When Seoul was preparing to open a liaison office in the North Korean city of Kaesong this summer after a decade of virtually no contact with its longtime enemy, South Korean officials had heated debates over whether they should seek approval from Washington.
Some top aides to South Korean President Moon Jae-in said that it was an issue for the two Koreas alone and there was no need to involve their US ally, two people with knowledge of the situation told reporters.
However, to the surprise of several officials at the meeting, South Korean Minister of Unification Cho Myoung-gyon argued that Washington must be consulted, because Seoul’s plans might run afoul of sanctions imposed on North Korea over its nuclear weapons program.
Illustration: Yusha
Two dozen countries, including the UK, Germany and Sweden, already have embassies in Pyongyang, and other officials saw the proposed liaison office as a far lower level of contact with the North. They certainly did not expect Cho to be a leading advocate of strict enforcement of sanctions.
Cho was Moon’s personal choice to head the ministry, whose prime mission is to foster reconciliation, cooperation and eventual reunification with the North.
Cho, whose 30-year public service history has been inextricably linked to reunification, was in 2008 even sacked from the ministry because of his “dovish” stance toward Pyongyang.
At the suggestion of Cho and senior diplomats, Seoul ultimately sought US consent before opening the office in September, one of the sources said.
All the sources spoke to condition of anonymity due to sensitivity of the matter.
Cho declined to comment for this article, but a senior official at the unification ministry said it was aware of criticisms of Cho.
“Inter-Korean ties are unique in their nature, but it’s been difficult, and there’s North Korea’s duplicity. It’s a dilemma we face, or our fate,” the official said, asking not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.
The previously unreported debate among Moon’s top officials illustrates a growing divide within South Korea over how to progress relations with the North while keeping Washington on side.
Some corners of the administration have argued that Seoul cannot afford to be seen veering from the US-led sanctions and pressure campaign until Pyongyang gives up its nuclear weapons program, while others feel that closer inter-Korean ties can help expedite the stalled diplomatic process, several officials close to the situation said.
“If the internal rift leads to moving too quickly with the North without sufficient US consultations, it could pose a setback to not only the nuclear talks, but also the alliance and inter-Korean relations,” said Shin Beom-chul, a senior fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul.
After the inter-Korean thaw earlier this year gave way to reconciliation efforts between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump, Trump asked Moon to be “chief negotiator” between the two.
That task has become increasingly difficult as Washington and Pyongyang blame each other for the faltering nuclear talks.
US officials have insisted that punishing sanctions must remain until North Korea completely denuclearizes. North Korea has said that it has already made concessions by dismantling key facilities, and Washington must reciprocate by easing sanctions and declaring an end to the Korean War, which started in 1950 and ended with an armistice in 1953.
“Unlike other advisers, minister Cho has balanced his staunch desire for peace with an understanding of the importance of retaining a strong South Korea-US alignment,” said Patrick Cronin of the Center for a New American Security, an Asia expert in close touch with US and South Korean officials.
“Some alliance discord is inevitable and not worrisome. What would be worrisome would be a clear rupture in South Korea-US approaches for managing North Korea,” Cronin said.
The presidential Blue House declined to comment, but Moon on Monday last week told reporters that the view that there was discord between South Korea and the US was “groundless,” because there is no difference in the two countries’ positions on the North’s denuclearization.
A third source familiar with the South Korean presidential office’s thinking said that there is mounting frustration with Cho within the Blue House and even inside the unification ministry, amid concerns that he worries too much about US views.
“What the president would want from him as the unification minister is to come up with bold ideas to make his pet initiatives happen,” the source said.
During three summits this year, Moon and Kim agreed to relink railways and roads, and when conditions are met, restart the joint factory park in Kaesong and tours to the North’s Mount Kumgang resort that have been suspended for years.
None of those plans have made much headway, either because sanctions ban them outright, or, as in the case of Kaesong, Seoul took time to convince skeptical US officials that cross-border projects would not undermine sanctions.
North Korea itself has been an unpredictable partner. Discussions through the Kaesong office have been few and far between, with Pyongyang’s negotiators often failing to show up for scheduled weekly meetings without notice, unification ministry officials said.
Even so, the Kaesong move has caused tensions with Washington.
US officials told Seoul that South Korea’s explanations on the Kaesong office were not “satisfactory,” South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs Kang Kyung-wha told a parliamentary hearing in August.
Washington was also caught off guard when a group of entrepreneurs who used to operate factories in the now-closed Kaesong Industrial Zone were invited for the opening ceremony of the office, a diplomatic source in Seoul said.
The allies last month launched a working group led by their nuclear envoys to coordinate North Korean policy, which was born out of the US’ desire to “keep inter-Korean relations in check,” the source said.
Asked about the Kaesong office, a US Department of State official said: “We expect all member states to fully implement UN sanctions, including sectoral goods banned under UN Security Council resolution, and expect all nations to take their responsibilities seriously to help end [North Korea’s] illegal nuclear and missile programs.”
Another State Department official said that the US endorsed April’s inter-Korean summit agreement during its own summit with North Korea, “because progress on inter-Korean relations must happen in lockstep with progress on denuclearization.”
Last month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met Cho in Washington, bluntly warning him that inter-Korean cooperation and progress on nuclear negotiations should “remain aligned.”
Even as he faced pressure from Washington to hold a tough line, Cho was being criticized for dragging his feet on reconciliation.
In May, the North called off planned talks with the South led by Cho in protest against South Korean-US air combat exercises. When the meeting eventually took place, Cho’s counterpart, Ri Son-gwon, openly blamed Cho for having caused a “grave situation” that resulted in the cancellation of the talks.
At the Kaesong office opening, factory owners pressed Cho to reopen the complex and said that they were dismayed at the unification ministry for repeatedly rejecting requests to visit the border city to check on equipment and facilities idled since the 2016 shutdown.
“We’ve expressed, directly and indirectly, our complaint that the minister may be too lukewarm about our requests, even though allowing the trip has nothing to do with sanctions,” said Shin Han-yong, who chairs a group of businesspeople with plants in Kaesong.
Cho has told the South Korean National Assembly that the delays are due to scheduling issues with the North and the ministry “needs more time to explain the overall circumstances” to the international community.
Shin Beom-chul said that any move to undermine sanctions could expose South Korean companies to risks of punishment.
After Moon’s and Kim’s summit in Pyongyang in September, a senior US Department of the Treasury official called compliance officers at seven South Korean banks to warn them that resuming financial cooperation with North Korea “does not align with US policies” and the banks must comply with UN and US financial sanctions, a South Korean regulatory document showed.
“Realistically, we have no option but to consider US positions, as the top priority is the North’s denuclearization and the United States has the biggest leverage on that,” said Kim Hyung-suk, who served as vice minister of unification until last year.
“Without progress on the nuclear issues, there would be constraints at some point in sustaining inter-Korean ties. And Minister Cho knows that,” Kim Hyung-suk added.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with