January 31, 2018

The Cataclysm That Would Follow a 'Bloody Nose' Strike in North Korea

H.R. McMaster’s broken rationale for confronting Kim Jong Un

By Mira Rapp-Hooper

Since last summer, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster has been building a case for the use of preventive force against North Korea. In interviews and public statements, he has called Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea, irrational and undeterrable. The implications of such a characterization are important: If a leader is irrational, he is, by definition, incapable of making the cost-benefit calculations necessary to ensure his own survival. No one can affect his cost calculations.

McMaster has also said that he believes Kim is acquiring nuclear weapons and long-range missiles to help him conquer South Korea. (Bringing a reunified Korean Peninsula under Pyongyang’s control has long been a goal for North Korea.) Under this logic, if Kim can threaten the U.S. homeland with his intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), he’ll be able to hold U.S. forces at bay while he tries to take the South. Nuclear deterrence and U.S. military superiority, in other words, would not be enough to halt Kim’s mission of peninsular conquest. New reporting now indicates that Victor Cha, the Trump administration’s nominee for the position of ambassador to South Korea, is no longer under consideration for the post, in part because of his misgivings about using force against North Korea. The administration’s interest in striking the North appears to be all too real.

In a recent piece for The AtlanticJames Jeffrey defended McMaster’s logic for preventive war. Jeffrey argued that the national security adviser may possess a superior understanding of Kim’s aims. These aims, Jeffrey wrote, include the acquisition of a nuclear-tipped ICBM; the undermining of America’s security guarantees to its allies in the region; and, ultimately, the invasion and reclamation of the South. While using force against North Korea would be destructive, it may also be the “least bad” alternative to Kim’s eventual attempt at conquest, according to Jeffrey.

Read the full op-ed in The Atlantic.

  • Reports
    • December 18, 2019
    Crossed Wires

    The United States’ current diplomacy with North Korea has enduring implications for its strategic competition with China....

    By Kristine Lee, Daniel Kliman & Joshua Fitt

  • Commentary
    • CNN Opinion
    • November 27, 2019
    Trump has three options with North Korea to avoid a dangerous perfect storm in Asia

    In the next few weeks, the Korean Peninsula will face a watershed moment -- one which could upend the United States' alliances in northeast Asia and regional stability as a wh...

    By Duyeon Kim

  • Commentary
    • The Diplomat
    • November 1, 2019
    How American Progressives Think About Asian Security

    Democrats running for the 2020 U.S. presidential nomination implicitly accept – or at least have not rejected – the premise that the United States’ fate is linked to that of t...

    By Van Jackson

  • Commentary
    • October 2, 2019
    Situation Report: U.S.-North Korea Negotiations to Resume This Weekend

    After months of stalled talks, U.S. and North Korean representatives will meet this weekend to resume negotiations over North Korea's nuclear weapons program. Just this week, ...

    By Duyeon Kim, Elizabeth Rosenberg, Kristine Lee, Van Jackson & ​Neil Bhatiya

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia