Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Saturday
Interview With Jim Walsh
Aired January 04, 2003 - 17:36 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: The new Bond film just happens to hit the world's movie screens just as North Korea is defiantly restarting a nuclear program the U.S. fears could generate weapons grade plutonium. Jim Walsh directs the Managing the Atom Project at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, good to see you.
JIM WALSH, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: Good to be in Atlanta, good to see you Fredricka.
WHITFIELD: Great, well do you suppose this was art imitating life?
WALSH: Well, sometimes things work out that way and I know people are probably worried that the film is somehow going to make the crisis worse but I don't think that's going to be the case. Most North Koreans can't see Western movies and even if they could, they don't have enough money for a bowl of rice let alone movie tickets, so.
WHITFIELD: And, at the same time though, perhaps the movie for those who are just learning a little bit more about North and South Korea that these pictures may influence American viewers or worldwide viewers considerably aside from the politics.
WALSH: Yes, I agree and it doesn't help. Let's face it, it's probably not a big factor. The reason why we have tensions between the United States and North Korea now are fundamental and profound. They have to do with North Korea's economic isolation, its near collapse and starvation, the nuclear policies. The movie is really sort of a secondary issue.
But you know where it may have an impact is really in South Korea, a further worsening perhaps of the perception of America in South Korea and we need the South Koreans if we're going to get this crisis resolved.
WHITFIELD: And there's already significant U.S. military presence in South Korea, so this can not help if this is going to sour South Korean public opinion of Americans.
WALSH: Absolutely, over 37,000 U.S. servicemen and servicewomen in South Korea. You know we've just had a series of big demonstrations over problems we've had with U.S. forces there and, of course, the recent presidential election where the candidate was seen as the least beholding to the U.S. became the victor in a surprise upset. So again, it's not great. It's never good to portray nationalities in a way, and particularly at a time of a crisis, but I don't think it's going to determine the outcome.
WHITFIELD: And now South Korea may play a pretty pivotal role in negotiations with North Korea, beginning with Monday a meeting between the U.S., South Korea, and Japanese representatives as well. Can much be expected of that? Are your hopes high?
WALSH: Well, I think it's always best to have modest rather than high hopes but I think this is an important development. If you ask me the biggest news of the week was the open criticism, really unprecedented criticism on the part of both the current president of South Korea and the new president-elect of U.S. policy, what they perceive as a hard line stance. Now the -
WHITFIELD: Saying they really don't like the U.S. approach of containment of an already isolated nation.
WALSH: Absolutely and it's not just containment. The U.S. wants to increase the pressure, and when they say diplomatic pressure they're really trying to tighten that noose around North Korea. The Chinese, of course, are concerned that that will lead to a conflict or lead to the collapse of North Korea, which would result in refugees flowing across into the Chinese border and that, of course, is also something that South Korea fears.
So this may be an effort on the part of the South Koreans to sort of take the reins and try to see if they can try a different path to try to resolve the crisis and I think it's an important development.
WHITFIELD: And how much of an impact might it make or is it making that the U.S., there have been some sources who are saying the U.S. is threatening to kind of cozy up with Japan to say OK we could help you, Japan, in this race with North Korea presenting a pretty direct threat between Japan and North Korea.
WALSH: Well, you know, and it's a more delicate dance than that because Japan also has had over the years, especially obviously World War II, difficult relations with South Korea and that is a relationship that has only recently gotten better. So the U.S. has to be very careful here.
If they play Japan against North Korea they may further alienate South Korea, further widen the gap, what appears to be a widening gap between South Korea and the U.S. government. That's not what they want to have happen and the Japanese themselves are really pro- engagement. The new prime minister is pro-engagement, so I think they're not going to be very enthusiastic about a hard line policy either.
WHITFIELD: How do you see Russia playing a part in all this?
WALSH: Well, you know, Russia for a while was one of North Korea's most important allies, and over the years that's really declined both because the Russians don't have the resources and the leverage that they once had. They are a key to the part of that group that has been working with the North Koreans to try to implement the agreed framework.
So I think they can play a helpful role but really the key players here are China and South Korea. Those are the two that really have the most leverage. If anyone has leverage it's those two and those are the two we have to count on.
WHITFIELD: Already pretty significant, as I mentioned, U.S. military presence in South Korea. Do you see the Bush administration moving close term, or I should say in the near future, toward moving more military forces in that region?
WALSH: Well, Fredricka, I think that's a great question and it invites us to think in what political scientists call counterfactually, what if, and in this case you can imagine if we weren't going to war with Iraq the current administration might have been more tempted to take a hard line policy.
This was an administration that came to office critical of the agreed framework, brought into office people who wanted to get rid of it and take a harder stance against North Korea, perhaps even threatening military action, but I think they're really constrained from doing that right now because they're also trying to do this other stuff in Iraq. But there are elements in that administration that would like to take a tougher stand and there's a battle brewing within the administration about what to do.
WHITFIELD: And especially with the IAEA saying wait a minute, let's give North Korea a chance. We're going to extend the deadline so to speak.
WALSH: Well, you know, the IAEA is sort of caught in the middle here. On the one hand it's their job. This is what they do. They're supposed to inspect these facilities and they've been kicked out and they've been criticized in the past for being soft on violators.
So, they want to make it clear that hey we take this seriously. But they also don't want to go to the Security Council and essentially be the match that lights a fuse that leads to war. So, they know as well as anyone else that it's really the regional players that are the most important players here.
WHITFIELD: All right, Jim Walsh, good to see you in person.
WALSH: Good to see you.
WHITFIELD: Thanks very much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired January 4, 2003 - 17:36 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: The new Bond film just happens to hit the world's movie screens just as North Korea is defiantly restarting a nuclear program the U.S. fears could generate weapons grade plutonium. Jim Walsh directs the Managing the Atom Project at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, good to see you.
JIM WALSH, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: Good to be in Atlanta, good to see you Fredricka.
WHITFIELD: Great, well do you suppose this was art imitating life?
WALSH: Well, sometimes things work out that way and I know people are probably worried that the film is somehow going to make the crisis worse but I don't think that's going to be the case. Most North Koreans can't see Western movies and even if they could, they don't have enough money for a bowl of rice let alone movie tickets, so.
WHITFIELD: And, at the same time though, perhaps the movie for those who are just learning a little bit more about North and South Korea that these pictures may influence American viewers or worldwide viewers considerably aside from the politics.
WALSH: Yes, I agree and it doesn't help. Let's face it, it's probably not a big factor. The reason why we have tensions between the United States and North Korea now are fundamental and profound. They have to do with North Korea's economic isolation, its near collapse and starvation, the nuclear policies. The movie is really sort of a secondary issue.
But you know where it may have an impact is really in South Korea, a further worsening perhaps of the perception of America in South Korea and we need the South Koreans if we're going to get this crisis resolved.
WHITFIELD: And there's already significant U.S. military presence in South Korea, so this can not help if this is going to sour South Korean public opinion of Americans.
WALSH: Absolutely, over 37,000 U.S. servicemen and servicewomen in South Korea. You know we've just had a series of big demonstrations over problems we've had with U.S. forces there and, of course, the recent presidential election where the candidate was seen as the least beholding to the U.S. became the victor in a surprise upset. So again, it's not great. It's never good to portray nationalities in a way, and particularly at a time of a crisis, but I don't think it's going to determine the outcome.
WHITFIELD: And now South Korea may play a pretty pivotal role in negotiations with North Korea, beginning with Monday a meeting between the U.S., South Korea, and Japanese representatives as well. Can much be expected of that? Are your hopes high?
WALSH: Well, I think it's always best to have modest rather than high hopes but I think this is an important development. If you ask me the biggest news of the week was the open criticism, really unprecedented criticism on the part of both the current president of South Korea and the new president-elect of U.S. policy, what they perceive as a hard line stance. Now the -
WHITFIELD: Saying they really don't like the U.S. approach of containment of an already isolated nation.
WALSH: Absolutely and it's not just containment. The U.S. wants to increase the pressure, and when they say diplomatic pressure they're really trying to tighten that noose around North Korea. The Chinese, of course, are concerned that that will lead to a conflict or lead to the collapse of North Korea, which would result in refugees flowing across into the Chinese border and that, of course, is also something that South Korea fears.
So this may be an effort on the part of the South Koreans to sort of take the reins and try to see if they can try a different path to try to resolve the crisis and I think it's an important development.
WHITFIELD: And how much of an impact might it make or is it making that the U.S., there have been some sources who are saying the U.S. is threatening to kind of cozy up with Japan to say OK we could help you, Japan, in this race with North Korea presenting a pretty direct threat between Japan and North Korea.
WALSH: Well, you know, and it's a more delicate dance than that because Japan also has had over the years, especially obviously World War II, difficult relations with South Korea and that is a relationship that has only recently gotten better. So the U.S. has to be very careful here.
If they play Japan against North Korea they may further alienate South Korea, further widen the gap, what appears to be a widening gap between South Korea and the U.S. government. That's not what they want to have happen and the Japanese themselves are really pro- engagement. The new prime minister is pro-engagement, so I think they're not going to be very enthusiastic about a hard line policy either.
WHITFIELD: How do you see Russia playing a part in all this?
WALSH: Well, you know, Russia for a while was one of North Korea's most important allies, and over the years that's really declined both because the Russians don't have the resources and the leverage that they once had. They are a key to the part of that group that has been working with the North Koreans to try to implement the agreed framework.
So I think they can play a helpful role but really the key players here are China and South Korea. Those are the two that really have the most leverage. If anyone has leverage it's those two and those are the two we have to count on.
WHITFIELD: Already pretty significant, as I mentioned, U.S. military presence in South Korea. Do you see the Bush administration moving close term, or I should say in the near future, toward moving more military forces in that region?
WALSH: Well, Fredricka, I think that's a great question and it invites us to think in what political scientists call counterfactually, what if, and in this case you can imagine if we weren't going to war with Iraq the current administration might have been more tempted to take a hard line policy.
This was an administration that came to office critical of the agreed framework, brought into office people who wanted to get rid of it and take a harder stance against North Korea, perhaps even threatening military action, but I think they're really constrained from doing that right now because they're also trying to do this other stuff in Iraq. But there are elements in that administration that would like to take a tougher stand and there's a battle brewing within the administration about what to do.
WHITFIELD: And especially with the IAEA saying wait a minute, let's give North Korea a chance. We're going to extend the deadline so to speak.
WALSH: Well, you know, the IAEA is sort of caught in the middle here. On the one hand it's their job. This is what they do. They're supposed to inspect these facilities and they've been kicked out and they've been criticized in the past for being soft on violators.
So, they want to make it clear that hey we take this seriously. But they also don't want to go to the Security Council and essentially be the match that lights a fuse that leads to war. So, they know as well as anyone else that it's really the regional players that are the most important players here.
WHITFIELD: All right, Jim Walsh, good to see you in person.
WALSH: Good to see you.
WHITFIELD: Thanks very much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
