The DPRK and a New Regional Order in Northeast Asia
Zhang Ling 1
Director of International Cooperation, The Charhar Institute
In November 2018, Professor Bae Kwang-Hee and Professor Yang Wook-joo from the Kim Il Sung University of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) were invited to the Charhar Institute Beijing office for an academic visit. During their stay, they lectured on the Korean language for Charhar’s research fellows and staff. Recently, Dr. Han Fangming, Chairman of the Charhar Institute, gave a farewell dinner at which the two professors who were wrapping up their visit to China were officially awarded certificates as senior fellows of the Charhar Institute2.
The six-month Korean program served as an unofficial communication channel with the DPRK, which we at the institute have come to call the “Charhar Channel”. This was initiated by the Charhar Institute, an independent think tank focusing on international relations and foreign policy with the pursuit of its ultimate goal of peace, development and harmony. Since its inception in 2009, Charhar has made unremitting efforts to promote the peaceful settlement of the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue as well as peace and cooperation in Northeast Asia through “track 2” and “track 1.5” dialogues. In this way, the “Charhar Channel” has made its own contribution to the restoration and development of bilateral and multilateral relations as well as the de-nuclearization efforts on the Korean Peninsula. Furthermore, the channel aims to expand the non-governmental exchanges between China and the DPRK into the fields of culture and the arts, to strengthen the role of think tanks, and to provide favorable conditions for the next step in opening high-level dialogues. At the same time, it also makes reports on the situation in and policies of the DPRK, offering suggestions for the development of relations from the perspective of people-to-people exchanges.
As a student of the program led by Professor Bae and Professor Yang, I had something akin to a phobia of Altaic languages prior to embarking on it; I felt almost dizzy whenever I saw Korean or Japanese. Still, with great curiosity and enthusiasm, I enjoyed the courses and was indeed impressed by the teachers’ empathy and experience as well as their cordial and humorous style. They taught us from the heart and their eyes always twinkled with joy and kindness. As the class neared its conclusion, we enjoyed singing the sorrowful Korean folk song “Arirang” and the radiant “Nice to meet you”, which really evoked mixed feelings about socialism and cosmopolitanism.
Sometimes I think of how, in today’s fast-developing world where we are bombarded by information, chaos and disinformation, the people of the DPRK live in another dimension. Of course some may interpret this as falling behind the times. However, there is also something to be said, at the individual, family and community levels, for self-sufficiency that is not affected by external shocks. There is also a kind of simple happiness in that lifestyle, reminiscent of Far From the Madding Crowd by Thomas Hardy.
Rather than judge, I simply want to call for mutual respect and emphasize the need to listen to each other in the context of the Korean Peninsula and the wider issue of reconciliation and cooperation among the countries of Northeast Asia. Above all, foreign policy decision-making and political risks should be based upon the expectations that the ordinary person has for security and a better life.
The pleasant get-together with my Korean teachers also keeps reminding me of the current situation and informs my point of view regarding the DPRK and Northeast Asia more broadly.
Consensus built upon differences
First, both in the context of the DPRK nuclear issue and Northeast Asian cooperation, the stakeholders should recognize their differences. More importantly, they should aim to reach consensus by all means.
One of the characteristics of today’s world is the simultaneous deepening of globalization and regional integration. Cooperation and integration among regional countries can in turn promote globalization, as evidenced by the European Union in Europe, ASEAN in Southeast Asia, and the League of Arab States in the Arab countries. However, the process of integration in Northeast Asia, even merely economic integration, has been slow. Territorial issues remain very prominent in Northeast Asia. The division of the Korean Peninsula is widely regarded as a remnant of the Cold War, and touches a nerve in all parties concerned. It is regrettable that the United States-DPRK summit in Hanoi, Vietnam on February 28, 2019 failed to reach an agreement. Despite the differences between the DPRK and the United States (US), we are encouraged to have witnessed that the DPRK’s nuclear activities were paused as the result of the conversations conducted. It sends a good signal that establishing a long-term security mechanism in Northeast Asia can be expected.
Northeast Asian security is also affected by political arrangements like the US-ROK Alliance and US-Japan Alliance. This introduces a degree of unpredictability. Nevertheless, what remains unchanged is our shared hope for security and prosperity; eschewing war and promoting collaboration. Hence the countries in the region would do well to abandon geopolitical games and zero-sum thinking in favour of common interests. They should promote peace and development in East Asia by promoting cooperation, harmony, mutual trust, solidarity and stability in Northeast Asia. This would be in the interest of all countries and is the hope of the international community. This goal of consensus-building should be the cornerstone of all endeavors.
NGO’s growing roles within the ever-changing situation
Second, civil society exchanges can serve to resolve disputes peacefully in the political sphere and NGOs should play a more significant and pragmatic role. At present, a general trend of peaceful dialogue on the Korean Peninsula has been developed and formed. Some scholars have concluded that the two Trump-Kim summits were “diplomatic shows”, in which the two protagonists enjoyed the attention of the media and the world while failing to yield any concrete measures. However, the “shows” themselves serve as information and signals of the momentum for peace. Now the global community expects even more discussion and more good results. All parties should therefore cherish this opportunity to bring lasting peace to the Korean Peninsula and the Northeast Asian region.
In recent years, many NGOs focusing on this topic have made tremendous efforts, acted quickly and yielded some valuable successful stories in terms of humanitarian aid, reports, forums, dialogues and open calls. For example, several American NGOs like American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) have become the icebreakers and sent humanitarian assistance to the DPRK with hard-won approvals from the U.S. Commerce of Department, the Treasury Department, and the UN Security Council sanctions committee. They have also obtained special passports to help with agriculture, children’s welfare and health in DPRK. Finally, they broke barriers and demonstrated belief, courage and action, just as Daniel Jasper, AFSC’s Public Education and Advocacy Coordinator for Asia, wrote ahead of the second Trump-Kim summit, “Take action today: On the eve of the summit, tell the Trump administration make reuniting Korean and Korean-American families a priority!”3. Their experiences and expertise can now be shared with others.
Meanwhile efforts should be made to map out more rigorous, moderate, and quantifiable new steps on three fronts simultaneously: denuclearization, the provision of humanitarian aid and the economic development of the DPRK. Every project is like an investment plan for peace. That is to say, that it cannot be considered a mere handout package, but rather, a step-by-step and detailed project based on feasibility and vulnerability studies. At every stage we will have to agree on an area on which to focus our actions, based on the strength of our various partners.
Communication: make rational and peaceful voices resonate
Last but not least, communication and the building of public opinion are also critical. Samuel Huntington4 asserted “It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.” While Northeast Asian countries enjoy similar cultural attributes, our popular beliefs are sometimes biased and steeped in stereotypes, partly due to our unique experiences formed by the different stages of modernization in which we find ourselves.
This kind of “clash” mostly occurs on social media, especially when discussing the issue of the DPRK’s nuclear status, tense bilateral relations and other serious political topics. Some scholars read the irrational comments of these “keyboard warriors’” with disdain. However, the age of mass communication and social media has already arrived and since public opinion can sometimes shape or endorse political actions, we cannot ignore it. How do we address the public’s lofty expectations before people come to grips with more realistic solutions? How do we make morally and emotionally responsible judgments about these issues? It is therefore important that rational and objective observations and ideas from researchers and practitioners be communicated to the general public.
More challenges ahead
Northeast Asia is a sprawling region, accounting for 40 percent of the total landmass of Asia. It consists of many countries. Together they boast a myriad of complicated political, economic and cultural traditions. Hence, it may well be said that Northeast Asia occupies a critical place in the international arena, which is further complicated by a changeable regional situation. Therefore, promoting peace and development, and prioritizing the situation in Northeast Asia will exert a positive impact on the political and economic structural arrangements in Asia as a whole and even in the rest of the world. Aside from the abovementioned geopolitical and economic issues, Northeast Asia also faces challenges shared by all other human beings: environmental pollution, urbanization, burgeoning AI, structural unemployment, and the contraction of equity and efficiency (i.e. addressing unbalanced development and ensuring a fairer distribution), etc. By harnessing the present momentum favoring peace and development, and by understanding the present-day challenges, we can contribute our wisdom to make peace possible.
1 Zhang Ling, Director of International Cooperation at the Charhar Institute. The article reflects the author’s views, and not necessarily those of the institute.
2 The Paper, “澎湃新闻：朝鲜学者加盟中国智库，察哈尔学会聘请朝鲜教授为高级研究员”, accessed April 10, 2019, https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_3283652.
3 Daniel Jasper, “How the U.S. can pursue peace with DPRK (North Korea)”, accessed February 8, 2019, https://www.afsc.org/story/how-us-can-pursue-peace-dprk-north-korea.
4 Samuel Huntington: The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993.
