By Tong Kim
WASHINGTON — While regime change inducing collapse in North Korea has been talked about in and out of government circles for the past 20 years, North Korea's collapse has never been and is not a policy goal of the Obama administration, according to a senior official of the White House.
"It is not for anybody to know when North Korea might collapse. The military and some South Koreans are always actively watching for development of any possible collapse scenario. Yet, predictions of North Korean collapse have not been reliable. Regime change is not our goal," said Jon Wolfsthal, special adviser and senior director for arms control and nonproliferation at the National Security Council (NSC).
He made the remarks at a Wilson Center press conference in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 23.
He said the U.S. objective is a denuclearized, stable Korean Peninsula; it is not to change the North Korean regime but change North Korean behavior.
"It is entirely up to North Korea whether to have dialogue with us. We said many times that if they are willing to seriously discuss the denuclearization issue, we are ready," he said. "Now we are enhancing the sanctions for them to change and come to dialogue."
The NSC official also said, even during Obama's first term, the White House never seriously considered the instability of the North Korean regime, which was heavily weighted in the North Korea policy of the Lee Myung-bak government in Seoul, anticipating a sudden change that might lead to unification on South Korean terms.
On some calls for South Korea's own nuclear development, he made it clear that the United States opposes it, pointing out South Korea "voluntarily joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty" (NPT). He said the U.S., together with South Korea, is capable of defending against any nuclear threat.
In a special statement issued upon the fifth nuclear test by North Korea on Sept. 9, President Obama assured the U.S. provision of "extended deterrent guaranteed by the full spectrum of U.S. defense capabilities." The president also repeated, "The United States does not and will never accept North Korea as a nuclear state." The president also said South Korea, Japan and the United States agreed to work with the U.N. Security Council to "vigorously implement existing sanctions and take additional steps including new sanctions to demonstrate to North Korea there are consequences to its unlawful and dangerous actions."
There are three main reasons against accepting North Korea as a nuclear state: to preserve the nonproliferation regime under the NPT, to prevent nuclear development by South Korea and Japan and to carry out the U.S. treaty commitment to the defense of the South.
A dominant view in Washington holds that if South Korea decides to go nuclear, it would legitimize North Korea's nuclear program, and could lead to a possible nuclear clash with the North that could be apocalyptic with the mutual destruction of both sides.
The writer is a Washington correspondent and columnist for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow at the Institute of Corean-American Studies and a visiting scholar at Korea University.
WASHINGTON — While regime change inducing collapse in North Korea has been talked about in and out of government circles for the past 20 years, North Korea's collapse has never been and is not a policy goal of the Obama administration, according to a senior official of the White House.
"It is not for anybody to know when North Korea might collapse. The military and some South Koreans are always actively watching for development of any possible collapse scenario. Yet, predictions of North Korean collapse have not been reliable. Regime change is not our goal," said Jon Wolfsthal, special adviser and senior director for arms control and nonproliferation at the National Security Council (NSC).
He made the remarks at a Wilson Center press conference in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 23.
He said the U.S. objective is a denuclearized, stable Korean Peninsula; it is not to change the North Korean regime but change North Korean behavior.
"It is entirely up to North Korea whether to have dialogue with us. We said many times that if they are willing to seriously discuss the denuclearization issue, we are ready," he said. "Now we are enhancing the sanctions for them to change and come to dialogue."
The NSC official also said, even during Obama's first term, the White House never seriously considered the instability of the North Korean regime, which was heavily weighted in the North Korea policy of the Lee Myung-bak government in Seoul, anticipating a sudden change that might lead to unification on South Korean terms.
On some calls for South Korea's own nuclear development, he made it clear that the United States opposes it, pointing out South Korea "voluntarily joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty" (NPT). He said the U.S., together with South Korea, is capable of defending against any nuclear threat.
In a special statement issued upon the fifth nuclear test by North Korea on Sept. 9, President Obama assured the U.S. provision of "extended deterrent guaranteed by the full spectrum of U.S. defense capabilities." The president also repeated, "The United States does not and will never accept North Korea as a nuclear state." The president also said South Korea, Japan and the United States agreed to work with the U.N. Security Council to "vigorously implement existing sanctions and take additional steps including new sanctions to demonstrate to North Korea there are consequences to its unlawful and dangerous actions."
There are three main reasons against accepting North Korea as a nuclear state: to preserve the nonproliferation regime under the NPT, to prevent nuclear development by South Korea and Japan and to carry out the U.S. treaty commitment to the defense of the South.
A dominant view in Washington holds that if South Korea decides to go nuclear, it would legitimize North Korea's nuclear program, and could lead to a possible nuclear clash with the North that could be apocalyptic with the mutual destruction of both sides.
The writer is a Washington correspondent and columnist for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow at the Institute of Corean-American Studies and a visiting scholar at Korea University.
![[INTERVIEW] Mirinae Lee's '8 Lives of a Century-Old Trickster' offers fresh perspective on Korean history](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/5fb62072584d44649ed0ca5956d387ea.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[REVIEW] Preview gala sets stage for grand premiere of 'La Rose de Versailles' musical](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/c7528d2924cd43c8a469cd46e6f56127.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
