朝鲜会为了和平条约给我们什么吗？ [美国媒体]

Will North Korea Give Us Anything for a Peace Treaty

朝鲜会为了和平条约给我们什么吗？

This peace treaty is not about peace; it's about recognition.
by Robert E. Kelly

这个和平条约不是关于和平的，而是关于对朝鲜的承认。
作者：罗伯特·凯利



Image: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visits the Fatherland Liberation War Martyrs Cemetery in this undated photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on July 27, 2018.

图片：朝鲜中央通讯社（朝中社）于2018年7月27日发布的这张未注明日期的照片中，朝鲜领导人金正恩凭吊了祖国解放战争烈士陵园。

The latest rumor this summer about the inter-Korean détente process is that a peace treaty is under clandestine discussion. The four main players—the two Koreas, China, and the United States—are apparently considering how to formally end the Korean War. The hostilities of the Korean War, 1950–53, halted with an armistice. No formal conclusion was ever signed. The liberal government of current South Korean president Moon Jae-in has sought significant outreach to the North. Formally ending the war is a part of that.

有关今年夏天朝韩缓和局势进程，最新传言是说和平条约正在秘密讨论中。四个主要角色——朝鲜、韩国、中国和美国——显然正在考虑如何正式结束朝鲜战争。1950 - 1953年的朝鲜战争的敌对行动随着停战而终止，但并没有签署任何正式的结论文件。现任韩国总统文在寅的自由政府一直在寻求与朝鲜进行有意义的接触，正式结束战争正是其中的一部分。



A peace treaty is another step on the road to recognition of North Korea, legitimizing its existence, despite being an orwellian tyranny, and formalizing the arbitrary division of the peninsula. Importantly now, both the South Korean and American leaders no longer seem to care about this. President Moon seems prepared to recognize North Korea as a distinct Korean state apart from the South in the interest of détente. The South Korea left has long thought that the United States is as much responsible for the division as North Korea. If peace means the United States leaves South Korea, then reconciliation and eventual unification will follow. The United States has long resisted this logic, but under President Donald Trump, the United States no longer cares about this worry. Trump’s primary interest in Korea is the perception of a political victory for domestic purposes. He cares little for the U.S. position in Asia or U.S. alliances generally. He has very publicly talked down the U.S.-South Korean alliance.

尽管朝鲜实行着奥威尔式的暴政，但和平条约是承认朝鲜的路径上的另一重要步骤，将使其存在合法化，并使朝鲜半岛的主观分裂正式化。重要的是，现在韩国和美国领导人似乎都不再关心这个问题。为了缓和局势，文在寅总统似乎准备承认朝鲜是一个不同于韩国的独特的朝鲜民族国家。韩国左派长期以来一直认为美国和朝鲜一样对半岛分裂负有责任。如果实现和平意味着美国要离开韩国，那么和解及最终的统一将随之而来。美国一直抵制这种逻辑，但是在唐纳德·特朗普总统的领导下，美国不再关注这种担心。特朗普对韩国的主要兴趣是出于要收获其在美国国内政治胜利之目的。他对美国在亚洲或美国联盟中的地位漠不关心，也非常公开地抨击了美韩联盟。

So there is now a unique window of opportunity for Moon to push a treaty through. But, as with so much else in this year’s very rapid détente, it is not clear why the democratic camp would agree to this new arrangement. The current lack of a peace treaty does not mean that Korea is on the cusp of war. This is common, but false, cliché in western reporting from Korea. Peace in Korea is quite stable. The deterrence and containment of North Korea by the United States and South Korea has worked for decades. If anything, it is North Korea which has routinely violated the peace, with attacks along the land and sea border going back decades. So a peace treaty is not actually about peace.

因此，现在文在寅有一个独特的机会窗口来推动一项条约的通过。但是，就像今年非常迅速的局势缓和时的其他许多事情一样，不清楚民主党阵营为什么会同意这一新的安排。当前和平条约的缺位也并不意味着朝鲜就正处于战争的边缘。这在关于朝鲜半岛的西方报道中是很常见的，但却是虚假的陈词滥调。朝鲜半岛的和平相当稳定。美国和韩国对朝鲜的威慑和遏制已经持续了几十年。如果说有什么不同的话，那就是朝鲜经常破坏和平，沿陆地和海上边界发生的袭击就如几十年前。因此，和平条约实际上不是关于和平的。

Rather the treaty is about recognition. A formal treaty with North Korea’s signature next to that of the United States and South Korea would be one more step on the way to the two-state solution North Korea has long sought. The more we, the democratic states, legally interact with North Korea, the more like a normal, legitimate state participant in the international community it becomes. This of course is the whole point of its diplomacy this year. Now that North Korea is safe behind its nuclear deterrent shield, it can bargain and deal to end its pariah status.

相反，条约是关乎对朝鲜的承认。如果随着美国和韩国，与朝鲜签署正式条约，这将会是朝鲜长期寻求的两国解决方案的又一进步。我们民主国家与朝鲜的合法互动越多，朝鲜就会越成为国际社会中一个正常、合法的国家参与者。这当然是其今年外交的全部要点。既然朝鲜在其核威慑盾牌的保护下是安全的，那么他们就可以讨价还价，以达成协议来结束其贱民地位。

There is of course a moral argument against this. Many hawks and human-rights advocates would arguing that legitimizing a totalitarian tyranny this awful is an error. North Korea is not a run-of-the-mill dictatorship, of course, like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and Bashar al-Assad’s Syria. It is far worse, literally akin to 1984 . But even if one is willing to accept that dealing with the actuality of North Korea is simply what we must do in the real world, there is still the missed opportunity of giving up a treaty—which we do not need and they want very much—for nothing.

当然，有一个道德上的理由来反对这一点。许多鹰派和人权倡导者会争辩说，这种将极权暴政合法化的可怕做法是错误的。朝鲜当然不像萨达姆·侯赛因的伊拉克和巴沙尔·阿萨德的叙利亚那样是一个普通的独裁政权。它要糟糕得多，有点像《一九八四》。但是，即使人们愿意接受处理朝鲜的现实，只是我们在现实世界中必须做的事情，仍然有机会放弃一项条约——我们不需要，他们也非常希望这样做——什么都不要。



Robert Kelly is an associate professor of international relations in the Department of Political Science at Pusan National University. More of his writing can be found at his website . He tweets at @Robert_E_Kelly.

罗伯特·凯利是釜山国立大学政治学系国际关系学副教授。他的更多作品可以浏览其个人网站。可以推特他@ Robert _ E _ Kelly。