Trouble in The East

By Kim Young Sam, James Gaines, Karsten Prager, Edward W. Desmond, Li Lanqing, Jaime A. FlorCruz, Mia Turner

Bill Clinton's Administration has proclaimed Asia "one of the most important regions for U.S. policy going into the 21st century." But recently U.S. Asia policy has taken a downward slide. Washington failed to persuade Japan to adopt tangible targets for opening specific segments of its market to more imports. Secretary of State Warren Christopher visited Beijing under a storm cloud of criticism from the Chinese, who accused the U.S. of interfering in their internal affairs by demanding human-rights improvements in order to continue granting China most-favored-nation trade status. And no sooner had Christopher returned home than North Korea resumed its stubborn cat-and-mouse game over nuclear inspection.

Last week a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that it had been prevented from examining equipment that would help determine whether Pyongyang has told the truth about its nuclear program. The North's refusal could set in motion a process of condemnation and sanctions from the U.N. Security Council and retaliation by Pyongyang that Washington has been negotiating for a year to avoid. On Saturday the North's nuclear negotiators stormed out of a meeting with the South. The U.N. may take the matter up this week; the U.S. has reportedly decided to resume plans to conduct joint military exercises with South Korea. North Korea has warned that it would consider these actions serious provocations. In Seoul last week TIME managing editor James Gaines, international managing editor Karsten Prager and Tokyo bureau chief Edward W. Desmond talked over the troubling events with South Korea's first civilian President in 32 years, Kim Young Sam, who will be in China this week for talks on the issue.

In Beijing the two TIME editors, bureau chief Jaime A. FlorCruz and reporter Mia Turner discussed the problem with Vice Premier Li Lanqing, who said China too prefers a nuclear-free Korean peninsula but has "limited" influence over Pyongyang. Li was more concerned about Clinton's human-rights campaign.

South Korea's Kim Young Sam

TIME: North Korea's nuclear program is an open secret. Are you confident they are acting rationally?

Kim: To be honest with you, North Korea is my greatest concern. I think seriously about this every day. I am sure that they are intent on acquiring nuclear weapons, but I don't think that there is any crystal-clear evidence that they have already acquired them. Unfortunately, we cannot trust any promises or pledges they make. In our experience, they abruptly broke all of them. It is also our experience that if you make concessions toward the North, then they come up with another demand for concessions, rather than making a positive response.

So it is difficult to imagine that you can give something to North Korea and expect the same substantial concessions to be made in return. This is exactly the difficulty the U.S. is experiencing now in its dialogue with the North. It is difficult to deal with North Korea patiently, but I think time is on our side. Even if North Korea can develop nuclear weapons clandestinely, that route will lead to its self-destruction. The most important thing in all of this is to persuade North Korea to open its doors and participate in the international community.

At the moment, our government is not publicly denouncing or criticizing North Korea. I made that decision in order to help the negotiations produce a meaningful result. North Korea, however, still denounces the Republic of Korea 13 hours a day in their broadcasting. I don't know what is their ultimate goal; it is very difficult to see in rational terms what they really want to achieve.

This is one of the important items that I will raise when I go to China on March 26. I expect the Chinese side will agree with our position that North Korea should not have nuclear weapons, and I think they have much potential influence they can exercise on North Korea.

TIME: Is reunification with the North in your interest?

Kim: It will be a great burden for South Korea to try to absorb North Korea, as it was for West Germany to absorb East Germany. I made it very clear several times that we are not interested in unilaterally absorbing North Korea. Instead we must take time and patience to move closer together. Instant gratification is out of the question. Based on this philosophy, we are trying not to provoke North Korea unnecessarily.

TIME: Japanese Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa has issued the most eloquent apology yet for its World War II occupation of Korea. Do you consider the chapter closed?

Kim: We have a long, unfortunate history. When the Prime Minister admitted last year that Japan invaded Korea, I think he honestly apologized. I have made it very clear that we don't need any monetary compensation. What we need from Japan is moral recognition of its wrongdoing. We should not be burdened by what happened in history, although we should not forget what happened in the past. It is very important for Korea and Japan, and for that matter, for peace in Asia.

TIME: How fast will you open up your markets?

Kim: My philosophy is that we should handle the rising competition by opening our markets and upgrading the quality of our products rather than just trying to protect ourselves. I admit that in the past there were unnecessary regulations that were very cumbersome for foreigners to deal with. I established a special task force to find these unnecessary regulations and make the business climate for foreigners much more favorable. Now, for example, foreigners can buy land in Korea, which was impossible before. Someday foreigners will say it is easiest to do business in Korea.

TIME: How have you achieved an unexpected degree of political reform?

Kim: There is a saying in Korea that only clean upstreams make clean downstreams. The President should take the initiative in creating a clean society. I pledged not to accept one dollar in political donations from outside, and by doing so, I am assured support from the people. We also made high-ranking officials disclose their personal wealth. You can't have something and hide it anymore, which is a kind of revolution in Korea.

I would like to create a society where the rule of democracy and the rule of law make a difference, and we are moving in that direction. Whether it is factory workers or business leaders, they find the society we are now creating is much more comfortable. For example, business leaders used to have to donate as much as one-third of their profits to the military regime. They don't have to do this anymore. I tell them, "If you have extra money that you would like to spend, don't give it to me: give it to your own employees."

TIME: Will the military stay out of politics for good?

Kim: Only two or three days after my inauguration, I started to reorganize the military radically. All those officials who participated in past coups d'etat were replaced. Military morale is high at the moment because there is a feeling that if you don't intervene in politics you can be promoted according to normal military procedures. It is a kind of renaissance of the Korean military: they are comfortably back in the barracks.

China's Li Lanqing

TIME: Your government certainly made it clear to Secretary of State Warren Christopher that it does not believe human rights should affect China's most- favored- nation status.

Li: China is a country that attaches importance to human rights. Although we have not yet acceded to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we do support these documents. Due to differences in history, religious beliefs and the level of economic development, countries cannot have exactly identical concepts of human rights. That is where the differences and the problem between our two countries lie. We are most concerned about our right to development and subsistence. We have to support 22% of the world's population on 7% of the world's arable land. At the same time we are striving to improve the living standards of our people. That is what the Chinese government and people care about most at this stage.

One should not link irrelevant issues to trade because in the long run it might harm the U.S. MFN is the basis for normal trade between our countries. Should there be problems with that, it would mean a great retrogression in our relations. It would also mean that the U.S. does not care about sacrificing its position in the China market, perhaps permanently. Supposedly a government should represent the interests of the American business community as well as the American people.

TIME: A lot of the opposition in the U.S. is a reflection of public dismay over Tiananmen Square. How do you deal with that?

Li: Some facts should be set straight. Not a single person was actually killed in Tiananmen Square. ((Western estimates are that at least 400 to 800 protesters were killed.)) No other government would have shown such tolerance toward the demonstrators for so long. Should a similar incident happen in the U.S., I can imagine how your President would handle it because I know how the U.S. handled the riots in Los Angeles. One should not exercise double standards. It seems to me that some politicians in the U.S. do not have firm principles in handling these kinds of matters.

TIME: Are you hopeful that the human rights/MFN issue will be resolved?

Li: We are a reasonable people, but you had better refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of China because we are a people with a strong sense of pride. We are ready to conduct a dialogue with you on the question of human rights, but one should not link irrelevant matters with trade.

TIME: What does China think about North Korea's nuclear threat?

Li: North Korea is China's friendly neighbor. We think a solution should be found to the question of its nuclear capability through dialogue. We hope that the Korean peninsula will be nuclear free.

TIME: How can China help to assure that?

Li: We will play our role in accordance with our policies and principles. But the role that China can play is a limited one. We cannot directly interfere.

TIME: What would Chairman Mao make of China today?

Li: ((Laughs)) I believe if Chairman Mao were alive today, he would be satisfied because the economy has been developing; the living standards of the people are rising. He would not say things are bad.

From the number of questions you raised, you can see how difficult it is to be an official in China. We have so many problems on our plate. Each day we have to study these problems and try to find solutions. By comparison, officials in your country do not have that many problems. That is why they can find time to mind other countries' business.