At North Korea\u2019s\u2064 ninth plenary meeting two \u2064weeks ago, Kim Jong Un broke with decades of \u2062official\u200d policy and declared reunification with South\u2062 Korea\u2063 \u201cimpossible,\u201d<\/a> describing the two Koreas as \u200b\u201cbelligerent states\u201d at war. <\/p>\n

In his diatribe, \u2062Kim took particular aim<\/a> at South Korea\u2019s relationship with the United States,\u2063 saying, \u2063\u201cSouth Korea at present\u2063 is nothing\u200b but a hemiplegic malformation and colonial subordinate state \u2063whose politics is completely\u200c out of order, \u2063whole society tainted \u2063by Yankee \u200bculture,\u200c and defense and security totally dependent\u2062 on the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n

He also \u200bthreatened\u200b to annihilate \u2063South Korea and the United States if they provoked \u2064North Korea. <\/p>\n

Whether Kim concocted these \u200cwords \u2062himself, or if it was his propagandist younger sister, Kim Yo Jong, the sentiment is striking and paints a\u200b grim outlook for a region at the center of U.S. foreign policy. <\/p>\n

By officially defining South Korea as\u200c an \u201cother,\u201d Kim has eliminated\u200d one obstacle inhibiting him from aiming his \u200cnuclear weapons at \u2062what his father\u2062 and grandfather considered part of a \u2063larger Korean family.<\/p>\n

Naturally, this\u2062 rhetoric and the potential \u200bfor \u2062escalation\u200d that it \u200bbrings require a thoughtful \u200dresponse\u2062 from Washington. Especially given the Korean Peninsula\u2019s strategic geographic location at the intersection of\u200b U.S.-China relations. <\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

The only question is, what should that\u200b response be? <\/p>\n

Publicly, \u2062the best response is no response. While Washington undoubtedly understands the implications of Kim\u2019s policy reversal, the American public won\u2019t have much of\u200b a reaction. After all, bellicose threats from Kim are so\u2064 commonplace \u200bthey\u2019ve become somewhat of a storied pastime. Responding in kind would only legitimize Kim\u2019s outburst and create unnecessary\u2064 fodder for the 24-hour cable news networks. <\/p>\n

Behind the scenes, however, Washington is \u2062in dire need of a rethink \u200dof its North Korea policy,\u2062 and Kim\u2019s own policy change underscores that \u200cnecessity.<\/p>\n

Rethinking Denuclearization<\/h2>\n
Since North Korea\u2019s exit from the Non-Proliferation \u200dTreaty (NPT) in 2003 and subsequent inaugural\u2064 nuclear test in 2006, Washington\u2019s sole guiding\u200b light for relations with Pyongyang \u200chas \u2063been and remains complete denuclearization<\/a>.\u00a0This policy may have made sense during the infancy of Pyongyang\u2019s nuclear \u200cprogram, \u200bbut given its increasing\u2063 capacity and capability, North Korean denuclearization\u2064 is nothing but a pipe dream. <\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
North \u2062Korea has<\/a> an estimated 20-30 \u2063assembled warheads as well as enough fissile material to build 40-55 more. Since its \u200d2017 test \u2063launch of the \u2063 intercontinental ballistic missile<\/a> (ICBM) dubbed the Hwaseong-15, it has also possessed the capability of delivering a nuclear payload to\u200d the continental United \u200cStates. <\/p>\n
More importantly, as long\u2063 as his regime is in \u200bpower, and he shows no signs of relinquishing \u2064his hold anytime soon, Kim will continue to view his\u200d nuclear deterrent as\u200c his only means of\u2062 survival. One need look no further than the lessons Kim has\u2063 learned from Libya and Pakistan \u2062for assurance of this notion. <\/p>\n
In one instance, Libyan\u200b leader Muammar\u2063 Gaddafi agreed to dismantle his country\u2019s weapons \u2063of mass destruction (WMD) \u200bprogram in exchange for economic engagement with the West. For his trouble, he was thanked with\u2064 NATO intervention on behalf of his opponents \u200cduring the Libyan\u200b civil war and was eventually killed by militia \u200cmembers after\u2063 a NATO warplane bombed his convoy.<\/p>\n
In a counter-example, Pakistan leveraged its position vis-a-vis<\/a> the United\u2062 States and Washington\u2019s\u200d interests concerning Islamabad\u2019s relations with\u2062 India and China to negotiate a more \u2062lenient cap<\/a>, but not destruction, of its nuclear program. \u2064Today Pakistan counts\u2063 itself as a\u2064 well-equipped \u2064nuclear state\u200b that has remained free from foreign intervention. <\/p>\n
From Kim\u2019s perspective, it\u2019s no secret\u200c which\u200d of \u2063these options\u200d looks \u200bmore attractive. <\/p>\n
If the \u2062U.S. accepts the reality that Kim will under no \u2063condition abandon his nuclear program, it can start\u200d formulating a realistic strategy toward Pyongyang that would benefit not only its own interests\u2064 and\u2063 the interests of its Northeast \u2062Asian\u200c allies but the people of North Korea as well. <\/p>\n
North Korean \u2063Nukes in the Wrong Hands<\/h2>\n
The real danger from North Korean \u200bnukes \u200dis not\u200b that they will be\u2062 used directly by Pyongyang. Afterall, Kim views his nuclear\u200c arsenal as a means for regime survival. Should he preemptively \u2062use\u2062 nuclear weapons all bets would be off, and he could guarantee a second strike aimed directly at him within minutes of him pressing his own button. The \u2064real concern is North Korean nukes finding their way into the possession of rogue\u2063 actors who don\u2019t possess the survival instincts Kim \u2062does.<\/p>\n
For the right price, it is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that North Korean nukes end up\u2063 in the hands of a terror group like Hezbollah, Hamas, or even a \u2064state actor like Iran. Considering North Korea\u2019s prowess in supplying Russia<\/a> with extensive amounts of artillery to \u200bsupport its war against Ukraine, that possibility should be taken very seriously.<\/p>\n
By accepting North Korea\u2019s nuclear status, at least quietly, the U.S. can push for agreements on\u2062 inhibiting cross-border proliferation. It would also\u200c allow \u200bthe U.S.\u200b to move the\u200b focus of talks with North Korea from its nuclear program to its human\u2064 rights abuses<\/a>. If Kim had no reason to fear foreign threats to his regime\u2019s survival, he would be much more willing\u2063 to make\u2064 concessions on \u200cthe harsh \u2064repression of his own populace.<\/p>\n
The only reason Kim would participate in clandestine nuclear arms \u2064dealing would be\u200b for substantial \u200dmonetary reward. If the U.S.\u2062 offers \u2063relief on economic sanctions in\u200c turn for agreements regarding the overwatch (not\u200c demolition) of North Korea\u2019s nuclear weapons, and \u200dimproved treatment of its people, then Kim would have no reason to risk his \u2062neck \u200don the nuclear black market. <\/p>\n
This change in U.S. policy would also allow for\u2063 a more normal diplomatic relationship with Pyongyang, and \u2064the potential \u200cto slowly peel it\u200b away\u2063 from Beijing\u2019s sphere of\u2062 influence. North Korea is inherently distrusting of China, and the two \u2064nations\u2019 interests are not as intertwined\u200d as their leaders\u2019 rhetoric might \u200blead one to believe. <\/p>\n
A nuclear weaponless \u2064North Korea would be a prime target for\u2062 Xi Jinping\u2019s growing imperial ambition, \u2062and for this reason, \u2064Kim\u2019s nukes are just as\u2063 much a deterrent against Chinese aggression as they are provocation from the U.S. or South Korea. <\/p>\n
Adopting a Realist Foreign Policy<\/h2>\n
By shifting its North Korea policy away from \u2062denuclearization to a broader focus on nuclear containment, the U.S. could leverage \u200cits potential role as an economic and\u200b security benefactor for Pyongyang in \u2062exchange for \u200dcooperation with Washington\u2019s greater Indo-Pacific strategy. In the event of a \u2062Chinese invasion of \u2064Taiwan, a neutral, if not friendly North Korea could\u200d prove \u2062extremely beneficial.<\/p>\n
Of course, there are many potential obstacles to undertaking such a drastic\u200d shift\u200c in \u2064policy. For one, upsetting years of\u200c policy inertia \u200bwould \u200dbe a hard sell \u200bon Capitol Hill, especially\u200c while Washington is dominated by liberal internationalists. However, a return to\u2062 a more realist foreign policy<\/a> approach \u2064under a second Trump administration would make the potential shift much more feasible. <\/p>\n
Second, there is the chance \u2063it \u2063would embolden other regimes to follow\u2064 in North Korea\u2019s footsteps. To mitigate that likelihood, the \u2063U.S. would have to be clear \u2063that any other country that attempts to nuclearize \u2062will be \u200bmet with swift force, \u200bsimilar to how Israel manages\u200d Iran\u2019s nuclear ambitions. On\u2063 top of that, very few if any hostile nations find \u2063themselves in such\u2064 a strategically important region as North Korea does. For that reason, \u2063these nuclear wannabes would find themselves with much less wiggle\u2063 room.<\/p>\n
Finally, the U.S. would have \u200dto convince regional allies, specifically South Korea\u200d and \u200dJapan.\u200b For leadership in both countries,\u2064 this would be\u2063 a terribly difficult\u200b sell\u200b to their voting publics. However, as Seoul\u2019s recent rapprochement<\/a> with Tokyo proves, there are no limits to \u2063what Chinese aggression can accomplish\u2062 in Northeast Asia.<\/p>\n
The reality is North Korea \u2062has nuclear weapons \u200dand high-level capabilities.\u200c No amount of \u2064carrot or stick is going \u200cto convince Kim Jong Un to abandon his nuclear deterrent when he views it\u200b as the only thing standing between him and annihilation. The\u2064 U.S. can either come to terms with this reality and adjust\u200b accordingly \u2063or continue \u2064to scream platitudes that\u200b have a\u2063 less than zero percent chance of affecting\u200d any real \u200dchange. <\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
rnrn <\/p>\n
What\u200b are some concerns about accepting North Korea \u2063as a nuclear state and how might it impact the international community?<\/h2>\n
And the entrenched belief in complete denuclearization may be difficult \u2064to overcome. Additionally, there may be concerns about the optics of accepting North Korea as a nuclear state\u200d and the potential backlash from allies and the international community.<\/p>\n
However, a realist foreign policy approach \u200brecognizes \u2063the need to adapt to changing circumstances and pursue \u200bpractical solutions that prioritize the long-term security and stability of the region. Accepting \u200cNorth Korea’s nuclear status does not mean endorsing \u200dtheir possession of nuclear\u2063 weapons, but rather acknowledging \u200dthe reality and shifting focus towards nonproliferation and containment.<\/p>\n
By engaging in negotiations with North Korea aimed at preventing cross-border proliferation, the U.S. can address the true threat posed by North Korean nukes finding their way into the wrong\u2064 hands. This approach would also allow \u200dfor discussions on human rights abuses and potentially lead to improvements in the treatment of North Korea’s own populace.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, adopting a more \u2064pragmatic stance would open the door for\u2063 a more normal\u2063 diplomatic relationship with Pyongyang. This could potentially reduce North Korea’s reliance on China and provide an opportunity for the U.S. to influence the country’s trajectory and \u2063align it more closely \u200bwith its Indo-Pacific strategy.<\/p>\n
In\u2062 conclusion, Kim Jong \u2064Un’s recent policy shift highlights the \u2062need for a \u200creevaluation of U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea. By moving away from an unrealistic focus on complete \u2063denuclearization and embracing a realist approach centered on containment and nonproliferation, the U.S. can better address the security challenges posed by North Korea’s nuclear program. This shift would not only\u2064 benefit the\u2062 U.S. and its allies but also hold the potential \u2062for\u200b positive\u2064 change within North Korea itself.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
At North Korea’s recent plenary meeting, Kim Jong Un stated that reunification with South Korea is “impossible” due to their status as “belligerent states” at war. He criticized South Korea’s alliance with the United States, claiming it hindered progress<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1376,"featured_media":2145084,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2145083","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2145083","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1376"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2145083"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2145083\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2145084"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2145083"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2145083"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2145083"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}