By Kim Yeon-chul, former minister of unification and current professor at Inje UniversityNorth Korea does not adhere to ideology but pursues its own interests. While a considerable number of people mistakenly believe that North Korea is invested in ideology, North Korea isn’t an activist movement, but a state. Pyongyang even officially declared that, when it came to inter-Korean relations, all that was left was “cool-headed calculation and strict response for our national interests.” The Lee Jae Myung administration also pursues pragmatic diplomacy that prioritizes state interest above all else. In this respect, the diplomatic approaches of both North and South Korea appear to be aligned. If the two sides can identify a shared balance of interests, we could open a new chapter in inter-Korean relations.But if that is the case, why do our interests continue to diverge rather than converge?Instead of interpreting the relationship among North Korea, China and Russia as part of a new Cold War bloc, we need to reinterpret it through the lens of North Korea’s national interests. North Korea acquired cutting-edge military technology, secured crude oil, food, and cash for its economy, and found a way around international sanctions after joining Russia in its war with Ukraine. Even during the Cold War, North Korea and Russia were never bound by genuine ideological solidarity. But now, their relationship is an alliance maintained strictly through the alignment of interests. The structural limitations of the North Korea-Russia relationship are very clear. Russia lacks the capacity to make large-scale investments in North Korea due to its war with Ukraine. The logistics network is too distant to be economically viable, and a long history of limited trade has left a weak foundation for cooperation. Methods to circumvent sanctions, such as ruble-denominated payments or bartering, also have their limitations. Additionally, no matter how friendly the relationship between the two countries is, only a small number of Russian tourists would travel to the tourist zone in the Wonsan-Kalma area. This is why North Korea-China relations remain significant. From China’s perspective, cooperation with North Korea is crucial to revitalize the economy of its underdeveloped northeastern region. North Korea has also gained purchasing power through cash revenue earned from the war in Ukraine. Access to the East Sea via North Korea’s Najin Port could also transform China’s northeastern region. Meanwhile, North Korea needs China to cooperate if it is to succeed in the ambitious pursuit of its regional development policy. The two countries agreed at their bilateral summit to open all border trade crossings. Of course, unlike Russia, China maintains a policy of complying with sanctions on North Korea. As such, differences exist in China’s and Russia’s stances regarding such sanctions. However, China may actively pursue legitimate sectors such as transportation infrastructure, exercise flexibility in the gray area between legal and illegal activities, and loosen controls on informal trade. Cross-border trade between North Korea and China has a long history, is structurally intertwined, and has developed a solid foundation for cooperation, including payment settlements. North Korea’s economic strategy will change as North Korea-China economic cooperation increases. Until now, North Korea has pursued state-led plans for developing local industry. Under this model, the central government provides the funds and materials needed to build factories, the military constructs the facilities, and local authorities oversee operations. If an influx of low-cost Chinese consumer goods increases due to the expansion of trade with China, it will become difficult for consumer goods produced by local factories to remain price competitive. Therefore, the fundamental framework of the local industrial policy must be revised. The state-centered distribution of goods, a result of sanctions and COVID-19 lockdowns, must also change. Foreign currency that has accumulated at the state level due to the war in Ukraine must be channeled to the private sector. If North Korea-China trade, which is centered on market transactions, becomes more active, the role of the private sector will grow. There are also reports that Pyongyang is allowing the sale and transfer of real estate, a practice previously permitted only in Najin and Sonbong. North Korea’s pragmatic diplomacy is a strategy aimed at developing its economy that secures a deterrent through its nuclear arsenal, maximizes benefits between China and Russia, and guards against threats to its regime by labeling South Korea as a separate, hostile state. The Lee administration’s pursuit of pragmatic diplomacy is also gaining momentum. Pragmatism requires examining available means to narrow the choice between different plans. Inter-ministerial cooperation is crucial, and differences in opinion must be reconciled. However, institutions like the National Security Council are not functioning properly at the moment. Regarding the policy of peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula, inconsistent messages from diplomatic and defense authorities have caused neighboring countries to question Seoul’s sincerity. It is also quite common to see presidential aides make statements that contradict comments made by the president. Pursuing pragmatism means pursuing an open worldview that seeks to solve problems by making adjustments on the fly when things go wrong. I hope we can return to the true spirit of pragmatism. Policies that are trapped in the past or treat North Korea, China and Russia as enemies will not enable South Korea to pursue its national interest in this changed world. Only when South Korea puts forth its own strategy will it be able to be trusted as a mediator in North Korea-US or China-Japan relations. The power of mediation stems not from simply relaying words from one party to the other, but on the skill of offering alternative plans that can be agreed upon. Such plans can only be made through inter-departmental cooperation. North and South Korea must balance their interests if we are to achieve peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula. A new relationship could be ours to have if we find a way to seek our individual benefits without threatening the North Korean regime. The nature of the relationship should not be the focus of the matter. What is important is to define what each country’s interests are. Pragmatism requires a nuanced, fine-grained approach. If we continue to rely on the broad, rigid frameworks of the past, it will be difficult to identify areas where our interests align. Reaching a balance of interests also relies on the environment. Pragmatic diplomacy is only possible with strategic autonomy.