What North Korea really wants
What does Kim Jong Un want? One thing: security.
Kim declared last week that North Korea has completed the task of building a nuclear deterrent. It will return to the task of building its economy and prosperity instead. Indeed, it will “stop nuclear tests and launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles,” and even shut down a nuclear weapons test site.
He’s obviously laying out his negotiating position for the summit meetings that are planned for this month with South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in and for next month with U.S. President Donald Trump. He clearly wants a deal.
A little story from the Cold War. I only realized how deeply I had been affected by the propaganda I had heard all my young life when I attended my first NATO military exercise in Europe as a journalist. It was the same exercise scenario as always, with Russian tanks surging forward to overrun Western Europe and outnumbered NATO troops struggling to halt the attack.
I did know that NATO wasn’t really outnumbered. It had almost twice as many people as the Soviet Union and its allies, and at least four times the wealth. It just chose to have smaller armies because soldiers are very expensive to maintain, and relied instead on the early use of nuclear weapons. But I had never questioned the threat of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. Nobody did.
Then one day, I was interviewing a senior British army officer and for some reason I asked the obvious question I had never bothered to ask before. What scenario did the Russians use when they ran their military exercises?
Oh, he said airily, their scenarios imagine that we have invaded East Germany, but after a few days they manage to turn it around and start pushing us back west. When their tanks are breaking through the Fulda Gap we use nukes to stop them, and the whole thing rapidly escalates into a general nuclear exchange.
Well, of course. Would the Russians tell their troops that they were launching a deliberate attack on the West that would end in a full-scale nuclear war? No. As the weaker side in the long confrontation, would they ever even consider doing that? Probably not. But I had never considered the fact that the Russians were afraid of us.
It had simply not occurred to me before that a country that had been invaded by everybody from Napoleon to Hitler, and had lost at least 20 million killed in the Second World War, might be obsessed about the threat of being attacked by us. We were the good guys: surely they must realize that we would never do that. But OF COURSE they didn’t.
The Kim dynasty inherited a devastated country at the end of the Korean War in 1953. Its cities were levelled and at least a million people had been killed. The American troops stayed in South Korea. Moreover, the Americans had nuclear weapons and would not promise not to use them — and there was no peace treaty, just an armistice.
The Kims built a very big army, and started working on their own nukes as soon as the economy had been rebuilt to the required level. However, that big army created a threat perception in the U.S. and South Korea.
So how might you negotiate your way out of this futile and dangerous confrontation? Pyongyang won’t give up the nuclear deterrent it has worked so long and hard to build: there’s not enough trust for that. But Kim is saying that he is willing to leave it at its current small and technologically primitive level. It’s no real threat to the U.S. in its present form.
Concentrate instead on a peace treaty that gives North Korea a sense of security at last. Demand that Pyongyang reduces its army to the same size as South Korea’s. And promise that once those cuts have been made, the U.S. troops in South Korea will go home.
It might work. It’s certainly worth a try.
Gwynne Dyer’s new book, ‘Growing Pains: The Future of Democracy (and Work),’ is published this month in Canada by Scribe.