[Kim Ji-hyun ] Who’s the peninsula’s real bully?

South Korea is a country with a big headache: North Korea.

The North has lately been more intensely provocative. This week, it fired a short-range rocket. Two weeks ago, it was medium-range ballistic missiles. Before that, it was a nuclear test.

And now, U.S. President Barack Obama, President Park Geun-hye and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe are meeting in Washington on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit.

While this is a welcome development because it means the world leaders are actually trying to do something about the issue, it will not necessarily amount to anything of substance.

It is like holding a parent-teacher meeting about how to handle a school bully after the bully has already administered one too many black eyes to the puny child who sits next to him in class.

The parents and teachers can admonish and punish the bully all they want, but unless they help the victims step up their self-defense, the aggression will most likely continue.

Similarly, Seoul is void of any real means to beat -- or at the very least scare -- its aggressor. 

In terms of weaponry, it may be a few notches above Pyongyang, but Seoul has nothing that even measures up to the threat of a nuclear bomb. Not only that, it also lacks any means to maintain a balance of fear.

One can maintain a balance of fear and actually keep the enemy from attacking just by possessing a weapon equally powerful to the ones the enemy has.

Seoul does have Washington as an ally, but its support is in the form of protection under its nuclear umbrella. And perhaps Mr. Donald Trump is right and the expenses being accrued are getting to high for the U.S.

Bear in mind that this pact was created out of bilateral necessity. Washington wants to keep Seoul from arming itself with a nuclear arsenal. It also wants and needs South Korea’s support on key diplomatic issues. Seoul, on the other hand, can stay under Washington’s protection in return for not pursuing controversial armament of any kind.

But if you want to talk about fairness, maybe it should be viewed from South Korea’s perspective.

Is this a fair contract for South Korea? Perhaps it was considered fair enough a long time ago -- more than half a century ago.

Perhaps it was fair enough when the country was run by military dictators who had no real vision about national interests when they were inaugurated as presidents.

Perhaps it was fair enough when North Korea was governed by a tyrant who was as provocative as the incumbent Kim Jong-un but was not in such a weak position.

Under the current circumstances, however, it seems like past assurances are offering no real help to Seoul in keeping itself and its people safe. With the elections coming up, nobody really seems to care about security issues, especially politicians who do not want to lose any votes from liberals at a point when conservatives have fallen out of favor.

If Washington really wants to keep South Korea safe, it should help the Seoul government beef up its defense policies. It should help the country arm itself with means that would at least maintain a balance of fear, and allow it to be such that China will not stand in the way. 

As for Japan, it would be nice if Abe could muster up some effort to disguise that it is only for his country’s benefit that he wants to keep the rogue state in check.

Perhaps in return for more endorsements from the U.S. to reinforce its defense, Tokyo could play a bigger role in persuading Washington to allow Seoul more alternatives to protect itself from Pyongyang.

Now that I have laid it all out, it is a little confusing as to who the real bully is. Regardless, unless the victims can stand up for themselves, the harassment will never stop.

By Kim Ji-hyun (jemmie@heraldcorp.com)

Korea Herald correspondent