Despite international media reports that the Second Trump-Kim Summit (Hanoi, February 27-28, 2019) was a failure I think it was successful.
Yes I think the US intelligence community is right in saying there is very little possibility that North Korea will de-nuclearize. Trump, working, within that assessment, is making the situation less dangerous.
As I argued on May 24, 2018 North Korea needs a nuclear deterrent more than most countries because all of its neighbours and the US, have invaded it many times. After decades of building up a nuclear deterrent at great sacrifice, North Korea is not about to disarm and thereby make itself vulnerable to takeover.
As well as deterring invasion nuclear weapons reduce the chances of large-scale conventional war.
The real danger is how nuclear armed countries threaten to use their nuclear weapons.
The problem with North Korea is not that it HAS nuclear weapons but how often it has threatened to use nuclear weapons.
North Korea and especially the latest Kim suffer from immaturity and an inferiority complex.
I think continuing to work on the ego of Kim, by allowing Kim to talk in Summits with the world's most powerful leader (Trump) is the best way to address North Korea's need to be noticed.
These Summits (with the first one being in Singapore, June 12, 2018) seem to be working. Have you noticed there has been no tension raising North Korean ICBM tests, nuclear weapon tests, or threats to use nuclear weapons since the Summits began in June 2018?
For all Trump's international mistakes he has been doing well over North Korea.
Pete
Yes I think the US intelligence community is right in saying there is very little possibility that North Korea will de-nuclearize. Trump, working, within that assessment, is making the situation less dangerous.
As I argued on May 24, 2018 North Korea needs a nuclear deterrent more than most countries because all of its neighbours and the US, have invaded it many times. After decades of building up a nuclear deterrent at great sacrifice, North Korea is not about to disarm and thereby make itself vulnerable to takeover.
As well as deterring invasion nuclear weapons reduce the chances of large-scale conventional war.
The real danger is how nuclear armed countries threaten to use their nuclear weapons.
The problem with North Korea is not that it HAS nuclear weapons but how often it has threatened to use nuclear weapons.
North Korea and especially the latest Kim suffer from immaturity and an inferiority complex.
I think continuing to work on the ego of Kim, by allowing Kim to talk in Summits with the world's most powerful leader (Trump) is the best way to address North Korea's need to be noticed.
These Summits (with the first one being in Singapore, June 12, 2018) seem to be working. Have you noticed there has been no tension raising North Korean ICBM tests, nuclear weapon tests, or threats to use nuclear weapons since the Summits began in June 2018?
For all Trump's international mistakes he has been doing well over North Korea.
Pete
4 comments:
Pete,
I agree with your comments.
Now that the Hanoi summit has defined the boundaries, next step is to come to an agreed compromise whereupon Korean peninsula' deterrence could be made permanent. Historically, Korean kingdoms have had complex relations with its neighbors.
I would argue that better economic integration on the Korean peninsula is in the US national interests.
KQN
Hi KQN
Yes the torrent of criticism from ("learned" experts) of Trump's "naive failure" at the Second Summit forgets that Trump can only work within realistic parameters. Parameters experts fail to imagine.
A major one being the US will not and cannot denuclearise all the US nuclear capable weapons that can attack North Korea, especially:
- the B-2 bombers
- F-22 fighter bombers and then the F-35s
- and especially US ICBMs including the Trident SLBMs
Against these permanent global US nuclear weapons, that could easily devastate North Korea, there is no way North Korea will dismantle its own nuclear weapons that it went through (self-inflicted) agonies to create.
Regards
Pete
Its not about all nuclear weapons the US has in its arsenal that can attack North Korea. Its more specifically their presence on the Korean peninsula and the surrounding seas. Strike weapons are far more accurate than long range ICBMs which arent relevant in this context
https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/18/06/2018/denuclearization-what-does-it-mean-korean-peninsula
Only a small number of USAF fighter bomber types ( F16 , F15E) are nuclear capable, as its all about the latest version of the B61 nuclear bomb. It is only around 800 lbs weight but long for its size. The capability is directly the result the software and wiring on the aircraft to be able to respond to the launch codes and arm the bomb for release.
Currently the F22 doesn have that capability even though it will fit inside its weapons bays. The F35 will have the full capability which is the centre of debate in Europe for replacing existing nuclear capable planes such as F16 and Tornado . The multi lateral Typhoon doesnt currently have the capability - but may in its 'ultimate version'
I have seen some sources say the US navy F18F isnt B61 capable but that is more likely a 'neither confirm nor deny' situation
https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/14/in-other-news-a-u-s-f-16-has-dropped-an-inert-b61-12-nuclear-bomb-over-nevada-last-month/
For long term context , the Korean War armistice specifically excluded 'indroduction of new weapons' to the Peninsula. In the mid 50s the US announced it was bringing nuclear weapons to the area and was open about repudiating what it had signed up to. Its well to consider that in looking at who hasnt been following what agreements, its not a judgemental thing, its just a relevant fact.
Thanks Anonymous [at 9/3/19 1:05 PM]
For your information and views on nuclear capable US aircraft and North Korea.
I'll use it for an article in a few days.
Regards
Pete
Post a Comment