Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Deflating the North Korean Threat
I believe there is more that the US government, as a whole, can do to maximize the odds of a non-violent or non-catastrophic end to the North Korean nuclear program. I am not arguing against any current effort, rather I see an additional line of effort which directly attacks the North Korean regime’s legitimacy. The latest missile test underlines the urgency of some further effort to stop the DPRK nuclear weapons program.
Deflate the DPRK regime by opening the escape valve into China
I propose that the US add a policy of economically and rhetorically encouraging North Korean refugee movement. Since the DMZ is almost impossible to escape across, with the rare defecting soldier exception, North Koreans have tried the Chinese border with some success. This creates a security risk and arguably economic costs for China. But what if President Trump announced an initiative to compensate China for each North Korean processed and shipped onward to South Korea?
North Korea is already vulnerable to an exodus.
According to Michael Malice, the North Korean regime has already allowed border guards to keep crossing bribes as a way to let the border force feed itself. We also know the regime classifies all citizens based on their putative loyalty and allocates resources accordingly. The military was supposed to have the lead in society, necessary in a prison regime. However, the recent dramatic DMZ crossing by a North Korean soldier led to a medical exam which revealed severe malnourishment and an intestinal worm infestation. If the front line soldiers are malnourished and lack basic medical care, it would seem near impossible for the regime to completely reverse their practice of turning a blind eye to border guards taking bribes.
Is China showing signs of concern about a mass exodus?
The announced closure of the Sino-Korean Friendship Bridge, ostensibly for repairs, might be a precaution against a version of the 1989 East European surge into Germany or the current mass migration into Europe. North Korea has a population of about 25 million. Chinese troop movement towards the border serves a double purpose of countering US forces and controlling a refugee surge.
Acknowledge Chinese concerns while signaling care for suffering people.
President Trump could demonstrate caring for the suffering people of North Korea while answering Chinese concerns by offering payment per refugee processed onward to South Korea. A payment of $2,000 would be equivalent to about two months of a Chinese worker’s wages. If every North Korean except “Rocket Man” escaped it would only cost us $50 billion — the cheapest victory in modern history!
This idea is completely outside of traditional foreign and defense policy thinking but might shake up the current calculations of all parties. So what do you think? An idea worth building on?
Published in Foreign Policy
I didn’t say that it would or wouldn’t. I’m just saying that the situation isn’t static. Six months from now things will be very different. Kim is going to feel the pinch, which will make him more desperate. That could mean he acts out more, or that he’s more likely to cut a deal, or both.
Either way, the situation is only made worse by an unstable American president who insists on publicly insulting Kim and undercutting his own Secretary of State’s peace efforts. And if things get rough, we’re really going to notice the absence of experience State Department staff that everyone is cheering in the other thread.
No but you can give it to the regime for favors and maybe improved living standards. This idea could just easily turn into a way for the DPRK to fleece a lot of money from us.
No I think the problem with the idea is that it wold require a cooperative China. If we had that we could do more than this. As long as China is determined to prop up the DPRK I think diplomacy will have little impact on its actions.
The catch might be that China doesn’t really have as much control, influence, or insight as we assume. They could find that they are holding the leash of an animal they can’t control. They can’t admit this, so they just pretend like they can control it but are choosing not to for their own deep reasons. What do we do if this is the case?
Let them.
What do they want? 30 billion in aid? 50? 100?
It’s still far cheaper than a war.
I don’t care about blame, or responsibility. My point is that right this minute they’re already a refugee crisis, it’s just that the Fat Little Boy is delaying that reckoning.
So, never been stuck in a communist country, I see.
I will say one thing here, they are at risk. I don’t blame them for it as you do, but I’m not going to cry if every one of them dies to resolve the situation. The problem has grown to where it is no longer they alone who are at risk. We are now at risk. Everyone in the world is now at risk, because an extortionist has gained the capacity of nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. If a few or a large number of North Koreans die in a war to resolve the situation, well, bowel movements happen. Probably a lot of other folks are also going to die to resolve this, unless somebody comes up with a very creative solution soon.
No, much more expensive. Once you pay Dane-geld you can’t get rid of the Dane.
Germany and Italy were allies in World War II, and yet they often worked at cross purposes with each other. The same is true here. China and the Norks work together -but they do have some conflicting interests. And neither one strikes me as being particularly trustworthy, even toward each other. China might like to have the money. Let me suggest a modification to Clifford’s plan. Trump doesn’t announce it publicly, but privately tells China that he will pay them $2000 for each North Korean citizen it sends to South Korea. China wants the money, but never admits it publicly, to keep from pointlessly antagonizing the Norks. Even if the Norks suspected what was up, their wouldn’t be much they could do about it. The Norks run their part of Korea as a huge prison camp. When you are running a prison, your worst nightmare is escapes. What if there were thousands of escapes? The Norks would be extremely irritated, which is the whole point of the exercise. We should be doing everything we possibly can, short of actual war, to make them uncomfortable. Never mind the possibility of 25 million escapes. I would guess that the point of Cliff’s comment in the 5th paragraph is that we can afford to pay for whatever number of refugees happen to show up, and it will be well worth our while to do so. Even if the number were only 25,000 it would make Kim look impotent, -and he would really enjoy that wouldn’t he? Is this a “magic bullet” solution? No. Will it work? Maybe, maybe not, most ideas don’t. But if it does work it moves us in the right direction. Put me down as cautiously in favor.
You are missing the Korean constitutional context. All North Koreans are defined as South Korean citizens. “Want” doesn’t come into it. South Korea faces West Germany’s situation if the DPRK regime collapses. And yes this might be to China’s short to medium range benefit.
While I usually agree with that in concept, it doesn’t apply here. I rarely say this, but the case of North Korea is unique circumstances.
Except that the PRC doesn’t want the South to absorb the North for several reasons, the largest being it would be US military forces in their border.
Why not?
I think “want” very much comes into it exactly because of the way the South Koreans are controlling the rate at which North Koreans do effectively become South Koreans. The South Koreans haven’t made a proposal such as yours. They have a government at the moment that is much more attuned to propping up the North Korean government with a rehashed “Sunshine Policy” and have seen the enormous cost to West German citizens of bringing in the Ostis.
At this point, I should point out that South Korea has a Ministry of Unification, whose job it is to plan for when unification finally comes.
The North Koreans live in a closed society. They are fed an undisputed line of propaganda beginning at birth. Most think it was the US who crossed the 38th parallel and invaded their homeland. Kim is a demigod and the only thing protecting them from invasion and enslavement by the US. If they are starving from famine it was all orchestrated by the evil empire, the US.
Only a regime change or at least a well planned assassination attempt will diminish NK as a nuclear threat. Only when Kim fears for his own life will his policies change.
Except NK is a closed society and we don’t know what most people think.
With apologies, Mr. Cole, I’m not buying it. A baby learns that crying gets his parent’s attention, so he cries more. The parent has all the power in the relationship, but somehow the baby keeps behaving badly. The power differential doesn’t enter into it.
I can’t see how one bribe to North Korea doesn’t lead to another bribe down the road. Unless there’s a war in between, which is what the bribes are supposed to prevent.
A crying baby is also not Danegeld.
And it totally will lead to another bribe down the road, depending on how’s its structured.
That’s still way cheaper than a war.
Ok, that’s just silly. North Koreans need to overthrow their own government or suffer the consequences. They aren’t babies. They are adults. It’s not our job to do anything for them. If they threaten us, they should have every expectation that they will die horrible deaths. That’s the incentive they should be given.
Works for me, too.
Heck, it works on me too.
…
Moving along, what end game do you have in mind? It’s only cheaper than war if you don’t also get the war after the bribe. How do you see this conflict resolving without a war being thrown? How likely do you think that outcome is?
I have no idea what the end game is. Anyone who doe and thinks they know for certain is a fool.
Look, war is an unacceptable solution because a war would be a catastrophe. Period.
Kim isn’t ideological. He’s not trying to start a worldwide communist revolution. It’s not trying to create a new global caliphate. He’s not obsessed with ending the world.
Hes also not crazy. His top three priorities are survival, survival, and survival.
So, war would be a disaster. Kim is nonidealogical and he wants to survive, probably in relative comfort. That’s what you have to work with.
Using that, figure out a solution.
Just pointing out a fact, there is a war. It has been going on for about 67 years now. We did not make peace, we only signed a ceasefire. It may not be a terribly hot war at the moment, but we are already at war with North Korea.
Isn’t that kind of a distinction without a difference?
No. It is a legal status. It is stupid to forget these things. The same thing happened in Iraq. We didn’t need “weapons of mass destruction.” All we needed to say was, “Iraq’s government has violated the terms of the ceasefire. The war is back on.” You might have noticed that North Korea has also violated the ceasefire we have with them many times. We are already at war, it’s just that so many ignorant fools forget or think the details don’t matter and are minor distinctions. The North Koreans have not forgotten that we are at war, and they constantly remind their people of it through their propaganda.
It all looks like a very risky game, on the part of Kim. In what way has anyone actually been offering credible threats to Kim’s “survival” prior to this latest round of NK threat displays? Why up the ante?
You give the appearance of assuming that Kim will not follow through on any of these threats.
He might, if we push him far enough or if he fears for his survival.
But if he launches missiles, then that’s it. The whole thing is over. Kim and his regime will be obliterated.
So it’s terribly stupid for him to do that. It doesn’t gain him anything. He only loses.
Okay.
So what? How does it change the discussion we are having?