Inter-Korean summit: Caution needed over North Korea’s pledges

The symbolism of the inter-Korean summit and declaration signed by the two Korean leaders may produce higher expectations from the Trump administration than what Kim may concede, says Dylan Stent.

What impact does the inter-Korean summit have on the Trump-Kim meeting?

Dylan Stent: The Trump administration does not appear to grasp history and this may heighten their expectations for a Trump-Kim meeting. 

Sceptics view the inter-Korea summit with déjà vu as much of the agreements in the 2018 declaration mirror those of 2000 and 2007. This illustrates an intractability that one meeting is unlikely to change. It’s been pointed out that the most recent declaration may imply North Korea will give up its nuclear weapons only if the US pledges not to invade. None of this has impacted Trump. He has stated the Korean War will end, and was adamant that North Korea will cede its nuclear weapons. 

The inter-Korean summit was designed to be symbolic much like those in 2000 and 2007. This included Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un talking a photo together that mirrored those of Kim Dae-jung and Kim Jong-il, and Roh Moo-Hyun and Kim Jong-il. This symbolism and the declaration signed by Moon and Kim Jong-un may produce even higher expectations from the Trump administration than what Kim may concede. The US has stated that the maximum-pressure policy will continue, and this will limit North Korea.

Why is South Korea giving credit to Donald Trump?

The Moon government crediting Trump is likely a political move aimed at reinforcing the Korea-American alliance. Moon’s party platform includes a “strong Korea-US alliance and proactive cooperative diplomacy with neighbouring countries”. 

Can Kim’s pledge to shut down the Punggye-ri nuclear test site be taken seriously?

The simple answer is no. Currently, there are two differing opinions on the state of the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site. Geologists from the University of Science and Technology of China authored a report suggesting that the mountain above Punggye-ri collapsed. This report was quoted worldwide and provided a narrative that Kim Jong-un was giving up little by discontinuing nuclear testing, essentially making the inter-Korean summit mean little. The differing opinion is held by 38 North and others and suggest the site is still operational. The opaque nature of North Korea means we cannot have a definitive answer until verifiable actions occur.

North Korea saying it will dismantle is not new. It also does not equate to long-term, consistent on-the-ground inspection. The 1992 denuclearisation declaration, the 2000 North-South declaration and the 2007 North-South declaration all allowed us to “witness history”, with each spelling the end of North Korea’s nuclear programme. Each of these failed.

What is the impact of the inter-Korean summit to Kim Jong-un’s regime and Moon’s administration?

The impact of the inter-Korean summit on Kim Jong-un’s regime is entirely unknown at this time. Some have stated it will result in Kim opening up his country a la Deng Xiaoping, while others have said Kim has finalised his nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and is just moving onto another stage without reform.

It is too early to judge if Kim will open up the North Korean economy. If he does, he would do so gradually and as a nuclear state. The world eventually became accepting of a nuclear-armed China under Mao, and it will likely have to come to this realisation if North Korea goes down this route.

On the other hand it is hard to trust the Kim Jong-un administration. Thus, change may be a lofty goal. The third-generation Kim signed a declaration that mirrored those signed by his father, Kim Jong-il, and his grandfather, Kim Il-sung. Kim knows that these vows were never fulfilled. He may not looking at fulfilling them either.

Moon Jae-in has experienced popularity rarely seen in South Korea, initially having support of 81 percent in his first quarter as President. Nonetheless, his popularity has started to wane according the Gallup Korea with only 68 percent supporting the President. An April Gallup Poll shows 23 percent of respondents said his pro-North Korean policy was the main reason they supported him, with 15 percent saying it is the main reason they disapprove of Moon Jae-in. Thus, the country appears divided on the summit.

If tangible results appear then the populous will support the administration, but if not they will likely disapprove of his détente.  

Dylan Stent is a panellist for the upcoming roundtable discussion, “War or Peace? Predictions on the Outcomes of the 2018 North Korea-United States Leaders Summit”, on 10 May at Victoria University of Wellington.  

– Asia Media Centre