By John Burton
When Koreans welcome (if that is the right word) U.S. President Donald Trump next week, they will be greeting a man who has the power to unleash a destructive war on the Korean peninsula that could kill millions. Whether Trump is preparing a preventive war against North Korea has become the subject of a feverish debate in Washington.
The consensus among analysts is that the U.S. faces two stark choices in dealing with North Korea's nuclear program, either accept it and pursue a policy of containment, or engage in a catastrophic military conflict to stop it.
At least in terms of rhetoric coming out of the White House, Trump has made clear that he rejects the first option. H.R. McMaster, Trump's national security advisor, recently said that Trump "is not going to accept [North Korea] threatening the U.S. with a nuclear weapon," adding that "accept and deter is unacceptable."
Analysts in Washington are worried that Trump is painting himself into a corner with such statements and he will have no alternative but to launch a preventive war if he does not want to look weak in the eyes of the world. Moreover, a decision for war might happen quite soon if the Trump administration rhetoric is to be believed. McMaster said that "we're running out of time" as North Korea rapidly advances its nuclear and missile program and he did not believe that negotiations with Pyongyang would solve the problem.
But should the White House statements be taken at face value? Some believe the scary rhetoric is meant to spook China into applying tougher economic sanctions against North Korea. Another interpretation is that Washington is engaging in "psywar" operations, which combined with U.S. military exercises involving B-1 bombers and carrier fleets, is meant to intimidate Pyongyang into stopping its nuclear and missile tests.
Moreover, the Trump administration appears divided on the issue, with U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reportedly resisting a decision for "kinetic action," Washington speak for a military attack. Other U.S. officials argue that increased international sanctions should be allowed time to cripple North Korea.
There is little doubt that the current situation has increased the chances of a conflict, but should Koreans be worried that war will really break out?
One possible restraint on the U.S. taking unilateral military action against North Korea is that it would be opposed by Seoul and Tokyo, which fear being sucked into the conflict. It would also likely be condemned by other major powers, including China, Russia and the EU, as well as the U.N. unless the U.S. gets prior authorization.
There are also the preparations for war to consider. Another major round of U.S.-Korean joint military exercises is not scheduled until next spring, which could reduce tensions over the winter months if North Korea also scales back its missile testing as it normally does during this period.
In addition, there are no signs yet of U.S. engaging in the significant deployment of troops and military material to South Korea, Japan and Guam or mobilizing reserves troops that would normally be taken as the U.S. gears up for a war. Moreover, North Korea has not increased its military readiness despite the escalating war of words between Washington and Pyongyang.
A more worrying sign would be if the U.S. decided to evacuate U.S. citizens or issued a travel advisory for visits to South Korea. But some analysts warn that the lack of military mobilization and evacuation measures should not be seen as a guarantee that the U.S. will refrain from taking military action. To avoid tipping his hand and alert Pyongyang, Trump might decide to sacrifice the lives of at least some Americans in South Korea as he conducts a surprise nuclear strike against North Korea that would need little overt sign of preparation to carry out.
It is still the unknown element about what Trump will do that in the end makes the situation so uncertain and increases the risks that the U.S.-North Korean war of words morphs into an actual war through miscalculation.
If Pyongyang, for example, believes that the continued presence of bombers and warships near its borders amounts to preparations for war, Kim Jong Un might decide he has no choice but to deliver the first blow. Some analysts believe Trump is deliberating engaging in provocative behavior so that Kim strikes first and provides a legal pretext for a declaration of war by the U.S.
Let us hope that the war of words remains just that. But the risks of war through miscalculation will increase if the Trump administration continues on its present course of issuing threats, such as "totally destroying" North Korea, and we may have little warning of what happens next.
John Burton (johnburtonft@yahoo.com), a former Korea correspondent for the Financial Times, is now a Washington, D.C.-based journalist and consultant.
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
The consensus among analysts is that the U.S. faces two stark choices in dealing with North Korea's nuclear program, either accept it and pursue a policy of containment, or engage in a catastrophic military conflict to stop it.
At least in terms of rhetoric coming out of the White House, Trump has made clear that he rejects the first option. H.R. McMaster, Trump's national security advisor, recently said that Trump "is not going to accept [North Korea] threatening the U.S. with a nuclear weapon," adding that "accept and deter is unacceptable."
Analysts in Washington are worried that Trump is painting himself into a corner with such statements and he will have no alternative but to launch a preventive war if he does not want to look weak in the eyes of the world. Moreover, a decision for war might happen quite soon if the Trump administration rhetoric is to be believed. McMaster said that "we're running out of time" as North Korea rapidly advances its nuclear and missile program and he did not believe that negotiations with Pyongyang would solve the problem.
But should the White House statements be taken at face value? Some believe the scary rhetoric is meant to spook China into applying tougher economic sanctions against North Korea. Another interpretation is that Washington is engaging in "psywar" operations, which combined with U.S. military exercises involving B-1 bombers and carrier fleets, is meant to intimidate Pyongyang into stopping its nuclear and missile tests.
Moreover, the Trump administration appears divided on the issue, with U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reportedly resisting a decision for "kinetic action," Washington speak for a military attack. Other U.S. officials argue that increased international sanctions should be allowed time to cripple North Korea.
There is little doubt that the current situation has increased the chances of a conflict, but should Koreans be worried that war will really break out?
One possible restraint on the U.S. taking unilateral military action against North Korea is that it would be opposed by Seoul and Tokyo, which fear being sucked into the conflict. It would also likely be condemned by other major powers, including China, Russia and the EU, as well as the U.N. unless the U.S. gets prior authorization.
There are also the preparations for war to consider. Another major round of U.S.-Korean joint military exercises is not scheduled until next spring, which could reduce tensions over the winter months if North Korea also scales back its missile testing as it normally does during this period.
In addition, there are no signs yet of U.S. engaging in the significant deployment of troops and military material to South Korea, Japan and Guam or mobilizing reserves troops that would normally be taken as the U.S. gears up for a war. Moreover, North Korea has not increased its military readiness despite the escalating war of words between Washington and Pyongyang.
A more worrying sign would be if the U.S. decided to evacuate U.S. citizens or issued a travel advisory for visits to South Korea. But some analysts warn that the lack of military mobilization and evacuation measures should not be seen as a guarantee that the U.S. will refrain from taking military action. To avoid tipping his hand and alert Pyongyang, Trump might decide to sacrifice the lives of at least some Americans in South Korea as he conducts a surprise nuclear strike against North Korea that would need little overt sign of preparation to carry out.
It is still the unknown element about what Trump will do that in the end makes the situation so uncertain and increases the risks that the U.S.-North Korean war of words morphs into an actual war through miscalculation.
If Pyongyang, for example, believes that the continued presence of bombers and warships near its borders amounts to preparations for war, Kim Jong Un might decide he has no choice but to deliver the first blow. Some analysts believe Trump is deliberating engaging in provocative behavior so that Kim strikes first and provides a legal pretext for a declaration of war by the U.S.
Let us hope that the war of words remains just that. But the risks of war through miscalculation will increase if the Trump administration continues on its present course of issuing threats, such as "totally destroying" North Korea, and we may have little warning of what happens next.
John Burton (johnburtonft@yahoo.com), a former Korea correspondent for the Financial Times, is now a Washington, D.C.-based journalist and consultant.
![[INTERVIEW] Can art become stable investment source?](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/d9b4b117e5b74f4c931de724ebd2ee68.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Choi Min-sik, Lee Dong-hwi on creating Korean-style noir with 'Big Bet'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/8b795a8f6b42492db4e8fdc47e9abd8d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Ahn Jae-hong on playing underdog basketball coach in 'Rebound'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/fe381342632c46bfa6d3245cb475676e.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
