Trump does not seek Kim's demise

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during an event with Independent Community Bankers Association in the Kennedy Garden of the the White House in Washington, D.C., Monday. / AFP-Yonhap

US needs to break NK’s dangerous illusion about ‘nuclear blanket’

This is the seventh in a series of interviews with international experts on North Korea to see how its nuclear issues will unfold down the road and seek ways to secure stability on the Korean Peninsula. ― ED.

By Kim Jae-kyoung

United States President Donald Trump is not seeking to drag North Korean leader Kim Jong-un down from power, according to William Brown, adjunct professor at Georgetown School of Foreign Service.

He said that what the Trump administration wants is for Kim to change its path or policy relying on nuclear weapons program to protect his regime.

“Kim should know that U.S. policy does not require his demise but it does require major policy changes that would lead to a radical transformation of his country, perhaps with him still as leader,” he said in an interview.

“Given changes Kim has allowed so far especially allowing domestic markets and real money to envelop the economy, I think he might be inclined to want positive change,” he added.

The retired U.S. government official, who worked on Korean issues for the CIA and the National Intelligence Council, stressed that Trump should focus on making Kim realize that nuclear brinkmanship is actually threatening stability for his regime.

“Kim is thought to view the nuclear program as a security blanket which he will not easily discard. But if the blanket is proven to have fleas, he might have to burn it or throw it away,” he said.

“The best card Trump has to play, one might call it a Trump card, is to make Kim and his circle of advisors, or even military, worry that the nuclear program itself has become a potential source of instability and insecurity for his regime,” he added.

He pointed out that big talk about U.S. military intervention is part of Trump’s current strategy but that alone will not likely do the trick even if a “dangerous surgical strike” is employed.

“Trump needs to couple that military warning with actions designed to prove to Kim we are not afraid of North Korea, or of its collapse, and that if it persists on its current path we will seek to destabilize the regime using all the economic and political tools at our disposal,” he said.

“That should lead him to at least consider if the nukes are worth the danger,” he added. “South Africa, perhaps, provides the best analogy.”

Brown does not believe that North Korea’s current threat is any more dangerous than it ever is, given the U.S. assets in the area driving the joint exercises and South Korea’s preparedness.

“Kim is likely somewhat afraid of Trump, or at least less sure of his potential reactions, even more after the Syria attack and the ‘armada’ bluster,” he said.

“Given North Korea’s problems launching even medium-range missiles, I doubt it is ready to try an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), instead making a big show about an engine test and the annual military parade,” he said.

Not ready to test ICBM

In Brown’s view, North Korea is unlikely to succeed in an ICBM test within the next few years because the reclusive country’s missile would be unlikely to do all the things it is supposed to do such as delivering a dummy nuclear weapon on a target 5,000 or more miles away.

“By concentrating on the failure, or at least an only partial success, the U.S. would not need a military response,” he said.

“But if the U.S. had information that all parts of a complete system test were included, I expect Trump would react with an attack on the missile,” he added.

The Washington-based North Korea expert, who served as a senior research fellow in the U.S. Embassy in Seoul in the 1980s, said that what is most worrisome right now is not North Korea launching an ICBM, but using small nuclear weapons nearby.

“I would be more worried if it seemed to be making real progress getting a shorter-range system to work reliably as a weapon, including a re-entry vehicle capable of dropping a small nuclear weapon on a specific target,” he added.

Citing an estimate by nuclear scientist David Albright, he voiced concern that North Korea produces about “a bomb’s worth of fissile material, plutonium and highly-enriched uranium” every three or four months.

“This is adding up to a lot of bombs which at some point they will be able to deliver or use somewhere,” he said.