Undoubtedly, much like his predecessor, one of President-elect Joe Biden's most pressing foreign policy challenges will be how to deal with a de-facto nuclear North Korea. In taking on this boogeyman which has plagued U.S. policy makers since the early 90's it will be imperative for the president-elect to remember that his counterpart, regardless of his sometimes unassuming demeanor, needs to be taken seriously every step of the way.
During his time in office, although he constructed a close personal relationship with the reclusive North Korean leader, President Trump failed to understand Kim's motivations, which were shaped by historical circumstance. These historical examples have not only inevitably made Kim scoff at the idea of abandoning his nuclear weapons, they've also likely helped construct a powerful sense of distrust. It would behoove Mr. Biden to understand these historical circumstances if he has any desire to gain ground on the nuclear issue.
To understand the role that Kim believes nuclear weapons play in maintaining his regime, the first date to look at is December 19, 2003. On this date Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi officially announced the nation would abandon their Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program and allow inspectors in to confirm the process. Tripoli, much like present day North Korea, had assembled this program to prevent outside intervention or threats to regime stability. Gaddafi's choice proved fateful less than 10 years later. In March 2011 Nato-led forces intervened in the Libyan Civil War and in October of the same year Gadaffi was killed in the fighting.
Conversely, but still further validating Kim's perception, is the case of Pakistan. Unlike Gaddafi and Libya, Islamabad's possession of nuclear weapons is largely viewed as the main reason they have been able to deter aggression from their larger and more powerful neighbor India, as well as earn special status with Western nations. It's this route that Kim is certainly hoping to pursue as it's the one that provides the strongest security guarantee for his regime.
Naturally these two examples are often discussed when attempting to assess Pyongyang's proliferation efforts. Less discussed however is the historical case of Vietnam. While the Vietnam case has nothing to do with possessing WMDs, it's one that must be kept in mind when trying to analyze the psyche of the North Korean leadership.
In February 1979, Chinese forces invaded Vietnam, which had been a long time friend of Beijing. According to then Chinese president Deng Xiaoping, the motivation was to teach China's communist neighbors a 'lesson'. After all Vietnam had been inching toward the Soviet Union's sphere of influence and Beijing couldn't have it's client state do that.
Therefore the Vietnam example has certainly contributed to Pyongyang's distrust of Beijing, a major player that the U.S. will likely need assistance from in the pursuit of any denuclearization. One theory is that the U.S. could offer North Korea refuge under the nuclear umbrella in exchange for disarmament, however this would essentially see the U.S. take the role of untrustworthy partner that China currently occupies.
By keeping nuclear weapons Kim is able to accomplish both the task of regime security as well as attaining international credibility and it's highly doubtful that he will give this up. Kim is often characterized as a mad cartoon character in Western media. This is unfair. By understanding North Korea's view of history it's easy to understand their desire to maintain nuclear weapons and also to view Kim as a perfectly logical actor on the international stage.
While Kim is in power it's unlikely he will loosen his grip on his nukes. However understanding why, Biden may be able to improve bilateral relations between Washington and Pyongyang which in turn could eventually lead to forms of gradual disarmament. Although this is still a long shot, it's no excuse to go into negotiations historically ignorant.
Comments