Six steps to stop a war between North Korea and the US from starting
Kevin Rudd says that a binding agreement with concessions by both the US and North Korea can prevent hostilities that might result in catastrophic conflict
This is the view held by many others and around the world. But having had numerous conversations with Chinese friends and colleagues over the last few months, I sense that view may be changing.
Watch: North Koreans celebrate latest missile launch on November 29
Chinese politics, North Korea: The economic dark clouds to watch for in 2018
The Chinese ask five core questions about this.
Donald Trump the ‘greatest source of instability’ in Asia, says Australia’s former PM Kevin Rudd
These go to the deepest conservative nature of Chinese strategic culture. Of course there is a different logic as well, which China also understands.
Japan to assess defence capabilities as it expands harsh sanctions on North Korea, freezing assets on 19 more firms
Therefore the internal debate on North Korea in China is complex – both sets of voices are heard, although the former remains in the ascendancy.
What would a final diplomatic solution look like? There are some who suggest that a settlement lies in North Korea agreeing to either freeze, abandon or, in its most ambitious version, destroy its intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capabilities.
There is an open question as to whether any such North Korean assurances would be credible, verifiable or acceptable in Washington.
A further problem with this approach is where it leaves South Korea and Japan (and, for that matter, US territories in the Pacific) in terms of the existing reach of North Korean short- and medium-range missiles (both land and submarine-based). In other words, does this (in time) result in a decoupling of the US from its East Asian allies?
South Korea investing heavily in arms industry in response to threat from Pyongyang
This is not the only diplomatic initiative on the table. The notion of a freeze could also be extended to other categories. It might, for example, include a freeze on nuclear testing, or on other types of ballistic missiles. The challenge would be to engineer an ICBM freeze (with the potential to bring about the destruction of the arsenal) in addition to other elements of North Korea’s overall programmes.
This means that any initial freeze would be the first step in a series that, over time, once calibrated with parallel initiatives that would benefit the North Koreans, could conceivably bring about denuclearisation.
This brings us to the possibility of a final “grand bargain” on the Korean peninsula, which could include:
● a timetable for the destruction of the North’s nuclear weapons;
● external security guarantees for the future of the North Korean regime;
● the economic reconstruction of the North; and
● a further adjustment of US troop numbers, including the final possibility of phasing out the US troop deployment.
This is not a definitive list. Any solution will require creative thinking. But diplomacy is the only way to avoid a repeat of the tragedies of the 20th century.
Kevin Rudd is the 26th prime minister of Australia and president of the Asia Society Policy Institute. This is an edited version of a speech delivered to the Korea National Diplomatic Academy