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

The ROK-US alliance, forged in the early Cold War and now in its 56th year, has navigated the rapidly changing post-Cold War era over the past two decades. However, the ROK and the US have not explicitly discussed a strategic vision beyond the Cold War. While the Roh Moo-hyun administration dealt with numerous issues such as base relocation, transfer of wartime operational control, and strategic flexibility of US Forces Korea during the transformation of the ROK-US alliance, 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 somewhat strained ROK-US relations and addressed many issues for future development, but 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, as it fundamentally redefines the common strategic interests of both countries beyond security issues. The common vision outlines the future direction of cooperation between the two countries not only in military matters but also in comprehensive areas such as values, systems, economy, environment, and human rights. 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 for both South Korea and the United States. South Korea's foreign policy strategy can no longer be confined to the Korean Peninsula. The nation's growing strength necessitates the formulation of a new foreign policy strategy encompassing East Asia and the entire globe. The Lee Myung-bak administration has put forth the slogan of 'Global Korea' as a national strategy, but there is still a long way to go. This is because it requires fleshing out more concrete policy details and building a strong domestic consensus. The future vision of the ROK-US alliance will be a crucial opportunity for South Korea's strategic leap forward. In the midst of unprecedented economic crisis in US history, the worst situation in Afghanistan since its inception, and the need to restore weakened leadership, the US is in dire need of assistance from allies like South Korea. The process of translating the long-considered common vision into concrete policies is becoming even more important.

This summit served as a comprehensive forum for developing a long-term common 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 situation, 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 firmly rejected North Korea's declaration of intent to possess nuclear weapons status during the press conference. Both leaders also expressed a unified view on the concrete 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 regarding the objectives and methods of pursuing the North Korean nuclear issue resolution, as they have done this time. This is not only due to North Korea's unprecedentedly provocative behavior but also because the national interests of both countries align. Furthermore, the participation of major countries like China in the UN sanctions resolution process has facilitated smoother cooperation between the ROK and the US. President Obama has consistently demonstrated a firm stance in pursuing a 'world without nuclear weapons' and punishing 'violent extremism' through various speeches in Prague, Cairo, and elsewhere. Through this, he has built an image as a strong diplomatic leader and pursued a political path that garners diverse opinions within the US. In President Obama's view, North Korea, unlike Iran, Iraq, or Cuba, is moving away from being an object of active diplomacy and is increasingly becoming a force that threatens a world without nuclear weapons through violent extremism. President Lee Myung-bak has also set the complete denuclearization of North Korea as his objective and is actively participating in the sanctions regime. While pursuing the effective implementation of UNSCR 1874, he has also proposed the idea of Five-Party Talks without North Korea.

The challenge lies in addressing the broader North Korean issue beyond the nuclear problem, which will be encountered in the phase following sanctions. If the 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 negotiation table due to unbearable sanctions, are new countermeasures prepared between the ROK and the US to comprehensively resolve not only the nuclear issue but also the North Korean problem? Furthermore, if North Korea, which is strengthening its military-first policy amid discussions of building a strong nation and succession, does not back down from the second round of economic sanctions, what alternatives do the ROK and the US have? While the principled agreement between the leaders of both countries on the principles for addressing the North Korean nuclear issue at this summit is commendable, the process of resolving future issues more flexibly and cautiously will be more difficult than it is now.

President Obama emphasized the 'another path' that North Korea would face if it completely abandoned its nuclear weapons during the press conference. It is regrettable that a clear path, noticeable to North Korea, was not concretely revealed at this summit. Unless North Korea can be assured of clear and reliable discussions 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 'another path.' Neighboring countries like 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, for China, which worries about 'North Korea's alienation,' to actively participate in the Five-Party Talks, it would be necessary to discuss, even further than in the Six-Party Talks, new ways to help North Korea emerge as the protagonist of a new history in the 21st-century international community after denuclearization. For the Five-Party Talks to proceed meaningfully, South Korea must now conceive of new 'patterns' that can unfold on 'another path' based on national consensus and wisdom, and simultaneously elicit cooperation from 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 of the century and the endless war on terror, and thus cannot prioritize the Korean Peninsula issue. It is time to begin contemplating an 'exit strategy' alongside sanctions. By pursuing new policies for North Korean advancement, North Korea should be guided to find its own path to denuclearization and prosperity. Along with North Korea's transformation, the changes in neighboring countries that 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, which goes beyond the existing Sunshine Policy and sanctions policy.

Due to the seriousness of the North Korean nuclear issue, the issue of dispatching troops to Afghanistan, which was expected to cause controversy, did not fully surface. However, the ROK-US alliance in the 21st century will face many global challenges beyond the North Korean nuclear issue. What the US desires most regarding the future of the ROK-US alliance is South Korea's global role. This summit did not convey a message that South Korea's military role would be expanded. However, regarding global security issues such as Iraq and Afghanistan mentioned in the common vision, the governments of both countries will need to carefully and cautiously explore avenues of cooperation, weighing the security relationship between North and South Korea, public opinion and political situations within South Korea/the US, and the interests of neighboring countries like China. Regarding the Afghan situation, both South Korea and the US showed a relatively cautious approach, understanding each other's positions with long-term cooperation in mind. The issue is the numerous global issues that will arise in the future.

South Korea is not addressing global security issues as a junior partner to the United States. Considering hostage situations or piracy incidents, South Korea's global status is not an option but a necessity. We must concretize the strategy of the ROK-US alliance that parallels our global strategy. In fact, the South Korean military already serves as a global force, acting as a pillar for maintaining world peace and regional stability, and this role is becoming even more important 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 is, above all, active participation 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 surrounding the future of ROK-US relations, both between the two countries and within each country, are inevitable and even desirable. It is desirable to explore the possibility of cooperation while acknowledging the differences in views between the ROK and the US regarding 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 renegotiation was discussed while criticizing the ROK-US FTA itself. It is noteworthy that an agreement was reached to keep the flame of the FTA alive ahead of its difficult ratification, considering the unemployment crisis in the US and Obama's election strategy, which was critical of the ROK-US FTA during the election campaign. South Korea, too, must adopt a broader perspective, viewing the FTA with the US not merely as a means to maximize immediate economic and strategic gains, but as a global role to invigorate the world economy by curbing protectionist movements amidst the global economic crisis and connecting the burgeoning East Asian economic network with the world's largest economy.

Domestic debates surrounding future ROK-US relations should 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, too, must 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 policy must begin with domestic policy.

Chairman

Ha Young-sun (Seoul National University)

Member

Kim Sung-ho (Yonsei University)

Son Yeol (Yonsei University)

Lee Sook-jong (EAI President, Sungkyunkwan University)

Jeon Jae-sung (Seoul National University)

[EAI Comment] 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 Comment].