Dealing with North Korea

Re: Trump best defence against nuclear- armed world, Conrad Black, Sept. 23

Mr. Black’s pro-Trump editorial neglects the fact that North Korea, in partnership with China, put an offer on the table in 2015, proposing to scrap its nuclear program if the U.S. would stop staging threatening military exercises on its southern border. This offer was rejected first by Obama, and then again by Trump, who recently began flying nuclear- capable B-1B bombers along that southern border in deliberate provocation. The China- North Korea offer is presumably still viable, and presumably could still be accepted. Surely this would be a better option than Black’s hoped for “pre- emptive strike” against North Korea’s artillery systems, which are trained on the city of Seoul and thus would almost certainly cause vast civilian casualties.

Black also claims that North Korea “successfully cheated three American administrations” by continuing its nuclear program. Actually, North Korea dismantled its program under an agreement with the Clinton administration that involved a cessation of U. S. aggression — an agreement that was unilaterally shredded in an erratic move by George Bush Jr., leading North Korea predictably to resume its program.

Trump’s recent war-mongering rhetoric has again resulted in a predictable uptick in missile launches and counter threats. In short, as any charitable observer of history can surmise, North Korea’s nuclear program is designed as a deterrent against U. S. aggression, which is why it predictably escalates and de-escalates in response to U. S. aggression. After all, North Koreans tend to remember the carpet bombing and war crimes committed by the U. S. during the Korean War, even if Mr. Black doesn’t. Glenn McCullough, Toronto