Thursday, September 7, 2017

North Korea: Getting Trump to Act Out of Character,”




Background Briefing: North Korea: Getting Trump to Act Out of Character Carlyle A. Thayer September 5, 2017
We seek your assessment about the latest North Korean nuclear test. Its hydrogen bomb test on Sunday raised fears that Pyongyang is getting close to constructing a nuclear-tipped missile that could reach the United States. The weapon was the most powerful North Korea has tested to date. The test also immediately raised new questions about U.S. Korea strategy and President Donald Trump’s likely response. We request your response to the following questions: Q1 – In your assessment, what does it mean for North Korea to test a nuclear bomb on September 3? ANSWER: This is North Korea’s sixth nuclear test. North Korea’s test of a hydrogen bomb is a demonstration that it is continuing to develop advanced nuclear technology at a faster pace than the U.S. intelligence community estimated. The test of a hydrogen bomb also demonstrates that North Korea is a de facto nuclear state outside the international nuclear control regime. Q2 – Why did North Korea test a nuclear bomb at this time? ANSWER: North Korea says it is responding to joint military exercises carried out by South Korea and the United States. North Korea is most likely reacting to threats by President Donald Trump to unleash “fire and fury” at North Korea if it threatens the United States, its possessions such as Guam, or its allies. North Korea uses nuclear brinkmanship to deter the United States from attacking it and to demonstrate the futility of a military threats. In other words, if the U.S. attacks North Korea first, North Korea will respond with a devastating attack on South Korea and/or Japan where U.S. forces are stationed. Q3 - How North Korea nuclear test put pressure on U.S., its allies (South Korea, Japan) and China? ANSWER: North Korea’s nuclear posture also aims to play on divisions among the United States and its allies, South Korea and Japan, and, as well, divisions between the United States and China. At the moment, North Korea does not have the capacity to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead and strike the continental United States. If a war broke out North Korea could inflict serious damage
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123

 2
and mass casualties on South Korea and to a lesser extent Japan. If the U.S. launches a pre-emptive attack on North Korea it will be South Korea that suffers the most. North Korea’s actions are also designed to raise doubts in Seoul and Tokyo that the United States is willing to go to war to defend these countries and, at the same time, to stoke fears of war in these countries. North Korea seeks to exploit differences between China and the United States. China does not want the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defence) ballistic missile system in South Korea because it reduces the value of China’s nuclear strike capability. China does not want the North Korean regime to collapse because this would generate hundreds of thousands of Korean refugees. Nor does China want to see Korea united and under U.S. influence. The U.S. will press China to rigidly enforce sanctions and to cut off trade. China will resist this. Q4 - International reaction to North Korea’s nuclear test has not been uniform. While the U.S. has talked up a military response, other world powers have emphasised different approaches. In your assessment, how should Trump administration respond? ANSWER: China and Russia have reached a common understanding on how the Korean crisis should be resolved. They urge both sides – North Korea and South Korea/United States to stand down from military posturing. How should the Trump Administration respond? The answer to this question partly lies with getting Donald Trump to act out of character and stop tweeting threats and using bellicose language. His actions only encourage Kim Jong-un to engage in brinkmanship to demonstrate that Trump is a paper tiger. The Trump Administration should continue to pursue diplomacy through the UN Security Council. The Trump Administration should give current sanctions time to become effective. And the Trump Administration should step up pressure on China to use its economic leverage on North Korea. In other words, Trump should give sanctions a chance. At the same time, the Trump Administration should continue to signal its resolve to respond to any North Korean missile attack on South Korea, Japan and Guam. Q5 –In your assessment, what is the knot in the current Korean crisis? Who could be a possible mediator in this crisis? ANSWER: The knot in the current Korean crisis is that the Korean War (1950-53) ended in an armistice but not a peace settlement. North Korea fears that its national security is under threat from U.S. military forces in South Korea and Japan. Therefore, in order to protect itself North Korea has developed nuclear weapons and is now developing the means to deliver these weapons. South Korea and the United States believe that North Korea poses a threat to their security. North Korea has few friends it can trust and so it is unlikely to accept a third-party mediator. What is needed is a broker, a country that can act behind the scenes to bring North Korea and South Korea to the negotiating table and/or sponsor secret talks between North Korea and the United States. Q6 –What happens next? Is there a peaceful way out of the North Korea crisis?

 3
ANSWER: North Korea is poised to launch more ballistic missiles. This raises the stakes for Donald Trump who declared that the time for talk was over. We are entering a period of brinkmanship, uncertainty and the real prospect of armed conflict. As U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis observed, there are always diplomatic options. The best that can be hoped for in the coming months is a stand-off. Prospects for a peaceful settlement could be addressed by reconvening of the Six Party talks and negotiations among all the parties on a grand bargain in which the security interests of all parties are respected and catered for. Among the issues to be resolved are the status of North Korea’s nuclear weapons. Should there be a freeze and international inspection? Should the Korean peninsula be denuclearized? What would be the trade off – a phased withdrawal of U.S. military forces and a moratorium on joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises? What forms of economic assistance should be given to North Korea? Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “North Korea: Getting Trump to Act Out of Character,”
Thayer Consultancy Background Brief


 3
ANSWER: North Korea is poised to launch more ballistic missiles. This raises the stakes for Donald Trump who declared that the time for talk was over. We are entering a period of brinkmanship, uncertainty and the real prospect of armed conflict. As U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis observed, there are always diplomatic options. The best that can be hoped for in the coming months is a stand-off. Prospects for a peaceful settlement could be addressed by reconvening of the Six Party talks and negotiations among all the parties on a grand bargain in which the security interests of all parties are respected and catered for. Among the issues to be resolved are the status of North Korea’s nuclear weapons. Should there be a freeze and international inspection? Should the Korean peninsula be denuclearized? What would be the trade off – a phased withdrawal of U.S. military forces and a moratorium on joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises? What forms of economic assistance should be given to North Korea? Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “North Korea: Getting Trump to Act Out of Character,”
Thayer Consultancy Background Brief
, September 5, 2017. All background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the mailing list type, UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key. Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.

No comments: