North Korea has been growing exponentially as a global threat to world peace. It is the United States duty, as the main target of North Korea’s nuclear weapons and as a global super power, to diffuse the tensions with North Korea in the most efficient way possible. The United States can take one of two courses of action in this scenario: negotiate a freeze on the nuclear weapons development with Pyongyang, or take aggressive military action to destroy the nuclear weapons. Given the motives of Kim Jong Un’s regime, the best way to diffuse the situation would be to negotiate a freeze on Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons would be the best way to diffuse the situation.

North Korea’s objective of acquiring nuclear weapons has been documented as beginning as early as the 1990’s, as demonstrated in the quote: “According to intelligence analysts and rocket experts, some Russian engineers seeking work after the Soviet Union fell apart moved to North Korea in the early ‘90s and helped advance the country’s nuclear program” (Chull 2). After World War Two, The Soviet Union and the United States agreed to divide Korea at the 38th parallel in August 1945. North Korea established a communistic-style country (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, DPRK). South Korea developed into a democratic-based government (Republic of Korea, ROK) with the adoption of the US constitution. Still to this day, citizens remain divided by the “demilitarized zone” (DMZ), one of the most heavily armed boarders in the world. “Around 600,000 South Korean and 28,500 U.S. troops face-off against 770,000 North Korea soldiers stationed within 80,000 kilometers of the demilitarized zone” (Schmitt).

In 1985, North Korea signs the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) binding them to cease their development of nuclear weapons. This proved to be futile in October of 2002, when North Korea admits to operating a secret nuclear weapons program in direct violation of the 1994 agreement. Then, in 2003 North Korea decides to withdraw from the NPT and declares that it has nuclear weapons. In 2006, North Korea fires its first successful test of long-range missiles. In 2007, Kim Jong Un attempts to con $400 million by agreeing to close its main nuclear reactor. By the end of the year, North Korea misses the deadline to deactivate the nuclear reactor and the nuclear reactor remains active. In 2009, North Korea admits to its second nuclear test. The Kim Jong Un regime has been proven to be not trustworthy and forces the hand of the U.N. After the second test the U.N. formally condemns all nuclear weapons test of North Korea and imposes new sanctions: “The Resolution 1874 (2009) put a series of sanctions on North Korea’s arm sales, luxury goods, and financial transactions related to its weapons program”(Nikitin 2). The implications of The Resolution 1874 were destining to fail without the total compliance of China. After several meetings from 2011-2012, North Korea openly defies the U.S. and the U.N. On January 24th 2013; “North Korea's National Defense Commission says it will continue nuclear testing and long-range rocket launches. The tests and launches will feed into an "upcoming all-out action" targeting the United States, "the sworn enemy of the Korean people," the commission says” (CNN). In February, North Korea launches its third nuclear test. Within the last couple of years, North Korea had developed the hydrogen bomb and a way to miniaturize nuclear bombs so they can travel further. On July 4th, North Korea successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that can travel anywhere in the world. Then, North Korea threatens to deliver that bomb to the “heart of the U.S.” if the U.S. attempts to remove Kim Jong Un as supreme leader. President Donald Trump responds to Kim Jong Un’s comments by tweeting; Trump, Donald (@realDonaldTrump) “North Korea best not make anymore threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.” August 9, 2017. 5:39 ET. Tweet. Almost a month later, North Korea responded with their sixth nuclear test causing a 6.3 magnitude seismic event using a hydrogen bomb. Threats to North Korea’s national security are proven to not be the most efficient way to achieve peace. 

North Korea has remained an isolated country with only China and the Soviet Union as its significant allies, since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s. China is the single most important ally to North Korea; however, Kim Jong Un’s erratic behavior has caused the relationship between the two countries to dwindle. The country remains isolated through Kim Jong Un’s regulation of the media, and social lives of the DPRK. Even though North Korea suffers from an impoverished economy with no central currency and limited support from allies, they still consider themselves to be fully autonomous solely because of their strong military and nuclear weapons. This is evident on page 6 of Denny Roy’s “Misunderstanding North Korea”: “The North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, sees the nuclear program as the means to sustain his regime. While it remains among the poorest countries in the world, North Korea spends nearly a quarter of its GDP on its military, according to U.S. State Department estimates”. The entire political identity of South Korea is based upon its militaristic strength and its ability to defend itself during an attack. Given this information, it is difficult to see Kim Jong Un reacting to an invasion in a way that does not result in a nuclear response to the U.S. When speaking to The Atlantic, a high-level associate at MIT said: “If I am sitting in Pyongyang, and I think you are coming for me, I’ve got minutes to decide if this is an all-out attack, and if I wait, I lose. So it’s use nuclear weapons or I lose them – which makes for an itchy trigger finger” (Bowden). This is precisely why more aggressive military action will prove to not be the best option in attempt to diffuse the nuclear crisis. 

Furthermore, the belief of destroying the nuclear base of North Korea as the best option in diffusing this situation is held by individuals that share a few common misconceptions of Kim Jong Un’s regime. The first of them being that the regime is “irrational” and the other being that China has the ability to solve the problem but is unwilling to do so. Kim Jong Un’s regime, while not ethical, cannot be considered irrational due to its consistency in it’s objective of autonomy my militaristic power. This is a platform in which the U.S. needs capitalize on with regards to negotiations towards nuclear proliferation. If the U.S. were to ensure North Korea’s survival and autonomy with a means to ensure a freeze on the development and testing of nuclear development, negotiations toward peace would be plausible. If North Korea were to decline these U.S. negotiations and accept war instead, then Pyongyang would be considered irrational. The other misunderstanding is that China has the ability to solve the problem. This is not true. China is North Korea’s main trading partner and supplier of most of DPRK’s food and fuel. However, this does not give China all of the leverage one would think comes from this relationship. “Beijing has insisted it has less influence over Pyongyang than Americans believe, that North Korea has often defied Chinese pressure, and that the responsibility for diffusing the crisis rests with Washington.” (Nikitin) China has obvious economic and militaristic motives for not wanting the regime to collapse. The collapse of the regime would lead to a stronger united Korea that would place a U.S. ally on the Chinese boarder. It would also lead to an increase in Korean refugees in China, which would be a huge economic burden. Lastly, the Chinese also worry about what would happen to the nuclear weapons after a fall of the Kim Jong Un regime, that could cause a power vacuum. China taking a more aggressive approach in sanctions could greatly decrease the nuclear tensions with North Korea, but would also cause short and long-term hardships for itself.

 Even though sanctions and diplomatic reasoning had failed the U.S. in negotiating Nuclear weapons out of the hands of Kim Jong Un in the past, we still have time to negotiate. The reason we still have time to persuade Kim Jong Un is through the use of “active containment”. “Active containment” is the strategy in which the U.S. forms a missile defense perimeter in international waters around North Korea that would knock down every missile launched. This would not only protect the U.S. home land but would also, put an end to Kim Jong Un’s missile tests as all tests would be shot down. This would buy us time to negotiate while also showing the strength of the technological advancement of the U.S. military. Any threats of a nuclear missile toward a U.S. entity can and should be seen as a direct threat and should be grounds for further militaristic actions. In the meantime, we should be shooting down the tests of North Korea and trying to negotiate the weapons out of the hand of the leader of the regime Kim Jong Un.

As I have stated earlier, Kim Jong Un is not irrational by the purest definition of the word. Webster’s dictionary defines the word irrational as “without the facility of reason; deprived of reason.” And “not endowed with the faculty of reason”. (Irrational) Merrian-webster.com. Merriam – Webster, 2011. Web. 22 November 2017. His regime does not fit the description of this term because his regime is consistent in the goal of survival by any means necessary, and use of military first. We can use this mentality as leverage for negotiations. If we can convince China to put more sanctions on North Korea and meeting Chinas need on our own, we can boost our economy, and our national security. China might be reluctant because they would be loosing productivity by doing business with us over the less expensive North Korea; however, the cost is miniscule in comparison to the cost of an all out nuclear war. Once, we start to drain North Korea of their resources they will become more inclined to listen to our demands that include the cease of nuclear development, and the testing and storing of already developed weapons. We can approach the negotiations with incentives for North Korea that would include assurance of national security without the use nuclear weapons, a lift of the current trade embargo, and also a threat of an all out war without total compliance. 

For the last 40 years the U.S. has chosen to intimidate North Korea by training South Korea’s military. The U.S. also had isolated the country with sanctions in attempt to suffocate its economy to the point where nuclear weapons are not feasible. However, North Korea has proven to put military over quality of living and been persistent in regards to its development of nuclear weapons. 

President George W. Bush established the Resolution 1874 (2009), which put a series of sanctions on North Korea’s arm sales, luxury goods, and financial transactions related to its weapons program. This was an attempt to put an end to the regime, and subsequently the nuclear arms program. President Obama had similar ideas when he issued “strategic patience” with no success in regards to retarding the development of nuclear weapons and the fact that the regime did not collapse. The Trump administration was similar in its policy of “maximum pressure”. The Trump administration is the most antagonizing of all the administrations with his public embarrassment of the regimes’ leader, Kim Jong Un, on social media. Trump, Donald(@realDonaldTrump). “North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?” July 3. 2017 10:19 PM. Trump further embarrasses Kim Jong Un with childish taunts such as calling him “little rocket man” on public platforms.  “Both China and Russia urge the U.S. to stop intimidating North Korea and start working towards a peaceful resolution” (Mullin). 

Sanctions should be used as an incentive for disarmament, not in attempt to destroy a regime whose policy is protect the regime by any means necessary (especially militaristically), and who puts the regime over its own people. This only leads to poorer quality of life for the citizens and higher tensions between nations. The goal of the negotiations with North Korea should include: “Three No’s”: first, no new weapons (freezing North Korean production of plutonium and enriched uranium); second, no testing of weapons or ballistic missiles; and third, no exports of nuclear technology or weapons to state or non-state entities” (Mullin). The context of negotiations does not stop there. The current regime has many issues it has to address which include, but are not limited to; the human rights violations of the regime and its history of torture and maltreatment of captured North Korean refugees. However, the nuclear arms negotiation is the most to prominent and immediate threat to the population at large. In order to fix these growing problems caused by this regime we must first eliminate the threat of a global nuclear war. 

The militaristic approach would include destroying North Korea’s nuclear reactors and weapons, as well as increasing U.S. military presence around the boarder of North Korea. The positive outcomes of destroying North Koreas nuclear weapons would be a short-term reassurance of no attack on the U.S. home front. This is limited, however, because North Korea has the ability to make the same weapons again; and will be sure to attack the capital of the U.S. with in retaliation once its fully restored to its full militaristic capabilities. This solution is also limited because information of location and quantity of nuclear weapons are very limited due the countries extreme isolation from the rest of the world. In assessing the militaristic opportunities we must assess the case in which the U.S. increased the military presence surrounding North Korea. This would be seen as a direct threat to Pyongyang as well, and could very possibly be responded to with a nuclear strike on the U.S. home front, which would result in a nuclear warfare that would be the cause of countless citizen casualties as well as an immeasurable amount of damage.

The militaristic approach would only be beneficial in these categories if the U.S. were to destroy the entire country, sparing only a small amount of North Korea’s population of over 25 million. If successful, the militaristic would bring the regime to an end and therefore and end to all the inhumane crimes and threats that it currently possesses to the world currently, but at the cost of an inhumane crime of our own. However, military action is feasible in the event of an attack on U.S. soil or on that of a U.S. ally. 

We have an obligation to our soldiers, our allies, and the citizens of every nation involved to exhaust every option before committing to an all out nuclear war. We have yet to exhaust the option of negotiation thoroughly and should not risk the lives of civilians until we do so.
