As November elections approach officials on both sides of the DMZ are taking a closer look at the implications that the election of either candidate will have on the region, North Korea in particular.
McCain has frequently criticized Obama for his willingness, to meet with Kim Jong Il. In a statement in the New York Times, McCain stated “[we must] build a united front with Democratic allies like South Korea instead of rushing to placate Kim Jong Il with a presidential visit.”
The Obama camp has taken its own jabs, criticizing McCain’s position as a mere continuation of the current administration policy. Obama has repeatedly criticized the Bush administration’s lack of engagement with North Korea, stating that nuclear weapons programs ‘only expanded while we refused to talk.’ In a heated Presidential debate on Tuesday, Obama’s criticisms that “Senator McCain…is the guy who sang, ‘Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran,’ who called for the annihilation of North Korea,” show that the debate about who is most qualified to direct evermore sensitive foreign affairs, is growing more caustic.
According to the official Obama website his goal will be to build, “a more effective framework in Asia that goes beyond bilateral agreements, occasional summits, and ad hoc arrangements, such as the six-party talks on North Korea,”—a statement which reiterates the failings of the Bush administration strategy for the last 8 years.
Another notable difference is that Obama has largely refrained from any pointed criticism of the North Korean regime. McCain, on the contrary, has made no secret of what he regards as the “most horrible regime probably on earth.” He continues, “The regime offends me, just in their terrible mistreatment and abuse of their own people.”
Such statements have led some officials to conclude that McCain would adopt a hard-line or even antagonistic policy towards North Korea—and by extension would heighten the risk of military conflict on the peninsula. McCain was not silent on this topic either, asserting, “We will not threaten war with North Korea,” but also acknowledged that, “While the use of force may be necessary, it can only be as a last resort not a first step.”
McCain’s hard-line position towards North Korea is coupled by the prediction that he would be more active in addressing the North Korean human rights issue in future talks. Criticizing that Kim Jong Il only seeks a “free hand for his regime to torture underground Christians, execute dissidents and starve the disloyal,” McCain has said that more publicity is needed for “people who have escaped from these gulags.”
While no official comment has been made by the Obama campaign concerning North Korean human rights issues, the Obama/Biden ticket does have a track record of activism. Suzanne Scholte, chairman of the North Korea Freedom Coalition, expressed high hopes in both parties’ candidates, stating, “While Senator John McCain knows this issue a lot better than Senator Obama, Senator Obama has selected as his vice president Senator Biden…who made key changes to the North Korea Human Rights Act of 2004.”
While their approaches to North Korean issues are different, the overall goals of each candidate show some marked similarities. In a statement responding to the public demolition of the Yongbyon cooling tower last June, McCain stated, “It is important to remember our goal has been the full, permanent and verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” further emphasizing that, “if we are unable to fully verify the declaration submitted…I would not support the easing of sanctions on North Korea.”
In almost an echo of McCain, Obama stated, “If the North Koreans do not meet their obligations we should move quickly to re-impose the sanctions that have been waved,” concluding that “the objective must be clear: the complete and verifiable elimination of North Korean’s nuclear weapons programs.”
As with all elections, just how each candidate’s campaign pledges will affect relations with the North remains to be seen in the months and years that will follow the November election.
