EDITORIAL from the Korea Herald on April 20)

Pragmatism again?

Seoul once again delayed the scheduled announcement of its full participation in
the Proliferation Security Initiative, raising questions about its position on
the U.S.-led effort to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The government had initially said it would announce its change of status, from PSI
observer to full participant, on April 15. The date was chosen so that the
announcement would follow on the heels of U.N. Security Council statement condemning
North Korea's missile launch.
That plan was scrapped at the last minute and a new date was set - April 19. The
Blue House said that the change was "strategic" and aimed at finding the right
timing and that the administration stands unwavering in its decision to fully
join the PSI.
On April 18, the Foreign Ministry said that there would be no announcement
regarding the PSI the next day. Inter-Korean talks and other elements needed to
be taken into consideration in the timing of the announcement, the ministry said.
The inter-Korean talks apparently refer to Pyongyang's proposal, made on April
16, for talks on the Kaesong industrial complex.
Indeed, it may seem prudent to delay the announcement given that the two sides
have not held official talks in more than a year and that there is a virtual
freeze in exchanges between the two sides.
While North Korea has not spelled out what it wishes to discuss Tuesday, it is
expected to tie the joint economic project with Seoul's full participation in the
PSI. Pyongyang has been issuing threats against Seoul's PSI decision, the latest
one made on Saturday. Calling a full PSI participation a declaration of war,
North Korea said that Seoul should "never forget for a moment that Seoul is a
mere 50 km away from the military demarcation line."
Seoul, which reiterated its commitment to the Kaesong industrial complex after
the North Korean missile launch on April 5, will find itself in a Catch-22 should
Pyongyang threaten to close the joint industrial complex in response to Seoul's
PSI participation.
The government is attempting to decouple PSI participation from North Korea's
missile launch. It has repeatedly said that the PSI is a global initiative that
does not target a specific country and should be considered aside from
South-North relations.
However, such claims are unconvincing given the fact that the government had said
before the April 5 missile launch that it would consider full-participation in
PSI in the event North Korea proceeds with the test-firing. The official
announcement originally scheduled for April 15 - which would have come after the
U.N. Security Council's statement - reinforced the impression that a full PSI
participation was Seoul's response to the missile test.
The administration did not want to jeopardize Tuesday's talks by making an
announcement on the PSI, which Pyongyang has repeated called a declaration of
war. Hence, Seoul decided to once again postpone the announcement until after the
talks.
The administration is being criticized for the way it is handling the issue and
has no one to blame but itself. It was taking the usual hard line stance toward
North Korea when it said it would participate as a full member in the PSI.
However, that position apparently softened over time and now the administration
is denying that it ever considered PSI participation as being connected to
inter-Korean relations. Not very convincing.
A lack of principled approach and consistency has been a glaring flaw of the Lee
administration. The administration claims pragmatism - the governing philosophy
of the Lee administration - to defend its often shifting positions on a range of
matters. However, pragmatism should not be used to cover up a lack of broad
principles that are upheld consistently.
(END)