INTER-KOREAN THAW?

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea have resumed direct dialogue which was interrupted seven years ago. However impressive disagreements between Pyongyang and Seoul are, ordinary Koreans sincerely hope that their motherland will reunite. This was demonstrated by the reunions of families separated by the Korean war of 1950-53 which were organized following the latest round of talks between North and South.

It is noteworthy that South Korean and DPRK officials highly praised the talks. "South and North Koreas have made the first step towards development of inter-Korean relations based on trust," said the leader of the secretariat of the National Security Council of the Republic of Korea, Kim Kyou-hyun.

The North Korean newspaper Choson Sinbo described in an even more convincing manner the current dialogue between Pyongyang and Seoul. It said "the top leadership of the DPRK consistently moves towards the reunification of the two countries".

The reunions of separated Korean families at the North Korean tourist resort of Mount Kumgang demonstrated in the most vivid manner the aspiration of "both Koreas" to become closer to each other. The first such reunion took place back in 1985. By 2010, 18 such reunions took place, and members of about 10,000 families took part in them. However, the current reunion is, perhaps, special. After all, despite all ideological and geopolitical constraints, which, it would seem, leave no hope for the reunification of the Korean states, it is the power circles in the DPRK and the Republic of Korea who say that the reunification process needs to be reformatted. In particular, the South Korean minister for the reunification of Korea, Ryoo Kihl-jae, proposed a new plan of reunification (without disclosing details, though). The previous plan, adopted by Seoul in 1989, included a three-stage process: reconciliation and cooperation between the Republic of Korea and DPRK, the establishment of a Korean commonwealth, and, finally, the full political unification of Korea. "The three-stage unification plan does not suggest specific ways of uniting our motherland and is questionable. The time has come to revise the plan," Ryoo Kihl-jae said.

Certainly, all of this may be considered to be signs of an inter-Korean thaw. It is good that Seoul and Pyongyang can not only threaten each other but also talk and plan, within a dialogue, to achieve specific results, with the establishment of a united Korean state promising to be its crown. At the same time, it is naive to expect results in the very near future. Differences in the ideological approaches of "both Koreas", where different systems run, towards unification are too strong, and so is the geopolitical reality in which the inter-Korean process is proceeding. This reality could have led even the latest round of talks between Pyongyang and Seoul to a failure.

Agreement on the reunions of families separated by the Korean war was reached ahead of the US-Korean military exercise Key Resolve, which is planned for 27 February - 9 March and is officially aimed at deterring the threat from the DPRK. Certainly, Pyongyang expressed dissatisfaction with this move by Washington and Seoul and even warned about a possible breakdown of the family reunions if the military exercise is not cancelled. However, North Korea did not go categorical over this issue, especially as US Secretary of State John Kerry, who visited Seoul, let it be understood that the USA will not refuse to hold the annual military manoeuvres with the South Koreans in any case.

However, the manoeuvres were not the only thing that was prepared for Pyongyang as a factor to deter the "North Korean threat". The UN sent a letter to Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, demanding an investigation into numerous crimes against humanity in the DPRK. The letter cited specific cases of repression, torture by starvation, violence against children and women, and also evidence that tens of thousands of political prisoners are kept in camps. The DPRK leader was warned that he bore personal responsibility for crimes committed by his regime and may appear in the International Criminal Court.

No doubt, human rights violations are not good for the image of any state and deserve total condemnation. However, the castigation - which the USA pushes via various UN agencies - of different countries over human rights violations is often selective (in any case, countries that are Washington's allies in different parts of the world are seldom discriminated against on this accusation). Therefore, the UN's letter to Pyongyang can be considered as a means of political pressure on the DPRK. However, what is in this contest Washington's attitude to the prospect of Korean unification?

Certainly, Washington is interested in this process, but only on the condition that it results in the fall of the North Korean regime. Otherwise, there is no guarantee that a united Korea, which almost inevitably stands the chance of becoming a leading regional power (and perhaps even a world power, considering the fact that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and there is a powerful technological breakthrough in South Korea), will become a US ally. Therefore, the process of Korean unification contains obvious geopolitical risks for the USA, especially considering the fact that other great powers have their own outlook regarding a united Korea, which is a hypothetical concept for the time being. First of all, that's China.

Incidentally, China has already said that it opposes the consideration of the DPRK case at the International Criminal Court. Beijing pledged to veto the relevant resolution at the UN Security Council. However, China's strategic approach to the Korea problem does not only stem from the traditionally allied relationship between Beijing and Pyongyang and also its political and ideological rivalry with the USA, but also from an aggravation in the overall security situation in Asia Pacific. China clearly sees a US threat: it is in this region, in the territory and fleets of US allies (Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan) that the bulk of US anti-missile defence systems are deployed. Officially they target North Korea, which test fired a ballistic missile over Japan in 2012 and conducted a third nuclear weapons test in 2013. However, Beijing realizes that the scale of US anti-missile defence systems clearly exceeds the North Korean threat and therefore there are grounds to view them as being set to prevent the growth of the Chinese potential of nuclear deterrence.

In the context of China deterring the US strategic threat and giving total political support to North Korea, Russia is China's partner. However, Russia's military positions in Asia Pacific have considerably weakened over the past couple of decades. Moscow is trying to intensify its cooperation with Pyongyang and Seoul, expressing, in particular, its willingness to export Russian gas to South Korea and expand cooperation with DPRK in projects related to communications, coal extraction, and crude oil exports from the Russian Federation's Far East region.

Based on the foregoing, one can say that there are both domestic and foreign obstacles to the unification of the Korean peninsula. Therefore, for the time being prospects for the process appear very obscure. However, even the start of the negotiating process relieves the world of one more tension zone.