By Kim Sang-woo
Kim Sang-woo
The world is undeniably in crisis. Yet crises can be catalysts for either rapid decline or significant improvement.
Optimism must be tempered with realism. The global landscape is indeed transforming, but many cling to old patterns of thought. The West often views international relations through a rather simplistic concept of “democracy versus autocracy.”
Today’s “axis of evil” from the Western perspective is led by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. The West wants the Global South to take its side. But, for the most part, with some exceptions, this does not appear to be the case. The concept of a rules-based world order is being contested.
World leaders should take realism more seriously and cast a more skeptical eye on any ideology that claims to have found the key to ending all wars.
Realism encourages humility. It acknowledges human fallibility, the dangers of unchecked powers, the limits of reason, and the ease with which the strong and privileged become arrogant and overconfident. It recognizes the unavoidable uncertainty that plagues political life and the tragic elements that are an inescapable part of human existence.
Political realism depicts a world that is rarely black or white but mostly contains many shades of grey, a world where unintended consequences abound and success today plants the seed for tomorrow’s troubles.
Appealing to our common humanity will not bring the world closer to peace. Humans are social animals with a deeply ingrained tendency to divide into groups and to cast a wary eye at those who are seen as different.
And leaders contemplating war should be reminded that once the fighting starts, they are no longer in control of their fate. Going to war unleashes a vast array of complicated and unpredictable elements that cause most wars to last longer, and cost more, than they expect.
There are no easy solutions to the problem, but realistic efforts to reduce the likelihood of war and destruction would greatly benefit humanity.
And the place to start is by constantly reminding political leaders that starting a war rarely produces the desired results and often leads to unexpected and very nasty surprises.
The adage attributed to former U.S. Secretary of State Dean Acheson is also relevant in today’s world: “Foreign policy: it is just one damned thing after another.
Indeed, challenges existing, expected and unknown will continue casting long shadows on the international landscape, threatening stability, peace and prosperity while vexing policymakers all over the world.
North Korea’s official newspaper, Rodong Sinmun, is predicting a year of the “highest risk of confrontation.” Addressing an end-of-year party plenum, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un warned that “war can break out at any time.” He added, however, military confrontation would be met by “a deadly blow to thoroughly annihilate” the enemy and subjugate “the whole territory of South Korea.”
Kim is also relying on the cooperation of like-minded partners, having strengthened ties with Russia by providing additional ammunition and missiles for Moscow’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping, locked in a fierce competition with the United States, appears eager to help North Korea. Xi’s New Year’s day greeting to Kim said that “the new situation in the new era” further underscores the need to take “a strategic and long-term perspective” on China-North Korea relations.
Security dynamics on the Korean Peninsula have been on a downward trajectory for some years. North Korea launches long range missiles with impunity and the U.N. Security Council is paralyzed to do anything due to U.S.-Russia tensions and the U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry.
The new environment shaped by the major power rivalry has provided North Korea greater maneuverability to evade U.N. sanctions and exploit Russia’s needs in the war with Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has relieved Kim’s isolation, assisted North Korea with a new source of funding and technical support for its military modernization, and provided a form of legitimation for North Korea as an internationally accepted nuclear state.
But the immediate trigger for escalating inter-Korean tensions lies with tit-for-tat exchanges exemplified in both the inter-Korean satellite race and the decision by both sides to abolish the 2018 military agreement North Korea signed with former South Korean president Moon Jae-in.
Following North Korea’s successful satellite launch, the Yoon administration announced that it would no longer be bound by provisions of the 2018 arms accord that restricted South Korean forces from utilizing equipment near the De-militarized Zone (DMZ) to monitor North Korean military activity. In response, North Korea declared the complete nullification of the agreement.
Escalation of tensions could lead to an unintended crisis, but the real concern might be that the international community and many in South Korea do not take Kim Jong Un seriously and view his rhetoric as a bluff.
South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol has said before that South Korea would respond a hundredfold if North Korea provoked Seoul. But Kim may have perceived this as a dare that must be met with an even bigger dare. The result is worsening tensions that could trigger an accidental clash that could spiral out of control.
The Korean Peninsula still remains one of the most potentially dangerous hot spots in the world. And while there are no easy solutions, a careful, sincere, and enlightened approach is a prerequisite for any progress towards peace and stability.
And perhaps what George Kennan proposed for dealing with China in the 1970s can also apply to the Korean peninsula: “Let us collaborate where we can, agree to differ where we cannot, and see whether we cannot contrive to live reasonably peacefully together for the time being, despite our differences; not asking too much of each other??? or too little.”
Let us pray for a safe and peaceful 2024.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Rachel Marsden
Donald Low
Bradley Blankenship
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Abbas Juma
Michael Kwet
visit website
