North Korea launched its Eunha-2 rocket from the Musudan-ri launch pad on the North’s northeastern coast at 11:30 a.m. on April 5. The first booster of the rocket fell into the sea off the western coast of Akita Prefecture in northeast Japan and the second booster dropped into the Pacific Ocean. The South Korean government confirmed the rocket was carrying a satellite, but the satellite apparently failed to enter orbit, since all three rocket boosters fell into the sea and there was no signal from the satellite, the Gwangmyeongseong-2. Vice chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff James Cartwright also said on Monday that, with the latest rocket launch, North Korea failed in its attempt to test the capability of its long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles. Still, some experts hold the rocket launch isn’t a total failure. Here’s Jeon Seong-hun from the Korea Institute for National Unification to explain.

There are various reasons for North Korea’s rocket launch, but most importantly, Pyongyang had the U.S. government in mind. The North needed to draw attention from the Obama government before striking a big deal with Washington. Domestically, the Presidium of the Supreme People’s Assembly will convene its plenary session soon, which means the launch of the third-term of the Kim Jong-il regime. North Korea also needed to demonstrate to its people their dear leader’s achievement and the legitimacy of the communist regime. So the North used the rocket launch as propaganda. But the rocket launch is considered a failure, if the purpose was to put a satellite into orbit. Still, the rocket represents a significant improvement in terms of range, since it traveled about 3,000 kilometers from the North Korean missile base in Musudan-ri. In light of the North’s missile development, it’s a very important result. So, the rocket launch wasn’t a complete failure. I’d say North Korea reaped some positive results in the unfinished missile test.

Contrary to the analyses of South Korea and the United States, North Korea’s state-run Korean Central News Agency reported on April 5 that the satellite entered orbit successfully. North Korea repeatedly stressed that the recent rocket launch was part of a scientific project for launching application satellites. Despite the North’s argument, U.S. President Barack Obama defined the projectile as a missile. Many are now wondering about Washington’s response.

In the past, North Korea pledged not to develop nuclear weapons, but it accumulated related technology to go ahead with nuclear arms development later. Citing similar examples, the U.S. is convinced that all the activities of North Korea related to missile development have military purposes. Regardless of North Korea’s arguments, the U.S. regards the latest rocket launch as a violation of the U.N. Security Council resolution. Against this backdrop, President Obama condemned the North’s action. Now that Pyongyang has fired a rocket, the U.S. finds it necessary to pay more attention to North Korea. I think the U.S. will examine its North Korea policy quickly and seek to hold negotiations with the North as early as possible.

Meanwhile, the Japanese government, which has maintained a hard-line stance with Pyongyang, has decided to extend its economic sanctions against North Korea by one more year. The current sanctions expire on April 13. Tokyo is considering imposing additional sanctions on the North and it asked the U.N. Security Council to convene an emergency meeting immediately after the North’s rocket launch. During the session, Japan, the U.S., the United Kingdom and France raised the need for sanctions against North Korea, pointing out that the North’s rocket launch is a violation of the U.N. Security Council resolution 1718. In contrast, China and Russia countered the assertion, saying it wasn’t a violation of the U.N. resolution because the rocket proved to be a satellite. Due to the conflicting views between the U.N. member nations, the rocket issue will likely be debated for some time. Mr. Jeon explains how the rocket launch may influence the six-party nuclear talks, which have been stalled since last December.

Both China and the U.S. continue to mention the six-party talks, but I think the possibility of resuming the multilateral negotiations has been slimmer, following the inauguration of the Obama administration. Even in the last stage of the Bush government, North Korea and the U.S. dealt with the nuclear issue through direct negotiations, with the six-party talks approving their bilateral agreements later. That is, North Korea-U.S. talks came first and then the six-way talks convened. Moreover, President Obama seeks to tackle the North Korean nuclear and missile issues through direct negotiations. So it’s highly likely the Obama administration will lean toward bilateral dialogue with Pyongyang. Therefore, the six-way talks won’t reconvene for a considerable period of time.

In the meantime, South Korea strongly denounced North Korea’s rocket launch, calling it a provocative act. Seoul also said it would take specific, corresponding measures in collaboration with the U.N., especially with the United States and Japan. The government has virtually finalized a plan to fully join the Proliferation Security Initiative, a U.S.-led campaign for preventing the spread of the weapons of mass destruction. But Seoul has also decided to carefully ponder the right timing for participating in the scheme, in consideration of developments in North Korea and in the international community. Many are now paying attention to any additional measures North Korea may take.

North Korea may take both positive and negative actions. The North has just escalated tension with its rocket launch, and as a next step, it may make a conciliatory gesture, like releasing two American journalists it has detained. I think it will be a very effective negotiation card. On the other hand, the North may take another confrontational measure, such as a military provocation near the maritime border on the West Sea or near the Demilitarized Zone separating the two Koreas. The risk has been somewhat anticipated since late last year when North Korea began stepping up its offensives against Seoul. North Korea’s future action will depend on how intensely the U.N. Security Council will pressure the North.

The U.N. Security Council’s response to North Korea will be the main factor influencing the political situation in this region. The diplomatic efforts of the international community are more necessary now than ever, so as to resolve the current setback through dialogue.

[Interview]Researcher Bridging Gap between Science Institutes in Both Koreas

Various North Korean aid projects and inter-Korean exchange programs have been sluggish due to chilly relations between South and North Korea. And bilateral exchanges in the science and technology area, both at the governmental and private level, are no exception. In the face of this difficult reality, a local researcher is working to bridge the gap between science institutes in the two Koreas. Lee Chun-geun has taken the lead in promoting inter-Korean scientific exchanges and formulating relevant policies at the Science and Technology Policy Institute. Here is Mr. Lee.

After I obtained a degree, I served as a professor at the Yenbien College of Science and Technology in China. There, I often heard about North Korea-related news and naturally became interested in North Korean people. I joined this institute in 1999 and my first mission was to study China. Following the first inter-Korean summit in 2000, many scholars, including myself, began researching North Korea. I’ve been in charge of three projects. First, we invite scientists from both Koreas and ethnic Koreans overseas to hold academic forums. Second, we run a research society on North Korea’s science and technology here in the South. The group promotes exchanges between local scholars, North Korean defectors who worked as scientists in their home country and ethnic Koreans. Through this network of scientists and researchers, we collect information and analyze it. Finally, we help the government formulate and implement relevant policies.

Lee has visited North Korea 15 times for inter-Korean exchanges in the science and technology field. He says research facilities in the North are woefully inadequate, but North Korean scientists are very enthusiastic despite the poor environment.

When it comes to science and technology, North Korea is currently working on research that South Korea conducted in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. In general, North Korean research institute facilities are very poor, and their equipment is pretty outdated. Scientists create experimental drugs and machine parts of their own because it’s very hard to procure them. Given the poor environment, North Korean scientists’ dedication and efforts are very impressive. But the situation is much better for a small number of institutes designed to study advanced technology, like genetic engineering. The central government spent a considerable amount of money in refurbishing the facilities at those institutes, so scientists there engage in high-level, extensive research.

According to the former vice president of the Yenbien College of Science and Technology, North Korea places great importance on technology cooperation with ethnic Koreans overseas. North Korea’s National Science Institute has promoted extensive exchanges with Pro-Pyongyang scientists residing in Japan, and ethnic Koreans in China are acting as a go-between in science exchanges between the two Koreas, taking advantage of geographical proximity. North Korea has been active in conducting exchanges with Koreans overseas, but Lee says inter-Korean exchanges in this area have been minimal.

Many of the exchange programs have been suspended, due to regional security jitters. Authorities-level dialogue has been closed, so it’s hard to expect governmental-level support. Only a handful of private projects are still underway, but overall, the situation isn’t very good. Science and technology is closely related to national defense and it is also subject to various international restrictions. Therefore, if the security conditions aren’t stable, it’s hard to facilitate science cooperation, even at the private level. We’re supposed to enter North Korea and provide local scientists with technology instructions, but that’s challenging, too.

South Korea seeks to develop scientific technology, mostly from a business point of view, while the North focuses more on the use of technology to revive its poor economy. As a result, it’s difficult to produce results that would be mutually beneficial to both sides. Yet, Lee stresses the importance of science cooperation between the two countries in order to improve inter-Korean ties, since North Korea views science and technology as the driving force behind its goal of building a “strong North Korea” by 2012.

Inter-Korean cooperation in this field should continue, regardless of political situations. And the governments of the two Koreas should be more committed to this goal. Scientists and researchers who engage in bilateral exchanges must use their achievements for the common interests of the two Koreas, and not for military purposes. I hope South Korean policymakers will keep in contact with their North Korean counterparts to discuss ways to promote bilateral cooperation. Seoul and Pyongyang may each set up a cooperation center where working staff will reside as one way to spur cooperation in science and technology.