|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Asia
: Korea
Bushs "evil axis" speech destabilises the
Korean peninsula
By James Conachy
15 February 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The threat of US military action against North Korea implicit
in George Bushs State of the Union address has cast a pall
over the South Korean governments sunshine policy
of rapprochement with Pyongyang and revived fears of another conflagration
on the Korean peninsula. Along with Iran and Iraq, the US president
labelled North Korea as part of an axis of evil that
would be targetted as part of his global war on terrorism.
Just 18 months ago, it appeared that decades of such hostility
were coming to an end. A political detente was well underway between
North and South Korea, following an inter-Korea summit in June
2000, and work had begun on joint economic projects. Subsequently,
10 European Union nations, including Italy, Germany and Britain,
had restored diplomatic relations with Pyongyang, as had Australia
and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) states.
But the prospects dramatically cooled after Bushs installation
last year. His administration withdrew the tentative support for
the sunshine policy given by the previous Clinton
White House, suspended talks with Pyongyang, raised unacceptable
demands on the North that it reduce the size of its conventional
military forces and accused it, without evidence, of developing
nuclear and biological weapons.
Now, after months of provocation, Bush has openly set a course
for conflict. The North Korean regime has responded by labelling
the State of the Union speech as little short of a declaration
of war and warned it is undertaking the necessary defensive
preparations. A heightened state of alert exists on both sides
of the Korean border, with half a million heavily armed North
Korean troops facing an equal number of South Korean and American
forces.
The immediate consequence of Bushs speech has been to
plunge South Korea into political turmoil. Opposition has emerged
across the political spectrum over the danger of war. President
Kim Dae-jung, author of the sunshine policy, warned
on February 5: We must think of the monstrous damage that
a war on the Korean peninsula would cause.
Among millions of Korean people, the memories and impact of
the 1950-53 Korean War have not faded. More than four million
Koreans lost their lives and millions more were maimed or lost
everything they owned. The peninsula was laid waste and took decades
to recover. Today, millions of South Koreans live within artillery
range of North Korea.
Student associations, trade unions and religious groups are
preparing anti-US and pro-peace demonstrations to coincide with
Bushs upcoming February 19 visit to Seoul. An opinion poll
on February 11 found more than 56 percent of South Koreans believe
Bushs speech to be inappropriate, while 70 percent
believed the US should hold talks with the North. Only 15 percent
voiced support for a policy of military pressure on Pyongyang.
The extent of the opposition is best gauged by the bitter divisions
that have emerged within the right-wing opposition Grand National
Party (GNP), which has close ties to the past US-backed military
dictatorships in South Korea. Until now, the GNP has aligned itself
with the US administrations criticisms of the sunshine
policy. While its leader initially expressed agreement with
Bushs speech, other GNP legislators have virulently denounced
it. One declared at a February 3 press conference: A country
[the US] trying to ignite a war on the peninsula, for any reason,
cannot be our ally. A GNP official told the Korea Times:
We cannot recklessly lend full support to Bushs position,
in light of the escalating anti-American sentiment.
A grouping of both government and GNP legislators went as far
as submitting a resolution to the parliament on February 7 calling
on Kim Dae-jung to demand the US support the sunshine policy.
According to the Korea Times, the resolution argued: The
biggest threat to US national security is not sophisticated missiles,
but the anti-US sentiment stemming from its hegemonic attitude
toward weak countries, its Middle East policy in favour of Israel
and its hardline policy toward the North.
Bushs stance toward North Korea has also provoked criticisms
internationally. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi bluntly
stated on February 6 that his government would not change its
policy toward North Korea and would work patiently to make
progress in talks on normalising diplomatic ties. European
governments have made clear their continued support for the sunshine
policy. Russia and China both officially disagreed with
the term axis of evil.
Strategic issues
The accusation that North Korea is a sponsor of global terrorism
or a threat to the US flies in the face of reality. North Korea
had no involvement in the September 11 attack. It is a backward,
famine-stricken and impoverished state, with a population of just
24 million and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of little more than
$US10 billion. Much of its militarys obsolete Soviet-era
equipment is dysfunctional due to lack of fuel, spare parts and
maintenance.
Far from threatening the world, Pyongyang has repeatedly
sought to appease the US and South Korea since the dissolution
of the Soviet Union in 1991, its main Cold War sponsor. In 1994,
it closed down its nuclear reactors after the threat of military
strikes by the Clinton administration. International teams that
inspected the sites found no evidence that North Korea possessed
either nuclear or biological weapons. In 1998, also following
US threats, North Korea suspended its long-range missile program
and has not resumed it.
In his speech, Bush cynically accused North Korea of arming
with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving
its citizens. Firstly, both Koreas maintain a huge military
following a war that has never officially ended. In the case of
South Korea, it is backed by the might of the US war machine,
including the presence of 37,000 US troops. Secondly, for Pyongyang,
the development and sale of missiles and other armaments is one
of its few means of earning foreign currency. The US has directly
contributed to the economic chaos in North Korea, and thus to
the countrys poverty and famine, by maintaining a strict
economic blockade dating back to the Korean War.
Bushs targeting of North Korea is bound up with major
power rivalry in North East Asia. North Koreas concessions
to Washington were not only the product of US threats and pressure.
Pyongyang has been encouraged by both South Korea and China to
seek a rapprochement in order to open up the peninsula to foreign
investment and as a land route for trade and energy to East Asia.
Sections of big business in both Asia and Europe regard the
Korean peninsula as a key to Eurasian economic integration. Work
began last year on linking Russias trans-Siberian railway
from Europe to both China and South Koreas ports. The move
has the potential to cut container transport time between the
EU and East Asia by more than 10 days. Feasibility studies have
been conducted for gas pipelines from Russia through China and
the North for use in South Korea and export to Japan. Special
economic zones are planned in North Korea and also Chinas
depressed northern provinces, offering export companies a continuous
supply of low-cost, politically repressed labour near the Japanese
market and with fast land transport routes to Europe.
It is precisely the possibility that the sunshine policy
could be successful that is animating the hardline stance of the
US administration. Bushs prime target is not so much North
Korea but China, which rightwing Republicans regard as the main
threat to US economic and military dominance in the region. Throughout
the US presidential election campaign, Bush referred to China
as a strategic competitor.
The realisation of the sunshine policy would remove
a major justification for the large US troop presence in South
Korea and Japandefending them against the North Korean threat.
At the same time it would economically strengthen a regime with
close relations to Beijing. It would inevitably, and most likely
rapidly, draw South Korea, Russia and Japan into closer economic
and security ties with China, as well as encouraging a greater
European interest in the region.
Against this perspective, Bush is advancing the consistent
policy of the Republican rightwing, which throughout the 1990s
advocated the complete isolation of North Korea through economic
sanctions, diplomatic pressure and military threats. The stated
aim has been to precipitate the political and social disintegration
of the country, regardless of the consequences for the Korean
people. Such a scenario would disrupt the economic development
of China, as well as position the US to increase military pressure
against it.
The same layers of the US administration who are pushing for
aggressive action against North Korea are also the most virulent
exponents of a confrontational policy against Beijing, including
the recognition of Taiwan as a separate state. Among them is Bushs
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who in the 1990s opposed
any dispatch of international food aid to North Korea, on the
grounds that it would assist the Pyongyang regime survive.
As was revealed several years ago, the Pentagon has already
drawn up plans for a pre-emptive invasion of North
Korea to overthrow the government and move troops to the Chinese
border. In November 1998, Richard Halloran, former military correspondent
for the New York Times and director of the Center of War,
Peace and News Media, published a detailed account.
According to Halloran, the American military has target lists
of North Korean military positions, underground bunkers and government
facilities. An unnamed senior US official told him at the time:
When were done, they will not be able to mount any
military activity of any kind. We will kill them all.
The plan assumes that the South Korean ruling elites would
be prepared to sacrifice their economic interests, send hundreds
of thousands of troops over the border and bear the cost of permanently
occupying the North; that US air power would so completely destroy
the Norths military it could not launch a counter-attack;
that Japan would participate and allow bases on its soil to be
used for the air strikes; and that China, Russia and the EU would
not intervene.
There is no doubt that this particular piece of military madness,
along with others, is now up for review and discussion in the
White House and the Pentagon.
See Also:
State of the Union speech:
Bush declares war on the world
[31 January 2002]
US steps up pressure
on North Korea
[30 November 2001]
North Korea seeks rapprochement
with South and the US
[28 September 2001]
The Nobel Peace Prize
and Korea's Kim Dae-jung
[3 November 2000]
The Korean summit:
no recipe for peace and prosperity
[27 July 2000]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |