.jpg)
The last month has witnessed several pro-active efforts on the part of the U.S. Trump Administration in carrying out unilateral action in different conflict –ridden areas- Syria and Afghanistan. This was evident in the recent US decision to bomb a Syrian airport with cruise missiles fired from US ships stationed in the Mediterranean Sea. After that came the bombing of an ISIS cave hideout located in the mountainous region of Afghanistan with the most powerful bomb used in any conflict situation since the second World War. Both these attacks were carried out against alleged perpetrators of terrorist and illegal acts and resulted in the death of more than 100 persons. Bilateral efforts of Trump in the international arena
The greatest worry among US allies appears to be the possibility of Trump pursuing a military option. They are worried that in case of such an eventuality, there would be extensive damage not only within South Korea but
also a humanitarian crisis in North Korea itself
Muhammad Zamir
The last month has witnessed several pro-active efforts on the part of the U.S. Trump Administration in carrying out unilateral action in different conflict ridden areas- Syria and Afghanistan. This was evident in the recent US decision to bomb a Syrian airport with cruise missiles fired from US ships stationed in the Mediterranean Sea. After that came the bombing of an ISIS cave hideout located in the mountainous region of Afghanistan with the most powerful bomb used in any conflict situation since the second World War. Both these attacks were carried out against alleged perpetrators of terrorist and illegal acts and resulted in the death of more than 100 persons.
Analysts have pointed out that these actions indicated that Trump is turning his own page and is prepared to take action which will be based on his Administrations interpretation of what is consistent with international law. That also, according to most, means that future actions might be more unpredictable than before. That is worrying many in the international community.
The situation has acquired a dangerous trend because of the evolving situation in the Far East where unilateral violation of international obligations by the North Korean regime is creating tension within the Korean Peninsula as well as within the adjoining territories that includes Japan.
The latest scenario was initiated with the test of a North Korean missile off their east coast as part of their weapons programme in the first week of April ahead of an important meeting and formal dinner on 6 April between the leaders of the United States and China in West Palm Beach, Florida, USA . The erratic North Korean President Kim Jong Un through this action was showing that despite strictures placed on North Korea they were still capable of carrying out their weapons programmes immaterial of outside pressure. This was interpreted by Euan Graham as North Korea showing an airborne middle finger to Trump. The response from US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was short and sharp. It was different from previous lengthy, threat-laden responses.
It is generally agreed that US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping might have a number of resons to disagree on different issues, but none is more volatile or potentially as deadly as that of North Koreas aggressive pursuit of nuclear and missile expertise. It may be noted in this regard that since last year Kim Jong Un has tested more missiles than his father and grandfather combined- while making continued progress toward an ICBM capable of targetting nearly the entire continental USA. It may be mentioned here that some intelligence agencies have remarked that North Korea appears to have built up an arsenal of several types of missiles with maximum estimated ranges of- (a) Nodong 1,300 km; (b) Taepodong-1 2,000 km; (c) Musudan 4,000 km and (d) Taepodong 2 with a potential range of 8,000 km that covers parts of Canada and Alaska in the United States. Some estimates also suggest that North Korea which began its nuclear programme in earnest during the Ckinton administration (which tried to prevent this buildup with a diplomatic agreement) may have the capability to launch a missile that could hit the continental USA by the year 2020. Such a potential in the hands of an unstable leader is indeed a matter of international anxiety.
It appears that North Koreas aim is to be able to put a nuclear warhead on an ICBM that can reach targets around the world. Pyongyang has also claimed that that they have been able to miniaturise nuclear warheads for use on missiles. Experts have however cast doubt on this claim given the lack of any palpable evidence. It may be mentioned in this context that North Koreas activity in this regard is against several Resolutions adopted in the United Nations pertaining to that country carrying out nuclear or missile trests. DPRK has however repeatedly broken these sanctions.
This evolving situation has gained greater attention of international observers because of the recent visit to Republic of Korea on 17 April by US Vice President Mike Pence. This symbolic and geo-strategic visit was consistent with earlier visits to Seoul and the DMZ (a highly fortified de-facto 250 km border area- dotted with military guard posts, mines and defensive structures that separates South Korea from the North) by former leaders of United States. It may be recalled that President Jimmy Carter visited the DMZ in June, 1979, President Ronald Reagan in November, 1982, President Bill Clinton in July, 1993, President George W. Bush in February, 2002, President Barack Obama in March, 2012 and Vice President Joe Biden in December, 2013. This time round Mike Pence took the opportunity to highlight growing US impatience with the Northj Korean leadership. He warned North Korea not to test the resolve of the US or the strength of our military forces, following a failed North Korean missile test.He also linked recent US military strikes in Syria and Afghanistan with the situation in Korea. He also reiterated that these actions had reflected the strength and resolve of of our President. His comments tend to reflect that the era of strategic patience on the part of the United States Administration with regard to North Korea appears to be coming to an end.
As it stands now, the United States appears to have taken a dual approach towards this issue. On one side it is leaning on China, North Koreas principal ally to apply diplomatic and economic pressure on Pyongyang to curtail its nuclear ambitions.
On the other side of the equation they have also decided to increase their military footprint in the region through the deployment of a naval carrier strike group in the waters off the Korean Peninsula. US National Security Adviser H.R.McMaster has in the meantime also warned that the US hopes not to use military force but has also warned that this problem is coming to a head. He has also mentioned that various US military and intelligence agencies are working on providing options to have them ready for Trump if this pattern of destabilizing behavious continues.
North Korea has reacted by pointing that the present dangerous security situation was due to Trump administrations reckless military provocations. On 18th April North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Han Song-ryol has through a BBC interview also warned the US against taking military action- warning that North Korea will react with nuclear strike and continue testing new missiles. This response has been interpreted by many security analysts as playing to the gallery.
CNN in a special report on 18 April has mentioned that Trump eager to stop rapid advances in North Koreas nuclear and ballistic missile programs is trying to sweeten the pot and is discreetly offering China better trade terms if the Asian powerhouse takes steps to put North Koreas provocative behavior to rest. It may be noted that China accounts for 80 per cent of North Koreas foreign trade and has significant political leverage over North Korea.
It is understood that in this context Trump has told the Wall Street Journal in an interview, a day after he spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping by phone that We have tremendous trade deficits with everybody, but the big one is with China. ... And I told them, You want to make a great deal? Solve the problem in North Korea. Thats worth having deficits. And thats worth having not as good a trade deal as I would normally be able to make. Such a course of action pre-supposes that China has a strong sway over the North Korean political dynamics. This assumption however suffers from lack of consensus. Reference is made in this context to the systematic purge and killing of rivals by Kim Jong Un, many of whom had been diplomatic conduits to Beijing.
China has been cautious till now about its response. Some of their analysts within this parameter have been suggesting that the the US needs to adopt a different approach: engagement. Beijing is also indirectly suggesting that North Korea might be persuaded to freeze its nuclear program if, in exchange, the US halts its military exercises with South Korea. Chinas proposal is practical, feasible, reasonable, objective and unbiased, a Chinese spokesman has told the CNN in this regard. We hope all parties can be level-headed. In the meantime, as of 17 April China, according to its State broadcaster CCTV has suspended its Beijing- Pyongyang direct flight. It may also be recalled that earlier in February, China announced that it was halting all imports of coal from North Korea- a crucial earner for North Korea- for the rest of this year. These are being seen as indirect use of influence.
Some US lawmakers and experts have also endorsed the idea of direct talks. Senator Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat has urged Trump to start direct talks with Kim Jong Un in exchange for a Chinese commitment to drastically escalate sanctions against Pyongyang if it fails to negotiate in good faith. Some other observers including Harry Kazianis have also endorsed this approach and pointed out that direct communication is crucial if theres a crisis. He has also pointed out that What if a North Korean missile landed in Seoul and killed a lot of people?I dont think anybody wants to see a second Korean War and everything that would happen, so I think its important to have some sort of communication with them. As horrible as it sounds, it is a reality.
The greatest worry among US allies appears to be the possibility of Trump pursuing a military option. They are worried that in case of such an eventuality, there would be extensive damage not only within South Korea but also a humanitarian crisis in North Koreas itself- with millions of affected and impoverished North Koreans streaming across the border to war-affected South Korea. This would create serious instability within a region already affected by competing geo-strategic paradigms related to the use of maritime potential of the region.
They are also pointing out that the world is already having to deal with crisis in North Africa, the Middle East, in Afghanistan, and the India-Pakistan border. There is also the unresolved migrant issue which is affecting Europe. They are also drawing attention to Russian Foreign Minister Lavrovs latest warning towards the USA asking it not to launch any unilateral strike on North Korea. Russia, in this regard has stressed that we do not accept the reckless nuclear missile actions of Pyongang that breaches UN resolutions, but that does not mean that you (the USA) can breach international law.
One can only hope that the relevant parties will exercise caution and not end up creating a chaotic disaster within the Far East and the adjoining region that might have been avoided.
Muhammad Zamir, a former ambassador, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance. He can be reached at [email protected]
