North Korea is in many ways not the
evil, unpredictable place that it is portrayed as in most media. Last month The Atlantic did a good job of breaking
down the motivations and possibilities of confrontation. The possibility of
resolution does seem remote, but so did any sort of agreement with Iran about
nuclear programs. It only came from long months of negotiation and showing them
that we were not adversaries but could work as partners. We gave them something
they could take back to their people and sell. Not just to the religious and
deeply conservative leadership council but also to the moderate population. The
majority of that population, by the way backed that plan by reelecting the
president of Iran to another term, so clearly the give and take allowed at least
one country to believe they had a real leader.
There are reasons this would not
immediately work with North Korea. They have less skin in the game, so to
speak, internationally. Their leader is not up for popular reelection, so his
grip on the country comes from strong propaganda to suppress any possible
internal dissent. Even so, North Korea is easier to understand as the kid in
high school who wore all black and had videos on youtube of him torturing
woodland animals. Are they wrong? Absolutely. Are they dangerous? Probably.
Will bullying or formal intervention work? It’s not particularly likely.
Instead I see them as needing a friend. Someone to bring them in to the
conversation, give them an invite to the party, and possibly even allow them to
sit at the cool kids table.
Right now North Korea does not have
a middle class. Any sanctions we impose against them will not hurt Kim Jong Un,
or those in his inner circle that much. They will hurt those who are already
suffering at the hands of the regime. If there was a middle class that would
have their lives disrupted by sanctions, and if they were empowered to actually
hold a referendum on their leadership, sanctions would have a shot at impact.
These conditions were nominally present in Iran and its arguable whether or not
sanctions really were ever all that effective.
This is the third generation of
Kims to lead North Korea and the third to pursue weapons of mass destruction.
Their existence, and therefore survival, has been predicated on staving off the
threat of Western intervention. The nuclear pursuit has given them purpose and the
ability to maintain power over their people. They need some sort of reward. We
need to meet them where they are. It costs the US nothing to admit we have felt
held hostage by the machinations of the dictatorship’s regime. We could send an
envoy to offer this admission and begin a dialog. Open the lines of communication
begin to inject aid into the country. These “rewards” could be the opening to
have a discussion with the people of North Korea. Get them sitting at the table
and feeding back to dear leader that they want more intervention. We need to be
able to show the North that they can allow the world in and still retain their
autonomy. Those connections will prevent nuclear holocaust more than any tough
talk and posturing. Once the Obama administration was willing to sit at the
table with Iran the gears began to turn, they will turn even slower in North
Korea from lack of use, but the best collective security is being bound to
other countries economically.
Many will complain that admitting
to being held hostage by this regime will hurt American leadership in the
world. In fact, if that is what opens the door to the hermit kingdom it will
cement American leadership. If it fails, then we are free to return to talking
tough and preparing for nuclear annihilation. I care less about the pride of
those wanting tough talk and more about the utility of a plan. Is it possible
to tease out an end game that does not involve shooting or carnage? If so that
plan is worthy of an attempt or at least greater study, however if our actions
are simply building towards violence, we should abandon them.
This tough guy talk will not work.
It feels good to some, but in the end the recipient will only feel bullied
more. They will react the way that the budding high school sociopath, when they
reach their limit they will lash out. Also like that kid, he may not want our
help but he should receive it anyway. In both cases we know there is suffering
there and it is wrong to let it continue needlessly. The people of North Korea
have been on the verge of starving for generations. That type of suffering
needs to be met with a strategy that has a chance at helping them. At the end
of the Clinton administration an envoy was sent to North Korea and deals were
struck to curtail their nuclear program. Unfortunately the deal was finalized in
October of 2000. Just 15 months prior to the Axis of Evil speech, cementing the
refusal of the deal that Bush signaled as he entered office. Later in the Bush
Administration, North Korea would test their first nuclear device and heighten
this dynamic for the next two presidents.
If our president is man enough to
set aside his machismo and negotiate like a sophisticated international player,
then we all have a chance at a reasonable solution. Whenever North Korean
aggression comes up, this should be the first idea that consumes the
conversation, not the last and most marginalized.
No comments:
Post a Comment