Saturday 21 April 2018 – Kim Jong-un suspends nuclear and missile tests ahead of meeting with Trump

It seems that now that Kim Jong-un has achieved his goal of creating nuclear weapons, and demonstrating that they have the capability to use them against the United States, the North Korean supreme leader is trying to bolster his position ahead of planned summits with South Korea and the United States. He has announced the suspension of all missile and nuclear tests and has vowed to shut down a nuclear test site. These decisions are of course welcome, but Mr Kim has only made them now because he has reached his goal of making North Korea into a nuclear-armed state. The country’s state news agency announced: “From 21 April, North Korea will stop nuclear tests and launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles,” with Mr Kim confirming as well that they were no longer necessary as the country had “verified” its nuclear capabilities. Nevertheless, this decision came as a surprise to the West – although welcomed.

President Trump, in an unusually measured Tweet, wrote: “North Korea has agreed to suspend all Nuclear Tests and close up a major test site. This is very good news for North Korea and the World – big progress! Look forward to our Summit.” The President earlier this week had encouraged North Korea that the future could be bright, saying that “a bright path [is] available to North Korea when it achieves denuclearisation.” North Korea’s decision to suspend tests and scrap a test site is not denuclearisation but is encouraging progress ahead of talks with South Korean leader Moon Jae-in next week and with Donald Trump in June, or possibly earlier.

Mr Moon’s office in South Korea described the decision as “meaningful progress. […] It will also contribute to creating a very positive environment for the success of the upcoming South-North summit and North-United States summit.” The North’s only substantial ally, China, also agreed that this was a positive move by Mr Kim, saying it would “help ameliorate the situation on the peninsula.”

The British Foreign Office said it was a positive step: “We hope this indicates an effort to negotiate in good faith.” The European Union foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini said the move was part of a process that must lead to the North’s “complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation.”

We shouldn’t forget, however, that this is not denuclearisation and that is still a subject that could derail any talks between the isolated state and South Korea and the United States. Mr Kim has dreamed for a long time of his desire to create a nuclear-armed state and he has achieved this despite the West’s protestations and sanctions to try and prevent him from achieving this. The North Korean state news agency statement pointed out: “nuclear weaponisation” has been achieved and that “the northern nuclear test site has completed its mission.” Mr Kim is shutting down the test site means little as it is no longer required. It seems that Mr Kim is content with the level of nuclear development the state has achieved, and with the ability to strike far beyond its immediate region. This was his goal and now that it has been reached he can play the diplomatic card with little or no damage to his nuclear status.

The BBC’s Laura Bicker, reporting from Seoul in South Korea, said that North Korea does not need to upgrade its existing designs any further. She also says that the North perhaps wishes to move from the effort and expense of developing and testing nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles and instead “concentrate all efforts,” as Mr Kim is reported to have said on Friday at a meeting of the central committee in Pyongyang, on developing a socialist economy. Mr Kim said: “The whole party and the whole nation should now focus on the development of the socialist economy. This is the party’s new strategic policy line. A fresh climate of detente and peace is being created on the Korean peninsula and the region, and dramatic changes are being made in the international political landscape.”

Catherine Dill, a senior research associate at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, said the promise to end missile and nuclear tests “does not equate to the dismantlement of the nuclear and missile programmes.” She continued, however: “Perhaps this signals that North Korea is confident enough in its nuclear and missile programmes to concede testing while stringing along the prospect of verifiable dismantlement for years past Trump’s presidency.”

According to Ankit Panda, senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists, believes that this decision reflects Mr Kim’s thinking – that the achievement of a summit with South Korea and more significantly, one with the American president, are his true prize. A meeting with a US president is something the North has wanted for decades – a place at the big table – and that this is something neither Mr Kim’s father or grandfather were able to achieve. Mr Panda says that in comparison to sitting face-to-face with Donald Trump is what he really wants and a unilateral moratorium in testing is a small price in comparison.

It will be seen whether talks between the North, South and United States will achieve a lasting settlement to the situation with North Korea but the progress being shown is encouraging and certainly the closest we have been to resolving the crisis for many years. My concern is the temperament of both Mr Kim and Mr Trump and whether these two men and their advisors can reach an agreement. Each sides has vastly different objectives – most notably on nuclear weapons – and these could yet prevent any meaningful progress when the sides come together for talks. President Trump, however, seems to be optimistic and positive about the chances of progress, having said that he would not even meet with Mr Kim if he didn’t think the talks could be successful. However, he also cautioned that he would walk away from a meeting if it turned out to be un-productive. It is yet to be seen whether Mr Trump would have the patience and stamina to continue talks if Mr Kim rejects outright denuclearisation. President Trump in the meantime insists that “our campaign of maximum pressure will continue until North Korea denuclearises.”

We should never forget also that the North has reneged on previous nuclear deals and that this latest decision by Mr Kim made no mention of shorter-range missiles capable of striking the South and Japan. This caution was reflected in Japan with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s statement: “We welcome it as a forward-looking move […] but an important thing is whether the move will lead to the complete abandonment of missile and nuclear developments in a verifiable and irreversible manner. We want to watch it closely.” Meanwhile, the Japanese Defence Minister, Itsunori Onodera, urged that “this is not the time for Japan and the United States and the international community to ease pressure.” Mr Onodera also said that he and the US Defence Secretary James Mattis had agreed that upcoming talks with North Korea must include weapons with which the North could continue to threaten is neighbours. Taro Aso, the Japanese deputy prime minister added to the caution when he said: “[North Korea] has made a lot of promises and we paid money on the condition that they will give up [nuclear] experiment sites, but they continued.”

This air of pessimism is understandable, especially from a nation who have seen North Korean missile test fly over their territory before crashing into the sea. Talks, however, are now in the offing and it seems clear that only a diplomatic solution is ever going to resolve the crisis in North Korea without the devastation to the region and possibly the world that a military solution would bring. The Washington-based satellite imagery analyst, Scott LaFoy, who focuses on ballistic missile and space technologies, said Mr Kim’s decision and comments should be seen as “the first part of a negotiation. It can be easily undone, but could also turn into the foundation of a deal. It shouldn’t be read as a concrete promise, it should be seen as the start of a complex discussion.”

Sources & Further Reading: