Will U.N. Cool Down North Korean Crisis?

The International Atomic Energy Agency is widely expected to refer the North Korea problem to the U.N. Security Council today after the regime in Pyongyang thumbed its nose at the world by dismantling its nuclear safeguards.

But then what?

Analysts say it’s difficult to see how the U.N. will have any more luck changing North Korea’s behavior than the IAEA, Washington, Seoul or the sundry other members of the international community that have tried to influence the isolated Stalinist state.

“It doesn’t do any good to refer it to the U.N. Security Council unless you have a diplomatic strategy,” said Scott Snyder, a Seoul-based representative of the Asia Foundation. “Is this a formula for continuing to ignore the problem, or will they really address it?”

In recent months, North Korea has upped the ante by announcing it has a nuclear weapons program in violation of international agreements, expelling IAEA inspectors, dismantling cameras that monitored nuclear activity, cranking up its Yongbyon nuclear complex and ending its moratorium on missile development.

The U.N.’s big sticks are resolutions that authorize military force by the United States and other countries or impose sanctions against nations that don’t play by international rules.

But the Bush administration doesn’t want another military engagement on its hands right now -- no matter what it may say -- just as it’s marshaling its might against Iraq. Furthermore, sanctions generally require months, even years, to have an impact and tend to be most effective against an economy that is well integrated with the rest of the world -- clearly not the case here.

In addition, at the policy level, most of North Korea’s neighbors don’t support the use of either. This makes a resolution unlikely, given that their cooperation is essential.

“People in Seoul are very reluctant to have the U.N. Security Council move ahead with any punitive action,” said Lee Dong Bok, a North Korea expert with South Korea’s Myongji University. “So I think the whole thing will just be put on a shelf.”

China, a veto holder on the Security Council and the source of much of North Korea’s fuel and food, remains wary of expanded U.S. influence at its doorstep.

North Korea has also increased the stakes by saying it will consider any step toward sanctions an act of war. Though it would surely lose any military conflict with the United States, the nation could inflict serious damage in the interim, either directly by using its arsenal or indirectly, given the probable outpouring of refugees.

The IAEA’s measured pace in referring North Korea to the Security Council reflects its dilemma and the international community’s lack of palatable options right now. The Vienna-based agency was originally scheduled to pass the issue to the council on Feb. 3. But it extended the deadline to today, ostensibly to give Pyongyang more time to cooperate, but also in hopes that the agency wouldn’t have to take the next step, analysts said.

The move to the Security Council also fuels a tit-for-tat debate that’s been going on between Pyongyang and Washington for weeks. The administration insists any meeting between the two sides take place with the involvement of other countries on the grounds the problem is multilateral, and it says it won’t succumb to what it calls blackmail. Pyongyang argues that the U.S. is the one making the decisions, so any meeting should be bilateral.

North Korea in recent weeks has snubbed envoys and ignored back-channel European and Asian requests to back down.

“North Korea views anyone other than the U.S. as a distraction right now,” said Choi Jang Jip, a professor at Korea University in Seoul. “In my view, North Korea would be highly reluctant to admit to an IAEA solution in any form.”

In fact, the IAEA and the Security Council have been in this situation before. A decade ago, during another North Korean nuclear crisis, the agency also referred the issue to the council. At that time, the Clinton administration agreed to take on the problem by negotiating directly with Pyongyang.

Analysts expect the council to make a pro forma statement of condemnation before in effect burying the issue. If nothing else, that may buy some time.

North Korea is under more time pressure than the United States in the standoff, analysts say. It hopes to extract concessions from Washington, whereas the administration is distracted by Iraq and presumably in a weaker bargaining position. Pyongyang fears that once the Iraq issue is settled, North Korea could become the next object of Washington’s military might.

“Of course, North Korea will just keep upping the ante by trying to ramp up the pressure on the peninsula,” Lee said. “But the Security Council will just issue some calls for more diplomacy or persuasion and let them stew.”