Out of Friends and Out of Options: The Story of North Korea’s Inevitable Denuclearisation
Dotard. Rocket Man. Barking Dog. It wasn’t that long ago when basic diplomacy between North Korea and the US amounted to nothing more than tit-for-tat and playground insults.
However, what the Winter Games in PyeongChang have proved is the sheer weight of international sports in building bridges between countries with even the most heated of relationships. The visit of Kim Yo-Jong came as a surprise to most of us, and much more so, the appetite for diplomacy was suddenly on the table.
“North Korea is an example of a country that is so far out of the international norms and so disconnected with the rest of the world”
To those with a keen interest in Inter-Korean relations, the return to multilateral negotiations on North Korea’s nuclear program has been very much welcomed. But as former US President Barack Obama mentioned today in Japan, North Korea’s diplomatic isolation minimises possible leverage in denuclearisation talks.
“North Korea is an example of a country that is so far out of the international norms and so disconnected with the rest of the world,” Obama told a packed hall in Tokyo. The understanding is that by commiting to these high-level talks and resuming diplomacy, the UN may be able to make succesful inroads into DPRK’s denuclearisation, which the North have been very open about for the past month.
But is Kim Jong Un playing 4D-Chess with the world, or should we buy into these summits as a genuine attempt to function within the international community?
Throughout the years, North Korea has exhausted most of its options. Isolated and outnumbered, it has moved its US Policy, a clear sign that UN Sanctions have worked. As a result, it will abandon its nuclear programme in exchange for some energy benefits as well as guaranteed security of the regime and nation, renewing China as its nuclear umbrella. This could mean a reduction in US hostility. But does this translate in a reduction in US bases within the peninsula? To put it short: No.
But having said this, it may as well be part of the terms. The North is willing to give up its programme, and in return may want the US to back off a bit (especially as it will have very little reason to do so).
But with the aftermath of the six-party agreement of September 2005, where the North detonated its first nuclear device in October 2006, is there any point in believing the North this time?
“My general impression is that North Korea has always been a revolutionary state that is committed to fostering and spreading international instability,” writes Benjamin Young, a fullbright researcher based in Seoul. “The conventions of international diplomacy do not matter to the regime in Pyongyang.”
“We’ll see what happens. That’s my attitude, we’ll see what happens.” — US President, Trump
However, it is worth noting that since 2006, North Korea has paid a heavy diplomatic price for aggrevating its closest friends — namely China and Malaysia. The latest sanctions have also started to bite into the North, with even China levying sanctions against the hermit kingdom through the UN Security Council.
It is not possible for the North to refuse to play by the rules and expect to function as a state. And with the advent of its fuel crisis it is soon realising this at the inter-Korean, DPRK-China, and the DPRK-US summits.
Moon Geun-shik, an analyst at Korea Defence and Security Forum said the North “will maintain the atmosphere for talks with a peace overture, as it attempts overcome the impact of economic sanctions.”
“It cannot overcome the sanctions alone so it will seek a breakthrough through the South Korean government,” he said. Since then, the price of gasoline in the North has tripled to 18,225 North Korean Won (approx. $2) per kilogram while diesel prices have jumped to 18,000 won.
While US President Donald Trump, who has been pushing a global sanctions campaign against North Korea to force it to give up development of nuclear missiles capable of hitting the United States (ICBM), reiterated that he would like to have talks with Pyongyang, but only if the conditions were right.
“They want to talk. We want to talk also, only under the right conditions. Otherwise we’re not talking,” Trump said while hosting a meeting with state governors at the White House.
“We’ll see what happens. That’s my attitude, we’ll see what happens.”
While, Obama maintained a more mellowed response. “Our view has always been that we would prefer to resolve these issues peacefully,” Obama said, adding that otherwise “the cost in terms of human life would be significant.”
Update 21/4/18: North Korea and South Korea are set to announce the formal end to the Korean War. Kim Jong Un has met with CIA director, Pompeo, forming a pre-summit relationship. North Korea tells Moons that it has shared understanding and wants ‘complete denuclearlisation’ which does not involve the scaling back of US troops. It commits to this by shutting down a major (albeit collapsed) nuclear test site (Punggye-ri), halting all ICBM launches and testing indefinitely as a pre-negotiation gesture of intent.
Many professional North Korea commentators left scratching their heads.
