Unattractive options on N. Korea

By Tong Kim

Following last Wednesday’s launch of the latest North Korean ICBM ― the “Hwasong-15 ― that soared to an altitude of 4,475 kilometers and flew 950 kilometers in 53 minutes, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un declared his country had realized “the cause of completing the state nuclear force (and) the cause of building a rocket power.”

Was it a surprise that the launch came after a two-month pause, from which some were quick to read as a possible sign of change in the Pyongyang regime to look for negotiation, as pressure through sanctions was mounting to strangle the North Korean economy? No. They were wrong.

Two weeks ago, this column suggested that North Korea will continue to advance its nuclear/missile programs: it was only pausing while focusing on the economy, conserving scarce resources and working on the advancement of technology.

There is no major dispute over an assessment of the new missile’s range ― that if fired for a standard trajectory it could reach any part of the U.S. homeland. An expert writing on the “38 North” website specializing in North Korea suspected that the North must have used a “very small payload to extend its range.” The heavier the payload, the shorter the missile flies.

Pyongyang claimed that the new ICBM was capable of carrying a “super-heavy warhead.” The DPRK also claimed that “the accuracy of hitting targets” was “confirmed” and “the safety of the warhead in the atmospheric reentry environment had already been confirmed.”

The North has long claimed it has miniaturized nuclear warheads and acquired the reentry technology. Yet, its claims on these two issues are not accepted due to a lack of supporting evidence.

If its claims are not taken seriously, the regime may be pressured into conducting a more dangerous nuclear detonation in the middle of the Pacific to demonstrate its capability. In September, after U.S. President Donald Trump said the U.S. will “totally destroy North Korea,” if necessary, the North’s foreign minister Rhee Yong-ho threatened to do “something like a thermal nuclear test in the Pacific” while he was in New York.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in told Trump over the phone that while the new missile test posed a serious threat, he did not think the North had resolved the reentry issue or developed a terminal guidance system to ensure the accuracy of hitting targets.

In summer, Moon said the North would be crossing the red line if and when it develops a complete ICBM ready for a nuclear warhead. Trump never set a red line, simply saying an ICBM test by North Korea “won’t happen.” Now it has happened ― for the third time since July. Moon never said what he would do if the red line were crossed. Would he then have to agree to a military option?

At the United Nations Security Council, Trump’s ambassador Niki Haley said: “The dictator of North Korea made a choice yesterday that brings the world closer to war … And if war comes … the North Korean regime will be utterly destroyed.” She was doing the tough talk on behalf of Trump, who again ridiculed Kim Jong-un as “Little Rocket Man” and a “sick puppy.”

Trump’s pressure on China in his call to Xi Jinping or his ambassador’s effort at the U.N. did not work. China will not consider cutting off crude oil to North Korea, which many believe would deal a devastating blow to the North Korean economy. Along with Russia, China still insists on dialogue for a double-freeze proposal, showing no interest in imposing further sanctions.

There is a widely accepted view that sanctions have limits, even though they may work in the long term. They will create more hardships for average people in the North than the ruling elites, who do not care about the plight of the deprived people. High tensions will continue in the absence of any prospect for a peaceful resolution.

There are no attractive options. One that must be avoided is any type of military action that will escalate into a catastrophic war that takes millions of lives. If the North attacks first, that will be a different story. Many sober minds believe Kim knows better: he is not insane or suicidal.

Two remaining options are: (1) accept and contain the regime’s arsenal, and wait for a downfall from within, as we did with the Soviet Union during the Cold War; (2) apply innovative diplomacy for threat reduction and take gradual steps to eventual denuclearization, maintaining peace through deterrence.

What’s your take?

Tong Kim (tong.kim8@yahoo.com) is a Washington correspondent and columnist for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow at the Institute of Korean-American Studies.