 |
|
The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on the summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump on Mar. 1, the day after the Hanoi summit concluded. (KCNA/Yonhap News)
|
What was achieved at Hanoi and what challenges remain in the road ahead?
The second North Korea-US summit in Hanoi, which ended without an agreement, is bound to be a new starting point on the long journey toward “the building of a lasting and robust peace regime on the Korean Peninsula,” in the words of the joint statement signed by North Korea and the US on June 12, 2018, at the Singapore summit. The outcome of the Hanoi summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump reveals the results that could be the driver of future efforts and the obstacles that must be overcome if a third summit is to be held. Two sides demonstrated ability to manage the situation “Since the summit, the two leaders have been considerate to each other and have been making an effort to manage the situation. That’s one of the biggest results that we’ve seen,” said former Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok “The two leaders are making it clear that they don’t intend to overturn the applecart,” said Kim Joon-hyung, professor at Handong Global University On Mar. 3, a senior government official offered a hopeful analysis: “We’re seeing that the leaders of North Korea and the US are determined to prevent any retrograde motion. As long as they don’t move backward, they can move forward again.” Indeed, Kim used the Rodong Sinmun to send the message that he and Trump had agreed during their Hanoi summit to “continue productive dialogue.” “Our relationship is very strong,” Trump said during a press conference held immediately after the summit. “And I think [. . .] eventually we’ll get there.” Preconditions for a deal brought to light “We learned for the first time that North Korea is willing to give up its Yongbyon nuclear complex in its entirety. If Yongbyon is dismantled, the rest of the denuclearization process can move forward quickly. That’s the biggest result,” said a senior government official. “The uncertainty has been cleared away, and all the points of disagreement have been clarified. The foundation has been laid for a higher-level agreement in the third summit,” said Cho Sung-ryul, former senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Strategy “It’s very important that the North Koreans proposed permanently shutting down the Yongbyon nuclear complex, along with involving US technicians in that process and allowing inspections and verification by US experts. That could serve as the basis for new efforts,” said Lee Jong-seok. During a late-night press conference in Hanoi, North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho definitely stated that North Korea would permanently shut down its Yongbyon nuclear complex and provide a written pledge to permanently halt its nuclear weapon tests and long-range missile launches in exchange for “relief from the provisions in five sanctions resolutions adopted by the UN Security Council between 2016 and 2017 that impede the civilian economy and the people’s livelihood.” During their press conference, Trump and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the US would not provide sanctions relief until North Korea went beyond dismantling the Yongbyon nuclear facility and made a declaration of “other things [. . .] that we found” – that is, uranium nuclear enrichment facilities other than Yongbyon – and “missiles [. . .] warheads and weapons systems.” Working-level meetings address weaknesses of “top-down” method During the press conference immediately after the summit, Trump said that he “had papers ready to be signed.” That means that North Korea State Affairs Commission Special Representative for US Affairs Kim Hyok-chol and US State Department Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun managed to prepare a rough draft of a written agreement for the summit in their working-level negotiations. This prompted Lee Jong-seok to say, “There was considerable progress in addressing the weaknesses of the top-down method compared to the first summit” and Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies, to conclude that “the method of a top-down approach plus working-level negotiations remains valid.” Still not enough trust The biggest challenge that was posed by the Hanoi summit is the question of how to overcome the continuing lack of trust between North Korea and the US in regard to the concept and mode of denuclearization. The Americans interpret the North Koreans’ principle of step-by-step and simultaneous action as meaning that they’re not adequately committed to denuclearization, while the North Koreans regard the Americans’ strategy of “big deal or no deal” as meaning that they’re not adequately committed to the negotiations. That’s a big gap. The policy confusion inside the US makes it harder to find a solution. During a lecture at Stanford University on Jan. 31, Biegun expressed the principle of acting simultaneously and in parallel, which suggested that the US would not insist on a nuclear declaration. But Trump was pressured by the US Congress and public opinion to adopt the “big deal or no deal” approach, and Pompeo asked for a nuclear declaration. The disagreement between North Korea and the US as well as the mixed signals from within the US are problems that need to be resolved. The danger of a prolonged impasse “Since there’s a presidential election in the US next year, there’s unlikely to be an agreement unless it happens this year,” said Yang Moo-jin. Kim Joon-hyung argued that the fact that the two sides laid their cards on the table during the talks at Hanoi “could turn out to be a double-edged sword.” Kim thinks resolving uncertainty could lead to a battle between the two leaders’ egos, thus rapidly eroding momentum. That’s why several experts said “it will be necessary to cool off for a while, but a prolonged impasse would be dangerous. The South Korean government needs to do its best to ensure that the negotiations resume soon.” A senior government official offered the following view: “There’s a risk of the policy confusion in the Trump administration worsening. We’re in a race against time now.” Inter-Korean relations hobbled by sanctions A number of experts expressed concerns that “basic needs such as the resumption of operations at the Kaesong Industrial Complex and tourism to Mt. Kumgang have been cast into doubt by the failure to reach an agreement in this summit.” Lee Gwan-se, director of the Institute for Far Eastern Studies at Kyungnam University, said, “Inter-Korean relations cannot be deferred until denuclearization. Inter-Korean relations can be used to create momentum in North Korea-US relations.” Lee Jong-seok called on the South Korean government to “make contact with the US and North Korea and cooperate with China” while using “vigorous internal debate” to come up with creative ways to actively and proactively engage in diplomacy. By Lee Je-hun, senior staff writer, and Park Min-hee, staff reporter Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]
