Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19

Paper ASEAN and East Asia Regional Dynamics

ASEAN in North Koreas Nuclear Problem: Completing The Role of Six Party Talk

Created by: Machfudz Agung (0806465554) Jang Min Ah (0806352271) Romarga A. Waworuntu (0806352416) Yonathan Susilo (0806352460)

Department of International Relations Faculty of Social and Political Science University of Indonesia Depok 2010

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background In his book North Korea: The Struggle against American Power, Beal argues that Korean Peninsula has been both blessed, and cursed, by its location. 1 Korean Peninsula has been blessed by its strategic location connecting Russia, China and Japan, but at the same time, cursed since its strategic location has long attracted the interest of outsiders, and thus their interference in the peninsula. In the past, it was the route by which religion and much culture passed from the Asian mainland to Japan, the springboard for the Mongols attempted invasion of Japan and the route Japan took for its attempted invasion of China and mainland Asia. Such intense activities (and interference) in the peninsula eventually reached its peak in the dawn of Cold War and then, inevitably broke the Korea apart. A divided Korea, with a northern part that is seen as threatening, keeps South Korea and Japan tied to America. After all, the Cold War ended in 1989, but in spite of reunification between the two Koreans just as the end of Cold War had reunited the West and the East Germany, the peninsula plunged into a deep nuclear crisis and the tension has exacerbated since then. It has been 43 years since governments of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand once established Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)a medium of
1

Tim Beal, North Korea: The Struggle against American Power (London: Pluto Press, 2005), 17

cooperation through which makes it possible for them to accelerate regional economic growth, social progress, and cultural development and to promote peace and security in the region. As the time goes by, ASEAN has grown bigger and bigger. Its memberships doubled to 10 during the 1990s. This enlargement, however, does not just end thereit is not only comes from within, but also beyond geographically Southeast Asia. There are growing interests of ASEAN to invite all major regional economic powers in Northeast Asia such as China, Japan and South Korea (Asian Plus Three/ APT) and later, (Asia) Pacific countries such as, Australia and New Zealand as well as India from South Asia (Asian Plus Six). And these all is not mentioning the United States and Russia (Asian Plus Eight?) as the two possible future members of this East Asia Community. Absolutely, the inclusion of those members is good idea, but no one has ever really calculated about the inclusion of North Korea as the next member of East Asia Community. Actually, a peacefully and consensually united Korean peninsula providing not merely a large market but a land bridge from easternmost Asia to westernmost Europe, would offer considerable economic benefits to the East Asia region, let alone China, Japan and Korea itself. Several attempts to reconcile the two Korean haves been made by Northeast Asia Countries, but the track record of ASEAN participation in the project of the reconciliation has been minimal. In this paper, our group argues that if we want to preserve the driving force of East Asia regionalism remains in the hands of ASEAN, then ASEAN should actively take part in the process of the denuclearization in the Korean Peninsula.

1.2 Research Question Based on background above, this research group is going to give its try to find out the answer for following research question, is ASEAN able to solve out North Koreas nuclear problem completing demerits of Six Party Talk in order to keep the regional stability?

1.3 Theoretical & Conceptual Framework 1.3.1 Concept .3.1.1 ASEAN The Association of South East Asia Nation (ASEAN) is a regional cooperation for the Southeast Asian countries. ASEAN is established on 8th August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand, which is marked by the signing of the Bangkok Declaration, by Indonesia,

Malaysia, Philippine, Singapore, and Thailand.2 This signing then followed by Brunei Darussalam on 8th January 1984, Vietnam on 28th July 1995, Laos and Myanmar on 23rd July 1997, and Cambodia on 30th April 1999. ASEANs aims and purposes are to promote cooperation in various field, such as economy, social, culture, education, and other fields, as well as to support regional stability and other mutual objectives. ASEAN has several fundamental principal3, such as to respect each members independence, sovereign, equality, and territorial integrity, and national identity; each countrys rights to prevent its country from external intervention, subversion, and coercion; non-intervention on internal affairs, peaceful conflict resolution; renunciation of the threat or use of force; and effective cooperation among ASEAN members. On the ninth ASEAN Summit in 2003, the ASEAN leaders came to conclusion of the establishment of the ASEAN Community, which is originally planned to be established in 2020, but after the twelft ASEAN Summit on January 2007 was being accelerated to 2015. This acceleration is marked by the Cebu Declaration on the Acceleration of the Establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015. ASEAN Community has three pillars, which is ASEAN Political-Security Community, ASEAN Economic Community, and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community. For each pillars, member countries contributes in the creation of blueprint. This blueprint is a form of commitment of the member countries and a contribution to the establishment of ASEAN Community. ASEAN Charter is also one of the factors that contribute to the establishment of ASEAN Community. ASEAN Charter gives a legal status and institutional framework to the ASEAN. This ASEAN Charter, which is being recognized on 15 December 2008, is a legal binding agreement between the ten member countries of ASEAN. 1.3.1.2 Six Party Talks The possession of nuclear power by the North Korea provides several threats, especially related to the North Korean means of using it or launching the missile test. For such reason, the international gave responses to stop North Korean intention for launching the missile. The pressure by the international world has made North Korea signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): sanction will be given on North Korea if it violates the agreement and launch its missiles. However, on 10th January 2003, North Korea declared
2 3

Overview, accessed from http://www.aseansec.org/about_ASEAN.html, on 21 November 2010, on 5.40 p.m. Ibid.

it resignation from the NPT, which by its resignation, made the North Korea as the first country that left the NPT.4 By its resignation, the North Korean proclaimed itself no longer being tied by the agreement. The North Korean resignation resulted in international responses, especially from China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and the United States, which later formed a forum for a diplomatic approach to North Korea on August 2003, which is called the Six Party Talks. Six Party Talks provides North Korea a larger incentive, included diplomatic relations, as favor of the guarantee of security and control of the development of the offensive technology.5 The Six Party Talks is being held for a few rounds and has provided some conclusion. On the joint statement that was being concluded on the fourth round of Six Party Talks in September 2005, North Korea agreed to leave its program of developing the nuclear power technology, however, North Korea failed to meet this commitment.6 On October 2006, North Korea made a nuclear explosion. The United Nations (UN) Security Council responded to this action by producing the Security Council Resolution 1718, and gave economic sanction to North Korea.7 Later, in February 2007, under the Six Party Talks, North Korea agreed to prohibit and ban the reactor in Yongbyon, as well as giving the permission for inspection to the International Atomic energy Agency (IAEA), as the exchange of the fuel and other assistance.8 However, the efforts made in the Six Party Talks have to face another failure after the rocket launch by the North Korea in 2009. 9 North Korea declared that it would never come back to the talk and consider itself no longer being tied to any of the previous agreement. The other five countries, however, stated that they would stick to their commitment on denuclearizing North Korea. 1.3.2 Theory of Regional Power Regional Power10

1.3.2.1
4

Devon Chaffee, North Koreas Withdrawal from Nonproliferation Treaty Official, accessed from http//www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2003/04/10_chaffee_korea-npt.htm, on 22 November 2010, on 9 a.m. 5 James Cotton, North Korea's Nuclear and Missile Proliferation and Regional Security, accessed from http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/1999-2000/2000cib01.htm, on 20 November 2010, on 1 p.m. 6 United States Joins Six-Power Arrangement on North Korea's Nuclear Program, accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4492918, on 22 November 2010, on 4 p.m. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Daryl Kimball and Peter Crail, Chronology of US-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy accessed from http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron, on 20 November 2010, on 7 p.m. 10 Accessed from http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/helsinki/ws9/nolte.pdf on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 12.10 Wib.

Regional power refers to the state which is: That is part of a region which is geographically, economically and political-ideationally delimited; Which articulates the pretension of a leading position in the region (self-conception); Which influences in a significant way the geopolitical delimitation and the politicalideational construction of the region; Which displays the material (military, economic, demographic), organizational (political) and ideological resources for a regional power projection; Which is economically, politically and culturally interconnected with the region; Which truly has great influence in regional affairs (activities and results); Which exerts this influence also (and more and more) by means of regional governance structures; Which defines the regional security agenda in a significant way; Whose leading position in the region is recognized or at least respected by other states inside and outside of the region, especially by other regional powers; Which is integrated in interregional and global forums and institutions where he articulates not only its own interests but acts as well, at least rudimentary, as a representative of regional interests. Regional Power is defined by Chase as a entity that would cause a disorder in a larger region if it collapses.11 1.3.2.2 Regional Cooperation Regional cooperation is a common world phenomenon in current international relations. Term regional refers to a wider geographical space. Regional cooperation is not born automatically or uniformly. The progress to define the regions characteristic and membership is very debatable, while the form of regional integration it self, are very various. Regional cooperation is a complex body of attentions concerning economy, social, politic, and security. More precisely, regional cooperation is a process to create regional
11

Daniel F., Regional Leadership in the global system: ideas, interests, and strategies of regional power (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2010), pages 225.

space which is ruled by certain common regulation beyond mere removing of barrier of mutual interaction among states. The reason of regional cooperation is being preferred by states are as following: (1)the management of independence, in which regional institution plays a vital role to manage international relations conflict within newly-born states; (2)interdependence, either economical, social, or peace and security matter, regional institution will advance the cooperation, create the rules of act, and also functioning as a space of knowledge and socialization in order to provide transnational security community; (3)management of internationalization, which means as the practice of internationalization. Regional cooperation have some important and vital advantages as following12: Regional cooperation will improve the possibility of multilateralism in order to promote it in domestic-international level. Regional cooperation is useful to promote liberalism to its member. Confrontation over free trade will be looser during the progress of fixing the regional cooperation. Regional cooperation owns not only free trade but also strategic and political characteristic Political impact of regional cooperation is very positive.

12

John Baylis et al, The Globalization of World Politic (Oxford: Oxford University, 2005)

CHAPTER II ANALYSIS

2.1 ASEAN as New Regional Power ASEAN that formed in 8 August 1967 is mature enough seen by its age. There are many changes inside ASEAN during its development. ASEAN have made many relations and cooperation with countries and institutions. ASEAN's reputation have known by international in the 1980s by its ability to keep the United Nations focused on the need of repulsing Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia. Hanois subsequent withdrawalthough achieved because of the Chinese-Soviet rapprochement was seen as a major ASEAN victory. Then, ASEAN also can arranged annual meetings between the Association and the great powers such as US, China, Japan, and Europe Union to discuss an agenda of political, economic, and security issues generated by Southeast Asian states.13 Undeniably, ASEAN have a significant role in forming and contributing to regional security in Southeast Asia and beyond.14 In 1990s, ASEAN had made former enemies such as Vietnam and Laos to being as members, and even completed the idea of ASEAN-10 with the recognition of Cambodia and Myanmar as members. Furthermore, ASEAN have played a central role in convincing that war is no longer an acceptable instrument of conflict resolution among its members. There is any change the focus of inter-state relations among regional countries to become regional economic cooperation and building trust. The security role of ASEAN has also extended beyond Southeast Asia. For example, after the end of Cold War, ASEAN managed to maintain its affair by embracing the process and taking an active part in shaping the post-Cold War regional architecture in East Asia. It made to put ASEAN at the centre of multilateral security arrangements in East Asia, which links the two sub-regions of Southeast Asia and Northeast Asia. This has been shown in the proliferation of ASEAN-based multilateral institutions in the region since 1993, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the ASEAN Plus Three (APT), and the East Asian Summit (EAS). Then, in 1971, ASEAN declared the region as a Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality (ZOPFAN), and in 1995, the region was declared as a nuclear free zone (SEANWFZ). In addition, ASEAN-based multilateral institutions have become one of two main pillars of regional security architecture in East Asia, whereas the other pillar is the bilateral alliance system led by United States.

13

Accessed from http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub793.pdf on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 12.00 Wib. 14 Accessed from http://www.kas.de/upload/dokumente/2010/06/PolDi-Asien_Panorama_022010/Panorama_2-2010_SecurityPolitics_Sukma.pdf on Monday, November 22, 2010 at 10.00 Wib.

Because of the preservation of regional stability and the maintenance of internal order allowed ASEAN countries to achieve remarkable achievements in accelerating domestic economic development. With the establishment of the ARF in 1993, the APT in 1997, and the EAS in 2005, regional order in East Asia was increasingly characterized by ASEAN-centered processes. Indeed, through these initiatives, ASEAN managed to position itself as a manager of regional order of some sort, not only within Southeast Asia but also in the wider East Asian region. ASEAN transform from a modest sub-regional association into an organization that underpinned multilateral process in East Asia reflected its relative success in coping with security challenges, both within Southeast Asia and beyond. Based on such a conception of security, ASEAN has always distinguished security in terms of traditional and non-traditional threats. In resolving regional security issues, both national and regional levels, ASEAN from the outset undertook two interrelated approaches. First, threats that come from non-traditional security problems were left to individual member states to resolve, especially through nation-building measures. Second, to enable individual states to resolve those problems, regional cooperation is necessary to create a peaceful external environment so that states would not be distracted from domestic priorities. These approaches later evolved into a strategy of building regional resilience, a conception influenced by Indonesia's thinking of ketahanan nasional (national resilience). This thinking mean that if each member nation can accomplish an overall national development and cope internal threats, then regional resilience will automatically result much in the same way as a chain derives its overall strength from the strength of its constituent parts. It also can be meant as ASEAN believed that the management of inter-state relations in the region should be founded on the sanctity of national sovereignty of its member states. Then, ASEAN has played an important role in instituting a multilateral security framework in Asia-Pacific. The creation of the ARF is a testament for that. With ASEANs role as a primary driving force, the ARF serves as the only multilateral forum for security cooperation in the region, involving not only Southeast Asian, South Asian, and Northeast Asian countries, but more importantly also Russia and the US. Through the ARF, member countries are expected to seek and attain national security with, not against, the regional partners. Within ASEAN itself, member countries have begun to deepen their cooperation in political and security areas. Then, in the Bali Concord II, ASEAN leaders agreed that the ASEAN Security Community (ASC) is portrayed to bring ASEAN's political and security cooperation to a higher plane to ensure that countries in the region live at peace with one another and with the world at large. The agreement reflects ASEAN commitment to create community of nation at peace with one another, characterized not only by the absence of war, but also by the absence of the prospect of war among ASEAN member states. The ASC itself is expected to be ASEAN Political and Security Community (APSC) that would strengthen ASEAN's commitment to

resolve conflicts and disputes through depoliticized means of legal instruments and mechanisms and through other peaceful means. The success of ASEAN's security role has been supported by six principles of cooperation adhered to by the association. First, ASEAN in its beginning had avoided tackling sensitive issues in its agenda of cooperation. It can be said that cooperation among ASEAN states began on the nonsensitive areas. Second, the focus of on economic cooperation, however, does not mean that ASEAN completely ignored the imperative of managing political and security problems among member states. Third, in addressing political and security matters, ASEAN member states preferred a bilateral approach rather than a multilateral one, and through quiet diplomacy. The notion of quiet diplomacy in the Southeast Asian context has often defined as the ASEAN Way. The ASEAN Way means that each member of refrains from criticizing the policies of others in public and this make the ASEAN members are allowed to subdue any bilateral tensions. Fourth, the quiet diplomacy practiced by ASEAN should be understood in the context of the preference of association for informality in managing conflict and dispute settlement. Fifth, informality becomes more effective when the leaders developed closer personal ties. Sixth, ASEAN cooperation progresses at a pace comfortable to all. On broader security matters, ASEAN had declared Southeast Asia to be a nuclear weapons free zone via treaty in 1995.15 Concerned about nuclear weapons proliferation in Northeast and South Asia, ASEAN desired to separate itself from the nuclear standoffs of its Asian neighbors. Moreover, ASEAN sees the nuclear free zone treaty to be an extension of its 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) that prohibits the use of force in settling international disputes. Signing the TAC has become the prerequisite for joining Asias latest security discussion forum, the East Asia Summit (EAS) which held its first annual meeting in December 2005. Inspired by ASEAN and its Northeast Asian partners (the Republic of Korea [ROK], Japan, and China), India, Australia, and New Zealand have also joined, but so far not the United States. Some in Washington are concerned that ratifying the TAC could limit U.S. military actions in the Pacific, though the treatys advocates point out that Americas closest Asian alliesJapan, the ROK, and Australiaare EAS members and do not believe their security obligations toward the United States have been jeopardized. Asias largest security discussion body is the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) consisting of all East Asian states, the European Union, the United States, and Canada. While the great powers dominate ARF discussions, its structure and procedures are modeled on ASEANs. Both ASEAN and the ARF emphasize security transparency such as the publication of national white papers on defense that include both order of battle and doctrine. The ARF looks forward to preventive diplomacy and even conflict resolution
15

Loc. Cit, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub793.pdf.

10

though neither of these future action categories has been implemented. The ARF has attained some success in anti-terrorist collaboration involving terrorist finances and the sharing of information among national financial intelligence units. Given ASEAN and ARF deficiencies, it is not surprising that the United States continues to rely primarily on bilateral security relationships in Southeast Asia. Nevertheless, with the creation of the EAS and ASEAN negotiating a new charter that includes designating the association a Security Community, Washington would be wise to rethink its multilateral diplomacy. ASEAN, the ARF, and the EAS could well become prominent political and economic actors in the 21st century.

2.2 The Failure of Six Party Talks Since the initiation of preliminary three party talks in April 2003, attempts to resolve the nuclear crisis in Korean Peninsula have been laid over multilateral framework of Six Party Talks, in which six countries involved are China, the U.S., Japan, Russia, South and North Korea. Until now, there have been five rounds of negotiation.16 The first round of negotiation did not go well and unable to reach agreement on a joint statement of the six parties although at least, all parties are willing to work for peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula through dialog, and to safeguard peace and stability and bring about lasting peace on the Peninsula. Again, there was no agreement made of the second round of negotiation although at least, the Parties expressed their willingness to coexist peacefully and to take coordinated steps to address the nuclear issue and the related concerns. Better is the third round of negotiation. Pyongyang expressed initiative of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and would transparently renounce all our nuclear weaponsrelated programs, only if the United States gives up its hostile policy against us through action. The third round ended with both the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) having made proposals but without serious discussion of either. The fourth round of negotiation shows the differences between the U.S., China and North Korea on how the denuclearization should start. At that time, the US was busy negotiating behind the scenes with Chinese, Russians, Japanese, and South Koreans, trying to achieve the understanding that if the US signed the draft joint statement, the others would not undermine the US by discussing or providing light-water reactors (as a compensation) until after Pyongyang had rejoined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).17 The U.S. suggests that China should shut down its oil pipeline to
16

Charles L. Pritchard, Failed Diplomacy: The Tragic Story of How North Korea Got the Bomb. (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 2007), 101-168 17 Ibid., 122

11

North Korea to pressure Pyongyang to return to talks. However, China rejected the idea totally. On Chinas perspective, pushing Pyongyang too far or cutting off oil and food assistance risks creating a dangerous and unstable situationsomething that Beijing will absolutely not do. 18 Meanwhile, DPRK insisted on the right, as a sovereign nation, to peaceful uses of nuclear energy that is not depend on its status in the NPTmuch as India, a non-NPT nation, had the right to peaceful nuclear energy and even, the U.S. supported it. The performance of the fifth round was no better than the previous negotiations, if it has not been worsening since then. The Six-Party Talks failed to prevent North Korea from becoming a nuclear weapons state, although the DPRK was still committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The DPRK argue that the rationale for staying away from completely abandoning its nuclear-related programs was because of the so-called sanctions that the United States had imposed on the Banco Delta Asia (BDA) in Macau. In point of fact, the U.S. Department of the Treasury had issued a statement of concern that BDA was involved in money laundering and handling of counterfeit U.S. currency for the North Korean government.19 In addition to that, Li, a senior envoy representing Kim Jong Il, said, we cannot go into the six-party talks with these hat [the hat of counterfeiting and the hat of terrorism] over our head. 20

2.3 What ASEAN Has But Six Party Talk Has Not To begin with, all Parties, including North Korea itself, agree that the goal of six party talks is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula through negotiation. However, no breakthrough has been made on how the denuclearization should start. China tends to avoid pressuring Pyongyang especially if it risks creating a dangerous and unstable situation in the peninsula. Russia remains silent while Japanese and South Korean maneuvers are limited by the influence of the U.S. The minor problem is that North Korea tends to pursue bilateral talks with the U.S. while the U.S. tends to pursue multilateral talks and avoids the direct meeting with Pyongyang. The major problem is that process has been deteriorating as the U.S. damaged the negotiating environment with some provocative and inflammatory rhetoric towards the DPRK. Actually, ASEAN initially urged all parties to resume the talks by utilizing ASEAN Regional Forum meetings. However, North Korea was unwilling to hold the Six-Party (nuclear) Talks on the sidelines of ARF. As it has been stated before, the major problem of Six Party Talks is a damaged
18 19

Ibid., 112 Ibid., 155 20 Ibid., 168

12

negotiating environment. If so, what can ASEAN do to resume negotiation of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula? Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said this, while there may not be formal SixParty Talks at the sidelines of this [ARF] conference it would be useful if we can help create conditions conducive for informal dialogue of informal communication to take place. 21 Here, the writers argue that ASEAN has the best potential to provide a peaceful negotiation, as we believe that ASEAN is important to the regional stability. As being stated by Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, the Secretary General of ASEAN, ASEAN and its partnerships with other countries in the Asia Pacific region, including China, Japan, and Korea, can play a leading role in multilateral engagement throughout the region.22 He also sees that there is a shift of weight from the West to the East and argues that ASEAN will benefits all because ASEAN is considered as a friend to all, as it is a threat to none. The writers are optimist that ASEAN will contribute to make such peaceful negotiation as it has experience in dealing with superpower rivalries. Therefore, ASEAN provides a potential solution to the issue of North Korean nuclear power, as it has previous experiences in handling such problem. Not only ASEAN has experience to handle the rivalries among the superpower in the region, but ASEAN is also succeeding to maintain the relative peace and growth in the region. 23 This fact is absolutely cannot be ignored. ASEANs experience in dealing with and maintaining peace in the Southeast Asia region is affected the East Asia region as a whole, as this experience bring significant impact to the regional stability. Pitsuwan, on behalf of the ASEAN member states, encouraged formal or informal meetings among the parties. Pitsuwan has persuaded North Korea to enter ARF back in 2000 and optimists that ARF can contribute to the denuclearization of Northeast Asia.24 This forum provides its member to cooperate and make a dialogue, as all members of the Six Party Talks are also full and active members of ARF. On the response to some crtitics that see the rise of Six Party Talks will rival ARF, Pitsuwan believes that the Six Party Talks is an outgrowth of the ARF. Pitsuwan sees the Six Party Talks as a forum that is being held for the North Korea and some relevant members that is closer to the issue, which is always being brought to the annual ARF meeting. In other words, Six Party Talks is a complementary effort, not as a competition.25 Therefore, in this case, ASEAN and ARF remain the
21

ASEAN in Security Talks over North Korea, accessed from: www.manilatimes.net/.../22008-asean-in-security-taksover-n-korea, November 21th 2010, at 22.11 WIB 22 Surin: ASEAN Can Play Leadership Role in Asia, accessed from http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2010/04/28/surin-asean-can-play-leadership-role-asia, on November 23rd 2010, at 8 p.m. 23 Ibid. 24 ASEAN Chief Welcomes North Koreas Nuclear Breakthrough: Surin: ARF Can Play a Role to Widen Region's Security, accessed from http://www.aseansec.org/21715.htm, on November 23rd 2010, at 11 p.m. 25 Ibid

13

main important factors, while Six Party Talks is a complement to the efforts.

2.4 Future Steps of ASEAN As explained above, it is strongly believed that ASEAN owns significant bargaining power as a new regional power in East Asia. In order to keep the stability and security of both North and South East Asia, nuclear weapon issue of North Korea should be effectively solved as soon and clear as possible. It is an obligation and also opportunity for ASEAN to take up the leadership role in this problem solving. Here, the group is going to present some concrete steps which are suggested to be taken by ASEAN in resolving nuclear weapon matter of North Korea. This solution is created to make a best use of the ASEANs merits and very correspond to Six Party Talks demerits. There are two main roles on this action, which are: environment creation and regulation appropriation. At the first roles, environment creation, ASEAN is expected to be able to preserve conducive atmosphere and space for states of East Asia to collectively and voluntarily bring their self into table of negotiation and discussion to sustain and enhance regional stability. As explained before, ASEAN as the only roughly integrated multilateral cooperation in East Asia, could provide more chances and reason for those states to sit together to question-answer and share the opinion for advancing the security of East Asia. Those states here include North Korea, of course. In North East Asia, there is no any single multilateral diplomacy achievement, such as ASEAN in South East Asia. It makes North Korea hard to get an opportunity to show its argument in a normal way. All the contact must be done in a bilateral way, while its neighbors are, of course, not welcoming in a friendly way. South Korea which was a brother now is half century length war enemy, and Japan had colonialized them for quite long time since even before it attacked South Korea. Moreover both are USAs closest alliances in Asia Pacific. Yes, it has China as its back up power but without any preset assurance over its period and duration in the middle of this kind of rapid transforming international politic. In East Asia, including South East Asia/ASEAN, North Korea will get a different scene. North Korea does have diplomatic relationship with several states of ASEAN members. In ASEAN, there are communism based countries which are not really tied in alliance chain to US, same to North Korea, such as Cambodia, Vietnam, or Myanmar. In ASEAN, there is also a country with a big market for economic growth, such as Indonesia. In case of Indonesia, North Korea really can do a good operation with it. Since Soekarnos era, Indonesia and North Korea have maintained their sustainable and collaborative diplomatic relationship. North Korea accepts Indonesia as a good partner of it, as can be

14

seen in a ministerial meeting of both countries on August, 2010. It was few moments after a horrible disaster of South Korean war ships sink. North Korea was very careful on defining its diplomatic steps, but North Korea still held a meeting with Indonesia to discuss various issues, including denial over involvement on sank war ship.26 Therefore the very first role should be played by ASEAN is the creation of suitable diplomatic environment for North Korea. Six Party Talks has always failed, not only on defining the common consensus but also in a way to hold that event it self. Several times, Six Party Talks failed to be held merely because North Korea refused to come out to the negotiation table. 27 ASEAN should and could provide many chances for states in North East Asia to meet up together in the same forums, such as ARF. In this first role, what must be focused is the willingness of North Korea to join and participate in the table of diplomatic in which ASEAN plays its central action and other North Asia related states such as South Korea, Japan, China, US, Russia also join and participate on it in an exactly uniformed treatment with North Korea. The second role, regulation appropriation, means ASEAN should be able to decide and announce the regulations and rules applied in ASEAN related forums to be abided by states. The difference and merits of ASEAN from Six Party Talks is uniformity. ASEAN will apply same rules in fair roles for all the participant states. ARF and TAC in instance. Treaty of Amity and Cooperation of ASEAN has been signed by most North East Asia states as well as Australia, Russia, India, and US.28 TAC does mention about nuclear weapon free matter within. ASEAN does not have to force certain states, e.q., North Korea, to dysfunction its nuclear arms but ASEAN will apply the rules saying Sorry, We accept no nuclear weapon for our region and if North Korea have a willingness to join it must obey it. Then does North Korea want to join it? In evidence, in 2000, North Korean Foreign Minister, Paek Nam-sun, wrote to the ARF chairman, Thailands Foreign Minister, Surin Pitsuwan, seeking participation in the regional forum, an application that was swiftly granted. Even at ARSs 2001 meeting, the ARF ministers expressed their appreciation for the active participation by the North
26

Kathy Quiano, North Korea, Indonesia foreign ministers hold bilateral talks in CNN Online, accessed from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-02/world/indonesia.north.korea.visit_1_south-korean-naval-ship-talks-cheonan? _s=PM:WORLD, on November, 22th 2010, at 21.00 WIB. 27 Baek Seung Mok, Waiting for North Korea accessed from http://www.newstown.co.kr/newsbuilder/service/article/mess_main.asp?P_Index=78411, on November, 22th 2010, at 21.03 WIB. 28 Mark E. Manyin et al, U.S. Accession to ASEANs Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) in CRS Report for Congress May 2009, accessed from http://docs.google.com/viewer? a=v&q=cache:VtSGAnpZSE8J:www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/R40583.pdf+ASEAN+TAC&hl=ko&pid=bl&srcid=ADGE EShTbH291sEYYAvrP498gKM7y6fmOzQMomv1lyWDCD5GOhNvChQmjAgMVWPZa9aKBJycd4PIWMFHOKewA ANOuw1TsymLtOg1sX0_b7qgoZht5xedb2TG_2Gbl09kheT48WAyalg&sig=AHIEtbTLlAnqmJju0UfpbuII1sLrA6YfBg, on November 22th, 2010, at 09.22 WIB.

15

Korea in ARF activities in the previous year and considered it a contribution towards strengthening the ARF process and advancing the cause of regional peace and security. From 2001 to 2007, North Korea contributed to no less than five issues of the ARFs Annual Security Outlook.29 This second role, in further long-term planning, is expected to be concretely contribute in the constructing kind of a permanent East Asia security organization. Smith argues that North East Asia alones regionalism is deemed necessary for dual purposenavigating power transitions (the rise of China and the alliance of Japan and South Korea to the U.S. to hedge against the rise of China) and developing habits of cooperation. However, there are two different reasons that Synder offers to explain the inertia of Northeast Asian countries to establish an official regional security framework. 30 Firstly, the differences separating the major players in the region are simply too extensive and difficult to overcome. Secondly, the U.S. alliance is still the primary obstacle that stands in the way of a multilateral security community in Northeast Asia. Certainly, the vision of establishing Northeast Asia security organization can benefit to the region, but the potential rivalry among the Northeast big powers could be an obstacle to the realization of the vision. But, what is wrong with the vision for the sake of ASEAN in East Asia Regionalism? Before the realization of the vision, at least, Sengs argument should be put into further consideration: Northeast Asia forum that comprises the big powers could mean the sidelining of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). For ASEAN leaders who decry the Americans alleged lack of commitment whenever the U.S. Secretary of State decides to give the annual ARF meeting a miss, the prospect of a competing mechanism that enjoys the enthusiastic support of the U.S. and other big powers is clearly bad news for the ARF. Moreover, the view that the ARF has achieved little of note other than as a talk shop (useful as that might have been) could compel the big powers to devote their energies and resources instead to a Northeast Asia forum, not least one which could eventually boast of a legacy of success in denuclearizing the Korea Peninsula. On the other, and perhaps of deeper concern to ASEAN, the realization of such a forum could well spell a decline in prominence of ASEANs own role in regional security management. It is a known fact that the strategic importance of Southeast Asia to the West, and particularly to the U.S., diminished considerably after the Cold War ended; a situation the regions leaders have sought to redress in
29

Rodolfo Severino, Why Join the ARF? in ASEAN Regional Forum (Singapore: Institute of South East Asian Studies, 2009), pages 25-27.. 30 Scott Snyder, Prospect for a Northeast Asia Security Framework, accessed from: www.keia.org/publications/Other/HSSynder.pdf, November 18, 2010, at 18.22 WIB.

16

the face of a rising China and other challenges. Moreover, the U.S. push for a Northeast Asia forum has to do with the evident contradiction at the heart of East Asias experience in regionalism.31

CHAPTER III CONCLUSION The nuclear crisis in the Korean Peninsula gives rise to the demand of a permanent Northeast Asia security organization. While the Six Party Talks have yet to demonstrate their utility in persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions, this nascent regional effort to institutionalize cooperation on a common security concern suggests a new interest in collective problem-solving. 32 The failure of the peaceful approach and negotiation in the Six Party Talks shows that in order to solve the nuclear power issue in North Korea, we will need another alternative, and ASEAN just might be the answer. ASEAN has attracted and caught the attention of the international. ASEAN has influenced in maintaining stability, not only to the Southeast Asia region, but also the East Asia region as a whole. ASEAN-led ARF is such a promising forum for peaceful cooperation and dialogue between North Korea and other closely related countries. The membership of the Six Party Talks in the ARF does not only indicate the importance of ASEAN in the international eyes, but also the ASEAN role and active participation in contributing to the efforts of peaceful settlement in the North Korean nuclear power issue. Therefore, based on the research that has been done by the writers, the writers believe and optimist that ASEAN will provide and give a huge contribution in solving the issue. The Six Party Talks, even though has failed, still possibly can be a good alternative to provide a dialogue forum for countries that are closely related to the issue. But at the end of the day, ASEAN assistance in solving the nuclear issue in North Korea will necessarily be needed, as it will go hand in hand and parallel with Six Party Talks. ASEAN does not have any tendency to make the Six Party Talks to be dysfunction, instead, ASEAN hope to be able to complete the demerit of Six Party Talks in solving the North
31

Tan See Seng, The U.S. Push for a Northeast Asia Forum: Three Ramifications for East Asia Regionalism, accessed from: www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/Perspective/RSIS04722008.pdf, November 18th 2010, at 18.16 WIB 32 Sheila A. Smith, New Impulses for Security Cooperation in Northeast Asia, accessed from: www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachements/NEAAsiaSecuritySmith.pdf, November 18, 2010, at 18.51 WIB

17

Korean nuclear power issue. Therefore, the writer are optimist that ASEAN can and has to participate actively in solving the issue, as ASEAN has emerged as the new regional power. And as the new regional power, ASEAN influence in the region is inevitable.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books: Beal, Tim, North Korea: The Struggle against American Power (London: Pluto Press, 2005) Baylis, John, et al, The Globalization of World Politic (Oxford: Oxford University, 2005) F.,Daniel, Regional Leadership in the global system: ideas, interests, and strategies of regional power (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2010) Pritchard, Charles L., Failed Diplomacy: The Tragic Story of How North Korea Got the Bomb. (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 2007) Severino, Rodolfo, Why Join the ARF? in ASEAN Regional Forum (Singapore: Institute of South East Asian Studies, 2009).

Websites: http://docs.google.com/viewer? a=v&q=cache:VtSGAnpZSE8J:www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/R40583.pdf+ASEAN+TAC&hl =ko&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShTbH291sEYYAvrP498gKM7y6fmOzQMomv1lyWDCD5GO hNvChQmjAgMVWPZa9aKBJycd4PIWMFHOKewAANOuw1TsymLtOg1sX0_b7qgoZht5xedb2TG_2Gbl09kheT48WAyalg&sig=AHIEtbTLlAnqmJju0UfpbuII1sLrA6YfBg

18

www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/1999-2000/2000cib01.htm www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron www.articles.cnn.com/2010-08-02/world/indonesia.north.korea.visit_1_south-korean-naval-ship-talkscheonan?_s=PM:WORLD www.aseansec.org/21715.htm www.aseansec.org/about_ASEAN.html www.asiantribune.com/news/2010/04/28/surin-asean-can-play-leadership-role-asia www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachements/NEAAsiaSecuritySmith.pdf www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/helsinki/ws9/nolte.pdf www.jstor.org/stable/4492918 www.kas.de/upload/dokumente/2010/06/PolDi-Asien_Panorama_02-2010/Panorama_22010_SecurityPolitics_Sukma.pdf www.keia.org/publications/Other/HS-Synder.pdf www.manilatimes.net/.../22008-asean-in-security-taks-over-n-korea www.newstown.co.kr/newsbuilder/service/article/mess_main.asp?P_Index=78411 www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/Perspective/RSIS04722008.pdf www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub793.pdf www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2003/04/10_chaffee_korea-npt.htm

19

Вам также может понравиться