HOW TO DEAL WITH ROGUE STATES (FOR PUBLICATION ON SUNDAY THE 29^TH OCTOBER 2006)

By Kazi Anwarul Masud (former Secretary and ambassador)

In total defiance of the wishes of the international community on 9^th October 2006 North Korea conducted a nuclear test. Prior to the nuclear test in July Pyongyang escalated tension by conducting ballistic missile tests rendering any meaningful talks with North Korea, in the words of Peter Beck (of International Crisis Group), as “dead man walking”. North Koreans have attributed the cause of their action to its suspicion that the US would not honor the September 2005 agreement which among others committed Washington to respect North Korean sovereignty and that it would allow Pyongyang to have a light-water nuclear reactor. But subsequent remarks by Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Bush administration’s points man in Korean affairs Christopher Hill suggested to the North Koreans that the US is backing out of its commitment. The matter was further complicated by Bush administration’s designation of Macau bank Banco Delta Asia as a “money laundering concern” by assisting North Korean government and its agencies in drug trafficking and in the distribution of fake US currencies. After its designation as a money laundering concern Banco Delta Asia froze 24 million dollars North Korean money lying with the bank. Meanwhile the US continued to decline to engage North Korea in direct talks outside of the context of the six party talks.

Pyongyang’s missile tests in defiance of the international community, particularly China, perhaps denote a fundamental change in North Korean attitude towards the six nation talks. It is suspected that the “center of gravity” within the North Korean dictatorial regime may have moved in favor of the hardliners who may have decided that it is futile to negotiate with the US. Besides the reaction of South Korea and China to the missile tests have been muted. Whether North Korean brinkmanship in its “inerrant” belief that conducting nuclear test would force the international community to impotence was responsible for the 9^th October incident described by Daryl Kimball (of the Arms Control Association) as constituting “one of the greatest non-proliferation policy failures” or the insistent refusal of the US to engage in direct talks with North Korea remain to be seen. Daryl Kimball suggested (before the UNSC resolution was adopted) that the Bush administration should adjust its “failed strategy and announce that senior US officials are prepared to meet anywhere anytime in bilateral talks with North Korean officials to resolve issues of concern so long as North Korea also agrees to six-party talks and refrains from further nuclear or missile tests”.  Critics of Bush administration have pointed out that The Agreed Framework concluded with North Korea during Clinton Presidency succeeding in preventing North Korea from producing plutonium for more than eight years.

On 14^th October the UNSC passed a resolution condemning the nuclear test and demanded of North Korea that it must refrain from further nuclear tests or launch ballistic missiles. The Council demanded that Pyongyang immediately retract its announced withdrawal from NPT, return to the pact, and accept IAEA safeguards. The resolution also demanded that North Korea must abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs “in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner”. Most significantly the resolution was passed unanimously with the support of China and Russia that in the past had been somewhat supportive of the North Korean stance in the talks.

In an article Robert Kaplan, visiting Professor at the US Naval Academy, Annapolis (The Atlantic Monthly-October 2006) has drawn a bleak picture on unraveling of the present North Korean regime. He describes Kim Jong IL as hardly an impulsive person but one who may be losing his edge. Kaplan apprehends that as totalitarian regimes close to demise are apt to do rash things the weaker North Korea gets the more dangerous it becomes. Whereas in 1980 40% of North Korean combat forces were deployed near the Demilitarized Zone in 2003 the number increased to 70%. North Korea, writes Kaplan, boasts of 100000 well-trained special operations forces and one of the world’s largest biological and chemical arsenals. But the more worrying aspect of the demise of Kim regime is North Korea’s potential for anarchy which is no less than that of Iraq and the potential of deployment of weapons of mass destruction – either during or after the pre-collapse of the regime—is far greater. Both South Korea and China have nightmarish vision of millions of North Korean refugees pouring into their territories after the collapse of Kim regime. Despite its image of Stalinist asphyxiated control over the people it is believed that North Korea is informally controlled as independent fiefs by local party bosses who are immersed in widespread corruption and trying to circumvent a failing central government. In the case of meltdown US along with China, South Korea and Russia are expected to pick up the pieces. Japan, despite its proximity and direct politico-security interest in the Korean peninsula is unlikely to be physically present because of Japanese sacking of Korea over the centuries and its atrocities during 1910-1945 when Japan occupied the Korean peninsula. Hatred of Japan in both parts of Korea is widespread particularly among the older generation. But then one should be cautious in writing an epitaph for the Kim Jong IL regime too soon as the Western prediction of demise of Iranian theocracy is yet to come to pass.  Besides there is no reason to believe that South Koreans are eager for reunification given the fact that they will have to foot the bill for the poverty stricken North Korea in a post-Kim unified Korea. To quote Kaplan “sacrifice is not a word that voters in free and prosperous societies tend to like. If voters in Western-style democracies are good at anything, it is rationalizing their own selfishness—and it may turn out that the authoritarian Chinese understand the voters of South Korea’s free and democratic society better than we do”.

Though China is the main fuel supplier and the country giving largest amount of food aid to North Korea and therefore supposedly has the most influence on Kim Jong IL regime the nuclear test has put Beijing in an embarrassing position by adversely affecting China’s efforts to keep a peaceful external environment essential for Chinese economic development and integration into international community. The test also puts doubt about Chinese influence over North Korean regime and its credibility in international affairs.  This perhaps explains the strong worded statement issued by Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs after the nuclear test expressing Beijing’s firm opposition to the test. The aberrant North Korean behavior also fundamentally changes geopolitical structure in the region and could spur a nuclear arms race among Japan (discounted by Prime Minister Abe), South Korea and Taiwan to the detriment of China’s long-term security interest.  

North Korean dependence on China became apparent when during the recent visit by a special Chinese envoy to Pyongyang Kim Jong IL not only regretted the embarrassment caused to China by North Korean nuclear test but also promised not to undertake further tests and also to join the six party talks so long abjured by North Korea. Though it has been reportedly that Kim Jong IL had apologized to the Chinese envoy State Counselor Tang Jiaxuan for conducting the nuclear Condoleeza Rice said that in extensive briefing given to her by the Chinese during her visit to Beijing she was not told of Kim’s apology to the Chinese envoy. Besides Kim’s promise to rejoin the six party talks is conditioned upon the US withdrawing economic sanctions against North Korea.  Concurrently the diplomatic efforts by the New Japanese Prime Minister through his visits to China and South Korea and US Secretary of State’s visits to China and Japan must have cautioned Kim Jong IL that the international community would not tolerate reckless behavior by the North Korean regime.  The nightmare scenario for the international community is the possibility of North Korea transferring nuclear materials to Iran and/or non-state actors. Such a possibility cannot be totally discounted. Demented rulers threatened by unraveling of their dictatorships are most desperate people who can do anything to hurt the “enemy” in the last throes of their rule.

President Bush reiterated that “opposing proliferation is one of the highest priorities of the war against terror” as terrorists if they ever gain WMD would kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people “without hesitation and without mercy”. He assured that the US would continue its vigilance against proliferation through enhanced intelligence capabilities; interdiction of materials and technologies in transit; insistence on multi-lateral approach as in the case of North Korea. It is now recognized that the real danger to international security and stability is the possession of WMD by rogue states and terrorists. International vigilance, particularly by P-5 of the UNSC, is essential to guard against the possibility of nuclear weapons and/or technology falling into the hands of non-state actors. Rogue states have to be identified, isolated and punished for the slightest infraction of non-proliferation regime.