Denuclearization may no longer be viable option
North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test that it claimed was a perfectly successful hydrogen bomb detonation Sunday. President Moon Jae-in followed it by calling for maximum diplomatic and military pressure on the North. U.S. President Trump flip-flopped again, threatening ill-defined military options against Pyongyang.
If this deja vu reaches its end as seen before, the two allies would reconfirm the lack of viable options. The United Nations would be stymied by China and Russia, settling for a meaningless notch up on its toothless sanctions. The U.S. would bring aircraft carriers to waters close to the Korean Peninsula, send B1B strategic bombers on a flyover and have a nuclear ballistic missile submarine make a port call. Then, the whole international community would go back to their business as usual, forgetting about the North until it conducts another nuclear or missile test.
To terminate this vicious cycle, we should face the situation as it is — the North is destined to become a nuclear weapons state, if it hasn't become one already. This means denuclearization cannot be the only viable goal so there needs to be a Plan B.
This contingency plan needs to serve three purposes — 1) creating a counterweight to tilt the balance of power with the nuclear-armed North, 2) reducing the period of tension and 3) paving the way for lasting peace.
What would be needed is the U.S.' more specific and stronger commitment to its "nuclear umbrella" for the South against a North Korean invasion or threat by employing its overwhelming nuclear power. Ironically, ever-more pressure should be applied on the North to force it to learn a set of rules it must adhere to as a nuclear state. Any chasm in the ROK-U.S. alliance could send Seoul on the path to its own nuclear armament. Japan would likely go for its own nuclear program, while China will beef up its asymmetric weaponry stockpiles. In other words, there could be a dangerous arms race amid a growing U.S.-China hegemonic rivalry.
Once the end game reaches its final stage, confidence-building measures with the North should be followed. There could be the provision of incentives for the North to make its nuclear programs transparent. The international community would have a big stake in helping Pyongyang open up, live up to its potential and ultimately become a normal state.
Finally, the involved countries should cooperate with the North to ensure peace will last. That is conditional on the North surviving its transformation from a pariah, rogue state to a member of the global community. Then, a peace regime or other devices could be used to ease any remaining concern by the North about its survival.
With war being no option, we need to shift our focus from blocking the North's nuclear programs to managing them within tolerable levels. It would be better now than later.
North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test that it claimed was a perfectly successful hydrogen bomb detonation Sunday. President Moon Jae-in followed it by calling for maximum diplomatic and military pressure on the North. U.S. President Trump flip-flopped again, threatening ill-defined military options against Pyongyang.
If this deja vu reaches its end as seen before, the two allies would reconfirm the lack of viable options. The United Nations would be stymied by China and Russia, settling for a meaningless notch up on its toothless sanctions. The U.S. would bring aircraft carriers to waters close to the Korean Peninsula, send B1B strategic bombers on a flyover and have a nuclear ballistic missile submarine make a port call. Then, the whole international community would go back to their business as usual, forgetting about the North until it conducts another nuclear or missile test.
To terminate this vicious cycle, we should face the situation as it is — the North is destined to become a nuclear weapons state, if it hasn't become one already. This means denuclearization cannot be the only viable goal so there needs to be a Plan B.
This contingency plan needs to serve three purposes — 1) creating a counterweight to tilt the balance of power with the nuclear-armed North, 2) reducing the period of tension and 3) paving the way for lasting peace.
What would be needed is the U.S.' more specific and stronger commitment to its "nuclear umbrella" for the South against a North Korean invasion or threat by employing its overwhelming nuclear power. Ironically, ever-more pressure should be applied on the North to force it to learn a set of rules it must adhere to as a nuclear state. Any chasm in the ROK-U.S. alliance could send Seoul on the path to its own nuclear armament. Japan would likely go for its own nuclear program, while China will beef up its asymmetric weaponry stockpiles. In other words, there could be a dangerous arms race amid a growing U.S.-China hegemonic rivalry.
Once the end game reaches its final stage, confidence-building measures with the North should be followed. There could be the provision of incentives for the North to make its nuclear programs transparent. The international community would have a big stake in helping Pyongyang open up, live up to its potential and ultimately become a normal state.
Finally, the involved countries should cooperate with the North to ensure peace will last. That is conditional on the North surviving its transformation from a pariah, rogue state to a member of the global community. Then, a peace regime or other devices could be used to ease any remaining concern by the North about its survival.
With war being no option, we need to shift our focus from blocking the North's nuclear programs to managing them within tolerable levels. It would be better now than later.
![[INTERVIEW] Hip-hop group Uptown returns after 13 years with new lineup](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/0eae35da5e9c40c38cf439e550a2eb3e.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] ASTRO members aim to shine in musical theater](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/df16760dc50f469d93434f66a069465c.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
