Saner heads should prevail on North Korea
American President Donald Trump can threaten Kim Jong-un all he wants. But there’s little he can actually do against the North Korean leader for his recent provocative missile launch over Japanese territory.
Even Trump’s recent steps to tighten UN sanctions against Pyongyang, along with the interdiction of North Korean ships carrying goods to or from North Korea, are unlikely to block North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.
However, economic and trade restrictions imposed by China on Pyongyang could have an effect if actually strictly enforced, which remains questionable.
While Trump predictably issued threats of what would befall North Korea if it continued its intercontinental missile tests, including unleashing “fire and fury like the world has never seen,” Kim nevertheless continued the missile tests.
In his latest threat, Trump warned that “all options are on the table.” However, according to many observers, that dire warning is divorced from reality.
Paradoxically, someone who has bluntly dismissed Trump’s military threats against Kim is Steve Bannon, Trump’s former major political adviser, who was recently fired for various reasons, including opposition from White House rivals.
Bannon, who quickly returned to his role in charge of the right-wing Breitbart News, said there was no realistic way such action could be taken because of the large-scale bloodshed and devastation it would unleash on next-door South Korea, as well as on American military forces stationed in South Korea, Japan and Guam.
Bannon is not alone in his analysis. Even senior American officers have privately expressed the view that taking military action, including surgical strikes against North Korea’s nuclear complex and launch pads, would not prevent an immediate military response from Kim.
Since the South Korean capital is less than an hour’s drive from the border with North Korea, millions in Seoul could be killed by massive deployment of missiles along the border and North Korea’s well trained army and special-forces units. (North Korea has more than one million military personnel.)
Considering these realities, it’s understandable that neither South Korea’s relatively new President Moon Jae-in nor Japan’s President Shinzo Abe would willingly back military action against North Korea.
By dismissing the option of using military force, Bannon has made it clear Trump’s threats are undermined by the stark, unpalatable realities on the ground. Such threats are simply pointless and without value.
Now that Bannon is gone, those surrounding Trump, especially three key former high-ranking U.S. generals, one being his new White House chief of staff, will have the challenge of trying to introduce a sense of reality in the president’s dubious mind.
This won’t be easy, as Trump seems immune to the ability to operate rationally.
His recent granting of a pardon to former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, facing sentencing for violating the rights of suspected illegal immigrants, shows the president has little regard for the U.S. democratic system, including the rule of law.
Some even fear Trump might deliberately provoke a military confrontation with North Korea to rally the American population around his faltering leadership.
To prevent such an unthinkable action, saner heads must make every effort to refocus the U.S. policy toward finding a workable nonmilitary solution to the crisis.
Key elements would require some form of non-aggression agreement involving North Korea, South Korea, the U.S. and Japan, along with trade and economic assistance to North Korea.
The status of North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs would be a contentious issue in any negotiations, but such a discussion would be essential in reaching an understanding with Pyongyang.
North Korea bought into that kind of agreement in the past, before hardliners in the U.S. Congress undermined American compliance with the agreement. Harry Sterling, a former diplomat, is an Ottawa based commentator. He served in South Korea.