America should make concessions in order to denuclearise peninsula
Many people have heaved a sigh of relief since the United States and the North Korea dialled down their rhetoric over the past few days.
US President Donald Trump tweeted on Wednesday: “Kim Jong-un of North Korea made a very wise and well-reasoned decision. The alternative would have been both catastrophic and unacceptable.” His tweet came after Pyongyang said it would assess “the foolish and stupid conduct” of the US before firing missiles towards Guam.
Trump alarmed the world on August 8 by warning North Korea that it had better not make any more threats to the US or “it will be met with fire and fury”.
Pyongyang responded by saying it planned to fire four missiles into the waters off Guam.
Dangerous war of words
The war of words caused grave concern, especially in East Asia. Given the powerful weaponry today, any war would be disastrous to the region, especially the two Koreas.
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defence Secretary James Mattis tried to clarify Trump administration’s conflicting messages in last Sunday’s Wall Street Journal. They said the US had no interest in regime change and no desire to inflict harm on anyone in North Korea.
Such words, however welcoming, ring hollow though, if they are not backed by credible policies and actions. Or they might be dismissed as “just a tweet from Trump”. For instance, the US has an obligation to convince Pyongyang that it really does not seek a regime change. After all, it was the US’s removal of Libyan leader Mu’ammar Gadhafi in 2011 after he gave up his nuclear weapons, and the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003 for alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction that ruined the credibility of the US government.
Mattis and Tillerson are right to say that China has a strong incentive to pursue the same goals as the US – the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula – but they are wrong to think that China can exercise decisive diplomatic and economic leverage over Pyongyang.
If China were to cut off those trades with North Korea which are not currently prohibited by UN Security Council sanctions, it would inflict enormous harm on people in the North and destabilise the region – exactly things that Mattis and Tillerson said they have no intention of doing.
No unilateral sanctions
China has made it clear that it will only observe sanctions imposed by the UN and won’t observe sanctions unilaterally imposed by the US. Unilateral sanctions reflect US disrespect for the UN because they effectively say it will only respect the UN process when it agrees with it, otherwise it will ignore it.
The US is also trying to dodge its own responsibility by pushing China to the fore of the issue. The key to denuclearising the Korean Peninsula lies not with China but the US and North Korea, who are so far unwilling to talk to each other.
It’s regrettable to see that the US, while seeking China’s help, is unwilling to accept Beijing’s “dual suspension” proposal – that Pyongyang halts nuclear tests while the US and South Korea halt their large military drills or sign a peace treaty to end the armistice reached 64 years ago.
If it could lead to a possible solution to such a critical issue, why not give it a try? Yes. Past talks have failed but that does not mean future talks will fail completely or even fail at all.
The US itself should be ready to make more compromise as a superpower if it is genuine about the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula.