|
The U.S. presidential election is over. President George W. Bush is likely to be re-elected. The election this time around, being too close to call to the finish, drew more world attention than before. The biggest issues in the presidential election, the first of its kind since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, unlike the past, were U.S. foreign policy and national security. The core of these were the War on Terror and thwarting nuclear proliferation.
On foreign policy and security issues, no clear differences existed between the Republican and Democratic parties. Both parties embraced pre-emptive strategies for blocking terror and nuclear proliferation within the range of policy options. The only difference was conceptual in that the Republican Party showed an attitude seemingly unburdened by world criticism of American-led unilateralism, while the Democratic Party placed weight on multilateral internationalism. It was confirmed that though polarized values deepened on domestic politics, economy and social affairs, the political circles and the people uttered the same voice in safeguarding their security. Convincing is this comment, "U.S. society was divided into two in the presidential election, but there was one security policy."
What we pay most attention to is the fact that sitting in the center of the security and terror issues is North Korea's nuclear development program. So much so that the issue was mentioned over 30 times during the first 90-munite TV debate between the two candidates. One can realize that the North Korean nuclear issue has become a centerpiece problem of the United States. The American government is highly likely to make the North Korean nuclear issue a priority and employ an aggressive policy of pressure against Pyongyang. Depending on how the North counters it, the security situation on the Korean Peninsula could undergo abrupt changes.
We are concerned about how the Korean government, which is so relaxed about the North Korean nuclear issue as to regard it "stabilized structurally," will be able to manage a possible crisis shrewdly and properly. The Korean and U.S. governments now should renew their efforts to elevate their mutual relationship, which has undergone no small throes in the past, to a more mature level. The United States has to pay attention to world criticism that its unilateral foreign policy narrows its own position.
The same applies to Korea-U.S. relations. Should the United States be pre-occupied with its Northeast Asia strategy in dealing with its forces in Korea, Korea's national interest could react sensitively. The two countries should exert themselves in cementing the spiritual foundation of their alliance, namely the sharing of common values, through a frank and courteous dialogue. When a relationship of trust in which words accord with action develops on such a foundation, the Korea-U.S. alliance will be able to secure the potential power to tide over temporary hardships.
|
