The politics of foreign policy today 649North Korean government to launch its remaining weapons against U.S., Korean, or
Japanese targets. Moreover, how should America respond to a nuclear attack against its
citizens or its allies, particularly if it is unclear which nation or group is responsible?
Historically, America’s policy toward North Korea as well as other near-nuclear
powers has emphasized incentives as well as threats. Economic and military sanctions
serve to pressure nations that continue to develop weapons, while offers of economic
aid and even civilian nuclear reactors serve to persuade nations to give up their weapons
programs.^59 Of course, because these agreements are voluntary, nations giving up their
nuclear weapons programs get something in return. In the case of the deal with Iran, the
United States and its allies made crucial concessions—the lifting of economic sanctions
and the return of Iranian assets held after the Iranian Revolution of 1979. These
concessions were hugely valuable to the Iranian regime because of their importance
in the Iranian economy. While President Trump has moved beyond previous
administrations by making threats about the magnitude of the U.S. response to a North
Korean attack, as well as by meeting with North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong Un, in 2018, in
concrete terms his policies are not significantly different from those of his predecessors.
The problem with America’s carrots and sticks is that the North Korean economy is
already in shambles and the country has relatively little trade with other nations. As a
result, economic sanctions are not very threatening. The North Korean government
has essentially isolated its citizens from the outside world and carried out a widespread
program of indoctrination to reinforce beliefs that building nuclear weapons is an
appropriate response to threats from the rest of the world. The government also
imprisons dissidents and withholds basic resources from the North Korean people,
focusing instead on building a strong military. Under these conditions, the offer to
reopen commercial and cultural ties is not very attractive to the North Korean leadership.
The difficulty of the problem does not eliminate conflict in American politics over
what policy to follow. The disagreement is in part over the potential for success of
different tactics. Some believe that North Korea’s weapons could be destroyed by a
bombing attack, for example. Despite ongoing missile tests, it is also uncertain whether
North Korea has the means to reliably launch nuclear weapons against American
targets. Others see a wider range of motivations, agreeing that North Korea’s nuclear
capability must be eliminated but also arguing that it is America’s responsibility to free
the North Korean people from an oppressive dictatorship.North Korea has one of the world’s
least predictable and most isolated
political regimes. Its nuclear
capabilities and large military make
North Korea a threat to the stability of
the region. However, because of the
poor state of the country’s economy,
economic sanctions are unlikely to
foster movement toward democracy
and openness.Full_18_APT_64431_ch17_614-654.indd 649 16/11/18 11:22 AM