On January 20, 2009, Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th president of the United States. The nation elected its first black president 233 years after its foundation and 144 years after the abolition of slavery. With the financial crisis emerging as a grave concern around the world, expectations are running high for the newly inaugurated administration in the U.S. It’s no exaggeration to say that the eyes of the world are on the new U.S. president, and many are wondering what solutions he will suggest. Special attention is also being paid to Washington’s future North Korea policy. On January 21st, one day after his inauguration, Obama said his administration will pursue “tough and direct diplomacy” to convince Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear ambitions. Here’s Professor Ryu Gil-jae from the University of North Korean Studies to explain.

According to a foreign policy agenda posted on the White House Web site, Obama said his administration plans to use tough diplomacy, backed by real incentives and real pressures, to eliminate fully and verifiably North Korea’s nuclear program. This is seen as the U.S. government’s basic position not to tolerate North Korea’s nuclear development and its nuclear programs. The U.S. knows little about North Korea and actually has a great distrust of it, since there have been few exchanges between the two countries. From Washington’s point of view, North Korea is an unpredictable, unreliable and dangerous country. The U.S. believes a nuclear-armed North Korea won’t serve its national interest. I think the U.S. has clarified its diplomatic principle of dealing with the communist nation.

Prior to Obama’s inauguration, the presidential transition team declared the same stance toward the North Korean nuclear issue. The Obama government adopted this as an official position and announced it through the White House Web site. The term “eliminate” is key in the U.S. explanation of its intentions for the North’s nuclear program. It is a much stronger expression than “freeze’ or “disable.” A complete denuclearization is the new U.S. government’s ultimate goal.

I would say the U.S. will be getting tougher in dealing with North Korea, as it promised to employ “direct diplomacy.” Washington also says it will ensure the security of various nuclear materials that could be used for North Korea’s nuclear weapons and strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The U.S. government is also adamant in preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. All these promises put heavy pressure on North Korea. There may be some changes in future negotiations between the North and the U.S., depending on Pyongyang’s response to Washington’s hard-line pledges.

Now that the U.S. has overtly mentioned “tough diplomacy,” backed by real incentives and real pressures, the Obama government is expected to employ the strategy of presenting both the carrot and the stick in order to push ahead with North Korea’s nuclear dismantlement. In addition, it vows to crack down on nuclear proliferation by strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and institutionalizing the Proliferation Security Initiative, PSI, aimed at stopping the transfer of weapons of mass destruction. Some speculate that the U.S. may urge South Korea to join the PSI in a stronger manner.

It’s a very tricky issue, since Seoul’s participation in the U.S.-led PSI will cause strong resistance from North Korea and China. South Korea should examine the problem more closely and think over alternative ways to cooperate with the U.S. Given the diplomatic leaning of the Lee Myung-bak government, it may accept the U.S. request. But it will be still hard for Seoul to make a clear decision, because it should also take public opinion into account.

The Proliferation Security Initiative was proposed by former U.S. President George W. Bush on May 31, 2003, to cope with the potential risk of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It has been joined by about 90 countries, including 11 core members, such as the U.S., the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan and France. But having relations with North Korea in mind, South Korea has been rather lukewarm to the scheme, although the U.S. has persistently asked Seoul to participate in it. The Obama government said that it would crack down on nuclear proliferation by strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that countries such as North Korea and Iran that break the rules will automatically face strong sanctions. It remains to be seen how South and North Korea will react to Washington’s position. Professor Ryu now explains the prospects for six-country nuclear talks.

The Obama government expressed its intention to maintain the framework of the six-party talks to resolve the nuclear issue, so the multilateral negotiations will likely continue. But the U.S. is expected to be more active in negotiations with Pyongyang, while keeping the six-way talks intact. As a matter of fact, bilateral talks between North Korea and the U.S. have comprised an essential part within the six-way talks. It may be an extreme description, but the other four countries have acted as a kind of foil for the negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington. It is possible that the Obama government will focus more on bilateral relations with North Korea.

The six-party talks have been increasingly dominated by North Korea-U.S. negotiations. Their bilateral talks in Singapore in April of 2008 found a breakthrough in the nuclear issue, and the U.S. State Department’s Korea office director visited North Korea in early May the same year to secure a document on the operation of the Yongbyon nuclear facility. Chief nuclear negotiators of the six-party talks did convene a meeting on July 12 to agree on nuclear verification, but the agreement is nothing but the endorsement of the preliminary coordination of views between the North and the U.S. The six-way talks have slowly lost their luster, influenced by North Korea’s strategy to turn the multilateral talks into a venue of direct dialogue between the North and the U.S. The Obama administration advocates direct diplomacy, so the nuclear issue will likely be dealt with in the context of bilateral dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington. Under these circumstances, what stance should South Korea take?

I think South Korea should be more flexible in handling relations with North Korea, even though it may not necessarily take conciliatory measures. Seoul needs to signal its will toward dialogue and cooperation with the North and toward a peaceful Korean Peninsula, both for South Korea-U.S. ties and the nuclear issue. It’s undesirable for South Korea to be recognized in the international community as being too rigid or stingy when approaching inter-Korean relations. I think it’s important for Seoul to take a more flexible attitude when it comes to cooperation with the Obama government and the nuclear issue.

“Change” has been President Obama’s most popular slogan. For now, it’s hard to predict how his views on North Korea and the six-party talks will change security conditions on the Korean Peninsula. But it’s obvious that his North Korea policy will have a considerable influence on this part of the world. 　 [Interview] Female N. Korean Defector Receives PhD degree in S. Korea
Today, we’ll meet with Lee Ae-ran, who became the first female North Korean defector to receive a doctorate degree from a South Korean university. When the Nutritional Science and Food Management Department at Ewha Womans University passed Lee’s doctoral dissertation, she expressed her hope to make a contribution to formulating food policy for North Korea after unification, as a nutritional scientist from North Korea. She came to South Korea in October of 1997 after crossing the China-North Korea border along the Aprok River and staying in China for some time. Everything in South Korea was unfamiliar to this newcomer at first, and it was the bright faces of children that impressed her the most.

I’ve visited the Daehan Life Insurance 63 Building before. The IMAX Theater inside the building was packed with lots of children who were watching a movie entitled “Song of Whale.” I was very shocked to see their faces shining brightly with happiness. Suddenly, I felt angry about the North Korean leader. How can the two Koreas be so different? Countless children in North Korea are starving to death and walking around in bare feet. As a mother, I was greatly impressed to see the happy South Korean children. My outlook on life completely changed that night.

Lee always felt uneasy about the writing of one of her relatives who defected to South Korea during the Korean War. That’s why she risked her life to escape the North. Her first impression of South Korea was not so much a ‘good place’ as an ‘unfamiliar land.’ But children’s happy faces and bright smiles gave her hope for a new life. She began to ponder how she could make contribution in this country, and decided to study a subject she was already intimately familiar with—the history of North Korean people’s diet.

I found South Korea has studied much about North Korea. But North Korean studies are mostly focused on political or ideological aspects, since North Korean publications are the major source for research. I majored in food science and studied eating habits in North Korea. I think North Korea’s chronic food shortage is a very serious problem and it’s also important to know about their diet and nutrition. But there are few relevant study materials here in the South. I thought research in this area would be necessary in providing North Korean aid and devising food policies for North Koreans after unification.

Lee believes studies of eating habits are, in fact, the studies of human beings. She stresses the need to understand North Korean society, especially food, before helping North Korean defectors adjust to South Korean society properly. Her dissertation title, “Changes in North Koreans’ diet before and after 1990,” shows the former North Korean food scientist is well versed in this area. But it was far from easy to complete the dissertation.

I learned Russian, but I had no knowledge of English. It was very hard to learn English. I wasn’t good with computers, either. One day, I skipped meals and wrote a report until 5 a.m., only to find my computer work all gone. I thought I would go crazy. It was also difficult to command Korean correctly. South Korean culture is starkly different from North Korean, and I’ve often misunderstood what people have said. I’ve made many mistakes, too. For example, I delivered an incorrect message to my classmates, so they skipped a class that they should have attended. During a cooking class, I used a different recipe, and my group ended up making the wrong dish. That was kind of embarrassing.

Now she can laugh away the embarrassing experience, but she admits she cried a lot at the time. Hopefully, she will realize her dream to serve as a messenger and spread healthy North Korean foods to South Korea.