Strategic Deterrence and Containment of the North Korea Regime

Strategic Deterrence and Containment of the North Korea Regime

E. Stanley Ukeni

So we are in a new year—supposedly a time of new beginnings and unknown expectations. Predictably, pundits have since the New Year been pontificating on possible surprises that 2018 holds. Of course, one of the most analyzed topics is how the crisis in the Koran peninsular would evolve.

Well, unlike the majority of experts, I opt to sue for peace. I’m sure some are wondering why I’m so bullish on a peace prospect. I will tell you, but before elaborate I think it’s important we reflect on the more recent past developments pertaining to the North Korean issue.   

In a diplomatic move to ratchet up pressure on the North Korean regime in other to force it to abandon its nuclear ambitions, the United Nations’ Security Council, on Friday, December 22^nd 2017, unanimously agreed on the imposition of new sanctions on North Korean. To be honest, I was quite surprised that even China and Russia—the traditional ally of the North Korean government, voted for the imposition of sanctions. I wondered why they would do so. What was in it for them?

But then it makes sense that the two, veto wielding, permanent members of the UN Security Council would endorse sanctions. This is because the argument for sanction was given more weigh by the stubborn refusal of the leaders of North Korea has to return to the negotiation table—citing their desire to significantly bolster their nuclear and missile deterrence capability before considering returning to the negotiation table.

In a statement following the unanimous decision by the U.N. Security Council, the United States’ ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, said, “It (the UN adopted resolution) sends the unambiguous message to Pyongyang that further defiance with invite further punishment and isolation”.

This current round of sanctions was imposed in response to North Korea’s latest intercontinental ballistic missile test on the 29^th of November 2017—a flagrant violation of previous U.N. resolutions against the country’s testing or fielding any offensive ballistic missile technology.

The United States-drafted resolution seeks to ban as much as 90 percent of refined petroleum product that the North Korean government can import by capping crude oil purchase at 500,000 barrels a year, and the expulsion of North Korean citizens working overseas within 24 months. The U.N. resolution aims to cap crude oil supplies to North Korea at 4 million barrels a year. 

This most recent round of sanctions regime against the hermit kingdom is designed to bring the country’s struggling economy—which has been battered by previous U.N. sanctions against the country, to its knee, and compel the North Korean leadership to return to peace negotiation.

However, I don’t expect it to accomplish its stated objective. Here is why. The two key strategic allies of North Korea, China and Russia, both have way too much at stake—particularly in the area of medium to long term strategic defense interests, to be swayed by the argument about the advancement of global peace and security. I think that by voting for the imposition of sanctions, both countries are playing for time.

The North Koreans on the other hand are playing an entirely different game. The entire country is in war footing. I believe that the leadership in Pyongyang is operating under a siege mentality.

I suspect that the North Korean regime have had time to devise a vast and sophisticated system of sanctions evasion. They probably have trained operatives and agents with unique abilities to move money and goods across borders, in anticipation of this eventuality—including the procurement of weapons related materials, technologies and other prohibited items. Even now, countries with hidden agendas and unscrupulous corporate entities are already violating the sanctions regime.

I am of the opinion that prospect of monetizing the increased risk associated with the violation of the sanctions regime will invariably incentivize adventurous profiteers. My sense is that the risk reward ratio suggests that sanctions will prove ineffective in crippling the North Korean economy.

If sanctions would have any chance of compelling the North Koreans back to the negotiation table, there must be concerted effort at enhanced surveillance of monitoring by the international community. It seems this is already the case. The sanctions pressure so far appears to be a winning strategy.

On Tuesday, the 9^th of January 2018—perhaps yielding to international pressure, senior North Korean officials agreed to meet their Southern counterparts at the border village of Panmunjom to initiate formal talks at reducing military tension in the Korean peninsula and other issues. This would be their first formal face to face dialog in two years—a remarkable step towards the advancement of peace and security in the Korean peninsula.

In yet another sign that Pyongyang has begun paying heed to the demands of the international community, South Korean Yonhap news agency has reported that a member of the North Korea delegation to the talk in Panmunjom told South Korean negotiators that Pyongyang has once again restored a military hotline with the South. 

This would be the second time in about a week that the North has reestablished the previously suspended inter-Korean communication channel.

It should be recalled that all major inter-Korean communication channels had been shut down as a result of hostilities over North Korea’s aggressive pursuit of an offensive nuclear and ballistic missile program, in recent years.   

According to Reuters news agency, the spokesman for the U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres, on Tuesday issued a statement stating that Guterres welcomed “the agreement to work to ease military tensions, hold military-to-military talks, and reopen the inter-Korean military hotline”.

The statement by the Secretary General’s spokesman, Stéphane Dujarric, further added that, “The re-establishment and strengthening of such channels is critical to lowering the risk of miscalculation or misunderstanding and to reduce tension in the region”.

Well, we are not even up to two weeks into the New Year, and it already looks like the year is off to a good start. However, it’s way too early to start celebrating. I foresee ominous dark clouds still hovering over our world—there may yet be an unforeseen disastrous geopolitical event in 2018 that would plunge our world into an era of intractable global insecurity. There is a need to maintain sustained vigilance if this trend towards peace and security in the Korean peninsula will be sustained.

And for those who still harbor the flawed notion that war is the most viable means of eliminating the threat that a nuclear armed North Korea possess to the United States, Japan and South Korea, consider the real prospect that a war in the Korean would unravel the global order, and perhaps unleash a global catastrophe the likes of which the world had not seen since the Second World War.      

If you like this article, consider becoming a supporter. We desperately need your support right now. Thank you in advance.

Authored by E. Stanley Ukeni, © 2018. All Rights Reserved. This material and other articles or stories posted on this blog site may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed, in whole or in part, without prior expressed written permission from the author, E. Stanley Ukeni.

You are invited to follow E. Stanley Ukeni on twitter at; @EzStan . You’re equally invited to follow him on google+. Oh yeah, don’t forget to subscribe to this blog Site. Thanks.

Photo Credits: