Moving into the future: building peace in North-East Asia

James Reilly

Despite being one of the world's most dynamic economic and political regions, North-East Asian security remains surprisingly dominated by the past. Half a century after the uneasy conclusions to massive conflicts that ripped apart China,Korea, and Japan, real peace in the region remains elusive.
Nearly 100,000 US soldiers are based in Japan and South Korea, with those inKorea on trigger-ready alert for war with the North. The region contains theworld's second-most well funded military (Japan), one of its largest arms importers(Taiwan), and over 1.6 million troops facing off amidst escalating tensions on theKorean peninsula. Peace News rightfully shines a spotlight on a number of criticalpeace issues in the region; this introductory essay tries to provide some context tohelp tie them together.

The Cold War lives on

Legacies of the Cold War continue to shape the world of war and peace inNorth-East Asia. Primary among them is the US "wagon wheel" system of bilateralalliances. Designed to contain the spread of communism, since the 1990s it hasmorphed into a strict realpolitik tool to assure no state challenges US supremacyin the region, with faint nods to the growing demands for autonomy andrespect in Japan and South Korea.
    The Cold War also left North-East Asiawith two unfinished civil wars, both of which periodically threaten explosion intomassive military conflicts with disturbing regularity. Ever since the US 7th Fleetinterposed itself between China and Taiwan in 1950, China has regarded Taiwanas a renegade province and so claims the right to use force if Taiwan ever formallyproclaimed its independence from China.
    In similar fashion, the armistice endingthe Korean War in 1953 dividing the peninsula for the first time in historylocked the two sides into a zero-sum struggle over the right to rule a united Korea. As the South leapt ahead of theNorth during its economic boom in the 1980s and "socialist brotherhood" allianceswith first the USSR and then China slowly evaporated, North Korea has come torely upon belligerent bluster, a millionperson army, and a nascent nuclear pro-gramme to ensure its national security.
    Anger with the oppressive US militarypresence, ongoing tensions on the Korean peninsula and between China and Taiwan,and the human costs of Asia's economic boom, are all major obstacles to buildinga stable, just, equitable peace in NorthEast Asia. Security structures forged inthe early days of the Cold War are inadequate in response to these challenges; newapproaches must be sought out.

Japan: a security threat?

Which North-East Asian country has most radically revised its security postureand dramatically increased its military capacity, creating great unease in itsneighbours, victims of its brutal and generally unacknowledged militarist aggres-sion? While Japan hardly leaps to mind, several domestic shifts in Japan in factpose a substantial long-term challenge for regional security. First, the generation traumatised by Japan's aggression in Asia during WorldWar II has largely passed from political influence. Younger Japanese have far lessappreciation for their neighbours' fears of a re-emergence of Japanese militarism, yet their neighbours have passed on thisanti-Japanese sentiment to their youth. Second, decade-long economic stagnationhas replaced Japan's heady confidence of the 1980s with a disquieting sense ofJapanese vulnerability to economic and security threats. Finally, progressiveopposition parties have lost political ground to the conservative DemocraticParty, with no effective peace demands within mainstream Japanese politics.The result has been a movement away from Japan's famed "peace constitution",particularly Article 9 banning the use of military force. Clearly, Japan today bearslittle resemblance to the militarism of the 1930s. Yet if Japan's conservative politi-cians succeed in establishing a powerful, active military force without fullyacknowledging the horrors of Japanese imperialism and embedding Japan withina restrictive multilateral structure, current trends may well lead to powerfulbacklashes in China and perhaps Korea.

N Korea: looking to make a deal

North Korea has sought a viable nuclear deterrent ever since it faced multiple USnuclear threats and near-launches during and after the Korean War. Kim Il Sungmanaged to convince the Soviets to build him a nuclear plant, although they delayedcompletion while pushing Pyongyang to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty. In the 1980s Pyongyang began to suggest it was willing to trade its nuclear potential for improved relations with its neighbours, particularly with the United States.
    In 1993 Pyongyang went to the brink in its nuclear blackmail before former Presi-dent Jimmy Carter's visit sparked the bargaining that resulted in the Agreed Frame-work. This deal traded two light-water reactors (resistant to creating weapons-grade plutonium), an interim supply of heavy oil fuel, a relaxation of US sanctions,and improvement of relations in exchange for North Korea freezing and eventuallydismantling its nuclear programme.
    Yet the Clinton administration nevercarried through. Fuel deliveries were chronically late, reactor construction fell far behind schedule, most sanctions wereretained, and diplomatic improvements stalled. North Korea responded in typicalfashion, provoking a crisis with its 1998 missile launch over Japan. The resultant"Perry process" almost cinched a deal on North Korean missile exports and devel-opment, only to fall through for lack of time and political will.
    In 2000, the new Bush administration put the North on hold for almost a year,emerging from isolation with its rhetorical guns blaring. As it was inducted into the"axis of evil", Pyongyang began to realise that the Bush administration was unlikelyto follow through on the Agreed Framework. Thus it provoked the latest crisis totry to reach yet another deal with the US.
    Hiding amidst all the smoke of therecent nuclear scares is a simple truth: North Korea seeks an end to the KoreanWar, access to economic assistance, energy security, and assurances that the USwill not attack it. If no deal emerges, the fallback option of a viable nuclear deter-rent and missile exports offer Pyongyang enhanced national security, diplomaticleverage vis-a`-vis the US and exports to earn hard currency. Yet these come at theprice of international condemnation and isolation, as the recent standoff has madeabundantly clear. The challenge is how to move toward a viable, sustainable dealthat cuts through the angry rhetoric to engage North Korea and build toward aunited and peaceful Korean peninsula.

US bases: innocents suffer, politicians dither

Massive US bases bring misery upon theirunwilling "hosts"; the local population. Cases of sexual misconduct by US service-men, the long-term environmental degradation, and the loss of tourism have allbeen cited in demands for a US withdrawal by the residents in Okinawa, hostto the majority of US forces in Japan. In South Korea, the population of Seoulexploded when two US servicemen were acquitted in November of running overtwo middle-school girls with their armoured vehicle during a military train-ing exercise in downtown Seoul.
Politicians in Japan and South Koreagive rhetorical support to these local movements for fears of electoral reprisals,yet they refuse join demand that the US military leave their countries. In Japan,some fear that a US withdrawal would spark a military build-up by Japan's Self-Defence Forces. For South Korea, US forces based between the 38th Paralleland Seoul act as a "tripwire," ensuring US participation in any Korean conflict. Togain widespread Japanese and Korean support for US withdrawal, it must beaccompanied by policies that lead to a reduction in tensions on the Koreanpeninsula and enmeshment of Japan within a region-wide multilateral securityframework.

Prosperity and peace

The East Asian "miracle" proclaimed by the World Bank in 1990 has had a decid-edly mixed impact upon peace in NorthEast Asia. Newfound prosperity in SouthKorea and Taiwan has grown along with democracy, rendering the societiesincreasingly unwilling to allow military tensions to undermine their current com-forts. Demands for human rights protection, including the vibrant movement forclaiming the right to conscientious objection in South Korea (described byAndreas Speck in this issue) reflect the growing dissatisfaction with militarismwithin these societies.
    China has also enjoyed historic levels of economic growth over the past two decades. The Chinese experiment with"socialism with Chinese characteristics" has given rise to an unruly, free-wheelingmarket economy that has expanded personal freedoms and individual prosperityfor millions of Chinese. To preserve this growth, China's leadership has pursuedengagement with the world community while moderating its foreign policy. Per-haps the most powerful example is the some 200,000 Taiwanese living in Shang-hai--a powerful force constraining military adventurism by either side.
    Yet prosperity has also exacerbated inequities, creating labour migrants vulner-able to repression in the famed sweatshops in Hong Kong, southern China, and SouthKorea. In this edition, Pranjal Tiwari and Christian Karl offer powerful examples ofways in which workers are fighting back to defend their rights. Protection of labourrights within and across national boundaries is essential for ensuring that the bene-fits of growth are shared equitably.
    Greater wealth has also given nationsthe ability to buy more advanced weapons, creating a destabilising downward spiral of arms races, weapons prolif-eration, and growing insecurity. The US plan to build Theatre Missile Defencesystems in South Korea and Japan is but the latest and most pernicious develop-ment in this dangerous trend. Only region-wide non-proliferation structures,such as a nuclear weapons free zone for part of North-East Asia, can turn thistrend around.

What to do: building peace in North-East Asia

Clearly, peace work in North-East Asia proceeds along many important lines: I highlight three for particular attention.Engage China and North Korea. While honest, constructive criticism on issuessuch as human rights can help gain reforms, isolation breeds distrust and fearwhile engagement builds understanding and common interests. NGOs can oftengo where governments may not; they have a unique opportunity to reach outand build direct, interpersonal ties.
Oppose militarism and seek economicjustice. Peace always starts at home. Ending conscription in Korea, fosteringrespect for workers' rights in Hong Kong, even protecting the environment in Chinaare all part of building more peaceful, democratic societies.Demand changes in US foreign policy. The US should withdraw its militaryforces, cease its arms sales, and end the antagonism toward North Korea. The EUhas an opportunity to pursue a more constructive, peaceful path; activists canpoint the way.

James Reilly is the Quaker International Affairs Representative, East Asia. He also works for the American Friends Service Committee.