North Korea is raising an aggressive voice following President Trump’s early withdrawal from talks with its leader Kim Jong Un in Vietnam on Thursday. But there are three reasons not to worry.
Foreign minister Ri Yong Ho lamented that the U.S. had rejected Kim Jong Un’s demand for in-tandem sanctions relief in return for staggered denuclearization actions. This in-tandem demand, the foreign minister said, “will never be changed.” The minister also suggested that the U.S. doesn’t understand North Korea’s red-lines for any deal.
Again, don’t worry here.
For a start, it’s notable who made the statement: the foreign minister, not Kim himself. That was deliberate. By keeping out of the riposte message, Kim retains maximum flexibility in future diplomatic dealings. But it also reflects a calculated effort by the North Koreans to avoid personally alienating Trump. This concern is further supported by the statement’s opening praise for the two leaders “excellent patience and self-restraint.” That’s hardly the language of the 2017 period in which North Korean statements were littered with references to Trump the “dotard.”
Second, the letter is pro forma North Korean complaining, utterly focused on the regime’s interest in achieving its own maximal outcomes at the lowest cost. Ri Yong Ho talked about the U.S. lifting 5 out of 11 United Nations sanctions on North Korea in return for Pyongyang dismantling its Yongbyon nuclear facility. But considering that those sanctions represent a significant chunk of the economic pressure that Pyongyang currently faces, the North Koreans must have known that such a demand was absurd in exchange for so little. When the foreign minister notes that the U.S. wanted further action than simply Yongbyon’s closure, he shows his tell. Ri Yong Ho is recognizing that which he must: that the U.S. would never agree to a deal in which North Korea closed one facility but continued its nuclear and ICBM weaponization activities in others.
So, why complain? Simple. By demanding major sanctions relief for Yongbyon’s closure, the North Koreans hope to draw Trump towards their preferred timeline of major sanctions relief in return for far slower denuclearization. Here, then, we see not North Korean brinkmanship but rather jockeying to seize the diplomatic initiative. It’s just a game.
Finally, the most important reason you shouldn’t be concerned here is the nature of this diplomatic process beyond the letter.
From the day Trump entered the Oval Office on Jan. 20, 2017, the process has been incredibly dynamic rather than predictably formal. That’s partly because Kim hasn’t decided how to proceed vis-a-vis the U.S. But it’s also because America’s unpredictable presentation of the stick (threats of military action) and the carrot (detente) has forced him to negotiate on terms his regime is unused to.
The basic point here is that nothing North Korea says in any one moment can be taken as a formal policy position for the future — especially if it isn’t coming from Kim himself. In 2017, North Korea was firing off missiles and pledging to defeat the U.S. in a nuclear Armageddon. Today, it is talking quite politely to the U.S. and hasn’t fired a ballistic missile in over a year (although the lack of tests is partly a function of established capability). To assume that Ri Yong Ho is setting North Korean policy is to mistake the absolute flexibility of Kim’s policy.
The basic point here is that North Korea is disappointed with the summit’s outcome. But its words should not be taken at face value. They represent an effort to seize the initiative, not a clear indication that negotiations have failed.
