18 Months Later – How has the whole North Korea thing played out? Would a patient “Carrot and Stick” approach be part of the solution? What if we make North and South Korea strong Western allies?
As North Korea’s former American Ambassador to South Korea, Chris Hill, and others, articulate, “There are, no doubt, problems and even crises in the world that go away on their own. The North Korean nuclear issue is not one of them (http://time.com/north-korea-opinion/).
On September 4, 2017, I posted my assessment of the then current circumstances between the U.S. and North Korea. It was a time when most in the military were leaning hard forward and preparing for a confrontation with North Korea. Even my military reserve unit was prepared to engage in specific missions, with specific units, in specific locations. We were ready.
Now, slightly more than 18 months later, where does the situation stand? We of course have not engaged in a war with North Korea, President Trump has met with the North Korea leader in an effort to seek better diplomatic circumstances, and North Korea still possess nuclear weapons. And, as for China, it is self-evident that they like circumstances just the way they are. Overt war was averted – for the moment.
President Trump tried a different approach that had not been tried in the past. He first threatened North Korea with the deployment of multiple U.S. carrier strike groups, ground force mobilizations, and preparations for a preemptive military strike. When that threat abated with a softening of tensions, diplomatic negotiations ensued, but currently to no resolutions.
Folks, we have to be painfully clear on North Korea’s position. Possessing nuclear weapons ensures the security of their regime. They would be foolish to voluntarily give up the investment they have made in acquiring these weapons. They will not voluntarily negotiate away or honor any treaties to dismantle their nuclear program. North Korea will not give up nuclear weapons - I wouldn’t, and neither would you.
Yet, simply possessing them will not be enough. North Korea engages in all manner of international crime and weapons proliferation to sustain their perceived interests. If I were North Korea, I would leverage my nuclear capabilities and weigh the merits of selling them to the highest bidder. I would also consider proliferating my technology to third parties, and terrorist groups, if I felt doing so would weaken my enemies. Count on it.
So, what do we do about it now? President Trump should be given some credit for boldly trying different approaches. Unfortunately, in lending legitimacy to Chairman Kim Jung Un, nothing measurably productive has come from it. Thus far, President Trump’s efforts have failed to protect America from this festering threat that only promises to get worse with time. The oppressive North Korean dictatorship is still intact, they still have nuclear weapons they threaten America with, and we are no better off. Are we worse off? The answer is “of course” yes, we are worse off! Imagine, North Korea, a country that possesses the capability fire nuclear weapons and strike America, and a single dictator who controls the ability to simply wake up one morning and launch them. That’s where we are. Scary, right?!
I assert that we continue to seek circumstances in North Korea for opportunities to disarm their WMD threat to the world. America, and our allies, must continue to stand tightly together, and we must continue to take bold deliberate measures to employ the tools of pressure American and our friends can exert to find solutions to achieve our objectives in the long term and be prepared to engage worst case confrontation scenarios in the short term before North Korea becomes an even greater threat. Patience, regime undermining efforts, and continued diplomacy are at this moment the best courses of action. Because, and as I have said before, when you see the words “North Korea” overlay the word “China.” The chessboard is more complex than simply narrowing focus on North Korea alone.
America must employ all covert special operations, technological capabilities, and diplomatic means to denuclearize and undermine North Korea, and contain their attempts to proliferate nuclear technologies to other nations and terrorist groups. Rushing to war, however, is risky, costly, and uncertain, and, unfortunately, cannot be left off the table as an option either. And, admittedly recognizing the risks of overt war, as we have seen in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, our recent adventures have cost us in treasure dearly resulting in huge financial debts, not to mention loss of life and credibility with our allies, with no tangible positive results. Caution and intelligent policy is best advised.
In spite of America’s best efforts, circumstances over the last decade and a half have resulted in strengthening Iran over Iraq as a regional hegemon in the middle east, who is also seeking nuclear weapons by the way. America is still engaged in its longest war with Afghanistan, and is now negotiating with the corrupt Taliban, who the American coalition overthrew, to resume legitimate participation in the control over the country (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/world/asia/taliban-peace-talks-qatar.html). And, Syria’s ally, Russia, has consolidated strategic gains in the Middle East with no end in sight for President Bashar Assad’s removal from power or the resurgence of extremist groups in the region (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-idlib/russia-syrian-army-step-up-attacks-on-rebel-held-northwestern-syria-residents-medics-idUSKCN1S80KG). The point is, rushing to war with North Korea, if recent outcomes are any gauge of success, may not be the right strategic approach to solving North Korea. A more intelligent nuanced approach, with a sense of urgency that includes indirect, and deliberate actions, is likely our best course of action.
The carrot and the stick. Perhaps we should set the conditions for North Korea to recognize it is in their best interests to lean West and become a willing supporter of the Western vision of global stability, rule of law, and order. In the case of North Korea, perhaps the best strategic approach is to consider actions that on the one hand secure the current regimes control over their territory, work to make them an ally of the West, rather than a tool of China, and over time, soften their harsh paranoid policies toward their own people, and the West, until circumstances are ripe for North Korea to calculate it is in their best interests to lean West and willingly see it is in there best interests to join the Western vision global stability. While, on the other hand, also taking overt measures to make their current approach to maintaining their security ineffective and destabilizing the long-term viability of their regime. Carrot and stick.
Consider this. A reunification of the Korean peninsula takes away the argument the West has to have a physical presence in territory bordering China. This is an important consideration. China would love reunification and assert it’s claims of a “One-China” that includes the territory of the Korean peninsula – just as they have re-acquired Hong Kong, and continue to make claim to Tibet, the entire South China Sea, and Taiwan. You know its true and you would do the same – get the West out of the Korean peninsula and off my border, China would say. So, finding a way to keep all of Korea (North and South) strong Western allies, is perhaps an intelligent strategic move in the chess game of geopolitical strategy – and in America’s best interests. Can you imagine, a Western leaning North / South Korea with nuclear weapons on China’s back door? Maybe this is a strategy America needs to embrace since in the long term, it would be a win-win outcome for both America and the Korea’s, and in the direction of countering China’s continual efforts to exert power over, and undermine, Western allies in the Asian region.
In summary, the approaches we have taken in the past have simply not worked, overt war is costly, and in recent years has not yielded the results we hoped for. Why not consider the more strategic implications at play in Asia and work to employ a “Carrot and Stick” strategy to the Korea’s. In my estimation, we have everything to gain in such a pragmatic win-win approach. We need to consider the bigger picture. We need to think outside the box and break the State Department and Pentagon “Group Think” that considers strategies that focus primarily on North Korea as a problem to solve isolated to its peninsula verses the greater strategic cards that must be considered in the competition for control and stability in the Asian theater.