|
 |
 |
TOKYO -- Following the June 12-14 North-South Korea summit in Pyongyang,
there will be one sure way to tell if the proceedings have been even
moderately successful.
Of course, some applause must be given for the fact that the parties
have even agreed to sit
down at all 50 years after the Korean War started. North Korea invaded
South Korea on June 25,1950, there was a truce in 1953, but technically
the Koreas are still at war.
The consensus among diplomatic analysts is that the tete-a-tete between
the South's President Kim Dae-jung and the North's leader Kim Jong-il, can
be judged successful if the North's enigmatic
chief agrees to reciprocate; that is if he will go to Seoul for a follow-up
meeting in the near future.
"Such a visit could really make a difference," said a diplomat formerly
posted in Pyongyang.
So far most of the accommodation has been on Kim Dae-jung's side as he
pursues
the national goal of reconciliation and the personal goal of winning the
Nobel Peace Prize.
His is the magnanimity of a Christian, statesman and patriot.
Lately there has been a quiet crusade to "humanize" the North's Kim,
which is among the greatest public relations challenges in the world,
considering the man's record.
Even Kim Dae-jung has said "Kim Jong-il has improved," which has more
to do with flattery than with factual research.
For my part, which serves only to confirm my bias, I would not trust
Kim Jong-il further than I could throw him, to use an old American saying.
But I may pay attention to the influence of
his advisers.
Kim Dae-jung is able to handle the flak from his domestic opponents that
he has gone soft
and has made too many concessions.
Georgy Kunadze, a former Russian ambassador to South Korea, pointed
out recently that these opponents will say "according to true Korean
tradition, the North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, who is almost young enough
to be Kim Dae-jung's son, should come to Seoul first, not vice versa."
The summit agenda and negotiations will have little to do with reality
until the Korean states bury the demons, phobias, psychological hang-ups
that have accumulated over the past five decades.
Western nations are likewise encumbered with myths about Korea that
need to be dissolved.
Kunadze, who is now the chief researcher at the Russian Academy of
Science's Institute of World Economy and International Relations, says:
"Idealists would like to believe that North Korea pursues its
unpredictable and occasionally
violent policy because of its leaders' lack of understanding. But
statesmen must acknowledge that, on the contrary, the country does so
because its leaders understand everything only too well."
This leads to the question of Kim Jong-il's advisers. It is going too
far too say that a virtual coup d'etat has occurred in the Pyongyang
palace. But a combination of pragmatism, elevation of younger officers
to the inner circle, gentle elbow-twisting from China and what might be
called "reading the handwriting on the wall," have led to a perceptible
change in approach.
The recent decisions to establish diplomatic relations with Italy and
Australia is evidence that
Pyongyang wants to become part of the world again. The Stalinist model is
still too much ingrained to be thrown into the trash can of history just
yet, but there is movement in that direction.
Foreigners have given Koreans the short end of the stick for too
long. Of course there are other than indigenous players in the background
and in support roles even now. But it will be heartening to see Koreans
occupying the two main chairs at the upcoming summit.
Edward Neilan (eneilan@crisscross.com) is a veteran journalist, based in Tokyo, who covers East Asia and writes weekly for World Tribune.com.