Russia and North Korea: an engagement that displeases US

The United States has a peculiar diplomatic history. It applies coercive means, economic pressures, isolation techniques and even military deterrence to enforce behavioural change in states that challenge the American-driven world order and international system. But if the state behaviour continues to take a threatening direction and creates issues that undermine American national security then America changes gears and resorts to diplomatic engagement. Why not do this in the first place? Why practice diplomatic isolation for years when immediate diplomatic engagement could resolve some of the simmering crises in the world affairs?

North Korea is a country that was denied diplomatic engagement after the end of the Korean War in 1953. And it was after 39 years, in 1992, that Washington began engaging with North Korea for the reason that it had begun developing its nuclear programme. What kind of policy would allow countries to take years to become isolated, secluded, uncertain, insecure, impoverished and ultimately become threats to world security? Why not strengthen engagement and build mutual trust in these lost years? Countries such as Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya and even Pakistan that have experienced American interference in their internal affairs are examples of how such interference has only led to increase in the difficulties for these countries. People of these countries have been subjected to sanctions and various diplomatic and military pressures yet none of these countries demonstrate pro-Americanism or an American-desired positive change.

Except Afghanistan, what has troubled the Americans most about these countries has been their nuclear programme. When Pakistan carried out its first nuclear test in 1998, the US imposed sanctions; and if it had not been for 9/11 and the compulsive need that the Americans felt for our use in their fight against Afghanistan, we could have continued being under sanctions. In fact, North Korea can learn three great lessons in how the US has managed and handled Iraq, Libya, Iran and Pakistan. In case of Pakistan, the lesson is simple: even if you are under US sanctions, any future geopolitical necessity may force the US to reconsider not only making you a major non-NATO political ally but also a recipient of its civil and military aid. Western Pacific is showing all the signs of becoming a conflict-prone zone; and to push back China and deterring it from attacking Taiwan, the US may be willing to offer many military advantages to the countries in the region. I don’t imagine North Korea allying with the US but given the conditions North Korea may be able to extract the gains and concessions that it could not during the two Presidential Summits.

In case of Iraq and Libya, the lesson is very simple: the dictators in both these countries gave up their nuclear weapons programme and the whole world has witnessed what has become of them and their countries. I personally think Kim Jong Un has already learnt this lesson and it is proved by the results of the two historical North Korea-US summits — the first of which was held in June 2018 in Singapore while the second followed eight months later in February 2019 in Vietnam. Interestingly, had it not been for these two summits, Kim Jong Un who has been in power in North Korea for 12 years wouldn’t have visited and seen any other country except South Korea, China and Russia. But this is beside the point, what happened in the first Summit was followed by the joint statement by both sides which called for transformed bilateral relations, complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and recovery of the remains of US soldiers during the Korean War from the North. President Donald Trump also announced the suspension of US-South Korea bilateral military exercises for year 2018. These exercises are held every year between the two allied countries. Kim Jong Un also reciprocated and returned 55 sets of US soldiers remains from the North.

Poor eight months follow-up on the Singapore Summit and not cashing in on the opportunity of this historic engagement was already laying grounds for the failure of the coming Presidential Summit in Vietnam. Knowing what had happened to Iraq and Libya, President Kim would not denuclearise North Korea without sufficient guarantees for the security of his country and so the follow-up Vietnam Sumit which was scheduled for two days was cut short in an arbitrary manner by President Trump on the second day without any announcement. This was taken as a deep diplomatic embarrassment by President Kim and it is because of this reason that North Korea no more responds to American call for a re-engagement and dialogue with US. President Kim has even given no response to President Joe Biden’s repeated calls for dialogue without any preconditions. This episode clearly suggests that President Kim knows the strategic significance of his nuclear programme and he also knows that the US has no interest in what kind of trajectory the future of his country takes, as its only interest is denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula to which he doesn’t agree without some North Koran pre-conditions being met.

In the third example which is the case of Iran, President Kim must have learnt that the US started applying diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran and isolated it economically to push it for agreeing for nuclear negotiations. Even when it eventually signed the JCPOA nuclear agreement, it didn’t abide by it and walked out of it under the Trump administration, demanding not just a ban on Iranian nuclear enrichment but also stoppage of its missile programme and end to its support to militant activities that lead to proxy wars in the Middle East. The simple Iranian lesson for North Korea is that it is strategic distraction and loss of diplomatic time and effort if the US along with its Western allies cannot stand up for their words and if agreements with them cannot hold.

President Kim is currently visiting Russia and to America’s great discontent is openly agreeing to supply Russia with much-needed ammunition to fight the long-protracted war against Ukraine. This agreement seems as natural as is the US and NATO countries support to Ukraine. Russia would not need ammunition and North Korea would not need to supply it if there was some diplomatic effort to stop this war. The Ukraine War is another simmering crisis the US is making no effort to resolve diplomatically. It is when Ukraine will become another Vietnam, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan that the US would eventually give up on the military means and consider applying diplomatic means to resolve the conflict. That has been generally the story and the diplomatic and military history of the great superpower we know by the name of United States of America.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 17^th, 2023.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.