The path to peace on the Korean Peninsula remains as perilous as ever. After a second summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in Hanoi in February produced no agreement, tensions have escalated, raising – yet again – concerns about a military confrontation.
The international community’s longstanding formula for dealing with North Korea combines harsh sanctions with intermittent negotiations focused on securing the country’s “complete denuclearization.” Multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions block North Korea from engaging in virtually any foreign trade. It cannot export coal, iron, or other minerals, and its imports of crude oil are severely restricted. Various targeted financial sanctions are also in place.
The United States augments these measures with sanctions of its own, targeting, in particular, foreign financial institutions with any connection to North Korea-linked activities. The US also refuses entry to any aircraft or ship that has been in North Korea in the last 180 days.
Sanctions have undoubtedly been painful for North Korea. The economy contracted by 3.5% in 2017, according to estimates by South Korea’s central bank, and is believed to have shrunk by more than 5% in 2018. North Korea’s struggles are now compounded by severe drought and a major food crisis caused by the worst harvest in a decade.
Making matters even worse for North Korea, its economic ties with China, its largest trading partner and most important benefactor, are weakening. According to official Chinese statistics, the North’s exports to China plummeted 88% year on year in 2018, to $209 million. Imports fell by one-third, to $2.24 billion.
Nonetheless, many experts, including Richard N. Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, argue that sanctions alone will never be sufficient to bring about complete denuclearization. After all, North Korea’s closed economy has proved far more resilient than anyone expected, and there is no sign that Kim’s regime is at risk of collapse. And collapse would not be a desirable outcome, as it would trigger regional chaos, with China and Russia doing what they could to avoid a unified Korea allied with the US.
At the Central Committee of the ruling Workers’ Party in April, Kim pledged to defy “hostile forces miscalculating that sanctions can bring North Korea to its knees.” Less than a month later, the North had resumed its favorite provocations, launching several of its newest type of short-range ballistic missiles and testing multiple launch systems.
The Trump administration remains stubbornly committed to maintaining its “maximum pressure” policy until the North agrees to its demand for total denuclearization. But, as the Hanoi summit underscored, the combination of denuclearization and sanctions relief that the US envisages differs sharply from North Korea’s position.
The truth is that a grand bargain, whereby North Korea completely eliminates its nuclear and missile capabilities in exchange for the removal of all sanctions, is not immediately realistic. The US and North Korea should keep in mind the long-term goals, agreed in Singapore last year, of complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, security guarantees for the North, and peaceful relations. But, for now, they should be pursuing an interim deal: in exchange for concrete, verifiable steps toward denuclearization, North Korea would gain partial sanctions relief and closer inter-Korean economic cooperation.
A critical step would be the North’s dismantling of all nuclear enrichment and reprocessing facilities at its main Yongbyon facility. The country should also stop conducting nuclear or missile tests, provide a complete list of nuclear facilities, and welcome international inspectors for verification. In exchange, the US could officially end the Korean War, 66 years after the armistice agreement was signed. This would be followed by the establishment of liaison offices in Pyongyang and Washington, DC, and the removal of certain UN sanctions.
South Korea could help by pursuing inter-Korean cooperation. Its government recently pledged to provide $8 million in humanitarian aid to the North, and to strengthen cooperation on health and environmental issues. If sanctions were relaxed, the two Koreas could consider reviving the Kaesong industrial complex, reopening Mount Kumgang to tourism, and building railways, roads, and energy networks linking the North and South.
Well-designed inter-Korean economic cooperation could bring about real, bottom-up change in North Korean society. Already, the North’s shadow market economy is expanding rapidly. According to a recent study, at least 70% of household income nowadays comes from informal economic activities, including sales at markets and smuggling. This increased marketization is weakening the state’s power.
Using aid and economic cooperation as leverage, South Korea should try to persuade the North to implement market-oriented reforms, including measures to recognize private ownership and protect foreign investment. Given his own interest in strengthening his country’s economy, Kim may well agree.
Cooperative projects, especially those involving large-scale investment, should be designed with care, so that they – alongside reduced sanctions – advance North Korea’s integration into Northeast Asia’s production and trade systems. They should also help to persuade the country to abandon nuclear-weapons development, establish diplomatic relations with the US, and join international organizations like the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization.
The future of the Korean Peninsula remains hazy. Sanctions relief and inter-Korean economic cooperation could be a game-changer, but they will become an option only if the North takes credible steps toward “final and fully verifiable denuclearization.” With South Korean President Moon Jae-In’s falling approval ratings potentially shaking his commitment to rapprochement, and Trump as unpredictable as ever, Kim may not have long to decide.
Comment here !
It looks all too eerily similar as a method: the expulsion of individuals from their home, the demolition of said
Hollywood, like the US press, has not been spared the influential hand of government. Under the mask of various projects,
June 10 bore witness to a valiant effort on the part of refugee groups and a trade union to stop
On June 3, Judge Santiago Pedraz of Spain’s national court, the Audienca Nacional, issued a summons for former CIA director