Mutual security should be theme of Moon-Trump summit
By Mark Fitzpatrick
.jpg?w=728)
Mark Fitzpatrick
South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s visit to Washington at the end of the month presents an opportunity to improve frayed relations and better coordinate North Korea policy. To do so, Moon will have to temper any nationalistic impulses and play to President Donald Trump’s self-image.
The bilateral relationship is fundamentally sound, with booming trade ties, common concerns over North Korea, shared frustration with China, and little of the anti-American sentiment that used to be so common among parts of the population. Yet South Korea has found itself on the back foot with Trump, who got it into his head that the nation is a free rider on trade and security.
Trump’s misguided suggestion that South Korea should pay $1 billion for the deployment of the THAAD missile defense system had to be walked back by his aides. His silly claim that Korea used to be part of China, because Chinese President Xi Jinping told him so, got the history exactly backward (parts of Manchuria belonged to the ancient Korean kingdom of Goryeo). Most worrisome was his threat to terminate the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement that entered into force five years ago. As with Trump’ disastrous visit to Brussels last month and his first telephone conversation with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in January, Trump has a tendency to abuse long-standing allies when they are out of tune with his “America first” pitch.
As much as Moon may be inclined to push back on such slights by taking his own “Korea first” approach, he should focus the conversation on the main security issue confronting both nations. North Korea’s bristling arsenal and proclivity for provocations has long presented a severe threat to South Korea. Development of nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles may soon pose a threat to the American homeland as well. Moon should seek reaffirmation that the U.S. security commitment remains firm. Although Trump omitted an Article V commitment to collective defense in his speech to NATO last month, his belated reference to it during the Romanian President’s visit this month suggests that he now realizes the importance of honoring security obligations.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un may think that by holding American cities at risk he can deter the U.S. from coming to South Korea’s aid in the event of renewed conflict on the Korean Peninsula. Trump should make it clear that this decoupling strategy will not work, and that it will only make the U.S. all the more determined to face down North Korean threats.
Military deterrence and strengthened sanctions will remain key elements of any North Korea policy. Moon should acknowledge that THAAD is a useful defensive measure, and downplay the deployment delay over an environmental impact assessment. He should also confirm that South Korea will continue to firmly implement U.N. sanctions. This means postponing any plans for reopening the Gaeseong Industrial Complex or any other steps that would transgress the U.N. ban on public and private support for trade with North Korea.
For his part, Trump should back the plan to resume humanitarian aid and nongovernmental exchanges with North Korea. Having himself suggested talking to Kim Jong-un over hamburgers last year, Trump should also support Moon’s idea of re-establishing dialogue with Pyongyang as a next step, as long as it does not require sanctions to be lifted first. Excessive emphasis on waiting for the “right conditions” can amount to waiting for Godot.
U.S. experience throughout the Cold War with the Soviet Union was that dialogue is not incompatible with sanctions. If North Korea’s response is negative, Moon’s initiative will prove to be an inexpensive test of intentions. A positive North Korean response, on the other hand, could lead to the engagement plank that should be part of any North Korea strategy. Although Americans will find it repugnant to engage a state that imprisoned fellow citizen Otto Warmbier for 17 months while he was in a coma, dialogue can help keep tensions in check and avoid misunderstandings.
Moon will undoubtedly be studying how his neighbors approached Trump. In applying the flattery and personal touch (literally and figuratively) that so appeal to America’s unique president, both Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Chinese President Xi came away from their U.S. visits earlier this year with firmer bonds of friendship.
In making a friendly connection with Trump, Moon can remind his host that South Korea is America’s most important partner in dealing with the North Korean threat. China’s role is too often overstated, as though it holds the key to cutting the Gordian knot that the nuclear program has become. Even in the unlikely scenario that Beijing decided to fully employ its considerable leverage, there is little evidence that Pyongyang would bow to the pressure.
If the current crisis can be managed, the longer-term solution lies in an information-based strategy that changes North Korean attitudes toward their leader and his nuclear program. No country is better suited than South Korea to conduct this strategy. It would be good if Trump realized that.
Mark Fitzpatrick is executive director of the Americas office of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and head of the institute’s nonproliferation and nuclear policy program.