Korean Peninsula on High Alert: Why Denuclearization Remains the Ultimate Goal in US Presidential Election
The US presidential election, in which Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris will face off against Republican former President Donald Trump, is just one week away. Not only the United States but the entire world is paying attention to the results of this presidential election as it will determine the direction of U.S. foreign policy for the next four years. VOA has prepared a variety of special reports, including expert diagnoses and interviews, that look at the impact this presidential election will have on the security landscape of the Korean Peninsula and the region. Today, for the second time, we listened to experts’ advice on the next U.S. president’s policy toward the Korean Peninsula. This is reporter Jiha Ham.
US Korean Peninsula experts and former officials emphasized that the next US president should never give up efforts to ‘denuclearize the Korean Peninsula’, despite some arguing that US policy on the North Korean nuclear issue should be changed to ‘disarmament’.
We must not give up our goal of denuclearization.
Bruce Klingner, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said in a phone call with VOA on the 25th, “The moment we officially abandon this goal, there will be a number of serious ramifications.”
[녹취: 클링너 선임연구원] “There’s a problem with abandoning denuclearization as a formal objective. It goes against the requirements in 11 UN resolutions requiring North Korea to abandon all of its WMD programs. It would also undermine the legal authority of the sanctions that are part of the 11 U.N. resolutions. It would also go against the Nonproliferation Treaty and decades of U.S. nonproliferation policy… It can also, increase concerns by our allies that the US would be more willing to just negotiate limitations on weapons systems that directly impact the American homeland, like North Korean ICBMs, and leave in place the missiles that would target and threaten Japan and South Korea.”
In particular, he explained that if the United States were to give up on North Korea’s denuclearization, “this would violate the requirements of the 11 UN resolutions requiring North Korea to give up all weapons of mass destruction programs, and would also weaken the legal authority of the sanctions that are part of the resolutions.”
In addition, it not only violates U.S. non-proliferation policies such as the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but also states that “the U.S. only negotiates weapons systems that directly affect the U.S. mainland, such as North Korea’s intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and targets Japan and South Korea.” He pointed out, “The alliance’s concern that the missiles will be left as is may also increase.”
Scott Snyder, director of the Korea-U.S. Economic Research Institute (KEI), also told VOA, “Denuclearization means reversing the status quo in North Korea,” and added, “It remains the most important (US) policy goal.”
[녹취: 스나이더 소장] “Denuclearization, what that implies is a reversal of North Korea’s current position. And that, I think, remains an overarching policy objective… And so I would say that utilizing arms control measures as one of the possible means by which to achieve the objective of denuclearization is pretty different from, declaring, surrender and giving up and, and, and pursuing arms control as a form of recognition of North Korea as a nuclear state.”
Director Snyder said there are various ways to achieve the goal, saying, “Using ‘disarmament’ as one of the possible means for denuclearization, and pursuing ‘disarmament’ in the form of recognition of North Korea as a nuclear state, such as declaration, surrender, and abandonment, are quite reasonable.” “It’s different,” he pointed out.
Evans Revere, former senior deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said, “Pushing for ‘arms control’ talks with North Korea is essentially the same as acknowledging North Korea’s status as a nuclear state, and will provide North Korea with an opportunity to demand a reduction of U.S. forces in the future.” said.
[리비어 전 부차관보] “Pursuing ‘arms control’ talks with North Korea would be a major mistake. Such talks would amount to de facto acceptance of the DPRK’s status as a nuclear power… The only arms that North Korea seeks to “control” are those that ensure the defense of South Korea.”
We must pressure North Korea through trilateral cooperation.
Experts also proposed specific measures that the next president can implement within the larger goal of ‘denuclearization.’ However, as the North Korean issue is a ‘difficult problem’ that has not been resolved for decades, the focus was more on presenting various opinions that could advance the current deadlocked situation to the next level rather than on specific solutions.
In particular, all experts agreed that the new administration should strengthen cooperation between the United States, Korea, and Japan.
Joseph DeTrani, former deputy U.S. representative for the six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear issue, told VOA on the 25th, “The United States must become closer to the governments of South Korea and Japan than it is now,” and added, “Beyond the Washington Declaration, the United States must support Korea not only in North Korea but also in China, Russia, and Iran.” “We must clearly show that we are closely connected to the Japanese government,” he said.
[녹취: 디트라니 전 차석대표] “We have to be even closer to the ROK and to the government of Japan. We have to go beyond the Washington Declaration to, to enshrine, to make it very clear to North Korea, but also to China and Russia and Iran that the United States is closely aligned with the ROK and with the government of Japan… I think in fact, I think it makes it clearer to Kim Jong Un that he’s threatening behavior. His provocative behavior, is is just going to intensify that allied relationship of the United States, South Korea and Japan.”
Former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Revere said that in a situation where it is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve the goal of denuclearizing North Korea, the three countries, the United States, South Korea, and Japan, “have no choice but to take measures that greatly increase the price North Korea must pay if it continues to pursue nuclear weapons.” “The three countries must be made to understand that they will face severe isolation, poverty, strong sanctions, and continued military, political, and economic pressure,” he pointed out.
In particular, he said, “North Korea will reconsider its decision to become a nuclear-armed state when it becomes convinced that nuclear weapons can lead to a potentially fatal weakening of its regime,” and hoped that the next U.S. president would pursue policies while recognizing this fact.
Need to use various tools… “The North Korean issue must be raised as a priority.”
There was also advice to use all available tools.
Senior researcher Klingner said, “We have often seen the debate unfold within the false framework of a dichotomous choice between diplomacy and pressure,” adding, “In addition to these two (diplomacy and pressure) in a comprehensive and integrated strategy, other national tools “It is also necessary,” he emphasized. He advised, “We must utilize all means, including diplomacy, information flow, military, and economics.”
[녹취: 클링너 선임연구원] “Well, there’s unfortunately no magic solution to solving the many North Korean problems. We have tried a number of different approaches over the years. You know, we’ve often seen a debate devolve to, you know, sort of a false paradigm of a binary choice of, you know, diplomacy or pressure. And we need both of those as well as the other instruments of national power in a comprehensive, integrated strategy. So, you know, with the different lanes and the road of, sort of diplomacy, information operations, military and economic, we need to use all of them.”
Senior researcher Klingner said that although it is not easy, especially when it comes to diplomacy, we must continue to try to contact North Korea.
However, as the ‘door to dialogue’ has been closed for the past five years, ‘deterrence’ remains the top priority for now, and the US, Korea, and Japan will continue to cooperate when North Korea refuses dialogue, increases military power, and continues threatening rhetoric. He emphasized that it must be done.
Director Snyder advised the new president to break away from the practice of prioritizing the ‘North Korea issue’ as a result of ‘a specific incident.’
“One of the fundamental challenges (of the new administration) is how to get North Korea to the top of the priority list in a way that is not the result of some kind of tragedy or disaster,” he said.
[녹취: 스나이더 소장] “And so I think that actually, at this particular stage, regardless of who wins the election, one of the basic challenges is, how can North Korea rise to the top of the priority list, in a way that is not as a result of some kind of, tragedy or catastrophe. I can imagine North Korea rising to the top of the priority list because of something bad that happens. But I it’s hard for me to imagine that there would be an effective, sustained, positive policy outreach. So that’s one challenge.”
Since North Korea only gets the president’s attention when it does something ‘bad,’ it is “difficult to imagine that there will be an effective, sustainable, and positive policy approach.”
It was also pointed out that the Korean Peninsula issue should be dealt with through professional management.
Former Acting U.S. Ambassador to Korea Robert Rapson said in an email to VOA on the 28th, “If Vice President Harris wins, I hope she will appoint a strong, competent, and principled cabinet and national security team that includes Republicans.”
He also gave advice to the next president, saying, “The U.S. policy direction must be maintained,” and “The national security team will provide excellent recommendations and options, so I hope you do not rush into specific policies, including those in the Asia-Pacific region.”
Policies that are appropriate for the current critical security situation must be pursued.
Meanwhile, experts also focused on the fact that the security situation on the Korean Peninsula is critical and proposed policy approaches toward North Korea linked to this.
Former Deputy Representative DeTrani said, “We need to put something on the table that goes beyond the offer to meet anytime, anywhere,” and proposed ‘sanctions relief’ aimed at fully verified denuclearization of North Korea and ‘normalization of relations’ with the US, Korea, and Japan. I said I had to do it.
When asked whether such a plan would be perceived as ‘reward for bad behavior,’ he said, “When we don’t talk, North Korea is building more missiles and more nuclear weapons,” and added, “Now it is even helping Russia invade Ukraine.” “Yes,” he answered.
Robert Manning, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, said that for the next president, “managing stability on the Korean Peninsula will be a huge challenge in itself.”
[녹취: 매닝 선임연구원] “I think we’re in a new period in in that Kim’s behavior, his nuclear and missile buildup since the failed Hanoi summit in 2019… So all the assumptions that our diplomacy has operated under for the last 30 years are no longer applicable. So, it’s a so whenever policy you want, that’s your starting point. I see the Korean Peninsula a more dangerous than any time since 1950.”
He continued, “Given Kim Jong-un’s actions in strengthening nuclear weapons and missiles after the failure of the Hanoi summit in 2019, we have entered a new period,” adding that the reason North Korea changed its unification policy and strengthened its military power was to improve relations with the United States. He explained that it shows that there is no will to do so.
Therefore, he said, “Diplomacy that has continued for 30 years is no longer possible,” and that whatever policy the new administration wants, “it must start from this point.”
In particular, he argued that a second Yeonpyeong Island bombardment and a second Cheonan attack incident could occur in a situation where North Korea has defined South Korea as an ‘enemy country’, and that policies that focus on managing stability on the Korean Peninsula should be pursued.
North Korea-Russia cooperation makes calculations more complicated… Advice on using China
Experts also noted that resolving the North Korean issue has become more difficult due to the recently deepened military cooperation between North Korea and Russia.
He said the next administration could seek a solution by taking advantage of China, which is uncomfortable with the situation.
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Revere called this a “serious and dangerous development,” saying that North Korea’s military deployment to Russia could lead to Russia providing cutting-edge military technology.
“The United States, South Korea, and Japan must prepare to respond strongly to this new challenge,” he said, adding, “We must take steps to strengthen cooperation and increase deterrence.”
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Revere said that such actions by the U.S., South Korea, and Japan are “highly likely to destabilize China,” adding, “The moment China becomes convinced that strengthening military cooperation between Russia and North Korea is weakening its own security, it will try to slow down or stop North Korea-Russia cooperation.” “We can take action,” he said.
Senior researcher Manning also said, “China has lost much of its leverage over North Korea to Russia and is very dissatisfied with Russia’s current influence on North Korea.”
[녹취: 매닝 선임연구원] “I think the Chinese are, are very, unhappy with, Russian influence because it’s taken away a lot of Chinese leverage on North Korea. The question is, is that are they unhappy enough to restore cooperation with the United States? So far, there hasn’t been much.”
However, he said, “The question is whether China has enough dissatisfaction to restore cooperation with the United States,” and diagnosed, “So far, dissatisfaction is not that great.”
“I think one of the very specific near-term priorities for the new administration in dealing with North Korea is to find ways to break the ‘supply relationship’ between North Korea and Russia,” Snyder said.
He went on to say, “The end of military hostilities in Ukraine will have a direct impact on Russia’s supply relations with North Korea,” adding, “Such a situation will create an opportunity for the new administration to think about its policy toward North Korea.”
This is Hamjiha from VOA News.
In a planned report prepared by VOA ahead of the 2024 presidential election, next time we will look at the views of U.S. lawmakers on the impact this presidential election will have on Korean Peninsula policy.