On March 24, North Korea test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In April 2018, just before the North Korea-US summit, the North’s ‘moratorium declaration’ to suspend nuclear and ICBM tests was abolished. This ICBM is believed to have the capability to strike the US mainland. Jeong Jae-min, editor of , met with two North Korean experts and listened to the causes and solutions of this situation, as well as advice on the next government by Yoon Seok-yeol.
■ Harry Kazianis, Director, Center for American National Interest
Why did North Korean leader Kim Jong-un dare to test-fire an ICBM capable of carrying a nuclear warhead at this time?
The main reason is the survival of the North Korean regime. For the past few years, Kim Jong-un has been working hard to maintain a nuclear and missile moratorium (on a moratorium) and at the same time secure a “nuclear deterrence” against the United States (North Korea prepares its own nuclear force under the pretext of preventing a preemptive nuclear attack by the United States). means it has been done). I am convinced that Kim Jong-un will not give up his nuclear weapons, even if many of his people are starving. North Korea’s economy is only one-third that of Ethiopia. However, for the survival of the regime, Kim Jong-un devoted all his economic resources to the development of nuclear weapons. It cannot be ignored that Kim Jong-un has felt very frustrated with the stagnant North Korea-US relations. Disappointment with the Biden administration may also be a major factor in the decision to test-fire an ICBM. In fact, the US Biden administration does not have ‘what can be called a North Korea policy’. After three months of review of North Korea policy since its launch in January of last year, a plan called a ‘calibrated practical approach’ was proposed. However, there is no substantive content in this plan other than to suggest ‘let’s talk’ with North Korea. He did not specify what the United States could give North Korea when the negotiations were concluded.
Is North Korea’s ICBM test a signal to the Biden administration to ‘stop ignoring us’?
Of course. In fact, Biden’s North Korea policy is no different from the ‘strategic patience’ of the Obama administration in the past, which said ‘we will wait until North Korea’s behavior changes first’. If this time fails to attract the attention of the United States, North Korea may soon conduct additional nuclear tests or tactical nuclear weapons tests in Punggye-ri, which is currently under restoration.
North Korea’s ICBMs can strike not only the western part of the US, but also the eastern part of the US, but the Biden administration’s response is lukewarm.
Biden is focusing on the Ukraine war (which could escalate into a nuclear war). The North Korean nuclear issue has been pushed back a long time. North Korea knows this too. North Korea may continue to test nuclear and ICBMs in the future, even to obtain concessions in future negotiations with the United States.
Immediately after the launch of the ICBM, North Korea declared that it would thoroughly prepare for a long-term struggle (with the United States). Do you think North Korea has turned from dialogue with the United States to struggle?
Yes. North Korea is expected to test nuclear weapons, ICBMs, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) in the spring and summer as well. However, it is unlikely that the Biden administration will adopt a different North Korea policy than it is now. All the more so if the war in Ukraine continues for a few more months. Even if the US tries to impose additional sanctions on North Korea through the UN Security Council, it will be difficult without the cooperation of China and Russia. China and Russia have already rejected the adoption of a statement condemning North Korea at the UN Security Council level. There could be a situation where the Biden administration fails to properly respond to North Korea, which continues to escalate tensions. North Korea could carry out a fairly dangerous provocation, passing an ICBM over the Japanese Islands. It may even launch a ‘complete launch test’, in which the ICBM is launched in a straight line instead of from a high angle like this time and dropped into the South Pacific. If Biden continues to ignore North Korea, this could actually happen.
It is analyzed that Ukraine was invaded by Russia after giving up about 1,700 nuclear weapons after leaving the Soviet Union (Soviet Union). There is also the view that North Korea will become more obsessed with nuclear weapons after watching this process.
Of course. North Korea will be watching the war in Ukraine very carefully. In fact, neither the United States nor South Korea, Japan, China or Russia can provide a level of security that North Korea can feel as possessing nuclear weapons. In the case of the United States in particular, North Korea may want to make a compromise that guarantees safety in exchange for freezing its nuclear weapons at the current level and not developing further nuclear weapons. However, it is difficult because of the political situation in the United States. If Biden offers such a compromise to North Korea, the opposition will not stand still. Chamberlain, who was criticized for ‘inflicting an appeasement policy on Hitler and inducing World War I on his own’, might be compared to Biden. It is unlikely that the next South Korean president, Yoon Seok-yeol, will go toward a compromise. In the end, North Korea continues to test nuclear and missile tests, and the US imposes sanctions on North Korea, repeating the vicious cycle.
The United States has imposed sanctions against North Korea’s nuclear program for decades. Did you achieve the intended effect?
Not like that. The sanctions have taken a toll on the North Korean economy, leaving the country’s residents suffering from starvation. But how much longer will the US have to sanction North Korea to halt its nuclear program? Sanctions are important in that they send a signal to North Korea not to develop weapons of mass destruction. However, sanctions as a means of restricting North Korea’s nuclear development are clearly limited.
Can sanctions against North Korea be useful without China’s cooperation?
If China does not cooperate, it is difficult for the US sanctions against North Korea to have a significant impact. China has been faking cooperation with the United States, but has weakened sanctions through unofficial trade with North Korea.
Can the Biden administration persuade North Korea to return to negotiations by any means other than sanctions?
In my view, North Korea expects Trump administration-level dialogue to take place under the Biden administration. Direct conversations between top leaders. In fact, it is meaningless to hold talks (working-level talks) between North Korea and working-level officials. This is because Kim Jong-un is the only person who can make the final decision in North Korea. The only way for the US to reach a real compromise is to deal directly with Kim Jong-un. otherwise it’s a waste of time Of course, not all negotiations can be held at the summit. However, I think Biden needs to send a signal to Kim Jong-un that he is also interested in the North Korea-US summit.
If the negotiations are to be successful, shouldn’t the Biden government also prepare specific compensation plans to provide to North Korea?
Yes. The Biden administration needs to draw a sketch of what specifically it expects from North Korea, what kind of compensation it is willing to give to North Korea in the event of a negotiation, and how to build a new North Korea-US relationship. The Trump administration was very good at preparing for this. North Korea knew in detail the price it would get from negotiations with Trump. However, no clue has been found about the Biden administration’s compensation plan.
Do you think President Biden should consider sending a special envoy to Pyongyang?
Yes. President Biden has nothing to lose by sending a special envoy. However, before considering sending his special envoy, I think Biden should first clarify his plans for North Korea. Considering the enormous risk that North Korea can pose, it is truly absurd that the Biden administration has failed to formulate a specific North Korea policy until now. Currently, Philippine ambassador to the Philippines, Seong Kim, is also serving as special envoy to North Korea.
In the end, it is said that the Biden administration’s indifference influenced North Korea’s ICBM test-fire.
100% agree To be honest, after the Biden administration took office, on the one hand, it hoped that the existing deadlock in the North Korean nuclear negotiations would be maintained, and on the other hand, it tried to focus its diplomatic power on China and Russia. However, with North Korea’s latest ICBM test launch, it became clear that Biden’s policy of maintaining the status quo could not last. Moreover, the real threat is that North Korea could proliferate weapons of mass destruction by selling nuclear technology to Iran or non-state terrorist groups. What if North Korea sells ICBM technology to Iran?
The new administration of Yoon Seok-yeol is expected to implement a much tougher North Korea policy than the Moon Jae-in administration.
In fact, President Moon Jae-in did everything he could during his tenure to improve inter-Korean relations. Nevertheless, South Korean citizens must have been very disappointed that inter-Korean relations had not progressed significantly. The next president, Yoon Seok-yeol, will try to resume South Korea-US military exercises by further strengthening them. The move is a bit risky, but the conservative government may have no choice but to do so. In order for the South Korean government to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, it will need to get cooperation from China, which will not be easy either. In particular, China is currently fighting with the US for long-term geopolitical hegemony. China may feel the need to push North Korea to the nuclear negotiating table.
■ Dr. Stefan Haggard
In response to North Korea’s ICBM launch, the US has again imposed sanctions on North Korea. Are sanctions against North Korea useful?
The purpose of sanctions against North Korea is often misunderstood. The purpose of sanctions is not just to stop North Korea’s nuclear program. It is to make North Korea undermine its national capabilities by incurring a huge economic cost in return for its nuclear development. Although the United States did not prevent North Korea from developing nuclear and missile programs with sanctions, it succeeded in inflicting enormous political and economic costs.
For sanctions against North Korea to be effective, China’s cooperation is needed. U.S.-China relations are deteriorating, is this possible?
China is not interested in cooperating with the United States for sanctions against North Korea. Basically, China has argued that sanctions against North Korea are ‘a problem that the US needs to solve’. The Biden administration needs to open a dialogue channel with North Korea in order to know its intentions. However, it is unlikely that the Biden administration will accept North Korea’s demands. It is unlikely that Biden will ease sanctions on North Korea in return if North Korea promises to re-promise a moratorium on nuclear and missile programs.
Is there any way to break the vicious cycle of nuclear armament (North Korea) and sanctions (US)?
I’m not sure if I can break that vicious cycle. There is a growing consensus that the United States has no choice but to coexist with a nuclear-armed North Korea. Moreover, continued US sanctions have affected North Korea in some way. However, it led to unexpected results. As North Korea grew closer to China, trade with other countries was cut off. In the midst of this, the North Korean leadership made a strategic decision: ‘It is better to pursue a more lethal deterrent at any cost.’ Even at an economic cost of a horrendous scale.
If the US provides economic incentives to North Korea, will negotiations become possible?
The Biden administration can’t do that, even because of domestic political issues. If there is any action that can be taken, it would be to the extent of sending a signal to North Korea that ‘something can be exchanged if the North Korea-US negotiations resume’. For example, if North Korea takes specific measures related to the dismantlement of the Yongbyon nuclear reactor complex, the US can also start a new ‘Hanoi deal’ negotiation. However, it seems unreasonable for North Korea to receive payments from the US on condition of a moratorium on this ICBM or additional nuclear development.
How likely is it that North Korea will want to seize the opportunity of the economic benefits it will receive as a result of the denuclearization negotiations?
The current North Korean regime thinks it can lose its country to the United States and South Korea. I just think that we need to strengthen our nuclear deterrence in order to keep the regime in power and get the attention of the United States. If North Korea behaves like this, it is questionable whether the US will be able to bring North Korea into the arena of negotiations even if sanctions are eased. The United States need not be aggressive toward North Korea, but may need to express a firmer will to deter North Korea’s nuclear program. The North Korean regime is now in a dilemma of its own making. It wants to maintain nuclear weapons and at the same time trade with the international community, including the United States. It is impossible.
Can the hard-line measures that the next government take, most likely to take, restrain North Korea?
A hardline policy toward North Korea may be politically attractive within South Korea. However, this will also be as difficult as the North Korea engagement plan. Rather, the political and economic costs of hard-line measures may be greater. If South Korea’s new government takes a hardline policy toward North Korea, the possibility of a low-level inter-Korean clash will also increase. Neither South Korea nor the United States have a choice other than to open a dialogue channel with North Korea and engage in negotiations. Hard-line measures against North Korea alone will not achieve the intended purpose.
© EPN