The Death of an Alliance, Part II

Add the Asian Wall Street Journal and Thomas Barnett (The Pentagon’s New Map) to the list of those who’ve noticed that the United States and South Korea suffer from a visible lack of common interests and policies these days.

The ASWJ said friction between Seoul and Washington was particularly intense over the joint North-South Kaesong Industrial Project. In the first stage of the project alone, 300 Korean companies were scheduled to employ 75,000 North Korean laborers and invest US$9.6 billion over nine years. Along with international aid and trade, this would greatly ease North Korea’s economic difficulties. The paper quoted Institute for International Economics senior fellow Marcus Noland as saying US$1-2 billion in funds a year was sufficient to keep the North Korean regime afloat.

I’m stuck in Barnett’s book, patiently waiting for it to tell me something I don’t already know (and that doesn’t relate to doing Powerpoint shows at the Pentagon), but his remark is significant in that Barnett’s views are fashionable and influential in the defense and foreign policy establishments these days.

Watching C-SPAN yesterday, the divergence was particularly apparent in a panel discussion on North Korea (at the Brookings Institution–Jack Pritchard hosted!). The Chinese representative, a visiting scholar at Brookings, outlined his government’s policy, point-by-point: peaceful resolution, no sanctions, no regime change, more U.S. flexibility . . . just like the South Korean position!

You can read Part I, which discusses the mood in Congress, here.