Forced to Escalate

 VS

 

“The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea… Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself.”

Donald Trump addressing the UN General Assembly on September 19^th

"There is a saying that goes: 'Even when dogs bark, the parade goes on'…. If [Trump] was thinking about surprising us with the sound of a barking dog then he is clearly dreaming."

North Korea’s Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho to reporters after hearing Trump’s speech.

Mr. Trump is "mentally deranged" and his comments "the most ferocious declaration of a war in history… [I will deploy] “the highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history [against the US. Trump’s] remarks ... have convinced me, rather than frightening or stopping me, that the path I chose is correct and that it is the one I have to follow to the last… As a man representing the DPRK and on behalf of the dignity and honor of my state and people and on my own, I will make the man holding the prerogative of the supreme command in the U.S. pay dearly for his speech.”     

Kim Jong-Un, in a statement carried by the North's official KCNA news agency September 21^st.

The North Korean delegation to the United Nations General Assembly was “fortuitously” seated in the front row as President Trump delivered is speech on September 19^th. As Trump uttered the above words, there was an audible gasp from many seated delegates; the North Koreans just shrugged it off. A dare? An invitation for a direct confrontation? Baiting North Korea to escalate its “tests”? Following the speech, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders sought to soften the notion that Trump's remarks were a break from past U.S. policy, tweeting: “Presidents have always been clear to deter threats: ‘We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals’ -@BarackObama last year.” Uh-huh, right…

Most of the world felt that Trump pushed the danger level one giant notch upwards, literally forcing Kim Jong-Un to respond rather tangibly with a nasty show of force. Former US Secretary of State, John Kerry questioned using an insulting word to describe Kim – “Rocketman”: "You have to ask yourself: Is America safer because of 'rocket man’?" 

We’re living in a world of a “barking dog” and a “Rocketman.” We’re distracted by truly devastating hurricane damage, a horrific killer earthquake in Mexico and Senate Republicans scrambling to pass a deeply-flawed “repeal and replace Obamacare” bill by September 30^th (after which a 51 voted majority will no longer be enough). But the potential of a thermonuclear war has risen to a level not seen since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. It’s too easy to forget that reality.

After pledging to allow other nations their sovereignty, after asking the world to join the United States in a global effort to force the Kim regime to denuclearize, in the very same speech, the President promptly trashed the last such global effort – the successful 2015 UN-backed agreement between Iran and the five permanent members of the Security Council (including the United States) – to halt Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, widely believed to be a necessary precursor to developing nuclear weapons. In mid-July, the Trump administration “certified to Congress that Iran is still complying with the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal, but it also promised to impose new sanctions on the country over its ballistic missile program and other alleged misbehavior.” Politico.com, July 17^th.  But Trump effectively threatened the sovereignty of two “rogue” nations. North Korean and Iran… strongly suggesting that US support for that nuclear accord was about to end.

The six-party Iran agreement was focused on one program: stopping Iran’s enrichment of nuclear materials necessary to weaponized Iran’s military accordingly. It was most definitely not a be-all-and-end-all to deal with all of Iran’s unwanted actions, from fomenting regional instability through its Hezbollah surrogate to developing other weapon systems including its missile program. Nor was that rather sweeping, broader containment of Iran’s efforts even realistic within parameters of a multiparty agreement. While the agreement falls short in many areas, it has successfully, by the Trump administration’s own certification, halted Iran’s nuclear program. There’s no reason why there cannot be another, separate, negotiation with Iran on those additional issues. Not enough, says Donald Trump.

Trump’s speech: “The Iran deal is one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the US has ever entered into to. Frankly, that deal was an embarrassment to the US.” A hint that the United States would withdraw? Leading to what? Iran continue to abide by that accord with the remaining signatories… provoking the United States to sanction its allies for not cutting Iran off? Provoking Iran to redouble its nuclear efforts? Perhaps convincing Iran to return to the bargaining table? Iran’s traditional enemies – Israel and the Sunni Arab nations – cheered Trump’s castigation of the Iran accord.

Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, responded in his own address to the UN General Assembly: “Ugly, ignorant words were spoken by the U.S. president against the Iranian nation… full of hatred and baseless allegations.” Rouhani defended his country's participation in the nuclear agreement and directed this a threat towards the U.S., saying that Iran “will respond decisively and resolutely to its violation by any party.”

Without Iran’s participation, the Middle East will continue to spiral out of control. Russia has seized on that opportunity – reinforcing its support of both Iran and Syria’s Assad regime – to counter “whatever America wants”… letting Iran know that it will make sure trade will continue with Moscow no matter what. Putin has also recently added a new ferry service between Russia and North Korea, again a rather direct taunt to American policies against the North.  And of course, Russia lambasted Trump’s anti-Iran, anti-North Korea rhetoric in his UN speech.

The “one true thing” about Kim Jong-Un’s nuclear and missile program: he passionately believes that without such massive deterrents, the United States will topple his regime and end his ambition to dominate the entire Korean peninsula. For him, it’s a matter of life or death, and he has rather successfully convinced his own people that the United States (a) is a bully that must be stopped (the North’s main “enemy”) and (b) North Korea is fully capable of defeating America in a war. Seriously. With few exceptions, most global leaders believe that Trump’s vicious and insulting rhetoric is both beneath the dignity of the world’s only remaining superpower – hardly commensurate with Kim’s tiny nation – and is literally baiting an exceptionally-insecure tyrant to escalate his missile and nuclear program even further.

Kim wants recognition as a bona fide member of the world’s nuclear club, joining the United States, several EU nations, China, India, Pakistan and Israel. He needs to maintain what he believes are the only factors that keep him in power: missiles and nukes. If the United States could live for decades with equally hostile enemies during the Cold War – the Soviet Union and the Mao-controlled People’s Republic of China – surely it could return to that era of mutually-assured destruction stasis with the North, he believes not without some logic.

On September 21^st, Trump added new sanctions against the North, targeting individuals and banks that deal with Kim Jong-Un… even Chinese banks. Even if Kim’s people are reduced to eating grass (the average N. Korean currently consumes about 1100 calories a day), virtually no global leader truly believes that Kim Jong-Un will ever denuclearize… but that’s what Donald Trump is demanding… along with US-demanded blanket support from every other nation on earth. Uh-huh, right… Are “Rocketman” and “Barking Dog” speaking to the world… or are they simply speaking to their respective bases? The world is listening… very intensely. There are consequences.

I’m Peter Dekom, and there appears to be a genuine Trump-disconnect between what can realistically be achieved with vitriol and vinegar, baiting the insecure, and what might work on the plain of realpolitik in the world as it actually is.