Ancient Korean Zen philosophy purported that reality is only a question of perception, and that soft power can overtake hard power. North Korea's recent missile (disguised as a satellite) launch reveals how different perceptions can be among nations, while sparking a debate over responding with soft or hard power.
Following the launch, the differing news reports from the countries participating in the six-party talks were revealing. Japanese news media reported that 'North Korea has launched an object that has crossed Japanese air space flying in the direction of the Pacific Ocean'. South Korean news media confirmed that 'North Korea this morning has launched a man-made satellite'. News reports in the US and Russia simply confirmed the launch of a North Korean missile. North Korea's news media, meanwhile, said: 'This morning we have launched the number two bright star communication satellite.' China's media predictably reported verbatim what North Korea's state news agency had said.
Given such different perceptions, how can these nations ever hope to achieve a consensus through talks?
On April 9, mass celebrations were held in Pyongyang. 'Dear Leader' Kim Jong-il used the opportunity to declare the launch a 'great success in politics, diplomacy, and status in the international world, demonstrating our achievement in the world'. He then cleverly requested UN sanctions be removed.
Actually, this should happen. It is good that China has been demonstrating the pragmatism of soft power by hosting the six-party talks. Talking is always better than not talking, and a lot better than brinkmanship. But it is not an end-game solution, either. In fact, China does not have a clear path in mind towards any solution. Unlike US diplomacy, which looks for clear resolutions even when none is in sight, classic Chinese diplomacy will delay an issue as long as necessary in the hope that a solution will arise in time or in changing circumstances, or so that the problem can be passed to the next generation of leaders. Sometimes this approach works.
But, this time, it might not be enough. So, while keeping the six-party talks going, a parallel approach may be needed. This should come from Washington. President Barack Obama hinted at change when he called for a global reduction in nuclear weapons in response to the missile launch. But that will not solve the North Korea imbroglio. A specific, co-ordinated response is needed. Embargoes do not work. Mr Obama is in a position to recognise this, and Mr Kim has given him the opportunity. The problem that Mr Kim faces, like most dictators, is one of managing internal politics and factions by presenting everyone else as a common enemy. His rocket launch served this purpose.
