Agenda

14:30-14:40   Welcoming Remarks and Introduction
Steve Flanagan, Senior Vice President and Henry A. Kissinger Chair, CSIS

14:40 - 14:50   Opening Remarks
Rep. Chung Mong-Joon, ROK National Assembly

14:50-15:00   Panel Introduction
Hahm Chaibong, Director, The Asan Institute

15:00-15:50   Opening Statements by Panelists
Korea-U.S. Alliance: Rep. Hwang Jin Ha and Amb. Jack Pritchard,    
President of Korea Economic Institute 

North Korea and China: Rep. Park Yung Sun, Rep. Choi Ku Sik, Rep. Paik      
Sung Woon and Rep. Hong Il Pyo 
                
KORUS FTA:  Rep. Kim Hyo Seok and Tami Overby, President, US-Korea 
Business Council, US Chamber of Commerce

15:50-16:10   Questions from Moderator
Victor Cha, Senior Advisor and Korea Chair, CSIS

16:10-16:30   Questions from Audience

16:30   Concluding Remarks
Hahm Chaibong and Victor Cha

링크: http://index.chinaenergyfund.org/articles/?_do=view&article_id=7260&catalog_id=1017&lang=eng
 

INTRODUCTION

The National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP) met on March 24, 2011 with a distinguished group of members of the Korean National Assembly led by the Honorable Chung Mong Joon. The legislators were on their way to Washington, DC to meet with U.S. government officials, legislators, and think tanks.

The visit marked the growing importance of the U.S.-ROK alliance. As Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell recently remarked, "over the last 60 years, our alliance with the ROK has continued to expand from its military roots into one of the most vibrant, full-spectrum strategic partnerships in modern history, encompassing dynamic political, economic, and social cooperation." The ROK hosted the 2010 G20 Summit in Seoul and will host the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit – a testimony to the ROK's willingness to become a global leader.

The ROK is now the seventh largest trading partner of the U.S. Its economy is the third largest in Asia and the 13th in the world. Public opinion surveys in both countries show an unprecedented level of support for the alliance in both countries. In a recent Korean poll, some 87% of Korean respondents called the Korea-U.S. alliance either "necessary to some degree" or "very necessary." And in the U.S., according to a Chicago Council survey, 62% of the respondents said the U.S. "should have" military bases long term in Korea, the highest figure among the countries polled, which included Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, and Japan. And in a Joint Vision statement released in June, 2009, the two countries pledged to work together to pass a Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) that could greatly strengthen the alliance.

THE U.S.-ROK ALLIANCE IS STRONGER THAN EVER

Although both American and Korean participants agreed that it is not wise to be complacent, most agreed with an American participant who said that the alliance is the best it had been in decades.

According to the American observer, there are several reasons for this very positive situation. First, there is a good personal chemistry between the two leaders, President Obama and ROK President Lee Myong-bak. Second, North Korean provocations last year have underlined for both sides the importance of the alliance in deterring future North Korean provocations. Third, the Obama Administration from its very beginning has given greater attention to the Asia-Pacific region and is determined to strengthen its alliances with both the ROK and Japan. Fourth, there has been very close consultations with the ROK on North Korea. Indeed, some American analysts think that the U.S. has given too much of a blank check to Seoul by agreeing that the U.S. would not engage the DPRK until it met the ROK requirements for improving relations. Fifth, China's clumsy and provocative behaviour in support of North Korea has reinforced the alliance. Sixth, the agreement to relocate U.S. bases out of Seoul by 2015 has made those bases less controversial in Korea. Finally, the shared values of the two countries help promote the alliance. All of these trends strengthen popular support for the alliance in both Korea and the United States.

A Korean participant, a member of the ruling party, said that the alliance is the "best ever" and the linchpin of security in the Asia-Pacific region. The Cheonan and Yeonpyong incidents made the significance of the alliance even greater for South Korea. He cited polling data in Korea that show 87% of the Korean people support the alliance. And, in the U.S., according to polling data, 80% of Americans support the alliance. The Korean participant concluded by saying that the U.S. and the ROK need to continue to work closely together on how to deal with the North Korean threat and how to engage a rising China. And they need to ratify the Free Trade Agreement "in the near future" in order to make a "more comprehensive alliance."

Another Korean participant, a member of the opposition Democratic Party, said there is not much difference between the ruling and opposition parties on the importance of the U.S.-ROK alliance.

HOW TO DEAL WITH NORTH KOREA

Although the South Korean participants all welcome and appreciate the close consultation between the two governments on the North Korean issue, there was some difference of views on how best to deal with this issue. Some Korean participants from the ruling party criticized the U.S. for allegedly having given up on denuclearizing North Korea while others from the opposition party criticized Washington for allegedly waiting for collapse of the North Korean regime. American participants rejected both lines of criticism.

On the hardline side, one ROK participant, a member of the ruling party, questioned the value of returning to the Six Party talks. China, he said, says North Korea will not give up nuclear weapons but China still "advises us to return to the Six Party Talks." What then is the purpose of the Six Party Talks? At the same time, the Korean participant alleged, the U.S. had changed its policy from denuclearization of North Korea to preventing proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology.

Another member of the ruling party in the ROK said there are two opinions in South Korea about the Six Party Talks. One school wants a return to talks. A second favours reintroducing tactical U.S. nuclear weapons or developing an indigenous nuclear capability. These views, he said, "will increase."

While these participants from the ruling party in the ROK seemed to suggest that the U.S. has given up on the goal of denuclearization, some of the opposition party participants seemed to criticize the U.S. for being too "tough" and too close to ROK President Lee Myong-bak. One opposition leader said that the current strategy of the Lee Myong-bak and Obama Administrations is not to return to negotiations but to put pressure on North Korea in order to facilitate a collapse. But, the opposition leader went on, China supports North Korea and there is no possibility of collapse. Moreover, said the opposition legislator, as the U.S.-ROK alliance strengthens, so too does the China-North Korea alliance and this raises the danger of a reversion to Cold War-type alliances.

Another ROK participant from the opposition party said that the U.S. and the ROK need to resume the Six Party Talks and to provide incentives for North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons. These incentives should include both economic support and security guarantees.

American participants rejected both lines of criticism. To those South Korean opposition leaders who questioned whether the U.S. is waiting for a collapse of the DPRK regime and so is not interested in a return to negotiations, one American said this is not a correct analysis of the U.S. position. On the contrary, he said, the Obama Administration came into office with a desire to improve relations with North Korea and was greeted by missile and nuclear tests and the eviction of IAEA inspectors from North Korea. The current U.S. position is to return to negotiations but only after North Korea has shown some seriousness both on steps towards denuclearization and on improving relations with South Korea. Trilateral coordination between the U.S., Japan and the ROK is important to achieve this goal. And the U.S. is also working with China on achieving this goal.

To those Koreans who questioned the value of the Six Party Talks, one American participant said there is a chance to cap the North Korean nuclear program through negotiations. Also a better case could be made for containment of North Korea if negotiations go forward and it is clear that North Korea and not the U.S. is the problem.

Another American participant said he thought it might still be possible to encourage North Korea to take serious steps towards denuclearization and that the U.S. is working with China and its ROK and Japanese allies on this. He is encouraged by the January 2011 Joint Statement issued by the U.S. and China which reflected some progress toward acknowledging the dangers of the North Korean uranium enrichment program. The same American said that it is not correct that the U.S. has shifted from denuclearization to non-proliferation. Rather both denuclearization and non-proliferation are the goals of U.S. policy. It is not a question of "either-or." And there was no difference between the U.S. and the ROK governments on this issue.

HOW TO DEAL WITH CHINA

Attitudes towards China and China's role in the Korean peninsula are complex. On the one hand, Korean participants said there is great irritation and disappointment over China's unconditional support for North Korea last year during the Cheonan and Yeonpyong incidents. South Koreans are concerned about the growth of Chinese influence in North Korea and there is a debate on how to counter it. On the other hand, the Korean participants said that both geography and economics required Korea to get along with China. Trade between China and the ROK last year was $200 billion, larger than the combined total of the ROK's trade with the U.S. and Japan. There are also 140 daily flights now between China and the ROK.

One Korean participant reported some evidence of China's growing concern about the potential for the reintroduction of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons into the ROK. An editorial in China's Global Times had warned against it. The Korean cited this editorial as an indication that China was increasingly concerned about tensions on the Korean peninsula that were driving the ROK closer to the U.S. and reviving prospects for nuclear weapons in South Korea.

American participants also expressed complex attitudes towards China's role in the Korean peninsula. On the one hand, as one participant observed, China acted as North Korea's defense attorney over the incidents last year. On the other hand, China has played a positive role in reining in North Korea, especially last December when the two Koreas were on the brink of military confrontation. Moreover, as one American participant said, the January 2011 Joint Statement agreed to by China and the United States reflected some progress between the two great powers in agreeing that North Korea's recent acknowledgement of its uranium enrichment program is a negative development. The United States still believes, this observer said, that it can work together with China in making progress towards denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

Another American participant argued that China's assertive behaviour on behalf of North Korea has drawn the U.S. and the ROK closer together and improved the prospects for trilateral coordination between the U.S., Japan and the ROK.

One Korean participant observed that on the North Korean nuclear issue, Russia is more helpful than China but less influential.

DIFFERENCES OVER THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (KORUS)

American participants reflected optimism about the prospects for passage of the Free Trade Agreement between the ROK and the United States, particularly now that the Ford Motor Company and the United Automobile Workers had come out in support of it. The Republican Party, said one American, is "overwhelmingly" in favour of KORUS.

Korean participants are divided along party lines. Participants from the ruling party support KORUS. One ruling party leader said that the passage of KORUS will contribute to a "more comprehensive alliance" and that, despite different opinions in the National Assembly and Korean public, the ROK needs to "ratify the agreement in the near future." Those from the opposition party complained that the "balance of benefits" was more in the American than in the Korean favour and they said that the agreement is opposed by the agriculture and fisheries industries in Korea.

American participants responded to these arguments by saying that KORUS was much more than an economic agreement. It has strategic and political implications. One American said that the passage of KORUS requires statesmanship on both sides.

THE JAPAN FACTOR IN THE KOREAN PENINSULA

As a result of the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear crisis in Japan early this year, and recent maritime disputes between Japan and China, there were several notable developments in ROK-Japan relations and in Japanese policy, according to the Korean participants.

First, there was a public outcry of support for Japan in Korea. Koreans contributed some $50 million of private donations of disaster relief to Japan in the wake of the crisis. Some Korean participants saw this as part of an important and positive change in Korean attitudes towards Japan which have traditionally been influenced by memories of Japan's colonization of Korea.

Second, there has been a change in Japan's attitudes towards its alliances after the dispute with China over the Senkaku islands. There was now what one Korean called a new Japanese understanding of the importance of such alliances. On a recent visit to Japan, the Korean participant said, Japan is even more favourably disposed to the development of military to military relations with the ROK. Past history still, however, remains a problem.

Most participants concluded that the prospects for trilateral cooperation between the U.S., ROK and Japan are now growing. One American participant said that Asians need to think more about new security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region and trilateral cooperation among the three allies could play an important role in such architecture.

link: http://csis.org/event/korea-us-alliance-and-northeast-asian-security