Priorities in the six-party talks
(From The Japan Times July 16 issue)

6ヵ国協議と拉致被害者問題

    Much has transpired since the last round of talks in June last year. At the meeting, the United States put a detailed proposal on the table: It reportedly provided the long awaited road map that spelled out what Pyongyang could expect in return for agreeing to the dismantlement of its nuclear-weapons programs. Instead of responding, though, the North suspended participation in the talks, citing hostile comments by the government in Washington. Pyongyang was most likely waiting for the outcome of the U.S. presidential elections, hoping for a "regime change" in Washington that would soften the U.S. position. Those hopes were frustrated by the re-election of President George W. Bush, but North Korea continued to hold out, awaiting clarification of U.S. policy.

    When things were clarified, Pyongyang remained unhappy with the results. The North demanded that Washington end its "hostile policies" and retract statements calling North Korea "an outpost of tyranny" and referring to supreme leader Kim Jong Il as "a tyrant." In an attempt to up the ante, North Korea on Feb. 10 declared itself a nuclear-weapons state.

    The statement was ignored, and it helped convince Seoul and Beijing, North Korea's two most important supporters, that Pyongyang was the cause of this crisis, rather than Washington. Both governments have become less tolerant of the North's tactics and demanded that it return to the talks. The United States has helped by repeating earlier statements that it has no intention of invading or attacking North Korea. Mr. Bush has gone out of his way to offer the respect that North Korea's leader craves by referring to him as "Mr. Kim."

    That may have given North Korea the "victory" it needed to return to the negotiations. South Korea's promise to provide fertilizer and rice sweetened the pot. Finally, the prospect of 2 million kilowatts of electricity — Seoul's latest offer to the North, conditioned on the dismantling of its nuclear program — gives Pyongyang an incentive to discuss the U.S. proposal.

    Getting the North back to the table is a step forward, but there must be genuine movement toward eliminating its nuclear-weapons programs and dismantling the stockpiles of plutonium and whatever weapons the country claims to have. Getting Pyongyang to do that requires that the other five parties speak with one voice and insist on denuclearization. Those five parties must be ready to meet North Korea's legitimate security needs. Some form of security assurances are needed, as is economic assistance.

    Resumption of the talks poses particular problems for Japan. It, perhaps more than any other country, is threatened by the North's nuclear arsenal. Pyongyang is unlikely to target China, Russia or South Korea, and does not have the capability to threaten the United States with its missiles. Disarmament is therefore a key security concern for Japan. But questions about the fate of Japanese abductees top the public's agenda with the North. This issue, although emotional, pales beside the nuclear one.

    Japan must be ready to compromise. It should demand security assurances from North Korea, just as Pyongyang makes demands from its interlocutors. But it is unlikely to get more than rhetorical support for a resolution to the abductee issue within the six-party framework. The other governments will focus on nuclear-related questions and large-scale economic assistance, as well as on a conceptual framework for normalizing relations among all six parties.

    That is the setting in which Tokyo and Pyongyang will be able to settle the abductee issue. It is not going to be a very satisfactory situation, but it is important that Tokyo focus on priorities. Only a unified position will get North Korea to deal, and only then will Japan be able to settle its grievances with Pyongyang. It will be a long and frustrating process.

The Japan Times Weekly
July 23, 2005
(C) All rights reserved

      04年6月に開かれた前回の協議で米は北朝鮮に対し、核開発放棄の見返りを明示したとされるが、北朝鮮は提案に応じず、米の敵対的発言を理由に6ヵ国協議参加拒否を表明。実際は、米大統領選の結果を見極めたいとの意図が明らかだった。

      ブッシュ大統領再選後も、米の「敵対政策」中止を求めていた北朝鮮は今年2月、核兵器保有を宣言した。同宣言は無視され、韓国、中国は北朝鮮に対し6ヵ国協議復帰への圧力を強めた。米政府は、米による北朝鮮進攻、攻撃の可能性を繰り返し否定した。

      韓国は北朝鮮に対し、肥料と食料の援助、さらに核開発計画の放棄を条件に200万キロワットの電力供給計画も発表。これで北朝鮮が米提案について話し合うきっかけができた。

      北朝鮮の6ヵ国協議復帰は、核問題解決への第一歩に過ぎない。核開発計画とプルトニウムなどの備蓄核物質の完全放棄への具体的な進展が必要だ。そのためには、5ヵ国の意見の一致、そして北朝鮮への安全保障の確約が必要になる。

      日本は、参加国のうちで北朝鮮の核の脅威を最も強く感じているが、国民にとっては日本人拉致被害者問題の解決が最大の関心事である。

      6ヵ国協議の枠内で、日本が北朝鮮との拉致問題解決について強い支持を得るのは難しそうだ。他の参加国は、核問題、経済援助問題、6ヵ国間の関係正常化に重点を置くだろう。

      日本政府は交渉の優先順位を見極め、4ヵ国と戦略を統一して初めて拉致問題解決が可能になる。それまでには長く困難な交渉が予想される。