Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Malign neglect meets brinkmanship

By Wonhyuk Lim - posted Thursday, 13 July 2006


But there are two problems with this approach. First, international non-proliferation and missile-control regimes have significant loopholes, and in the absence of serious diplomatic efforts to define and maintain "a red line", what constitutes "something really stupid" would be unclear. Back in 1994, through direct talks with North Korea, the US made sure that re-processing plutonium would constitute a red line, and the Agreed Framework helped to sustain this red line.

Similarly, back in 1999, the US was able to establish a red line on North Korea's missile tests after serious bilateral negotiations. In short, these red lines were shaped through diplomacy. But, after years of malign neglect, no one knows where the line is drawn anymore. Can North Korea continue to produce fissile material as long as it does not transfer this material to a terrorist organisation?

Second, North Korea has taken tentative measures for economic reform and greatly improved its relations with China, South Korea and Russia since 2000, and these neighbours are unlikely to go along with punitive sanctions unless they are convinced that the US has given diplomacy a fair chance. North Korea would like to stabilise its external environment by normalising relations with the US, but, if it must, it can get by on decent relations it has with its neighbours. In the meantime, while Washington hardliners pretend they are making life miserable for Kim Jong Il, the US position in north-east Asia is being eroded.

Advertisement

If pre-emption is too risky and malign neglect is too ineffective, the only remaining alternative is to establish a credible red line and negotiate seriously with North Korea through bilateral and multilateral talks.

The US should end what North Korea regards as "hostile policy" towards it and North Korea should dismantle its nuclear program under inspection in a phased and reciprocal manner. Through various efforts to improve relations and promote economic cooperation, the six parties should build peace in north-east Asia. Otherwise, North Korea is sure to produce more fissile material and perfect its missile technology, escalating tension every once in a while to draw attention.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

First published by The Brookings Institution, July 6, 2006.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Wonhyuk Lim is a nonresident Fellow for the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Wonhyuk Lim
Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy