I would think that North Korea would be jubilant if a deal was agreed to with President Trump that leaves them with a Pakistan like nuclear arsenal:
So are there any models of “rogue” regimes with nuclear programs that might appeal to North Korea? The answer is yes. But, unfortunately, it’s a state that kept its nuclear deterrent intact: Pakistan. If Pyongyang is weighing up two possible futures—Libya vs. Pakistan—it’s not much of a choice.
Pakistan began to seriously pursue nuclear weapons in the 1970s, motivated by a desire to deter its more powerful rival India, as well as match India’s nuclear capability. The Pakistani politician Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who later became prime minister, claimed, “If India builds the bomb, we will eat grass or leaves—even go hungry—but we will get one of our own.” In 1998, on a clear and bright day in the Chagai district, Pakistan carried out a series of nuclear tests. Pakistan’s chief scientific officer said “All praise be to Allah” and pushed the button, causing the mountain to shake in a vast explosion.
In 2016, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistsestimated that Pakistan had 130 to 140 warheads and predicted that it would nearly double its arsenal by 2025. Islamabad could deliver nuclear weapons by medium-range ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, F-16 fighters, and tactical systems for short-range use on the battlefield. [The Atlantic]
You can read more at the link, but President Trump has said that he wants North Korea to follow the South Korea model of using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. So the Pakistan model is likely off the table. However, if the Pakistan model is being considered, from the US perspective leaving North Korea with a short range nuclear arsenal is in the US’s interest since these missiles cannot target the US mainland, Hawaii, Alaska, and Guam.
However, the Pakistan model would not solve the issue of proliferation. Strict inspections would be needed to ensure nuclear technology is not being proliferated. What kind of inspections will the Kim regime agree to? The other major issue with the Pakistan model is would the North Koreans agree to give up medium range missiles that could target Japan? I just don’t see the President Trump agreeing to any deal that will allow the North Koreans to keep nuclear weapons to target Japan with, not only because they are a US ally, but because of the multiple US military bases in Japan.
The final issue I foresee is trying to get a Pakistan model deal passed through the Senate as a binding treaty. I don’t think President Trump could get enough support of such a deal in the Senate especially in a Congressional election year.
The dismantling of the nuclear test site in North Korea is not a significant measure because it is easily reversible. The Kim regime at a time of their choosing can easily go and drill more shafts into another mountain if they want to do more nuclear testing. This is just another example of how the Kim regime tries to give up little to nothing in return for aid and the dropping of sanctions:
North Korea on Sunday stressed the importance of its dismantling the Punggye-ri nuclear test site this week and called it a “significant measure” amid reports the North has disregarded South Korea’s roster of journalists planning to cover the dismantlement.
The decommissioning of the site is “a very meaningful and significant measure” undertaken voluntarily by the North to achieve the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula based on the spirit of an agreement reached at a historic inter-Korean summit, North Korea’s propaganda website DPRK Today said.
DPRK stands for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the North’s official name. The leaders of the two Koreas met on April 27 at the truce village of Panmujom on the inter-Korean border.
DPRK Today referred to the May 12 announcement by the North’s foreign ministry that it will hold a ceremony for the dismantling of the nuclear test site between Wednesday and Friday and invite journalists from China, Russia, the United States, Britain and the South to cover it.
On Saturday, another North Korean propaganda website, Uriminzokkiri, carried a commentary in which the North said it does not give the slightest consideration to “a mental patient’s grumble” in the South. “The international community as well as the United States and South Korea is giving a great deal of support to the dismantlement,” it said.
In the commentaries carried by the two propaganda websites, the North lambasted conservative forces in the South, including the main opposition Liberty Korea Party, for underestimating the planned closure of the site. Pyongyang apparently aims to stress the importance of the dismantlement by raising the issue again.
South Korea’s unification ministry handling inter-Korean affairs said Friday the North had not responded to the list of South Korean journalists chosen to attend the ceremony. [Yonhap]
The pre-summit gamesmanship has already started by the North Koreans cancelling high level talks with the South Koreans yesterday and threatening to cancel the Trump-Kim summit in Singapore:
Unification Minister Cho Myoung-gyon enters his office building in Seoul, Wednesday, after North Korea cancelled high-level inter-Korean talks unilaterally. / Yonhap
Political analysts presume North Korea’s abrupt cancellation of high-level inter-Korean talks and threats to reconsider the Washington-Pyongyang summit are aimed at taking the lead ahead of talks over its denuclearization.
Most predict the North is unlikely to spoil the current mood for dialogue but is trying to strengthen its bargaining power before negotiations and send a warning ― to the U.S., rather than to South Korea ― not to underestimate the country.
About 12:30 a.m. Wednesday, Pyongyang notified Seoul that it had cancelled the high-level talks, which were to take place in less than 10 hours, citing the ongoing South Korea-U.S. joint military drills, which it sees as a rehearsal of war.
Later in the day, North Korea’s Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan also said in a statement the country would reconsider the summit between its leader Kim Jong-un and U.S. President Donald Trump, slated for June 12, if the U.S. forces the North to unilaterally give up nuclear weapons.
Experts say the exercises may not be the true reason for the North canceling talks, considering that the drills started May 11 and the North suggested the meeting four days later. Kim Jong-un also earlier told South Korean envoys that he understood the allies’ joint military drills.
“With the drills as a pretext, Pyongyang is indirectly expressing discontent at the recent hard-line stances from Washington, such as moving the North’s nuclear weapons to the U.S., removing biochemical weapons and raising an issue of human rights abuse,” said Shin Beom-chul, senior fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. “The North is making use of the high-level talks as a chance (to express its discomfort).”
Indeed, Kim Kye-gwan said American officials’ remarks, such as “denuclearization first and reward later” and “complete abandonment of nuclear, missile and biochemical weapons,” are “thoughtless words that provoke its counterpart.” [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but what I suspect is happening is that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Kim Jong-un what the US expects of the regime from the summit during his recent trip to North Korea, but in the US media other things are being said that were not discussed previously. People bringing up that human rights should be included in the summit is an especially sensitive topic in North Korea. Threatening to cancel the summit sends a message to the Trump administration that these topics will not be discussed at the summit.
Unless something drastic happens I would be highly surprised if this summit does not happen because the Kim regime has too much to lose. South Korea’s Moon administration at least needs the Kim regime to pretend to denuclearize to justify the massive aid package they have planned to give to Kim Jong-un. They can’t attempt a denuclearization facade if they don’t even show up to the summit.
The closure of the nuclear test site is nothing, but a show that can be easily reversed; shipping nuclear materials out of the country is a real sign of denuclearization because this is cannot be reversed:
The United States has demanded that North Korea ship some of its nuclear weapons, fissile material and long-range missiles out of the country within months after next month’s summit between the two countries, sources said Sunday.
The U.S. made the demand during talks with the North to fine-tune the agenda of the summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un set for June 12 summit in Singapore, saying sanctions won’t be relaxed unless the demand is met, the sources said.
The North’s response to the demand is not known, they said.
The demand suggests that the U.S. believes the North’s pledge to suspend nuclear and missile testing is not enough and the communist nation should do more to demonstrate its commitment to abandon its nuclear and missile programs. [Yonhap]
You can read more at the link, but if the Kim regime agrees to begin shipping nuclear weapons and material out of their country than we know they are in fact serious about denuclearization.
President Trump is as expected getting bashed for pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal with claims that it will impact his ability to negotiate with Kim Jong-un:
President Donald Trump announces Iran nuclear deal withdrawal. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal is a major setback to US negotiating credibility and will complicate efforts to reach an agreement with Pyongyang over its own more advanced weapons programme, analysts say.
Trump is set to hold a much-anticipated and unprecedented summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in the coming weeks to negotiate over Pyongyang’s arsenal, after it last year carried out by far its most powerful nuclear test to date and launched missiles capable of reaching the U.S. mainland.
But the US president Tuesday pulled Washington out of the 2015 accord with Teheran, pouring scorn on the “disastrous” agreement and describing it an “embarrassment” to the United States ― although European signatories and the IAEA say Iran has complied with its obligations.
Antony Blinken, who was deputy secretary of state under Barack Obama, said the White House move “makes getting to yes with North Korea that much more challenging”.
“Why would Kim … believe any commitments President Trump makes when he arbitrarily tears up an agreement with which the other party is complying?” he asked on Twitter. [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but it can be argued that if the Obama administration thought the Iran nuclear deal was so great why did they not try and lobby the Senate to consent to the treaty as the Constitution requires? Consent from the Senate would have made it much harder for the President to withdraw from the treaty. This is what I will be looking for if President Trump is able to strike a deal with the North Koreans; will he try to get consent from the Senate?
As far as impacts to negotiating with Kim Jong-un, I think it is arguable that Trump is sending a message that North Korea will need to agree to denuclearize or there will not be a deal.
Here is what former nuclear negotiator Robert Gallucci has to say about North Korean denuclearization:
Robert Gallucci, former chief U.S. negotiator on the North Korean nuclear crisis, speaks during The Korea Forum 2018, Thursday. / Korea Times photo by Bae Woo-han
He noted it would not be easy work to achieve complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization (CVID), unless North Korea makes a candid declaration of its nuclear stockpile.
Gallucci said the core of the nuclear bomb that devastated Japan’s Nagasaki in 1945 was small enough to be hidden in a small “speaker box,” explaining the difficulty of reaching complete denuclearization.
He said if it was unrealistic for inspectors to find and check all the containers ― small and big, and declared and undeclared ― existing in North Korea, the pursuit of complete denuclearization would be also “nonsense.”
So rather than pursuing CVID, he said, it would be more realistic to focus on reducing the North’s nuclear capability and how to achieve this. [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but this is more of the same analysis that seems intended to persuade President Trump that he should not demand complete verifiable denuclearization by North Korea in his upcoming summit.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/59678205/956113070.jpg.0.jpg?resize=396%2C264&ssl=1)
