On North Korea, give Trump some credit

On North Korea, give Trump some credit
© Getty

June 12, 2018 could very well be a make-or-break moment for world peace, international stability and U.S. national security. This is when President Donald Trump flies to Singapore to look North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in the eyes and begin what could very well turn out to be a long, frustrating and stressful process of diplomatic horse trading.  

ADVERTISEMENT
This is not the first time an American president has attempted to negotiate in good faith with a Kim. We all know the general outlines of the story; Bill ClintonWilliam (Bill) Jefferson ClintonHypocrisy in Kavanaugh case enough to set off alarms in DC Getting politics out of the pit Kavanaugh and the 'boys will be boys' sentiment is a poor excuse for bad behavior MORE, George W. Bush, and Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaGetting politics out of the pit To cure Congress, elect more former military members Democrats should end their hypocrisy when it comes to Kavanaugh and the judiciary MORE all talked with the North Koreans and even managed to strike nuclear agreements them, but the deals eventually collapsed and the diplomatic process eventually broke down.

 

For a number of reasons — North Korean obfuscation, domestic U.S. politics, problems with verification  and the inherent paranoia embedded in the Kim regime’s very character — Washington and Pyongyang have yet to reach a mutually acceptable agreement that provides both sides with what they desperately want: Normalization and permanent security for the North and the complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization (CVID) for the U.S.  

The ultimate goal for the United States is the same as it has always been since the early 1990s.

What is different today is that the Kim regime is already a nuclear weapons power, which means the White House will have to offer more diplomatic and economic concessions to Pyongyang if it is to achieve a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula.

To the Trump administration’s credit, there appears to be something in the air that leads one to believe (or at least hope) that an agreement can in fact be struck. While we are still in the opening stages of the diplomatic process, the White House is taking diplomacy with the utmost seriousness. Senior administration officials, like Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoOvernight Defense: Air Force outlines plan for biggest force since end of Cold War | Trump admin slashes refugee cap | Mattis accuses Russia of meddling in Macedonia's NATO bid Hillicon Valley: Elon Musk sued by diver from Thai cave rescue | Researchers find new malware family | FEMA delays new presidential alert test Trump administration to cut refugee admissions to 30K for 2019 MORE, are saying all the right things and acknowledging that the United States cannot rely on economic strangulation and political pressure alone.  
If North Korea’s denuclearization is to be accomplished, Kim Jong Un will need to be granted assurances that he and his regime will be safe even without a nuclear arsenal and ICBM capability.

As Pompeo told Fox News last Sunday, “If we’re going to get to this historic outcome, both sides have to be prepared to take truly historic measures to achieve it.” For Washington, this will involve considerable sanctions relief, dropping regime change as a long-term U.S. objective, and normalizing relations with the North once the entirety of its nuclear weapons — including all of the centrifuges, research documents, testing sites, and plutonium facilities — are packed up and destroyed to America’s satisfaction.

The outline of a prospective agreement with the North is not a mystery. U.S. negotiators are well aware that CVID is the aspiration and that nothing short of that benchmark will be good enough to members of Congress.

If the White House wishes to avoid the possibility of the next president undoing what it achieved with the North Koreans, the Trump administration must submit any accord it signs to Congress for debate and ratification.  

And yet while we are all hoping and praying for a successful outcome, the U.S. must also prepare for the likelihood that no amount of concessions will persuade Kim Jong-inept to part ways with his “treasured sword.” Kim Kye Gwan, North Korea’s First Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, tempered expectations considerably in his May 15 statement, in which he scolded the U.S. for believing that Pyongyang would adopt a Libya-style denuclearization scheme up-front. “If the U.S. is trying to drive us into a corner to force our unilateral nuclear abandonment,” Gwan said, “we will no longer be interested in such dialogue and cannot but reconsider our proceeding to the DPRK-U.S. summit.”

So, if President TrumpDonald John TrumpOver 100 lawmakers consistently voted against chemical safeguards: study CNN's Anderson Cooper unloads on Trump Jr. for spreading 'idiotic' conspiracy theories about him Cohn: Jamie Dimon would be 'phenomenal' president MORE cannot come back to Washington with a nuclear agreement in hand, he need not worry — and neither does he need to resort to more forceful military options, which would very likely include the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the use of the very nuclear weapons Washington hopes to destroy.

Thanks to American power and leverage in the region, in addition to Kim Jong Un’s obsession with survival, the United States retains the capability to deter Pyongyang from rash actions.

We should all be cheering the Trump administration along as it embarks on its most important foreign policy mission yet. But we should also keep our expectations low and be level-headed and rational if things don’t go our way.

Daniel DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities, a D.C.-based foreign policy organization focused on a strong military to ensure security, stability and peace.