The North Korean nuclear crisis seems to have no solution, but I have some thoughts on a possible workaround. First, this is my perception of what the relevant parties want:
North Korea goals:
- Survival as an independent state.
- Preserve Kim family regime from being deposed by outside forces or civil unrest.
China goals:
- Maintain peace for economic reasons.
- Prevent U.S. troops along its border.
- Prevent potential North Korean refugee crisis in Chinese territory if war breaks out.
U.S. & Allies goals
- De-nuclearization of North Korea to end threat of attacks or accidental launch
- Prevent potential proliferation
One possible solution that I haven't seen proposed in the mainstream American press is the possibility of China extending its "nuclear umbrella" over North Korea. In this scenario, China pledges to provide deterrence much like the United States has for its non-nuclear European allies in NATO. The North Koreans could then deactivate their nuclear program without fear of becoming the next Iraq. China would preserve its buffer against the US. The US and its allies would not have to fear North Korean nuclear attack or proliferation risks.
Would China be willing to pledge defense of North Korea in this way? Does China have the nuclear arsenal to provide a credible deterrent? Would the North Koreans accept this in turn for nuclear disarmament? This last issue could be an unsolvable stumbling block, because the North Korean state policy favors self reliance and autarchy (as part of their Juche political philosophy). More reliance on Beijing is probably not what Kim Jong Un wants.
It's not clear that the North would hold up their end of the bargain either, given their history of reneging on prior agreements. It might be difficult if not impossible to make sure that North Korea didn't keep building nuclear arms technology as a backup plan should China decide to end any alliance with the North.
Perhaps a new "mini Cold War" is inevitable, with North Korea and the US/Allies keeping the peace via the principle of Mutual Assured Destruction via nuclear missiles pointed at one another. It would be a frightening time, especially given the risk of mistakes (accidental launches or accidental response to false alarms).
I'd be especially interested in
@Intl Professor 's take.
Excellent analysis and creative idea for a solution—very nice.
Gnatnuts additions to your very clear and right-on statements of the situation.
N. Korea:
3. Wish to continue modernization of the economy. (Source, NPR report on this. A baby approach in the North toward a mixed economy which has been so successful in other “communist” states.)
China:
4. Desire to control situation if there are ‘loose nukes’ due to instability or war. (Source: Charley Rose interview of Michael Morrell.)
U.S. & Allies:
You have the correct goals. Trump’s include diversion from domestic scandal(s) by threatening war. I’m sure you agree there is always a gonadal twitch effect for Trump added to Nixon’s invention of the “mad president” idea.
On your Creative Idea:
I do not see why the Chinese would not be willing to do so. It enhances their international prestige and local security interests. It would require some really serious guarantees by the U.S. and others, and I think they might take a leaf from Obama Administration’s approach in the Iran case by using the technical guys on each side to work out the details and share their common interest in avoiding nuclear war. I don’t think N.K. scientists want war more than others, but their lives are more at risk if they step on Kim’s toes.
A less moderate and therefore unrealistic approach: a peace treaty with a nuclear free zone including all within (what?) range with intrusive inspections like the Iran deal. Japanese might do that. When I worked for the feds there was some concern about nuclear proliferation. If the Japanese wanted, they could put together a bomb in a matter of weeks or days. That intelligence should rattle a few cages!
China certainly has a more credible deterrent than North Korea. If I remember correctly, they have been careful to leave their land based missiles in plain sight and the warheads are ostentatiously kept in plain sight at some remove. (Source: probably
Scientific American.) The idea is kind of like the Tsar’s order of partial mobilization as WWI began. (Unfortunately the Russian military had plans for full mobilization only, prompting Kaiser Willy II to remark: “Mein Godt, if grandmother were alive this never would have happened!” Source: Barbara Tuchman. Pardon my German.)
You’re way ahead of me on the Juche philosophy. Never heard of it. Thanks.
“ More reliance on Beijing is probably not what Kim Jong Un wants.” We must hope that his concerns for his own life include some compromise on this point.
I’m not at all sure he exploded a hydrogen bomb, for example, could just be bunch of the normal kind, or a bigger one. (If more than one, we would detect it. So would others. I speak from experience on this.) Plus, one would think based on our history that miniaturization did not come right away, and then there’s the guidance problem, yada, yada. Not a problem for China which has much more experience in space—the key technology for guidance and re-entry.
Your expectation of the denouement is the most probable. I think the key stumbling block is the shape of Trump’s head. Bush II, the Shrub, had Candy Rice to bring him up to speed on foreign issues during the campaign and as NS Advisor fought Cheney but with little effect. As Secretary of State she did more as it was obvious Bush had learned his mistake. Since our dear leader makes no mistakes he is constantly at war with anyone with the gonads to set him straight. I’m not sure Hillary would have been better and while some Republicans now seem on guard about Trump, assuredly they would be beating the drums of war on this issue with her.
Sorry, long, as usual. Keep on trucking. Have you thought how this idea might be “sold?” Curt Renz might be helpful. As an amateur on media, off hand it would be nice to arrange this to be Trump’s idea. (My teacher, and his friend, Norman Cousins, tried to arrange the Pope’s first visit to the U.N. through Lady Bird Johnson. They were unsuccessful. Ivanka? Bebe Netanyahu?) No, Bebe fights the Iran deal.
Now that I think of it, denuclearization in the Middle East is a good idea. Israel fights it because it already has the weapon and can deliver it by cruise missiles from nuclear submarines off our coasts. That buttresses your idea Kim might want the weapon more than peace and is using it against China now. Of course Israel would not do such a thing, but they have tried to sink one of our warships in international waters. Just as in 1964 my students at Santa Barbara did not believe me when I suggested we overthrew the government of Iran in the fifties.
The principle of symmetry at work again: North Korea and China have the same relationship as Israel and the U.S. We have limited influence on Israel and China the same for North Korea. The cause of that proximity, mixed nationals, is different but it negates the geographic dissimilarity.
Thanks for teaching me that.
