Politics

特朗普的朝鲜战略失误

Nov 29, 2017 Christopher R. Hill

丹佛—当美国总统特朗普抱怨他接手了朝鲜难题时，确实不无道理。朝鲜领导人金正恩没有表现出任何谈判兴趣，甚至不愿意听到任何人对他不顾后果追求核武器和发射核武器用的远程导弹置喙。

但特朗普接手问题这一事实并不能意味着他可以撇清解决问题的责任。到目前为止，他甚至没有对应对朝鲜的战略做出过论述，更不用说实施了。他上任总统已近一年，唯一的成就是确保了联合国升级制裁。更糟糕的是，他对前任的怨声载道表明他根本不知道接下来该怎么办。

特朗普应对朝鲜问题的最新尝试发生在本月早些时候，他大声宣布其政府将朝鲜重新打入了美国国务院的支持恐怖主义国家名单。从金正恩的行为看，这一决定固然相当合理，但基本上属于象征意义，一如前总统小布什在2008年10月决定将朝鲜从这个名单中移除。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Christopher R. Hill

Writing for PS since 2010
103 Commentaries

Christopher R. Hill, former US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, was US Ambassador to Iraq, South Korea, Macedonia, and Poland, a US special envoy for Kosovo, a negotiator of the Dayton Peace Accords, and the chief US negotiator with North Korea from 2005-2009. He is Chief Adviser to the Chancellor for Global Engagement and Professor of the Practice in Diplomacy at the University of Denver, and the author of Outpost: A Diplomat at Work.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 3 Comments on this article

Vidvuds Beldavs Dec 4, 2017

Trump is seeking a foreign policy coup that would outshine all his predecessors that in his view kicked the DPRK problem down the road for decades. He has claimed that he would solve the problem on his watch on his terms. But the only real tool available to him is the willingness of China to put the screws on the DPRK. There is zero reason for China to starve the DPRK into submitting to Trump's demands. A long term strategic objective of China is actually that the U.S. withdraw its military from South Korea. The DPRK shares this objective.
The rhetoric of Trump, his national security advisor McMaster, and other Trump spokespeople, and supporters in Congress is "The threat level is rising. We are running out of time and war is imminent." When Trump threatens the total destruction of the DPRK unless it submits, it raises the question of the deterrents available to the DPRK to respond to such a threat. Nuclear and the capacity to significantly damage the enemy may be the only possible deterrent. Under such an extreme threat to its existence the DPRK could not agree to denuclearize. Trump's rhetoric has created the conditions for a deal that Trump's predecessors would never have considered.
Faced with the threat of a devastating war, South Korea may rationally seek relief by agreeing to a UN brokered settlement that could include terms like:
- Security of South Korea and DPRK guaranteed by the UN, backed by China
- Total dismantlement of the DPRK nuclear weapons program
- Removal of U.S. forces from South Korea
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Dec 1, 2017

Christopher R. Hill is right about Trump "missing" a strategy for North Korea. While complaining about inheriting a "difficult problem" he also criticises his predecessors for doing nothing to rein in Pyongyang's nuclear ambition. His inconsistency in dealing with Kim Jong-un shows he does not know how to handle the current crisis. While condemning the missile tests in recent months and threatening to "totally destroy" North Korea during his speech at the UN in September, Trump - deep inside - seems envious of the absolute power the young despot in North Korea wields.
In January 2016 he sang Kim's praises days after Pyongyang had detonated an alleged hydrogen bomb: “You’ve got to give him credit. How many young guys -- he was like 26 or 25 when his father died -- take over these tough generals, and all of a sudden ... he goes in, he takes over, and he’s the boss," Trump said. "It's incredible. He wiped out the uncle, he wiped out this one, that one. I mean this guy doesn't play games. And we can't play games with him."
Despite all the names Trump calls Kim - "Little Rocketman", a "madman" or a "sick puppy" etc. - describing his adversary in Pyongyang as "short and fat", he is apparently impressed by Kim's leadership style, and the “amazing” way this brute murders political rivals. Even after the young, unruly leader called Trump "old" and a "dotard", his American nemesis still claimed "trying hard" to be his "friend."
In an interview in May Trump called Kim “a pretty smart cookie,” praising his ability to maintain power in North Korea. He even said he would be “honored” to meet with his counterpart “under certain circumstances,” which helped boost Kim's credibility and prestige of a dictator. Speaking at a conference in Hanoi earlier in November, Trump offered a fresh olive branch to Kim, reiterated his willingness to sit down with his North Korean adversary, saying it would be a "good thing" if the two men met. Yet at the same time he stepped up his attacks on Pyongyang.
Before the lastest missile launch two days ago, there had been weeks of restraint since Pyongyang's last launch on September 15. Trump could have taken the opportunity to explore the path of diplomacy and reach out to Kim. But on November 20, he put North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which was counterproductive. Yesterday he proposed more sanctions against North Korea and urged all nations to isolate the brutal regime in Pyongyang.
That Kim Jong-un "has shown no interest in negotiation" is comprehensible. The nuclear programme guarantees his political survival and personal security. He and his father had seen what happened to Iraq's long-time dictator, Saddam Hussein and Libya's strongman, Muammar Gaddafi, after they had given up their nuclear ambition. Kim also fears that a deal with the West would be rendered useless by Trump and Congress, as Iran's nuclear agreement with the West has shown.
The author can not compare the circumstances a decade ago, while he was Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs under George W. Bush. The US had more clout then in the absence of a rising China and a resurgent Russia. Before Arab Spring and the war in Syria, the world was more stable. Today, Kim is emboldened by Trump's inward-looking approach, and a vindictive Russia, that seeks to settle a score with the West for imposing sanctions after grabbing Crimea.
China is more assertive today and determined to expand its influence across Asia and prevent the US from maintaining a permanent presence in the region. Both China and Russia are essential partners in denuclearising the Korean peninsula. There is no mutual trust on all sides, and any cooperation would be accompanied by distrust and hostility. "That cooperation would have to be based on a long-term commitment, not one-off transactions." but it would not suit Trump. And, "perhaps more importantly, it would require daily engagement not just with China, but with all of the other regional stakeholders as well." It is doubtful whether Trump will sit out his term of office. His strategy seems play by ear and take things as they come.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst Nov 29, 2017

There is no plan because there is nothing much Trump can do. China smiles because Trump has to ask a favour which shuts up the anti China rhetoric. The plan therefore has to be to have NK on a leash but let it out for a run now and then to keep Trump asking. Where is the surprise. Fiendishly clever those chaps, well compared to Trump that is.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.