Watching the US and DPRK Media Report a “Delicate Handshake”

On Feb. 29, the U.S. and DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] held a high-level conference that led to a most pleasing result: America agreed to provide North Korea with 240,000 tons of food stuffs, while the DPRK agreed to a moratorium on nuclear testing, long-range missile testing and the Yongbyon uranium enrichment program. The six-party talk participants — America, North and South Korea, Japan and China — welcomed the news with the U.N. Secretary General. There are also reports of U.S. and North Korean officials meeting in Beijing on the 7th to finalize the details of providing aid to the DPRK.

This author thumbed through the two countries’ joint media releases. According to the Washington Times, North Korea has agreed to completely stop nuclear testing, as well as long-range artillery testing and all uranium enrichment activities. The Korean Central News Agency reported that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had decided during the productive talks that it would temporarily halt nuclear tests, far-range artillery tests and uranium enrichment programs. One group says “completely halt” and the other says “temporarily suspend”; the discrepancies in the terms give the whole world more room in which to decipher their meanings.

It should be said that even if the media don’t use the same terms, they have given people hope. Especially for North Korea, this reflects a “new person, a fresh breeze.” Kim Jong Eun is consolidating power faster than expected, and this is how he can make a relatively grand diplomatic gesture. Kim Jong Eun’s regime’s decision to take a moratorium in exchange for 240,000 tons of food aid is undoubtedly a pragmatic move. Nowadays the North Korean food shortage is a well-known problem. The Hong Kong media reported that when Kim Jong Il died in December, China provided 500,000 tons of grain and 200,000 tons of crude oil. The North Korean media in this year’s New Year’s Day editorial put it bluntly: The current problem of feeding all the people is a pressing problem for nation-building. When King Jong Eun came to power, the DPRK media revealed that he issued an oath to let the people eat rice and drink broth. The food shortage is a growing storm. Given the choice between nuclear testing and solving the food shortage problem, King Jong Eun has decided the latter, which suggests that in dealing with domestic and foreign affairs, this really is a new regime.

For the United States, resolving these internal contradictions to create a favorable external environment is the number one priority. Nowadays, the most important thing in America’s domestic politics is the upcoming presidential election. The parties are competing for the winter. The Republicans are aiming to seize power, while the Democrats are hoping to maintain it – and the North Korean nuclear program has become a controversy between the two sides. Resolving this issue has been a blessing for Obama’s ballot. As the two sides finally reach a compromise, this is undoubtedly conducive to the Democratic Party’s campaign.

Of course, China has been actively promoting this handshake between the U.S. and DPRK. The location of the talks in Beijing is indicative of China’s attitude, and as the DPRK announced the results of the talks, the Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed appreciation for the results of the negotiations. For China, the resumption of six-party talks is an important diplomatic signal, demonstrating China’s positive role in regional peace and security. But past experience tells us that this alone is not enough; only a real resolution of the nuclear issue will move towards lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia as a whole, which is in the best interests of China. In summary, the DPRK – U.S. compromise is a strategic one. Even the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton believes that North Korea’s suspension of its nuclear programs reminds us that the world is changing. Dealing with bilateral issues or issues of regional security can’t be solved through conventional thinking or according to a textbook, which just leads to a rigid approach.

The world is changing. North Korea is changing. And U.S. foreign policy should be changing with it. By the same token, with the changes that are taking place in international disputes, there should also be changes in the approaches to dealing with them.

Of course, while the DPRK and the U.S. are working together, there are still concerns.

Secretary Clinton, for example, said that “the United States still has profound concerns” and will be closely watching the actions of the leaders of the DPRK. Although Japan reopened six-party talks, it lacks confidence and says that it is still too early to talk about it. The six-party talks over the years have stopped and started, and the fact that the U.S. and other states have concerns is not surprising. The difference over the terms of the agreement is also not surprising. For decades, the U.S. and DPRK have been rivals, and the two sides do not get along. But the most important development is that bilateral relations are improving. This author believes that whether the DPRK suspends or terminates its nuclear tests, it is important that the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] supervise. With supervision, leaders will be embarrassed to make irresponsible remarks. Therefore it is important that the IAEA monitoring is in place quickly to test the sincerity of the DPRK in their agreement.

The U.S. should reiterate its statement that it is no longer hostile to the DPRK. The U.S. should practice what it preaches; if it behaves again like it did in 2011 by engaging South Korea in military exercises against North Korea, it is inevitable that the DPRK will become defensive and leads to the deterioration of bilateral relations. People should see an expansion in communication through sports and other types of cultural and educational exchange of personnel.

It should be noted that potential stiffness and lack of communication in the U.S. and DPRK are important reasons for concern. Only if the two sides sit down to communicate and know each other’s concerns on addressing the problem can the conflict be resolved.

The six-party talks in China have proved to be the only platform to address the instability of the Korean Peninsula. Today the DPRK and the U.S. work together for peace and stability.