Trump inaction

By John Burton

• Published Mar 8, 2017 5:20 PM KST
• Updated Mar 8, 2017 5:20 PM KST

When North Korea launched its new solid-fuel medium-range missile on Feb. 12, the U.S. cable news networks immediately gave the event full-blown coverage. They portrayed the launch as the first serious foreign policy test for the new Trump administration, highlighting the fact that the president was entertaining at that very moment Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the southern White House in Florida.

Speculation was rampant whether the unconventional and mercurial Trump would take some type of dramatic action in response to what seemed to be a clear provocation by Pyongyang. Instead, Trump declared that he was “100 percent” behind Japan and left it at that.

Trump’s mild response was even more surprising since analysts had been predicting for weeks that North Korea was likely to challenge the Trump administration with a missile launch or nuclear test. Since then Trump has continued to adopt a largely passive attitude on North Korea despite his hardline rhetoric.

“Obviously North Korea is a big, big problem and we will deal with that very strongly,” he recently told a news conference. But the only action he has taken so far has been to block a planned back channel meeting between North Korean officials and U.S. experts in New York. He even failed to mention North Korea in his first address to Congress despite warnings that its nuclear program represents his most urgent foreign policy problem.

The reality is that the Trump administration is unlikely to focus much on North Korea unless something dramatic happens, such as Pyongyang conducting a ICBM launch, which Trump vowed “was not going to happen!.”

It is a rule of thumb that the White House (or any government, for that matter) cannot deal with more than four or five major issues at the same time. The Trump administration’s plate is already quite full. It is focusing on three key domestic issues – ending Obamacare, tightening immigration controls and tax reform – while battling an escalating scandal over links between the Trump election campaign and Russia. In addition, the administration appears to be more interested in fighting ISIS in the Middle East when it comes to foreign policy.

In addition, the Trump administration’s management style appears to be particularly chaotic despite the president’s claims during the campaign that he would bring efficient business practices to government. Key positions in the foreign policy and national security team remained unfilled outside of the top spots.

Meanwhile, the domestic problems confronting the Trump are only likely to grow worse, distracting the president from fashioning a coherent policy on North Korea. Ask any expert in Washington what the president’s policy will be on North Korea and they will frankly reply that they still haven’t a clue. It seems that the default position, for the time being at least, will be a continuation of President Barack Obama’s “strategic patience” stance on North Korea.

Indeed, Trump appears comfortable with maintaining the status quo. He has abandoned campaign talk that he would withdraw U.S. troops from Korea and Japan unless their governments paid more in shouldering defense costs.

Sticking to a traditional policy toward Northeast Asia would also reduce the chances that Trump might try to slap import duties on Korean products or renegotiate the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement as some have feared in Seoul.

One uncertainty, however, is how would Trump deal with a more leftist government in Seoul should the opposition win the next presidential election since the new government would favor a less hardline approach to Pyongyang.

Trump also needs to improve relations with China if he is to get more help from Beijing to curbing North Korea. It is noteworthy that the new administration has failed to follow up on China’s important move to stop coal imports from North Korea for the remainder of this year, which Pyongyang swiftly condemned. Beijing appears to be expecting the Trump administration to reopen talks with North Korea now that China has temporarily applied pressure on Pyongyang.

But for the moment at least, the Trump administration appears to be woefully unprepared to deal with a major security crisis on the Korean peninsula. White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon’s talk of the “deconstruction of the administrative state” threatens to deplete the ranks of seasoned policy experts in government, leaving a vacuum in terms of measured leadership. Moreover, the administration is failing to name nominees to important subcabinet posts, where most of the work is actually done.

The situation is frightening the foreign policy establishment. “They are ‘starving the beast,’ letting the government die from neglect,” a former State Department official told me. “Come April, this becomes manifest in a draconian budget that reduces capabilities across the agencies, aside from the Defense Department.”

So Trump appears willing to put North Korea in his inbox without taking immediate action for now, but what happens when the president – bereft of professional advice – faces a real crisis on the Korean peninsula?

John Burton, a former Korea correspondent for the Financial Times, is now a Washington,. D.C.-based journalist and consultant. He can be reached at johnburtonft@yahoo.com.