Why Obama needs to call Kim Jong Un

Earlier this month, North Korean ruler Kim Jong Un convened a rare Workers Congress of the Korean Worker's Party in Pyongyang, North Korea. Convened five years after his father's sudden death, the meeting of North Korea's political elites was meant to demonstrate Kim's absolute control over the country.

Since assuming power in 2011, Kim Jong Un has proven himself to be a dictator whose ruthlessness exceeds even his own father's. He has purged North Korea's leadership, ensuring the rank-and-file remain loyal only to him. He has defied world opinion and even turned on China, one of the isolated country's few remaining allies.

Kim Jong Un, barring assassination or war, will likely be in charge of North Korea for decades to come.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

In the meantime, Kim has continued his father's pursuit of a nuclear deterrent to keep his enemies at bay. In just the last six months the country has conducted its fourth nuclear weapon test, held several long-range missile tests, and seems poised to put nuclear missiles on submarines — where they will be more difficult to locate in wartime.

All of this occurred despite the Obama administration's policy on North Korea, which assumes the country will give up nuclear weapons once its economic problems become unsolvable. The administration has also continued a wide range of sanctions against the country, meant to slow the development of nuclear weapons and hasten economic decline.

Despite the policy, North Korea has managed to make impressive progress on its nuclear programs. Eight years after President Barack Obama took office, North Korea is believed to be able to hit Japan with a nuclear missile — and it's expected to be able to target the West Coast of the United States around 2021. Pyongyang's nuclear arsenal is estimated at less than 10 weapons, to grow to up to 100 nuclear weapons by 2020.

It's hard to argue with success. The corollary is that it's also hard to see the administration's policies as anything more than a failure. Still, the United States has options. The United States has one more card to play: direct negotiations with North Korea.

The United States held talks with North Korea before. They have not gone well, with North Korea repeatedly going back on its word. Direct talks were held as late as early 2012 — shortly after Kim Jong Un took power. North Korea agreed on a moratorium on nuclear and missile tests, as well as to open itself up to international inspections. Just weeks later, North Korea went back on its word by announcing a new missile test.

What would be different now? Politically, Kim Jong Un is in a different place now. It's not surprising that a 32-year-old political neophyte thrust into power in a "mafia state" dashed the hope of U.S. negotiators. If he wanted to show the North Korean political elite he was ruthless enough to deserve his job — and avoid a bullet — making a mockery of negotiations with the most powerful country in the world was one way to prove it.

Of course, that's just a theory. But that's exactly the problem — we only have theories. We don't know why Pyongyang broke off negotiations. We know very little about the younger Kim, and from thousands of miles away, we're not going to know more any time soon.

That is, unless we talk to him.

It would be naive to not be deeply skeptical of any agreement to come out of negotiations. North Korea has a long record of going back on its word and dashing the hopes of the international community.

At the same time, it would be naive to believe that Kim Jong Un is his father and wants everything his father wants. The mistake here is to assume that any North Korean government will reflexively go back on any negotiations, as though doing so is a systemic problem on their part. Dictators are the system, and there is a new system in charge.

It goes without saying that even if we do open direct negotiations with Pyongyang, the broad American policy — denuclearization of North Korea, South Korean sovereignty, and the defense of Japan — are non-negotiable. It also goes without saying that America's regional military posture cannot be lessened without concrete, positive action on North Korea's part that increases security on the Korean peninsula and improves the lives of the North Korean people.

Opening a high-level diplomatic channel with North Korea would likely lead to charges of appeasement that could hurt a president politically. Fortunately the Obama administration is in its final months, and has considerably less to lose politically than an incoming administration. A new administration will not risk being made a fool of — but it could follow positive, fruitful negotiations begun by its predecessor. The Obama administration could create an opening with Pyongyang that the next administration could continue to exploit — and benefit from.

The current policy of ignoring North Korea is simply not working — and is detrimental to U.S. security. Let's talk to Kim Jong Un and find out what he wants. We don't have to give it to him.