October 29, 2018
How to tell if North Korea is serious about denuclearization
Since the Singapore summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in June, Pyongyang has made gestures and statements suggesting that it will curtail its nuclear-missile programs. However, in the absence of a nuclear deal between Washington and Pyongyang, the North’s nuclear arsenal continues to expand, and the regime continues to violate UN Security Council Resolutions that prohibit nuclear and missile-related activities.
With preparations for a second Trump-Kim summit underway, how should the international community determine what initial denuclearization steps really count? As Washington and Seoul engage with North Korea diplomatically, they have a rare opportunity to persuade the regime that surrendering its nuclear weapons and programs will in fact lead to a brighter future and eventual peace on the Korean Peninsula. But observers need to distinguish steps that are symbolic at best from those that demonstrate Pyongyang’s seriousness. Grabbing hold of whatever Pyongyang offers indiscriminately will only weaken Washington’s future negotiating position.
Before deciding what does constitute a meaningful or serious offer from North Korea, it is helpful to consider what does not. The broad targets of North Korea’s denuclearization should include: the regime’s fissile and thermonuclear material production programs, its nuclear weaponization program, its nuclear weapons and related missiles and other delivery systems, its proliferation programs, and its illicit trade and smuggling networks. Each element is comprised of various facilities, materials, and technologies. With that level of complexity, North Korea could divide each target into multiple steps to offer as bargaining chips, a tactic known as “salami slicing.” And while some initial steps in isolation may be noteworthy or even meaningful, they could actually become relatively meaningless depending on the context.
Read the full article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
More from CNAS
-
Commentary
Indo-Pacific Security / Energy, Economics & Security
Can India Survive the Trade War?India has little choice but to try to soothe simmering trade tensions with the U.S. without abandoning its redlines, while carefully managing the implications of increased coo...
By Eleanor Hume & Kyle Rutter
-
Commentary
Indo-Pacific Security / Technology & National Security
America Should Rent, Not Sell, AI Chips to ChinaSelling AI chips to China outright reduces America's AI lead for little benefit....
By Janet Egan & Lennart Heim
-
From Military Warnings to Global Maneuvers; Is North Korea Poised for a Strategic Shift?
Video
As Washington and Seoul prepare for a key summit, the North is tightening military ties with Russia, pledging thousands more personnel by year's end. To help break down what's...
By Dr. Go Myong-Hyun
-
Commentary
Indo-Pacific Security / Transatlantic Security
Sharper: The Axis of UpheavalDespite some claims to the contrary, the axis of upheaval remains active: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea continue to deepen their ties. Russia and China are flexing thei...
By Ryan Claffey, Charles Horn & Anna Pederson
