HARVARD GAZETTE ARCHIVES

Allison joined Edward Baker, an associate at the Harvard-Yenching Institute, and Patrick Webb, former chief of nutrition for the UN World Food Programme, in a discussion titled "The World's Most Dangerous Situation: North Korea, Nukes, and U.S. Policy" on Feb. 16 at Harvard Law School.

"I think if North Korea becomes a recognized nuclear state, within a few years - but only a few years - I think you'll see Japan becoming a nuclear state," Allison said, "and I believe you'd see South Korea [becoming a nuclear state] and you'd see an interest in nuclear weapons in the rest of the region, including Taiwan." And China, Allison assured his listeners, would not sit idly by if Taiwan were to become a nuclear power.

The problem, all panel members agreed, is complex. North Korea has stated that it has constructed an atomic bomb. International experts agree that the country has enough nuclear material to construct approximately eight bombs. But who would North Korea bomb? The answer is unclear - the preferred target, panel members said, would probably be the United States, but North Korea doesn't have the capability to deliver a nuclear warhead to the United States and is unlikely to develop this capability. China is another possible target, but not a likely one, given that it is North Korea's chief ally. South Korea is, of course, another possibility. But, asked the panel, is Japan at risk? Taiwan?

The situation is further complicated because North Korea is in the midst of a humanitarian disaster. In the mid-1990s, two years of flooding forced a cessation of coal mining and rendered crop fields unusable. Two years of drought followed, at the end of which only 10 percent of North Korea's rice fields could be cultivated. A resulting famine killed an estimated 2 to 3 million of the country's 23 million people.

According to Patrick Webb, the greatest needs of the North Korean people are for food and energy. North Korea uses coal to produce most of its energy and to produce fertilizer. However, coal production has yet to return to pre-flood levels. No coal means no fertilizer; no fertilizer means low food yields; low food yields mean an undernourished country; and an undernourished country has poor human resources with which to rebuild productivity: "Labor productivity ... requires a healthy and well-fed workforce, and by no stretch of the imagination does North Korea have this," Webb said.

North Korea accepts food and energy aid from China and from South Korea. Until recently, it also accepted food from the United States and other countries through the auspices of the UN. Last year, however, North Korea began refusing UN food aid because it thought that a combination of domestic food production and imports from China and South Korea would be sufficient. According to Webb, neither the imports nor native food production have met expectations.

Food remains the primary need of most North Koreans. But their leader, Kim Jong Il, is reluctant to trade North Korea's nuclear capabilities for food. "If I'm Kim Jong Il," posed Allison, "do I care about my starving countrymen?"

"You don't," returned Webb, "unless the tragedy is so severe that it threatens your regime."

The panel agreed that Jong Il was likely very concerned about his status within North Korea, and that he would probably use his nuclear "playing cards" to retain control of his country. And with no clear succession plans, it's uncertain who would run the county in Jong Il's absence.

The United States' stated goal for North Korea is regime change. Ironically, according to Allison, this is China's "nightmare" because China worries about refugees streaming across its border and fears a unified Korea for a neighbor, a country that would presumably retain its alliance with the United States.

The brightest hope, according to the panel, seems to be that Jong Il may be willing to negotiate in return for energy and for assurances that he can remain in power. The United States, however, has not been a good negotiating partner, said Allison: It has adamantly stated that it wants Jong Il gone and, in a 1994 agreement, agreed to help construct light water nuclear in return for a nuclear freeze. These reactors were never completed and, according to Allison, the United States probably never intended to complete them.

What the future holds is unclear. North Korea has said that they would like to negotiate unilaterally with the United States and the United States has refused, insisting that all negotiations occur through six-party talks, including China, the Republic of Korea, Russia, and Japan. The six-party talks broke down in August 2005. While North Korea has said that it would be interested in further six-party talks in the future, no date has been set.

A military option is unthinkable, according to Yenching's Baker, because China would not sit by if the United States invaded North Korea.

An audience member asked, "Is the international community just waiting for Kim Jong Il to go away, to die?" Baker answered, "Oh, I think so! But he's just turned 64, he's likely to be with us for a long time."

bob_brustman@harvard.edu

Related stories: