Trump
versus Kim
S P
SETH
The situation on the Korean peninsula is becoming scarier by the
day. If it were not that serious, it might make one chuckle at times. Trump,
for instance, calling the North Korean leader “Little Rocket Man” for his
testing of ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs, the last one said to have been
a hydrogen bomb. Trump has also dubbed the North Korean leader a “mad man”,
while Kim Jung-un has called Trump a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard.” And to further reinforce the insult, Kim
reportedly also called Trump “a mentally deranged person full of megalomania
and complacency” who is trying to turn the United Nations into a “gangsters’
nest”, apparently for imposing all sorts of sanctions against North Korea.
This kind of schoolyard bullying might be ignored but for the fact
that both the leaders are threatening to destroy the other side. North Korea
has said that targeting the US with its rockets was “inevitable”, as the US Air
Force bombers flew over waters close to the North Korean coast in a show of
force, which further rattled Pyongyang threatening to shoot US planes even in
international space near their coast. Pyongyang has also threatened to test a
hydrogen bomb over the Pacific. On the US side, Trump has tweeted that the
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un “won’t be around much longer”, thus threatening
the regime and the country with oblivion.
North Korea’s foreign minister, Ri Yong-ho, has commented that Trump
himself was on a “suicide mission”, after the US President said the North
Korean leader was on such a mission. And Trump tweeting that, “military
solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act
unwisely.” There is always this caveat that either party will be reacting to
the madness of the other side.
But the big question is how to interpret when rhetoric has ceased to
be rhetoric and is about to enter the realm of reality? One thing is clear,
though, that both the United States and North Korea are in a state of readiness
for some sort of a military conflict, if and when it eventuates. And South
Korea seems on a war footing too to face any attack from its neighbour. Speaking on South Korea’s Armed Forces Day,
President Moon Jae-in reportedly said that his government was accelerating work
on three fronts: a pre-emptive strike system known as Kill Chain that would
target North Korean missile sites; an air and missile defence system; and a
program devised to launch devastating strikes against North Korea’s military
and political leadership. And then there is of course the massive US military
presence in the country.
However, even without a nuclear breakout, South Korea’s capital, Seoul,
with its population of about 10 million is within the easy artillery range of
North Korea. The escalatory rhetoric and military preparations on both sides
have the potential of creating a momentum of its own, even when it is all clear
that a war over the Korean peninsula will have devastating consequences that
might not remain confined simply to that country and the region.
There have been contradictory messages from the US side, with Trump
going for the kill rhetoric while some of his cabinet trying, at times, to be
reassuring to Pyongyang. For instance, while Trump was sending the “locked and
loaded” for action message if Pyongyang continued its provocations, his
Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, and Secretary of Defence, Mattis, penned a
joint op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, which sought to calm things down a bit.
They wrote, “The US has no interest in regime change or accelerated
reunification of Korea”.
In his recent China trip, Secretary Tillerson reportedly said that
the US was in direct contact—without specifying its precise nature—to explore a
diplomatic route, even though his boss, President Trump, immediately
countermanded his peace initiative. Trump told his Secretary of State via
twitter: “…that he is wasting his time in trying to negotiate with Little
Rocket Man.” And he added ominously, “Save your energy Rex, we’ll do what has
to be done.”
Despite such warlike rhetoric, the US is still relying on China to
produce the desired results. Beijing lately has ratcheted up the pressure by
the intensity and scope of its sanctions to dry up North Korea’s economic
capacity to pursue its nuclear ambitions. But going by the past experience of
sanctions and whatever else, Pyongyang, though, seems determined not to give up
its nuclear course and; if Russian President, Vladimir Putin is right, as he
reportedly said recently, North Korea would rather eat grass rather than accept
denuclearization.
And that is also the considered view of James Clapper, the former
director of the US National Intelligence. In a long article titled, On the
Brink, the New Yorker’s reporter Evan Osnos, quotes James Clapper, who visited
Pyongyang in 2014, as telling him that, “The North Koreans are not going to
give up their nuclear weapons. It’s a non-starter.” Clapper added, “Whether
it’s pressuring, threatening, negotiating, or trying to leverage China,
everybody’s tried all of that--- and it’s not working.”
Apparently, short of a preventive strike on North Korea to destroy
its nuclear sites and weapons and kill its leadership with all its horrible
consequences, there is now a dangerous eye-for-an-eye stalemate of sorts on the
Korean peninsula.
Note: This article first appeared in the Daily Times
Contact: sushilpseth@yahoo.com.au
No comments:
Post a Comment