[EAI Commentary No. 1] Evaluation and Tasks of the ROK-US Summit: From North Korean Sanctions Strategy to "Coevolution" Strategy

The ROK-US alliance, established at the dawn of the Cold War and now in its 56th year, has undergone significant changes in the post-Cold War era over the past two decades. However, the ROK and the US have not explicitly discussed a shared strategic vision beyond the Cold War. While the Roh Moo-hyun administration dealt with numerous issues during the transformation of the ROK-US alliance, such as base relocation, wartime operational control transfer, and strategic flexibility of US Forces Korea, it focused on resolving issues from the bottom up rather than sharing a strategic vision between the two countries. The Lee Myung-bak administration, in conjunction with the Bush administration last year, restored the ROK-US relationship, which had become somewhat distant, and addressed many issues for future development. However, a full-fledged alliance vision had to be deferred to the Lee Myung-bak-Obama partnership.

The alliance vision resulting from this ROK-US summit is somewhat belated in that it has fundamentally redefined the common strategic interests of both countries beyond security issues. The shared vision has outlined the future direction of cooperation between the two countries across a comprehensive range of areas, including values, systems, economy, environment, and human rights, extending beyond military issues. The geographical scope of the alliance has also expanded globally, beyond the Korean Peninsula and the Asia-Pacific region.

The future of the ROK-US alliance is crucial not only for South Korea but also for the United States. South Korea's foreign policy strategy can no longer be confined to the Korean Peninsula. Its national strength has grown to the extent that a new foreign policy strategy must be formulated for East Asia and the entire globe. The Lee Myung-bak administration has put forth the slogan of "Global Korea" as its national strategy, but there is still a long way to go. A more concrete policy content needs to be filled in, and a strong domestic consensus needs to be built. The future vision of the ROK-US alliance will be a crucial opportunity for South Korea's strategic leap forward. The United States, facing an unprecedented economic crisis in its history and the Afghan situation, which has reached its worst point since the war began, and needing to restore its weakened leadership, urgently requires the assistance of allies like South Korea. The process of translating the carefully crafted shared vision into concrete policies is becoming even more important.

This summit served as a comprehensive forum for creating a long-term shared vision for the ROK-US alliance and, based on this, addressing key issues including the North Korean nuclear problem, defining the alliance's global role, and non-military issues such as the FTA. However, due to the severity of the North Korean nuclear crisis, a significant portion of the summit was focused on this issue. Regarding the North Korean nuclear problem, Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Obama showed considerable alignment in their perceptions, strategic objectives, and policy directions. Firstly, both leaders reaffirmed the strategic objective of the complete and verifiable denuclearization of North Korea. President Obama unequivocally rejected North Korea's declaration of its status as a nuclear state during the press conference. Both leaders also expressed a unified view on the specific policies to pursue denuclearization. As North Korea has repeatedly engaged in a pattern of "provocation and reward" within the framework of the Six-Party Talks, it was decided to break this chronic pattern and urge fundamental behavioral change in North Korea through consistent and effective economic sanctions.

It is novel that the ROK and the US have spoken with one voice on objectives and methods in the process of resolving the North Korean nuclear issue, as they have done this time. This is not only because North Korea's actions have been unprecedentedly provocative, but also because the national interests of both countries align. Furthermore, the participation of major countries such as China in the UN sanctions resolution process has facilitated smoother cooperation between the ROK and the US, serving as a background factor. President Obama has, in various speeches in Prague and Cairo, demonstrated a firm stance in pursuing a "world without nuclear weapons" and punishing "violent extremism." Through this, he has built an image as a strong diplomatic leader and taken political steps to garner diverse opinions within the US. In President Obama's view, North Korea, unlike Iran, Iraq, or Cuba, is moving away from being a target of active diplomacy and is now approaching the category of forces threatening a world without nuclear weapons through violent extremism. President Lee Myung-bak is also actively participating in the sanctions phase with the objective of complete denuclearization of North Korea. While pursuing the effective implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1874, he has also proposed the concept of Five-Party Talks excluding North Korea.

The issue arises in the phase after sanctions, concerning the overall North Korean problem beyond the nuclear issue. If sanctions against North Korea succeed, or if they do not achieve the expected results, where will be the new starting point for resolving the North Korean nuclear issue? If North Korea returns to the negotiating table, unable to withstand the sanctions, are there new ROK-US response measures in place to comprehensively resolve not only the nuclear issue but the entire North Korean problem? Furthermore, if North Korea, which is strengthening its military-first ideology in pursuit of a strong nation and succession, does not back down from the second round of economic sanctions, what alternatives can the ROK and the US pursue? While the agreement in principle between the two leaders on the principles for addressing the North Korean nuclear issue at this summit is commendable, the process of resolving future issues with greater flexibility and prudence will be more challenging than it is now.

President Obama emphasized at the press conference the "another path" that North Korea would face if it completely abandoned its nuclear weapons. It is regrettable that this path, which would capture North Korea's attention, was not concretely revealed at this summit. If North Korea cannot be assured of a clear and credible discussion between the ROK and the US regarding its system and regime's future, it will stake its destiny on the current military-first path rather than the "another path." Neighboring countries, including China, will also hesitate to participate in the Five-Party Talks proposed by South Korea unless a vision beyond sanctions cooperation is established. The Five-Party Talks are several times more difficult than the stalled Six-Party Talks. Above all, to encourage China, which worries about "North Korea's isolation," to actively participate in the Five-Party Talks, it would be necessary to discuss anew how to help North Korea, once denuclearized, emerge as the protagonist of a new history in the 21st-century international community, going a step further than the Six-Party Talks. For the Five-Party Talks to proceed meaningfully, South Korea must now, based on national consensus and wisdom, conceive of a new "pattern" that can unfold on "another path" and simultaneously garner the cooperation of neighboring countries for international consensus. This task must be led by the Lee Myung-bak administration, rather than the Obama administration, which is hampered by the unprecedented global financial crisis and the seemingly endless war on terror, and thus cannot prioritize the Korean Peninsula issue. We are at a point where we must begin to conceive of an "exit strategy" alongside sanctions. By pursuing new policies for North Korean advancement, North Korea must be encouraged to find its own path to denuclearization and prosperity. Along with North Korea's transformation, the transformation of neighboring countries that will create peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula in the 21st century must also proceed. This is a third strategy, a strategy of "coevolution" between North Korea and its neighbors, going beyond the existing Sunshine Policy and sanctions policy.

Due to the severity of the North Korean nuclear issue, the deployment of troops to Afghanistan, which was expected to be controversial, did not fully surface. However, the ROK-US alliance in the 21st century will encounter numerous global challenges beyond the North Korean nuclear issue. What the United States desires most for the future of the ROK-US alliance is South Korea's global role. This summit did not convey a message of expanded military roles for South Korea. However, in the future, the two governments will need to carefully and cautiously seek paths of cooperation regarding global security issues mentioned in the shared vision, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, by weighing the ROK-US security relationship, public opinion and political situations within South Korea and the US, and the interests of neighboring countries like China. Regarding the Afghan situation, South Korea and the US have shown a relatively cautious approach, with mutual understanding of each other's positions, keeping long-term cooperation in mind. The issue is the numerous global challenges that will arise in the future.

South Korea is not addressing global security issues as a junior partner to the United States. Considering hostage and piracy incidents, South Korea's global status is a necessity, not an option. We must concretize an alliance strategy with the US that parallels our global strategy. In fact, the South Korean military already serves as a global force, a pillar supporting world peace and regional stability, and this role is becoming even more crucial at a time when the North Korean nuclear crisis is escalating. Furthermore, regarding the Afghan situation, it is believed that both countries are in the process of agreeing that focusing on civilian contributions would be beneficial for the division of roles within the ROK-US alliance. The path for South Korea to contribute to international peace beyond the Korean Peninsula lies above all in actively participating in regional reconstruction, which is increasingly important for peacebuilding. The Lee Myung-bak administration must establish a clear consensus with the Obama administration on how this division of roles benefits the ROK-US alliance, US national interests, and international peace.

Many debates within South Korea and between the ROK and the US regarding the future of ROK-US relations are inevitable and also desirable. It is desirable to seek possibilities for cooperation while acknowledging the differences in views between the ROK and the US concerning the ROK-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA). At this summit, President Obama mentioned the issue of the FTA and expressed his view on seeking appropriate methods for its advancement. This is a more progressive stance than in the past, when the FTA itself was criticized and renegotiations were discussed. Agreeing to keep the FTA alive ahead of its difficult ratification process is noteworthy, considering the unemployment crisis in the US and Obama's electoral strategy, which was critical of the ROK-US FTA during the election campaign. South Korea, too, must adopt a broader perspective, viewing the ROK-US FTA not merely as a means to maximize immediate economic and strategic benefits, but as a way to curb protectionist movements amidst the global economic crisis and to invigorate the world economy by connecting the emerging East Asian economic network with the world's largest economy, thereby fulfilling a global role.

Domestic debates surrounding future ROK-US relations must also be based on mature democracy, seeking rational compromises while acknowledging mutual differences. We must be prepared to engage in rational and sustained debates centered on genuine national interests, overcoming ideological confrontations between progressives and conservatives on issues such as the North Korean nuclear problem, the ROK-US alliance, and the FTA. The government must also listen to these debates and strive for longer-term policy development. The key to future developments lies in whether the Lee Myung-bak administration succeeds in building national consensus on policies through communication with the public and creating a cooperative relationship between the ruling and opposition parties. The external agenda must first address the internal tasks, starting with domestic policy.

Chairman

Ha Young-sun (Seoul National University)

Committee Member

Kim Sung-ho (Yonsei University)

Sohn Yeol (Yonsei University)

Lee Sook-jong (EAI President, Sungkyunkwan University)

Chun Jae-sung (Seoul National University)

[EAI Commentary] aims to provide in-depth analysis and practical alternatives through a balanced perspective on major domestic and international issues. Please cite the source when quoting [EAI Commentary].