President Trump’s hard line rhetoric on North Korea is working.
Following months of escalating tensions with the U.S., North Korean says it will wait before taking any further action against the U.S. territory.
Still, lamenting joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises that began Monday, North Korea warned that the U.S. was throwing “fuel onto the fire” and risking nuclear war. Such words cannot be considered pure rhetoric. Kim Jong Un’s prospective irrationality demands constant U.S. preparation for all forms of war.
That said, the evidence suggests that Trump has at least temporarily altered Kim’s calculations. Just a few weeks ago, the North Korean leader was firing off intercontinental ballistic missiles and threatening to destroy America. But now North Korea is focusing only threats of retaliation.
What changed?
Put simply, Trump is persuading China that his diplomatic patience is running out. Rejecting the Bush and Obama administrations’ preference to let the clock run out and hope for the best, Trump has shaken up the board. Most obviously, he has mastered the art of dangling the carrot (“I’ll meet with Kim because I’m a dealmaker”) with the stick (“fire and fury”).
In turn, China seems to have convinced Kim that Trump is serious about his threats. North Korea’s cooler rhetoric also suggests that China has threatened to cut support for Kim’s economy. In light of recent United Nations restrictions on North Korean exports, Kim likely feels newly vulnerable. This proves the central thesis of the Washington Examiner‘s July 15 editorial; namely, that U.S. diplomatic and economic influencing of China goes hand-in-hand with China’s influencing of North Korea.
But the U.S. cannot take anything for granted. While Trump must continue to work with China to pressure Kim, he should also state that he is ready to defend U.S. interests. That bears special significance in light of two North Korean editorials on Sunday, which made additional threats against Japan and the South Korean capital, Seoul. With South Korea showing more conciliatory rhetoric towards North Korea, the North may take limited action against the South as an alternative to risking U.S. retaliation.
Again, as rendered in his 2010 sinking of a South Korean corvette, Kim has shown a deep streak of aggressive unpredictability. In that vein, any inclination Trump might have of goading Kim or challenging his ego would be idiotic.
Ultimately, Trump should now double down on his diplomatic back channels with Kim. The ingredients for a mutually beneficial deal are clear.
