Two Koreas and the Korean Peninsula

1. Two Koreas and the Korean Peninsula Jihwan Hwang Myongji University

2. Two Koreas and Northeast Asia

3. Main Issues • The Division of the Korean Peninsula • The North Korean Regime and its Leaders • The North Korean Nuclear Crisis

4. Main Issue (1)The Division of the Korean Peninsula

5. Main Issue (2) The North Korean Regime and its Leaders

6. Main Issue (3)The North Korean Nuclear Crisis

7. Main Questions (1) • The Division of the Korean Peninsula • When and Why was the Korean Peninsula divided? • Why was not the division over despite the end of the Cold War, as opposed to the case of Germany?

8. Main Questions (2) • The North Korean Regime and Its Leaders • Are the North Korean Leaders Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il psychologically okay? • Is the nature of the North Korean regime always aggressive?

9. Main Questions (3) • The North Korean Nuclear Crisis • Will North Korea eventually give up its nuclear weapons program? • Why does North Korea pursue its nuclear weapons program, the security dilemma or the expansionist ambition?

10. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • When was the Korean Peninsula divided? • 1945 and 1948 • August 15, 1945: The end of the World War II led to the Korean liberation from the Japanese colonialism • The Korean War 1950-53.

11. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • When was the Korean Peninsula divided? • The divided occupation by the U.S. and the Soviet Union for the disarmament of the Japanese troops like Germany (Yalta Conference) • Pro-American regime in the South, August 15, 1948 • Pro-Soviet Union regime in the North, September 9, 1948

12. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • Why was the Korean Peninsula divided? 1) International Politics • The Soviet participation in the Asia-Pacific War (Yalta Conference) • The divided occupation by the U.S. and the Soviet Union like Germany, unlike Japan • Cold War

13. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • Why was the Korean Peninsula divided? 2) Korean domestic politics • Pro-American leader, Rhee Syngman seized power in the South. • Pro-Soviet leader, Kim Il-Sung seized power in the North. • Nationalist leader Kim Koo failed to build one unified government.

14. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • Why was the Korean Peninsula divided? • Nationalist leader Kim Koo traveled to the North and tried to build one unified government. • But, he failed between Rhee Syngman in the South and Kim Il-Sung in the North. • He was assassinated in 1949.

15. The Division of the Korean Peninsula • Why was not the division over after the end of the Cold War? • Germany was divided with the beginning of the Cold War and unified with the end of the Cold War. • North Korea did not collapse: self-reliance(주체), military-first(선군), control system, autocratic regime  Economically failed, but still militarily and domestically strong state and regime • Regime security: relatively stable hereditary leadership succession • National security: missile and nuclear weapons program

16. The North Korean Regime and Its Leaders • Are the North Korean Leaders psychologically okay? • Kim Jong-il: idiotic pygmy and spoiled child vs. decisive, practical and serious man and quite clear in explaining his understanding • Is he a man of a cautious foreign policy or a reckless man of impulse?

17. The North Korean Regime and Its Leaders • If he is a reckless man, he is more likely to gamble. • If he is not, he must be good at calculating the benefits and costs • Domestic politics: 60 years under Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il and a stable leadership succession  They know how to control a nation as a dictator. • They are malign but not mad, rather quite rational in calculation

18. The North Korean Regime and Its Leaders • Is the Nature of the North Korean regime always aggressive? • Is North Korea rising or declining in terms of power? • Defensive or offensive in terms of strategic environment? • Rice: DPRK is little to gain and everything to lose (desperation mindset)  Does the regime see a war against the U.S. as guaranteed suicide, or economic survival as a distinct possibility? • DPRK’s domestic situation desperate or sustainable? • If it sees it can muddle through, it is less likely to gamble externally. • If it sees it is internally unsustainable, it is more likely to gamble

19. The North Korean Nuclear Crisis • Will North Korea give up its nuclear weapons program? • Initial argument: It will not give up its nuclear program unless the U.S. abandons its hostile policy toward DPRK? • Will the U.S. fully engage North Korea before DPRK gives up the nuclear program? • Current argument: It will not give up its nuclear weapons and wants to be regarded as a nuclear state. • Is the U.S. ready to recognize DPRK as a nuclear nation? (“a world without nuclear weapons,” and NPT review conference 2010) • DPRK is unlikely to abandon under the current regime.

20. The North Korean Nuclear Crisis • Why does North Korea pursue the nuclear weapons program? • A security dilemma (the collapse of the Soviet Union and the change of China, strong Korea-US alliance), or • An expansionist ambition: 1950 Korean War, DPRK rogue behaviors • DPRK’s strategic calculation of nuclear weapons • An expansionist ambition to attack the South, or • A status-quo concern to guarantee the regime security?

21. Chronology of the North Korean Nuclear Crisis (1) • 1989 Detection of DPRK nuclear program • 1992 IAEA inspection and the issue of cheating • Mar. 1993 DPRK withdrew from NPT (1st nuclear crisis) • June 1994 Carter-Kim Il sung’s Pyongyang Deal • Oct. 1994 Agreed Framework (Geneva) • Aug. 1998 Missile test (Daepodong I) • June 2000 Summit meeting between two Koreas • Oct. 2000 Jo to White House, Albright to Pyongyang • Oct. 2002 HEU program (2st nuclear crisis) • Dec. 2002 The collapse of Agreed Framework • Jan. 2003. DPRK withdrew from NPT

22. Chronology of the North Korean Nuclear Crisis (2) • Aug. 2003. Six-party talks launched • Feb. 2005 DPRK nuclear possession announcement • Sep. 2005 9.19 Joint Statement and BDA deadlock • July 2006 Missile test (Daepodong II) • Oct. 2006 Nuclear test (1st) • Feb. 2007 2.13 Agreement • Oct. 200710.3 Agreement • Oct. 2007Summit meeting between two Koreas • Apr. 2009 Rocket launch • May 2009 Nuclear test (2nd) • July 2009 Deadlock

23. ROK Policy toward DPRK:The Lee Myung-Bak Government • Vision 3000: Nonproliferation, Openness, and 3000 • If DPRK fulfills nonproliferation, • ROK will foster a genuine opening of North Korea, • and support to make the North’s GDP per capita $3000 in 10 years ($500 in 2007).

24. ROK Policy toward DPRK:The Lee Myung-Bak Government • Vision 3000: Nonproliferation, Openness, and 3000 • The condition is the complete nuclear dismantlement, not a freeze. • A policy shift from unilateral appeasement (Sunshine) to reciprocity. • International coordination is preferred to the inter-Korean cooperation: focus on Korea-U.S. alliance

25. Kim Dae-Jung and Rho Moo-Hyun Governments • Sunshine Policy • Analogy: Aesop’s fable: It was not the storm but the sunshine that succeeded in taking the traveler’s coat off. • Kim Dae-Jung’s Sunshine policy since 1998 • Rho Moo-Hyun’s Peace and Prosperity Policy since 2003

26. Kim Dae-Jung and Rho Moo-Hyun Governments • Sunshine Policy • It is not the stick but the carrot that can change the North Korean regime and bring the peace on the Korean peninsula. • cooperation and reconciliation rather than confrontation and sanctions

27. Debate Inside South Korea • Conservative vs. Progressive • Selective and give-and-take engagement or unconditional support • Does DPRK respond to the conditional and selective engagement? • If not, is it designed for the hardline punishment and sanctions? • Does DPRK always reciprocate to ROK with a goodwill? • If not, how should the South deal with the North? • How to combine international coordination and inter-Korean cooperation? • How to deal with DPRK policy of isolating ROK, approaching the U.S.?

28. South Korea and the U.S. • Kim Dae-Jung and Clinton: Convergence • Agreed on how to deal with North Korea: engagement • Mt. Geumgang, Gaesung industrial park, FDI, humanitarian aid • 2000 summit meeting • Kim Dae-Jung, Ro Mu-Hyun and Bush: Divergence • Disagreed on North Korea policy • Engagement policy vs. coercive diplomacy and sanctions (CVID) • The collapse of Geneva Agreed Framework • The second nuclear crisis

29. Lee Myung-Bak and Obama • Convergence on Sanctions • Building a global nonproliferation regime: a “world without nuclear weapons” • Coercive diplomacy and sanctions: “Any nation that breaks the rules and tries to leave the treaty will face real and immediate consequences; Violations must be punished.” • South Korea’s joining of the US-led PSI and sanctions • Convergence or Divergence on Negotiation? • Will Obama negotiating with North Korea?: tough and direct diplomacy like Iran, Cuba and Arab • Will the Lee government and the Obama administration also agree on how to negotiate with DPRK?