in
the Korean Peninsula, especially the nuclearization of NK, in 2003 following Hu
Jintao’s appointment as president. After NK’s second nuclear weapon experiment,
China initiated a three party talk, along with the US, NK, and in August, the
number of participant countries was expanded to its current format of six
countries. This involvement stands in great contrast to China’s previous aloof
stance as stated by then-Vice Premier Zhu Rongji: “Whether NK develops missiles
or nuclear weapons is not an issue in which we can interfere.”
What caused this turnabout in China’s attitude? The election
of President Bush in 2001 marked a turnabout in American foreign policy. The
State Department focused on spreading American values one-way. This policy
gained greater strength after 9/11, and the War on Terror meant that this
translated into greater shows of American force in the “outposts of tyranny.”
The tensions further heightened when NK admitted to enriching uranium to James
Kelley (Assistant US Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs) on
his visit to NK in 2002.
The Six-Party Talks were an offspring of cooperation between
the US and China. However, to think that the two countries could reach a level
of cooperation sufficient enough to resolve NK nuclearization was too much from
the outset of the Talks. It is true that the 2005 Joint Statement as well as
the Resolution no.1718 of the UN Security Council were brought forth through
the joint efforts of the two countries. Nonetheless, the two countries would
take separate initiatives when NK significantly raised tensions through
experiments. At such times, China would seek to restore its old relationship
with NK, whereas the US would alienate any progress that had been made through
the talks by antagonizing NK as part of the axis of evil. Therefore, the
lessons given by the Talks were that powerful resolutions put forth by the
Security Council were powerless without the cooperation of the US and China. In
practice, this was how all cooperative efforts between the two countries at the
Talks ultimately failed.
In February 2013, the Park government introduced a new
foreign policy that centered on “Trustpolitik.” The policy seeks to build a
framework in which Northeast Asian countries can cooperate in attaining
stability and peace. The Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative, which
is founded on US-Chinese cooperation, reflects the government’s recognition
that reunification is a multilateral effort.
In contrast to Europe and Southeast Asia, where regional
security is a subject of joint effort, such a project is not even in its
infancy in Northeast Asia. There are three reasons. Firstly, most of Northeast
Asia is still engaged in the Cold War. Three nuclear powers (the US, Russia,
China), and economic powers (the US, China, Japan) are lined up against each
other, not to mention the Korean Peninsula where a ceasefire is still in place.
Secondly, an analysis of security situation of Northeast Asia is centred on
bilateral alliances formed by the two powers with their respective allies.
Thirdly, these two major powers are choosing to compete rather than cooperate
against each other.
Hence, the disconnectedness of Northeast Asian countries is
owing to the structural power imbalances in the region. Can a multilateral
effort ever be brought about to solve the issues of Northeast Asia?
Paradoxically, the one issue which showed the need for multilateral cooperation
and its likelihood of success is NK nuclearization. The Six-Party Talks were
the first ever talks held on a security matter, thereby proving that a
multilateral security structure can be built in Northeast Asia.
Ahn Jung-Geun penned the essay “On Peace in East Asia”
during his imprisonment by the Japanese. He proposed that peace in Northeast
Asia will ultimately be successful if it includes Southeast Asia as well. He
envisioned an “Asian Union” of sorts, in which there was a common navy,
parliament, banking system, military, and language. The core of the union would
consist of Korea, China, and Japan, but would include other Asian countries
like India, Thailand, and Vietnam.
Admittedly, that is a difficult project to realize,
especially in the context of the military face off and territorial disputes
among Korea, China, and Japan, not to mention the battle for supremacy between
the US and China. A new approach is necessary to arrange a multilateral effort
at achieving peace.
Firstly, a new actor needs to play the role of mediator
between the two opposing parties, namely ASEAN. The association is composed of
Southeast Asian countries, and is credited as the most successful assembly of
developing nations. Its experience in cooperative efforts would be valuable in
bringing together the opposing parties to the table to break the security
impasse in Northeast Asia. A precedent for such an extended framework exists in
APT, short for ASEAN Plus Three, which is an informal forum between ASEAN and
the three countries of South Korea, China, and Japan.
Park’s government also recognizes the need to breathe new
life into the Six-Party Talks. If more East Asian countries become parties to
the Talks, then it will gain momentum in two ways. Firstly, additional parties
will lift the scope of the Talks beyond the current deadlock that is in place
in Northeast Asia. As aforementioned, ASEAN needs to act as a buffer zone or
mediator between the US and China. ASEAN suits the role due to the fact that
both countries are struggling to extend their power in Asia. President Obama
recently announced the “pivot” to Asia, while China is extending its dominion
over the South China Sea. Secondly, ASEAN has experience in multilateral
cooperative efforts. The states of Northeast Asia are more familiar with bilateral
strategies rather than multilateral cooperation, which makes ASEAN’s expertise
all the more valuable.
Secondly, the agenda of issues to be considered by a
multilateral union must be grow beyond the single issue of NK nuclearization.
Security issue alone will not suffice to build an Asian multilateral union; the
union must comprise the areas of politics, economy, culture, etc. similar to
the EU. In the context of the various disputes in Northeast Asia, such as the
faceoff between the US, China, and Russia, the Dokdo and Senkaku Islands
disputes, the need for a functioning multilateral union really becomes obvious.
That is why the issues put forth by the Park government such
as climate change, counter-terrorism, safe usage of nuclear power, are ones in
which all states have a common interest. Therefore, it is possible that the
Six- Party Talks could become the foundation of an Asian Union of sorts,
recognizing the threats posed by North Korea’s nuclear development, but using
them as a springboard to solve a myriad of other issues.
* Views expressed in Guest Columns do not necessarily
reflect those of Daily NK.
