[Smart Q&A: Mr. Tanaka Hitoshi] Engaging North Korea and the Future of the Six-Party Talks

YouTube Link: video.eai.or.kr/110225TH_interview.flv

On Friday, February 25, at 10:00 AM, the Center for Asian Security Studies hosted a Smart Q&A session with Mr. Hitoshi Tanaka, Senior Fellow at the Japan Center for International Exchange and former Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs. The session focused on the North Korean nuclear issue, the Six-Party Talks, and the concept of a Comprehensive Settlement.

Smart Q&A is an interview series conducted with speakers of seminars, utilizing the opportunity of Smart Talk, a forum for exchanging perspectives between prominent international scholars and domestic experts on major domestic and international issues. Through Smart Q&A, the East Asia Institute aims to deepen understanding of current affairs and foster creative and strategic ideas for relevant policies by posing specific, policy-oriented questions to speakers, thereby examining issues from multiple viewpoints.

Interview

Hitoshi Tanaka, Japan Center for International Exchange

Questions

1) Firstly, we would like to ask how you would evaluate the current situation regarding the North Korean nuclear crisis and the Six-Party Talks.

a) Please give us a brief outline of your concept ‘comprehensive settlement.’

2) You have commented that a two-step approach involving informal bilateral talks before the resumption of the Six-Party Talks is necessary. Yet, the stance of South Korea, the U.S., and Japan cannot be synchronized perfectly, and may cause confusion and even a conflict of interest. In the worst case scenario, these informal talks could jeopardize further negotiations with North Korea. What do you think is the solution for this problem?

a) When the credibility of North Korea has been totally lost, as you pointed out in your article, can we still sit with them at the negotiation table?

b) In conducting informal bilateral talks with North Korea, cooperation among South Korea, the U.S., and Japan is vital, particularly on the issue of denuclearization vs nonproliferation. Do you think it is possible to find a common ground among the three?

c) For North Korea, nuclear weapons are indispensable for its survival and are not a card for negotiation. Against this backdrop, how is a breakthrough regarding the four related key elements achieved through the informal bilateral talks?

3) There is no doubt that China’s role in comprehensive settlement is significant. But we also need incentives for China so it can engage more actively in the settlement with North Korea. What strategic measures would you suggest to reel in China?

4) The challenge North Korea poses to the international community is derived from its domestic regime. What are your thoughts on the international efforts to bring changes not just in North Korea’s nuclear strategy but also in its regime or political DNA?