The US must change its rhetoric to effectively engage North Korea
The US must change its rhetoric to effectively engage North Korea
WRITTEN BY GABRIELA BERNAL
2 April 2021
“Hostile policies”. That is how North Korea’s First Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui recently framed the current US policy towards North Korea. In a statement published by North Korean media, Choe emphasised that her country would not be giving the US another opportunity for talks unless America changes its rhetoric and adopts a strategy based on equality and goodwill.
Despite the Biden team reaching out to their North Korean counterparts last month, Pyongyang has made clear they will not be engaging in any diplomatic efforts so long as Biden continues Washington’s long history of unilateral demands by pushing for denuclearisation upfront.
Mixed messages
One of the key problems plaguing the US-North Korea relationship is related to word choice and how both countries define the term ‘denuclearisation’. For North Korea, denuclearisation encompasses the entire Korean Peninsula, including the US nuclear umbrella protecting the South. This is made clear through the wording of the 2018 Panmunjom Declaration and Singapore Summit joint statement in which the DPRK reaffirmed its commitment to the “denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula”. For the US, however, denuclearisation seems to solely refer to North Korea. The comments coming out of North Korea’s foreign ministry last month are not surprising, given Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s recent comments calling for the denuclearisation of “North Korea”.
No matter how badly Washington wants complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearisation (CVID), the likelihood of Pyongyang agreeing to this while receiving no concessions in return is close to zero.
In the eyes of Pyongyang, this is a major faux pas. “What has been heard from the US since the emergence of the new regime is only lunatic theory of ‘threat from north Korea’ and groundless rhetoric about ‘complete denuclearisation", Choe said in her statement “It seems the US has not yet dropped the habit of doggedly faulting the DPRK”, she continued. Successive US administrations have tried to handle North Korea through maximum pressure (demanding denuclearisation upfront); maximum flexibility (summit-level meetings before any progress was made at the working levels); as well as maximum passivity or the strategic patience approach (hoping the North Korean regime collapses someday and thereby avoiding any kind of engagement).
None of these approaches have worked because they lack balance; the “maximum” of anything is not going to achieve desirable results in the long term. If Biden wants to avoid prolonging the state of war on the Peninsula, Washington must listen to what North Korea is actually saying instead of focusing solely on what the US desires.
The clock is ticking
Every day the current administration spends pursuing a failed North Korea strategy is equivalent to throwing more gasoline at the already large fire that is North Korea and its nuclear weapons arsenal. North Korea has repeatedly stated what it wants: to be treated equally and for negotiations to be a two-way street. In case Biden and his team missed that, Choe reiterated her country’s stance in her statement.
“We have already declared our stand that no DPRK-US contact and dialogue of any kind can be possible unless the US rolls back its hostile policy towards the DPRK”, Choe said. “In order for dialogue to be made, an atmosphere for both parties to exchange words on an equal basis must be created”, the statement read. Biden has many examples available to him on what not to do when it comes to North Korea. A key nonstarter is doing what Trump’s team did and demand the North Koreans give up all their nuclear weapons in exchange for absolutely nothing. It’s called a negotiation for a reason: both sides must give something to gain something. Demanding a country give up its only lifeline and security guarantee while receiving nothing substantive in return is absurd.
While Trump and his advisors were trying to force North Korea to denuclearise upfront, North Korea used those four years to further expand its weapons arsenal, which Kim Jong Un cheerfully put on display for the entire world to see this January. It has now been over three years since North Korea last tested a nuclear weapon. If no progress is made on the diplomatic front, there’s no telling how long Kim Jong Un’s patience will last.
Getting on the same page
Given the high stakes, Biden and his team must not repeat the same mistakes of their predecessors. No matter how badly Washington wants complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearisation (CVID), the likelihood of Pyongyang agreeing to this while receiving no concessions in return is close to zero. Biden and his advisors must face reality and stop approaching the North Koreans with the same rhetoric and tactics that have failed time and again.
Instead of pushing for the CVID of North Korea, the US must aim for a gradual arms reduction approach that will scale back North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and prevent it from building more weapons. South Korea, Russia and China have all been advocating this kind of step-by-step approach for years. North Korea has also repeatedly offered to scale back its nuclear activities in exchange for cooperation with the US, but this approach has consistently been rejected by Washington.
North Korea is willing to talk, but only if the US is willing to truly negotiate instead of demand. If progress is to be made on the gradual denuclearisation of North Korea, the US must also make gradual concessions. Examples could include allowing US medical NGOs to operate in North Korea amidst the on-going pandemic or granting certain sanctions exemptions to allow for the implementation of inter-Korean economic projects. These relatively small concessions would signal a new, good-faith approach emanating from Washington instead of a continuation of what North Korea sees as a “hostile policy”.
It’s worth pointing out that some key figures in Biden’s foreign policy team once advocated this kind of gradual denuclearisation approach. Notably, Blinken, before becoming Secretary of State, had expressed how he thought an Iran-style phased arms reduction approach could work well with North Korea. Back in 2018, Blinken suggested the Trump administration consider an “interim agreement that requires North Korea to disclose all of its programs, freeze its enrichment and reprocessing infrastructure under international monitoring and destroy some warheads and missiles in return for limited economic relief”. This would then buy some time to negotiate a more comprehensive deal further down the line.
A step by step strategy
Instead of sticking with old strategies, Blinken would do well to remember his own words. Indeed, if such a deal would be pursued, the Biden administration would also increase its chances of cooperation with China, — North Korea’s closest ally and biggest economic partner — an ardent supporter of the Iran deal. This kind of step-by-step strategy would also be welcomed in South Korea, where the current government’s plans for inter-Korean economic projects have been blocked due to existing sanctions against the North. Although Biden has a lot going on at home, he must not forget America’s real “forever war” still threatening, not just the Asia Pacific region, but the world. Seventy years on, it’s time for a US president to finally conclude a realistic and long-term diplomatic agreement with North Korea before it’s too late.
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.
Author biography
Gabriela Bernal is a Korean affairs analyst and freelance writer based in Seoul, South Korea. She is currently a PhD candidate at the University of North Korean Studies and her research focuses on North Korean foreign policy and inter-Korean relations. Image credit: Flickr/US Dept of State.