'Gift politics': Author Gordon Chang explains why Kim Jong Un is pressuring Trump to relieve US sanctions on North Korea
Sanctions threatens Kim Jong Un's ability to buy the loyalty of senior regime members, says Gordon Chang, foreign affairs journalist and author of 'Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes On the World.'
Following North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un’s annual New Year’s Day address Tuesday, President Trump has a golden opportunity to break the current deadlock in denuclearization negotiations with the North.
But to succeed, Trump will have to pay attention to what North Korea wants in exchange for surrendering its nuclear weapons, as well as the way Kim would consider giving up those weapons.
Kim will not give up his nukes for a handshake, a smile and words of reassurance from the U.S. president. He will demand a high price. His country has spent decades and devoted massive resources to develop its nuclear weapons and missile program, which Kim sees it as his guarantee that the U.S. will not attack the North.
The North Korean leader’s New Year’s speech gives us an important window into his thinking about President Trump’s demand that the North get rid of its nukes.
The good news is that Kim used the speech to offer an olive branch to Washington: he is willing to once again meet with President Trump for a second historic summit.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
But at the same time, Kim complained that America is unwilling to negotiate a viable path forward – not just on denuclearization but also on lifting crippling international economic sanctions on the North to build trust.
In addition, Kim has long sought a formal peace treaty ending the Korean War to replace the armistice that halted fighting in 1953.
“I am willing to meet the United States president at any time for the betterment of our international community,” Kim said in his speech. “However, if the United States does not keep its promise in our international community and misinterprets our patience and intention and continues with the sanctions, then we have no choice for the sake of our national interest and peace of the Korean Peninsula but to come up with new initiatives and new measures.”
Kim will not give up his nukes for a handshake, a smile and words of reassurance from the U.S. president. He will demand a high price.
In other words, Kim is threatening to scrap denuclearization plans without getting some important concessions from the U.S.
Of critical importance, Kim said: “We will not make nuclear weapons and we will not proliferate nuclear weapons, and I have said this, and I will say this again now. If the United States can show corresponding measures, the relationship between the two countries will, through many processes, accelerate for the better. But if the counterpart continues with its past habits, it won’t be good, but I hope they stop this.”
In plain English, that means Kim was sending the message that he won’t take further steps to get rid of his nuclear weapons without actions by the U.S., such as beginning to lift at least some economic sanctions on the North.
If Kim was being truthful in his speech – always a question mark – he is offering what would amount to an historic arms control agreement, but only in return for big U.S. concessions that might also include withdrawing American troops from South Korea.
Ending North Korea’s production and testing of nuclear weapons would prove President Trump’s approach to North Korea is working, knocking down criticism that the U.S. president has received at home. However, the issue of what to do with the North’s existing nuclear weapons stockpile would still have to be dealt with.
Kim clearly drew what seems to be a line in the sand, making clear he will not surrender his nuclear arsenal unilaterally, and that he is looking for some sort of “corresponding measures” – meaning his all-important goal of sanctions relief – as the foundation for a path towards a new relationship with Washington.
Kim also previewed what will happen next if negotiations collapse. He declared that he might pursue a “new way” if America pushed “one-sided demands”.
None of this is surprising at all, and we should not be shocked by Kim’s words. The current deadlock is rooted in a major difference of opinion on what Kim and President Trump agreed to during the Singapore Summit in June.
Each side agreed at the summit “to establish new U.S.-DPRK (North Korean) relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.”
The agreement also said that Kim “reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” and that “the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.”
That all seems straightforward, but some in the Trump administration have a different perspective. President Trump’s top national security officials have been trying to swap out that wording in media interviews and press statements, claiming that North Korea agreed to give up its nukes, not simply “work toward complete denuclearization.”
In fact, administration officials keep using the line over and over that Kim has agreed to “the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea.” Unfortunately, Kim has not.
What U.S. diplomats want the North to do is simply give up its nuclear weapons for a promise to relieve sanctions. That’s wishful thinking. No nuclear power armed with long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles and hydrogen bombs – as North Korea is – would ever accept a deal like that.
States with the power of atomic arms accept negotiation, not to surrender on all fours.
The good news is that we are not headed back to the days when President Trump was threatening “fire and fury” against North Korea and Kim was threatening nuclear war.
Thankfully, Kim’s “new way” does not mean a return to missile or nuclear tests – something that could push America to strike.
Enter China. Kim could make the case that Beijing should loosen sanctions or completely drop them because Washington is being unreasonable.
Over 90 percent of North Korean exports flow through China, meaning the Chinese government has been responsible for enforcing Washington’s maximum pressure strategy of stiff economic sanctions on the North.
That’s a fatal flaw that Chinese President Xi Jinping will exploit if current trade negotiations with the U.S. look to be headed in a direction unfavorable to China. The plain truth is that without Chinese cooperation, trade sanctions by the U.S. and other nations on North Korea will have only a very limited impact.
The good news is that there is a path forward – thanks to South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in.
I will admit, I was no fan of South Korea’s approach, but I can honestly say I have been proven wrong. In what I have called the Moon Miracle, Seoul has chosen to engage the Pyongyang in as many different ways as possible – diplomatically, economically where it can, and working to lessen military tensions.
And those efforts are bearing fruit, with a successful Winter Olympics held in South Korea in 2018, an entire year with no North Korean missiles in the sky or nuclear tests, and multiple agreements to lessen tensions along the Korean Demilitarized Zone.
Instead of trying to push North Korea into unilaterally surrendering its nuclear weapons, Washington should instead try an approach to reassure the North that America is not a threat, and work to convince Kim that he can trust the U.S. and Seoul far into the future.
If Washington were to take the same approach as Seoul – creating the conditions where trust can be built and allowing both nations to work on smaller issues of mutual concern first – such steps could lead to a breakthrough on denuclearization. Perhaps they could even bring about the eventual normalization of relations between the U.S. and North Korea.
The Trump administration could, for example, finally offer to the North a “corresponding measure” in response to the North’s offer during the Third Inter-Korean Summit to close or allow inspections of its Yongbyon nuclear facility. That could come in the form of a political declaration that ends the Korean War and an offer to roll back a small amount of sanctions.
We can avoid making 2019 another year of tensions on the Korean Peninsula. I say it’s time for President Trump do what he does best: negotiate. But he needs to approach such negotiations realistically, not expecting North Korea to simply give up its nuclear weapons without getting a great deal in return.
Get the recap of top opinion commentary and original content throughout the week.