President Moon Jae In is left in a great mood from Pyongyang. But the great overall solution to the Korean question is not yet tangible, such as East Asia expert Hanns-Günther Hilpert in the interview-explained.
DW: Moon Jae In declared that he and Kim had agreed to transform the Korean Peninsula “in a Land of peace, free of nuclear weapons and the nuclear threat”. At the same time, North Korea has not done the necessary steps. The fault of the Moon naivety?
Hilpert: I would be President of the Moon, no naivety. He is already a very long time in North Korea-business, and knows very well. But it’s also to spread a bit of flowery semantics, and to reinforce the political Impetus in the direction of peace and reconciliation. Because that is what is propagated by Moon in the core: dialogue, reconciliation, renunciation of violence and war.
A part of the agreement between Kim and Moon Jae-In relates to the resumption of the interrupted economic relations. The industrial Park in Kaesong on the Northern side of the border to back the mountains of the operation, as well as the tourist trips to the Kumgang shooting. The criticism that is practiced by various sides from the US (Trump), is entitled?
Yes, the is quite entitled to do. Because at least the spirit of the sanctions resolutions would be contrary to such steps. Sanctions should cut off North Korea, among other things, of foreign exchange earnings. By the resumption of this economic contacts with North Korea would, of course, can again earn foreign exchange so that the economic pressure on the Regime would be reduced.
Asia expert Hilpert: inter-Korean blockades are easier to solve than the nuclear complex
Question to Moon, the reconciliation with the North a higher priority than the solution of the North Korean nuclear?
I think the Moon two sides of the same coin. There is no intra-type Korean rapprochement and reconciliation, as long as the nuclear issue is at least mitigated, in part, and therefore, I don’t think that is out of view. But it is now times in such a way that the blockages in the intra-Korean relationship are relatively easy to eliminate. With the nuclear question of Power, however, is for the Kim Regime and the survival question, therefore, is a solution of this question will be much more difficult.
Is there not a danger that these blockages can be dissolved by the moon’s initiatives and the nuclear disarmament of North Korea device from the focus from the international perspective?
Yes, absolutely. Pyongyang is pursuing legal sent the strategy until the beginning of 2018 but relatively clear existing Front of the neighbouring States to break up. Succeeded Kim Jong-Un in relation to China and Russia very well, and in relation to South Korea, he is now working. And if this Front is broken, then the USA, of course, bad cards, to have a De-nuclear build-up so, as you imagine it to be, namely, verifiable and irreversible.
It is now the question of the extent to which Moon is the honest broker between the United States and North Korea can be. For this, he must keep on one side of the security interests of the United States, which are also important for the security interest of South Korea versus North Korea. On the other hand, he has to keep the survival of the interest of the North Korean regime in view and between the two create a balance. This procedure corresponds to the existential interest of the South Koreans: they want to have, in principle, continue to the security guarantee of the United States, and at the same time no war on the Korean Peninsula.
How is Japan because, given the current mood of optimism on the Korean Peninsula ?
Shinzo Abe is the only head of government of the littoral States, has not so far met with Kim Jong-Un. Japan is also something to be in an Offside position. At the same time Japan was when all the threats launched by North Korea in the past, always at the forefront. Now it has no opportunity to influence, at most, indirectly, on the Moon or or Trump. But the two represented in the first line of national interests and not that of Japan, is Japan, of course, in a difficult Position.
Announced decommissioning of Test and launch facilities sounds good, but will hardly be enough
How would you rate the Commitments North Korea’s various nuclear facilities, to dismantle, so a test facility for Rocket engines, as well as a rocket launching base?
Symbolically, it has its value, but as a disarmament step, it is pretty meaningless, because these voluntary actions can be taken. It is, in principle, in the Hand of North Korea, as it continues to run. There will be invited international observers, but not the one that would be decisive, namely, the IAEA. At least no mention is made of it, but there are probably people that choose North Korea.
In addition, a prerequisite would be to start with a disarmament, North Korea – as the United States required to submit an inventory list of its nuclear facilities, materials, and ballistic capabilities. Also, this is not yet happening.
Hanns Günther Hilpert, head of the research group for Asia at the Berlin science and politics Foundation (SWP).