Menon’s arguments are quite rational, but with the current American Republican Administration having rational arguments doesn’t count for much.
“Here’s a prerequisite for avoiding war in Korea: stop believing in the North’s denuclearization, attractive and desirable as it might be (if achieved through diplomacy).
It doesn’t follow, however, that war can’t be avoided. Kim Jong-un and his inner circle are not, in fact, irrational beings immune to deterrence. Their paramount aim is to ensure the survival of the North Korean state. Starting a nuclear war would destroy it. Yes, many people have perished in North Korea (whether due to repression or famine), but deterrence worked in the cases of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin and China’s Mao Zedong, both of whom enacted policies that killed millions. Mao supposedly even boasted that China could survive a nuclear war because of its huge population.
Coming to terms with the reality of a nuclear-armed North Korea and trusting in deterrence may not sound like a perfect ending, but under the circumstances it’s undoubtedly the best way to avert catastrophe. And that, unquestionably, is the urgent task. There are other ways, down the line, to make the Korean peninsula a better place through dialogue between the two Koreas, by drawing the North into the regional economy and reducing troops and weaponry on both sides of the Demilitarized Zone. These shouldn’t be ruled out as infeasible.
For them to happen, though, South Korea would have to separate itself from Trump’s war plans by refusing to allow its sovereign space (land, sea, and air) to be used for such a preventive war. The symbolism would be important even if Trump could strike in other ways.
Seoul would also have to build on two recent positive developments that emerged from a surprise January 9th meeting between the Koreas. The first is the agreement on Kim Jong-un’s proposal (initially advanced by the South last June) to send a North Korean contingent to the February Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The second flowed from South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s follow-up idea of restoring the hotline between the countries and beginning discussions of how to tamp down tensions on the peninsula. (Pyongyang shut down the hotline in February 2016 after South Korea’s conservative government closed the Kaesong joint industrial zone located in the North, which then employed more than 50,000 North Koreans.) Moon’s suggestion doubtless eased the way for the subsequent agreement to hold future military talks aimed at reducing the risks of war.
There are further steps Seoul could take, including declaring a moratorium on military exercises with the United States — not just, as now (with Washington’s consent), during the February Olympics and the Paralympics that follow and end in March, but without a preset time limit. While such joint maneuvers don’t scare Pyongyang, moves like flying American B1-B bombers and F-15C fighter jets in international airspace off North Korea’s coast do ratchet up the tension. They increase the chances of one side concluding that the other is about to attack.
Trump may continue his threats via Twitter and again denigrate the value of negotiations with Pyongyang, but South Korea is a powerful country in its own right. It has a $1.4 trillion economy, the 11th largest in the world (versus North Korea’s paltry $32.4 billion one), and ranks sixth in global exports. It also has a formidable military and will spend $34 billion on defense in 2017 — more than North Korea’s entire gross domestic product. It is, in short, anything but the Asian equivalent of a banana republic for which Donald Trump should be able to write the script.
Trump’s generals and the rest of the American foreign policy establishment won’t welcome independent initiatives by Seoul, as witness the condescending remark of a former official about the hazards of South Korea “running off the leash.” Predictably, mainstream warnings have already begun. Cunning Kim Jong-un wants to drive a “wedge” between the United States and South Korea. He’s trying to undo the sanctions. Agreeing to talks with Pyongyang will only communicate weakness. The United States must demonstrate its resolve and protect its credibility. And so it goes.
Policies based on these shibboleths, which portray South Korea as an American dependency, have brought us to the brink of war. Continuing them could push us over the edge. “
6 comments
January 27, 2018 at 5:14 pm
bleatmop
I’m not sure I can agree with what is written here as being any kind of solution to the North vs South hostilities, with this US administration or any other for that matter. This is because what is happening doesn’t really even involve the Koreans. What is happening in the Koreas is a continuation of the Korean war. That is to say is that there is a power struggle between two superpowers, China and the USA. Nothing more, nothing less. China is not about to allow any type of unification that doesn’t leave the North Koreans firmly in control of the peninsula. Nor is the USA going to allow any unification that does that. Neither side is going to allow their prizes to fall out of their spheres of influence. Period. Dot.
So for these reasons the article’s comparisons of military spending and economic size are completely off the mark. It really doesn’t matter what either of these countries are spending because the USA spends $600 billion per year. China may claim to spend about $150 billion per year, but that number must be taken in context that their currency value is centrally controlled and they have virtual slave labour in their country. Also, if this were to devolve into a nuclear war, does it really matter how many tanks or troops either country has? Both can exterminate the human race and it matters not how many times they can do it.
So what are the options? A ground war? Not going to happen as neither China nor the USA want this to happen again. The USA or North Korea actually launching a nuclear strike? Not going to happen. China has said it will retaliate if the USA initiates an attack but, more importantly, that they would not help North Korea if they initiate an attack. So what are we left with? Exactly what has been happening every since the end of the Korean War. Both super powers holding onto the Gems they have captures, coveting that what they don’t have, and alternating barking loudly and licking their balls.
The Korean people will probably get a resolution to this imperial conflict right after one of the superpowers blinks and backs off.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 27, 2018 at 7:51 pm
Meg
I don’t think we have much of a choice, for reasons already stated in the article.
I’m not sure why military exercises would be necessary during the Olympics in the first place. It’s kind of like saying “let’s not get out our guns and have a dick measuring contest on Christmas.” It goes without saying: that’s not what Christmas is for. Neither is the Olympics a time for executing military drills. Am I missing something? I assume that South Korea and the US military is abundantly aware that routine drills are presented on North Korean media as acts of aggression, and I assume that they aren’t dumb enough to fly fighter jets around while everyone is trying to enjoy an international event.
Eh, I think we ought to give South Korea more credit than this. And we ought not give North Korea more credit than it deserves. South Korea knows (like the rest of the world knows) that North Korea is shameless in it’s propaganda and presentation of the truth. For decades North Korea has dropped propaganda leaflets in South Korea via hot air balloons. South Koreans, for the most part, ignore it. They know it’s just literal hot air bullshittery.
But we can’t accept North Korea as a nuclear-armed country without being willing to talk with them. Republicans can say what they want about Obama, but George W Bush did his share of shit disturbing and stirring the pot with North Korea before handing the country over to Obama. Obama inherited an angry hornet’s nest and the Republicans know it even though they use it as an excuse to say Obama failed to deal effectively with the region.
If he’s worried that North Korea is going to view us as pushovers, he doesn’t need to. North Korean propaganda relies on making America look as war-like as possible. North Koreans are raised from a young age to view Americans as aggressive imperialists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 27, 2018 at 10:07 pm
Meg
Sorry, this was too funny NOT to quote.
Yep, China plays ball with North Korea, which puts North Korea in it’s back pocket as leverage when negotiating with the US. As long as North Korea behaves itself, China will playing ball with North Korea. As long as China continues to babysit North Korea, the US will keep playing ball with China.
The whole thing was already a delicately managed clusterfuck before Trump came up with the brilliant idea to toughen sanctions on North Korea, which erodes China’s influence on North Korea, making it harder to keep North Korea in control in the long run.
But that’s not all – as in all things internationally related, Trump and Trump related business dealings in China might be affected by this. There’s at least one town in China that has been affected by tougher sanctions against North Korea. This makes me ask the same question I asked when Trump promised a wall along Mexico when he gets his suits manufactured in Mexico. Maybe I’m missing something here (unknown business shenanigans?) but isn’t it just bad business sense to undermine the countries that supply your goods?
But wait! There’s MOAR. Russia is an ally to North Korea and has been caught supplying North Korea with oil and supporting their weapons programs; so how deep does the rabbit hole go with Russia’s election meddling in the US? (I’m just wondering out loud, because even I don’t have the foggiest idea.) Does Trump himself even know or was he too busy “making a deal” to care about the state of international foreign politics? Maybe he doesn’t care because he can afford not to care, because he’s not the one who will be affected by his terrible decisions. Who knows.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 29, 2018 at 8:46 am
The Arbourist
@bleatmop
The situation you describe is akin to what Europe looked like pre-WW1. Bigger states and their vassal satellite states all dancing a complex economic, political and social rumba that is all predicated on some sort of meta-stable state.
Unfortunately, all it takes is one of the players to falter and poop hits the fan. Double unfortunately there is now nuclear poop on the table. :/
LikeLike
January 29, 2018 at 12:13 pm
bleatmop
@sardeth Arg! I’m trying to make a succinct point but I keep ending up with virtual reams of text. I’ll try again to make a my point in a succinct manner.
1. I agree that one false move on the Korean Peninsula could end badly for the human race.
2. The events leading up to WWI do not significantly remind of what is happening in Korea. Whereas in Korea we have two sides that have many vested interests in not going to war (at least not over this issue), such as the trade between the USA and China and the desire for Mutually Assured Destruction not to come about. However the events leading up to WWI we had every European side that took place in that war having a vested interest in going to war (the colonies obviously did not). Not only that I would argue (and have argued in previous drafts of this comment) that every side actively wanted to go to war.
That’s basically it. At least I got this to less that a mind numbing wall of text. I did enjoy the exercise of trying to write a focused comment though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 29, 2018 at 3:40 pm
The Arbourist
@bleatmop
1. :)
2. :) – Fair enough. No one is thinking that the next war is going to be ‘the good war’ and short and organized affair.
I should have prefaced my comments with a specific reference to the assassination of the archduke and the system of alliances that forced the hands of the great powers at the time, into conflict.
Always appreciate your input. :>
LikeLike