Obama Needs to be Nuanced in North Korea Response

The pin-pricks, as Brent Scowcroft calls them, have started. North Korea is testing Obama's resolve and strategic skills.

North Korea's ballistic missile test masked as a satellite launch violates agreements that the United States, Russia, China, South Korea, and Japan negotiated with North Korea in order to bring it back into compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Set aside for the moment that despite the missile succeeding in covering more than 1,900 miles -- doubling the distances achieved by earlier North Korea tests -- the North Koreans failed to put anything into orbit, though state news agencies are reporting the satellite launch to be a success.

My friend Jeffrey Lewis who blogs at Arms Control Wonk wondered out loud on his facebook profile "What happens to North Korean rocket scientists after failed launches?" I wonder if these scientists are really in any jeopardy for failing when the State is calling their work a major success.

But Barack Obama, in a well-crafted speech in Prague calling for a return to serious work on constraining the spread of weapons of mass destruction, has ratcheted up the decibel level of his protest of the North Korea launch -- saying that their must be consequences.

The problem is that China and Russia, which actually deployed warships and fighters to the region of the launch, believe that the world must not overreact to North Korea's provocation. These two countries have thus far blocked the issuance of any statement from the United Nations Security Council, which met last evening (Sunday) for an emergency session.

North Korea seems to be demanding that it not fall too far down the Obama priority list -- and it has engineered one of the first of many probable global crises designed to test the resolve and strategic course of the Obama administration. Joe Biden warned during the campaign that this would happen, and he was absolutely right.

North Korea is already the target of some of the world's most stringent sanctions. And maintaining them -- and even adding some categories of sanctions -- does send a signal, but it is a soft one that the North Koreans may not care about or respect.

If this provocation was designed primarily "to get attention," then the Obama administration should be asking what can be done to give North Korea "more" attention. Attention itself is not a strategic commodity -- or something that a great nation should withhold if there is a chance of securing strategically significant successes over the ability of North Korea to further enhance its nuclear weapon systems capacity.

Giving North Korea more attention will be pilloried as appeasement by voices such as John Bolton and Frank Gaffney who think that there is little else but expedited regime change and military collision that will change North Korea's course.

But what I have learned watching North Korea's engagement with the US over the years is that North Korea does not move behaviorally in straight lines. But after all is said and done, when one looks back, one sees that North Korea is moving generally in a direction that the West may eventually be able to accept.

North Korea may be a rogue state -- but it is not the kind of transnational, undeterrable threat that al Qaeda represents. North Korea's leadership is a shrewdly self-interested, rational, calculating tyranny and as awful as dealing with such regimes may be -- there are many options that can move the regime that are short of war.

Thus, in my view, Obama should not put himself into a box when it comes to a tough-edged response to North Korea. Give North Korea the attention it craves -- and set up benchmarks for behavior.

And some of Obama's responses may indeed have to be harder edged -- but we need to be sure that the US isn't giving the most thuggish part of North Korea's leadership structure the excuses needed to undermine progressive movement inside the country.

At the same time, we simply need more alternatives and allies -- and the best I can think of is to work with Japan, South Korea, and China in not calling for withdrawing engagement and toughening sanctions but rather crafting how to strategically enhance engagement with particular forces inside North Korea that we want to cultivate.

It's time for a Nixonian approach that would enrich some of North Korea's potential robber barons against the interests of others inside the regime. We need to try to unleash opportunities for some and not others. This is risky and could itself be destabilizing -- but we need a strategic course that ultimately improves the leverage of other of North Korea's neighbors over its conduct.

Bluster will not work and is not respected. Force actually is respected by the North Koreans but can easily escalate beyond control.

North Korea is not monolithic. It would be prudent to try to generate some leverage on the competing factions around Kim Jong Il.

But hitting North Korea hard now may undermine any chance of teasing out these factions and of generating other more promising scenarios. At the minimum, if this was all about "attention" -- then that is something America can give at low cost.

If North Korea doesn't get off this new provocative course, then we have to consider some options that change the game.

-- Steve Clemons directs the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation and publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

Comments

[fourbrrl]

CNN said they have a satelite in orbit...hm­mmmm...won­der why the denial by the US ?

[kepary]

we should get rid of our nuclear weapons so only Iran and No. Korea have them... lets let them be the bad guys for a while

[WorkingClass]

Why is the treaty a big deal for North Korea but means nothing with regard to Iran and Israel? So they shot half their GDP into the air. Who cares. Send Kim some viagra and a case of wine. I downloaded the photo by the way. First smiling Kim I have seen. He looks like a guy I would like to have a beer with. Does anyone have a link to an MP3 of the patriotic music that the satellite would have broadcase if it had not fallen into the ocean?

[Paul Carr]

(Part 4) The previous policy of "containing" China needs to be abandoned. Now, we need to co-opt China as a global partner for peace, not just in North Korea but, in other regions of the world where presently there are conflicts of interests between these two countries, such as the Sudan, Zimbabwe and Myanmar.

A "League of Democracies" that Grandpa McCain proposed last year is not the way forward. Expelling Russia from the G8, as Grandpa McCain proposed last year, is not the way forward. We need to open up a sensible dialogue between developed and developing countries on this planet. We need to prioritize what it is that the MAJORITY of our species, Homo Sapiens, want on this planet. ( I think 85% of the world's population live in developing countries). They want 1) human and social development and THEN 2) democracy. What's the point in having democracy in a place like North Korea or Myanmar where half the people or more are starving the death or suffering the effects of severe malnutrition? Have any of you well-fed readers here ever have to contend with the horror of starvation? When you starve, your brain shuts down. All it seeks is food and water. The last thing you want then is a pen and a piece of paper to put an X on for your favored candidate or party.

[Paul Carr]

(Part3) Barack Obama should tell Hu Jintao that he's willing to remove all his troops from the Far East regardless of whether he accepts Obama's offer or not. He should acknowledge to Hu Jintao that the USA takes its share of responsibility for dividing China in 1949 by using its 7th fleet to protect the island of Taiwan from an invasion by Mao Zedong's forces, providing Generalissimo Chiang Kai Shek with a platform to continue to terrorize his people for another quarter of a century. He should then make the offer to blockade the island with his fleet which is, after all, the world's largest. Why not put it to good use?

The North Korean Missile/Nuclear Crises are a series of incidents that were just waiting to happen. Kim Jung Il and his father Kim Il Song have had, like, decades to prepare their missiles and nukes. No one can say that this crisis just came up out of the blue like an aberrant piranha fish and bit them in the backside. The USA has had an opportunity since China began to open up in 1978 to transform relations with China but has refused to do so. Better late than never. And if it takes another North Korean Missile Crisis like this one to wake intelligent and enlightened US policy makers up (and, yes, I DON'T mean the thick neo-cons) to what needs to be done then so be it. Relations with China need to be transformed.

[Paul Carr]

(Part 2) For me, the keystone for resolving the diplomatic tension in the Far East is not North Korea, but Taiwan. Obama and his team need to head over to Beijing to talk with Hu Jintao, China's President, and Wen Jiabao, China's Prime Minister, about resolving the Taiwan issue once and for all. It would be foolish to pretend that there's no problem there. It's there. It is a problem. And, in my mind, it's the biggest potential source for global instability in the world today, even more so than Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and even Pakistan and North Korea. The fact that presently it remains largely hidden from public view as a problem makes it even more pernicious.

Obama needs to be decisive. He should talk to Hu Jintao, China's President, and tell him that he's willing to place the island of Taiwan under a military blockade with his navy, if necessary, to force the island of Taiwan into reunification talks under the principle of "one country two systems" which has worked so well already for Hong Kong and Macau. I believe China is still generously offering the principle of "one country two systems" to Taiwan in the event of a peaceful reunification with the mainland.. A generous offer is already on the table.

[Paul Carr]

(Part 1) I think we all need to calm down and take a deep breath. I don't agree with Steve Clemons' suggestion that there is a "progressive movement" within North Korea which needs to be teased out and encouraged. North Korea is an impoverished country. Kim Jung Il rules his country with an iron fist.

Obama needs to do something historic and heroic just like Richard Nixon did in the early 1970s when he first went to China ending the freeze on relations between the two countries. Obama needs to transform relations in East Asia.

The neo-con answer (also expressed by one or two on this thread) of going into North Korea with all guns blazing would be incredibly thick!!.. We'd almost certainly start a new cold war with rising superpower China. (whose economy is already almost as large as the USA's!!). The Military Industrial Complex in the US will rejoice. No one else will, aside from their paid lobbyists and the honestly bribed politicians in Washington.. Social programs like social security, any possible mandatory health insurance scheme in the future and pensions will all be cut back. The USA is almost bankrupt as it is. A new cold war with China will drive the country over the edge into fiscal oblivion. And, of course, there is always the risk of a hot nuclear war which will be catastrophic for life as we know it on this planet.

[Beachrunner]

Here's a fun game!

http://www.carloslabs.com/projects/200712B/GroundZero.html

Type in "San Francisco," select the size of the North Korean nuclear missle, and watch blast radius appear!

[Beachrunner]

Media sycophants may consider themselves duty bound, à la Chris Matthews, to work for Mr. Obama's success.

Kim Jong Il and friends take a different view.

In the real world, theirs are the views that count.

[alumtrix]

............"North Korea is already the target of some of the world's most stringent sanctions. "........

Do we know this for sure? Iraq had a lot of sanctions imposed on them as well until we went in there and found that Germany, France, Russia and even at least one American was undermining the sanctions. The UN is useless at this point. NK having these capabilities goes back to the Clinton era when he wanted to be loved by the world just like Obama. He trusted but never verified. But at least we have Obama on our side who will probably..­..........­..........­......do the same thing.

[idest]

What the hell are you talking about? We had cameras inside North Korean nuclear reactors, we knew where every missile was when Clinton was President. It was BUSH who ruined that with his standoffish approach, and it was under BUSH that North Korea developed its nuclear arsenal. You conservatives have serious issues dealing with reality, man. Seek help.

[foxbat]

Picked this tidbit from an article on the North Korean missile lanuch:

" ... administration called the missile launches "a clear provocation," but said there was no immediate threat to the United States.

The launches today put North Korea in violation of a moratorium on missile testing it signed in 1999."

Of interest is that the article referenced was written in July 2006 right after North Korea had launched SIX missiles in ONE day during the Bush admin; including one of the long-range variety. Where was all of this "conservative outrage" from folks like Gingrich? By the way, apparently EVERYTHING that Bush admin during their tenure did nothing to make it harder for North Korea to launch the recent missile. Matter of fact, using Cheney's line of thinking, the steps that Bush didn't take at that time made us less secure as a nation and helped to make the recent launch possible. I mean if we are going to use that Cheney/Gingrich reasoning, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[alumtrix]

Au contraire monsieur FOXBAT! The Bush regime did exactly what the libs wanted him to do. "You can't go it alone Mr Bush" cried the masses!!! So he initiated the six party talks because he already saw that Kim Jung-il ran circles around Billy Bob Clinton. OH Mr. Clinton, Mr. Clinton, can't you help us with our nuclear technology to help with electricity and not for nuclear weapons. Please, we promise. Will you say you love me Mr. Kim?? Of course Mr. Bill. OK, here's the blueprints.

[foxbat]

Bush didn't do anything that anyone else wanted him to do. He was the ultimate "who cares what you say" leader.

Bush did the six party talks because he had such a carved-in-stone policy that he would not talk with anyone that was "on his list" and he couldn't stop the other five from being part of talks, so he inserted the US to "listen in." He would not acknowledge North Korea one-on-one. Had nothing to do with placating "libs" no matter how one tries to spin it.

[bighat]

This is nothing new. More than likely Obama was being tested. 90% chance China and Russia had the inside details of the missile being able to perform. But stood on the sidelines. They want to get a reaction of our young President

[GoldenAgeMaster]

Nuanced hell! He needs to tell Il-Jong that once the 6 party talks get under way again, then, and only then, will he listen to anything NK has to say.

No more, and no less.

[Donald Wolberg]

Unfortunately, no action is an action. Instead of confronting the less than reliable North Koreans and destroying the rocket, miserable as it seems as a launch vehicle for anything, or allowing the Japanese to destroy the vehicle on the launch pad, as they clearly preferred to do, the appeasement like nonaction of Mr. Obama will encourage more bad behavior. It seems clear that Ms. Clinton (true to her campaign rhetoric), Mr. Gates, as well as the Joint Chiefs had every intention of nulifying the rocket launch and had the needed technology to accomplish the task, either on the launch pad or at lift off. I suspect that the destruction of a missile would have made Mr. Obama, who has never shown an appreciation or understanding of such matters, uncomfortable since it is his inclination to kill the anti-missile defense available to Europem and pised for an Iranian threat. This does explain the sudden non-engagement shift of Mr. Gates and the surprising silence of Ms. Clinton, both now very embarrased. Mr. Obama should at least attempt to show some courage and resolve when dealing with bad characters.

[RobinSeattle]

Whoopie! WWIII! We can put even more death and destruction on the national credit card and reduce the unemployment rate by killing more U.S. soldiers while now needing to institute a draft! Happy days are indeed here again!

And the stock market will love it when North Korea retaliates by invading a major economic power in Asia in South Korea. No doubt about it, war is good for the stock market, so lets have more war!

[foxbat]

The North Koreans would have had much more advantage by the US destroying this missile at this time. They lost face in a major way by having only one stage of a three-stage rocket work. Had the US shot it down, the bogus claims of strength would have resounded from the NKs and also given the rest of the world major cause to wonder if Obama was really just the Black Bush. Different times and different circumstances may call for different actions in the future, but for now the right stance was taken in this particular incident.

[RobinSeattle]

"I wonder if these scientists are really in any jeopardy for failing when the State is calling their work a major success."

Mission Accomplished, same thing.

"but we need to be sure that the US isn't giving the most thuggish part of North Korea's leadership structure the excuses needed to undermine progressive movement inside the country."

Aren't all the progressives in North Korea in prison? From what I have seen on NK, it seems to me that things between the Kim regime and his military are kind of tense because they are even more evil than he is.

The problem with engaging NK ala China is that Kim isn't Mao or even Zhou En-lai. The North Korean regime is more impulsive, paranoid and far less able to meet the west on its own terms than China was and that will make any negotiations we undertake with them a heck of a lot trickier and more sensitive.