North Korea has attempted to
engage in dialogue with US allies, while Donald Trump’s CIA director threatens
an illegal assassination against the North Korean leader.
The question as to whether
the DPRK is willing to engage in broad dialogue with potential international
partners, has been answered. Last week, the DPRK sent an open letter to
multiple governments, including the US ally, Australia, in which Pyongyang
asked to form a united front against Donald Trump’s aggressive stance towards
Pyongyang. Australia, in taking an overly literal reading of North Korea’s
letter, threw away a chance to reply to Pyongyang.
Had Australia engaged with Pyongyang, this would have literally been the
beginning of dialogue between North Korea and a stanch US ally in the Pacific.
The short-sighted attitude of the Canberra, demonstrates that when North Korea
does reach out to countries in an unexpected way, this attempt to establish
lines of dialogue is essentially met with a cynical and obstinate attitude
that doesn’t get anyone anywhere. Dialogue is never easy in such situations,
but all countries owe it to the wider cause of world peace to try. Australia
foolishly read North Korea’s letter as a kind of ‘geo-political prank’, where
in fact it was a thorny olive branch.
While North Korea has recently stated that they will not negotiate
their nuclear programme until Pyongyang possesses the ability to strike all of
the US mainland with nuclear missiles, the reality behind such dramatic remarks
is far more mundane.
All negotiations in difficult situations have a cat and mouse
element to them, with the roles of feline and rodent, often swapping by the
day, if not by the hour. North Korea’s actions are often far more reasonable
than their words. The fact that the DPRK did reach out to a US ally,
demonstrates that they are ready for dialogue now. The fault here, therefore
lies with those who refused to respond.
Furthermore, with North Korea months away from reaching the final
stage of its nuclear development, by Pyongyang’s own admission, the treat to
refrain from dialogue until such a state is reached, is becoming increasingly
moot in any case.
While it is impossible to independently verify the DPRK’s internal
nuclear timeline, there is no reason not to test the waters and begin attempts
to negotiate in both good faith and more importantly, with pragmatism. This
statement applies to all potential negotiating partners.
The truth of the matter is that North Korea is not going to forego
its nuclear programme at this point in time, in spite of any attempted efforts
by others to change this, even from traditional partners. The world must come
to accept that a nuclear North Korea is a fact of life and rather than risk
provoking a nuclear war in trying to change this, instead, one should approach
North Korea under the assumption that it will be a nuclear power for the
foreseeable future and all that can be established through negotiations is the
nature of the DPRK’s nuclear reality.
In this respect, what North Korea needs is a regional peace treaty
and additionally, negotiating partners should work with North Korea to return
to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a nuclear country, but one which
joins its nuclear neighbours Russia and China, in promoting the responsible
maintenance of nuclear weapons.
This is the only peaceful and realistic solution to the crisis and
it is one that can and should be augmented with the Russia offer to both Korean
states to engage in tripartite economic cooperation with Russia.
While Russia and China are opposed to North Korea’s nuclear programme,
Russian President Vladimir Putin stated in public that he
understands its justification, based on the precedents of Iraq and Libya, two
countries that were obliterated by NATO due to their lack of weapon of mass destruction. In this
sense, Russia has tacitly admitted that there is a real deterrent value to the
DPRK’s weapons, even while working to try and reduce tensions and reach an
accord for a Korean peace process.
The world is reaching a point of no return with North Korea, just
as it did in respect of nuclear weapons in India, Pakistan and Israel, three
countries that have a far more realistic chance of using their nuclear weapons
than North Korea, because unlike North Korea which is in the midst of a frozen
conflict, India, Pakistan and Israel have had decades long, hot conflicts with neighbouring
states. If the world can learn to pragmatically live with three non-signatories
to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) having nuclear weapons, than
surely, a similar status quo could be reached with North Korea, a former
signatory to the NPT and one which has in the past, shown signs that under
certain conditions, it could return to the NPT.
Hence, all responsible countries should open up channels of
communication to North Korea, without preconceived notions, dogmas or
ultimatums. The penultimate understanding guiding such negotiations is that the
DPRK should rejoin the NPT and no country should ever again threaten North
Korea. In many ways, even China would have to go some way towards compromise on
this as Beijing would like to see both sides of the Korean peninsula
de-weaponised. However, China’s position here, while ideal, is also at this
stage in time, unrealistic because of Pyongyang’s desire to maintain a
deterrent to the very real threat of US aggression.
Whereas China feels betrayed by Pyongyang’s weapons programme,
Russia, while condemning it, tends to take a more practical approach, one which
if successfully put into practice, China could embrace as a partner. In this
sense, it would help to see the NPT as a Korean gateway to One Belt–One Road
and the overall spirit of One Belt–One Road is one of bringing peace to the
wider world through mutual prosperity creating initiatives. There is no reason
why either Korean state should ultimately not reap these benefits. If Russia
can help to transform North Korea into a responsible nulear power, Russia could
also convince China to join in a peace process which involves promoting a
harmonious Korea through economic outreach in the form of a tributary of One
Belt–One Road.
Once again, the US is the biggest obstacle to such a pragmatic
peace process for the following reasons:
–the US is not interested in China expanding One Belt–One Road,
nor is Washington interested in Russia expanding its commercial endeavours into
East Asia.
–the US generates money by feeding its domestic weapons makers
cash in order to then, ‘give’ expensive arms to South Korea
–the US sees a weaponised Korean peninsula as an opportunity to
distract China from her peaceful economic activities by parking a nuclear
frozen conflict on her doorstep
Now though, the US has taken its peace averse attitude a step
further as the perpetually unhinged CIA director Mike Pompeo, has made another
ludicrous and provocative statement.
In a recent statement, Pompeo talked brazenly about assassinating
Kim Jong-un. The CIA director stated,
“With respect to … if Kim Jong-un should
vanish, given the history of the CIA, I’m just not going to talk about it.
Someone might think there was a coincidence.
‘You know, there was an accident.’ It’s just not fruitful”.
Pompeo then ominously stated that the CIA is “going to become a
much more vicious agency”.
Pompeo’s statements will be seen by North Korea as yet a further
sign that the US does not seek peace, but in fact seeks yet another illegal
overthrow of a head of state. With someone like Pompeo engaging in Dr.
Strangelove style rhetoric against North Korea, is it really unreasonable to
assume that North Korea should want to expand its deterrent against a US which
is openly promising acts of illegal violence against North Korea?
This is not the first ludicrous thing Pompeo has stated. He
previously said that Russia and the Lebanese party Hezbollah are operating in
Venezuela, in combined efforts to harm the US. He also stated
that the publisher and peace activist Julian Assange would have supported
Hitler in the 1930s and 1940s. Pompeo also said that Russia’s current
Chief of the General Staff invented the concept of RT and Sputnik, one which
relies on the power of the internet in 2017, in the early 1970s when he was in
his late teens and still in the equivalent of high school. Finally, Trump’s CIA
director stated that Russia not only rigged Donald Trump’s election but also
did so with Barack Obama’s victories in 2008 and 2012.
When it comes to being a danger to world peace and totally
out of touch with basic facts in the process, Mike Pompeo fits this description
far more than the North Korean leadership.
North Korea is looking for assurances and Pyongyang’s actions
indicate it is also looking for dialogue in various forms. Mike Pompeo is
looking to make the CIA even more aggressive and lawless than it already is.
Against this backdrop, is it any wonder that the crisis on the Korean peninsula
continues to smoulder?
