FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Diplomacy Toward North Korea is an Opening, Not a Surrender

The picture of Vice President Mike Pence standing stiffly next to the trusted younger sister of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un at the Olympics in South Korea spoke a thousand words.

After weeks of escalating tensions, the North Korean dictator decided to use the Olympics to reach out to South Korea and to the world. He sent North Korean athletes to the games. The two Korean teams marched into the Olympic arena under a unified flag. They fielded a joint women’s ice hockey team for the first time. Kim’s sister not only attended the ceremonies, but also issued an invitation to the South Korean president to make an official visit to the North after the games.

Vice President Pence came to the games to enforce the administration’s no-talk policy. He stiffed Kim’s sister on the podium. He and his wife refused to join the crowd in standing when the Koreans marched in.

“We will not allow North Korean propaganda to hijack the message and imagery of the Olympic Games,” he said, vowing to focus on North Korean provocations and human rights abuses, while promising new and harsher sanctions.

But the “message and imagery” of the Olympic Games is that athletes of all nations put aside bitter conflicts to compete in contests. The space for peaceful sports competition could create the opening for serious talks.

When campaigning for the presidency, South Korean President Moon Jae-in promised an opening to North Korea. The jarring North Korean tests of nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles cast a pall on that. President Donald Trump responded with a characteristic combination of insult and bluster. He infamously strutted that he had a “bigger (nuclear) button” than the North Korean president.

The administration ratcheted up sanctions, pushed China to get Kim under control, declared that North Korean possession of nuclear weapons was a dire national security threat and ramped up military exercises to the very borders of the North.

For our South Korean allies, the escalating threats are bone chilling. There is no rational military “option” against North Korea. A pre-emptive attack would be an illegal act of aggression that would lead to massive casualties in both North and South Korea and make the U.S. a pariah among nations.

Worse, the military threats only make the North Korean leadership less likely to negotiate away their nuclear weapons program. The U.S. sees North Korean nuclear weapons as offensive, threatening the U.S. and our allies. North Korea clearly sees its nuclear weapons as defensive. For an isolated dictatorship that is denounced by the U.S., a nuclear weapons capacity may serve the same purpose the U.S. claims for its own nuclear arsenal — deterring any country from attacking.

President Moon would clearly like to lessen tensions and move toward better relations. He has no desire to distance himself from the U.S., but would like to bring the U.S. and North Korea to the negotiating table.

What do Trump and his advisers want? The no-talk, big-stick policy leads to a dead end. North Korea already has nuclear weapons. Severe sanctions have not slowed its development of intercontinental missiles.

The Chinese suggest that talks could start if the U.S. suspends its regular joint military exercises with South Korea and North Korea responds by suspending nuclear and missile tests. Neither the U.S. nor North Korea has expressed support for that.

Kim vows to “mass produce” nuclear weapons; Pence demands that North Korea begin “denuclearization,” the dismantling “permanently and irreversibly” of North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs before there are any negotiations or loosening of sanctions or suspension of military exercises.

A no-talk, all-swagger policy has produced nothing. If escalating military exercises and threats don’t produce a war by miscalculation, they end up advertising the impotence of U.S. policy.

Diplomacy isn’t a surrender; it is an opening. The only way North Korea will give up its nuclear weapons is if it can receive concrete guarantees against foreign attack. The only way we can live with North Korea having nuclear weapons is with dialogue and mutual steps to build trust and security.

North Korea is a ruthless dictatorship with a failed economy. South Koreans are understandably fearful of war, but not exactly eager to bear the cost of rebuilding the North. Kim has made an opening gesture at the Olympic Games. Both South Korea and the U.S. have every reason to call his bluff, to seek discussions rather than to continue a no-talk policy that leads only to greater tension and frustration.

 

More articles by:

Jesse Jackson is the founder of Rainbow/PUSH.

November 19, 2018
David Rosen
Amazon Deal: New York Taxpayers Fund World Biggest Sex-Toy Retailer
Sheldon Richman
Art of the Smear: the Israel Lobby Busted
Chad Hanson
Why Trump is Wrong About the California Wildfires
Dean Baker
Will Progressives Ever Think About How We Structure Markets, Instead of Accepting them as Given?
Robert Fisk
We Remember the Great War, While Palestinians Live It
Dave Lindorff
Pelosi’s Deceptive Plan: Blocking any Tax Rise Could Rule Out Medicare-for-All and Bolstering Social Security
Rick Baum
What Can We Expect From the Democrat “Alternative” in California?
Thomas Scott Tucker
Trump, World War I and the Lessons of Poetry
John W. Whitehead
Red Flag Gun Laws
Newton Finn
On Earth, as in Heaven: the Utopianism of Edward Bellamy
Robert Fantina
Shithole Countries: Made in the USA
René Voss
Have Your Say about Ranching in Our Point Reyes National Seashore
Weekend Edition
November 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jonah Raskin
A California Jew in a Time of Anti-Semitism
Andrew Levine
Whither the Melting Pot?
Joshua Frank
Climate Change and Wildfires: The New Western Travesty
Nick Pemberton
The Revolution’s Here, Please Excuse Me While I Laugh
T.J. Coles
Israel Cannot Use Violent Self-Defense While Occupying Gaza
Rob Urie
Nuclear Weapons are a Nightmare Made in America
Paul Street
Barack von Obamenburg, Herr Donald, and Big Capitalist Hypocrisy: On How Fascism Happens
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fire is Sweeping Our Very Streets Today
Aidan O'Brien
Ireland’s New President, Other European Fools and the Abyss 
Pete Dolack
“Winners” in Amazon Sweepstakes Sure to be the Losers
Richard Eskow
Amazon, Go Home! Billions for Working People, But Not One Cent For Tribute
Ramzy Baroud
In Breach of Human Rights, Netanyahu Supports the Death Penalty against Palestinians
Brian Terrell
Ending the War in Yemen- Congressional Resolution is Not Enough!
John Laforge
Woolsey Fire Burns Toxic Santa Susana Reactor Site
Ralph Nader
The War Over Words: Republicans Easily Defeat the Democrats
M. G. Piety
Reading Plato in the Time of the Oligarchs
Rafael Correa
Ecuador’s Soft Coup and Political Persecution
Brian Cloughley
Aid Projects Can Work, But Not “Head-Smacking Stupid Ones”
David Swanson
A Tale of Two Marines
Robert Fantina
Democrats and the Mid-Term Elections
Joseph Flatley
The Fascist Creep: How Conspiracy Theories and an Unhinged President Created an Anti-Semitic Terrorist
Joseph Natoli
Twitter: Fast Track to the Id
William Hawes
Baselines for Activism: Brecht’s Stance, the New Science, and Planting Seeds
Bob Wing
Toward Racial Justice and a Third Reconstruction
Ron Jacobs
Hunter S. Thompson: Chronicling the Republic’s Fall
Oscar Gonzalez
Stan Lee and a Barrio Kid
Jack Rasmus
Election 2018 and the Unraveling of America
Sam Pizzigati
The Democrats Won Big, But Will They Go Bold?
Yves Engler
Canada and Saudi Arabia: Friends or Enemies?
Cesar Chelala
Can El Paso be a Model for Healing?
Mike Ferner
The Tragically Misnamed Paris Peace Conference
Barry Lando
Trump’s Enablers: Appalling Parallels
Ariel Dorfman
The Boy Who Taught Me About War and Peace
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail