North Korea. Rational Actor. Perhaps.

During Sec of State Tillerson’s recent trip to Asia he made it very clear that Obama’s policy towards N. Korea, known as strategic patience was over. What was strategic patience? In my opinion it was non engagement and as others have said, collapsism.  What this will be replaced with is yet to be seen but Tillerson upped the ante by stating no options were off the table, a euphemism for military action is possible.

S.Korea, N.Korea and China at night. Source.

There are many theories out there as to how we should deal with N.Korea’s nuclear and ICBM programs and none of them seem to be very good options. N. Korea is too close to getting a viable nuclear warhead and an ICBM with which to threaten its adversaries. Any diplomatic venture would require months, if not years, to complete within which time the North could easily field an operational nuclear deterrent, perhaps with several delivery options.

Here are some options that are bouncing around out there. The last one is my oddball theory.

Chinese Pressure.
I doubt this will work as China wants a N.Korea regime on its border as a buffer. The Chinese like the status quo. The US could enact sanctions against China if they don't force N. Korea to change its ways, but that could lead to a trade war.  This would be devastating to both economies. 

Talks.
Talks have never worked in the past and the N.Koreans have played us, with the aid of China, every time. Unless we get assurances of China and concessions from N.Korea before we act on our part this is not worth it. It only buys N. Korea time. One way this could work would be a credible threat of a US strike against N.Korea, as it would realize China’s greatest fear, a war. See the last option regarding this.

Deal with it.
This is the most likely thing that will happen. No one wants a nuclear NK but it has already happened. The problem with dealing with it is the North will conduct nuclear blackmail when it wants something from us. While it is doubtful they would ever use their nukes, they could threaten to proliferate them to terrorist groups that wouldn't hesitate to set off a nuke in the US.  This would be an indirect blackmail they could hang over our heads. However grim this seems we must develop a strategy to deal with this outcome.

Strike N. Korea, or at least a credible threat.
 Most articles you read and experts would say this course of action would likely cause a war. I tend to agree but have a theory as to why it may not. And a strike could actually be possible, or at least the threat of a strike. The purpose of this legitimate threat would be to drive N.Korea to the negotiation table. But it must be credible. 

My theory is simple. The Kim regime is a rational actor. The Kim regime only wants to stay in power it may actually suck it up and only retaliate with sabotage and perhaps some limited shelling of border towns. Why? While any shelling of S. Korean towns and cities would cause mass panic and casualties it would surely invite swift retaliation and the potential massive degradation of N.Korea’s conventional artillery forces. These forces have been the most potent threat for decades, especially due to their large chemical weapons stash.  

Before I go further any strike against N.Korea would require the implicit approval, support and participation of South Korea. It is they who will decide this, not the US.

The threat against Seoul is also not as great as most think. Only N.Korea’s most capable and modern artillery pieces, mostly rocket, would be able to range the most densely populated parts of Seoul. And even then this artillery would have to be placed in potentially less than optimal positions within range of Seoul. That makes it easier for S. Korea and the US to target and destroy these pieces. That is not to minimize the panic and casualties it would cause but Seoul would not be wiped out. 

Would the Kim regime be willing to risk its most effective conventional weapons in the event they lost their nuclear and ICBM programs?  I would think not as they would be even more vulnerable than before and a full scale war would certainly put the Kim regime out of business. The Kim regime is more rational than most believe. As history has shown us thru famine, drought and purges the Kim regime is not interested in maintaining a thriving society, its only interest is to enrich itself, and it does this by maintaining an iron grip on power. 

The big wild card in this would be China. How would they react to US airstrikes being conducted so close to its border? China’s biggest fear would be the implosion of the N.Korean regime. That would create a humanitarian crisis along the Yalu river and most likely position US and S.Korean troops even closer to China as they attempt to regain control in NK. This would be bad in domestic politics for the ruling communist party. As I have said before, the Communist party’s biggest concern is to stay in power and this means keeping the population happy. Any sign of weakness, such as a humanitarian disaster along the Yalu river,  would be a public relations nightmare for Beijing. 

Perhaps this option should be furthered by increased intelligence collection as to what’s really going on in NK and their intentions. One thing is clear is that Kim is consolidating power by assassinating those with ties to China.

I am not saying we should conduct a pre-emptive strike against N. Korea’s nuclear and ICBMs programs but that it should not be taken off the table. Maybe our strategy should be to develop a credible threat in order to get N.Korea to negotiate in good faith.