What would provoke Trump to 'totally destroy' North Korea?
On the president's fuzzy warning to the 'Rocket Man'
![President Trump speaks at the United Nations.](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LvRqCq2GSCDFBraNvVFt8n-415-80.jpg)
At the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Trump did his best to sketch out a real foreign policy vision for his administration. And while many will claim they don't understand it, don't like it, or don't want it, the Trump Doctrine is clear and has been all along. Trump is embracing his own form of realism — it's just mixed with a splash of moralism and topped with a reality TV twist.
But when it comes to the details, like say, what to do about the world's biggest national security challenge — North Korea — his positions are much fuzzier.
It was clear, at least, that President Trump again put Kim Jong Un, whom he called "Rocket Man," on notice on Tuesday. If America or its allies are forced to defend itself from an attack by Kim, "we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea," Trump said. This quote lit up social media, and for good reason.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
![https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516-320-80.jpg)
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.
The word "destroy" is likely to make foreign policy experts here in Washington twist in their cushy chairs. Did Trump mean he would nuke North Korea — the only way to destroy a nation of 25 million people — if Kim even attacked with conventional weapons? What does the word "destroy" actually mean? Is he really serious?
Unfortunately, we can only speculate about the answers.
You see, the U.S. president, if you haven't noticed, loves to exaggerate just a wee bit. He also does not understand the precise language of foreign policy or national security. He does not have a master's degree from Yale in international affairs. His remarks come from the gut — even his prepared ones, it seems.
America's established policy is that if North Korea launched the scariest of all attacks — a nuclear strike, likely what Trump was referring to — on the U.S. or its allies in the region, America would launch a devastating nuclear counterattack on Pyongyang. While we don't know how far Washington would go, you can bet President Trump would at least match North Korea nuke for nuke. Trump would also probably utilize the full resources of the U.S. military, including its nukes, to destroy Kim's ability to attack again with nuclear weapons. Essentially, a Second Korean War would begin — the only question is how many atomic bombs would be dropped. And considering the size of North Korea, it would only take a few nuclear weapons for that nation to be truly wiped off the map.
That all seems clear, if terrifying.
Where things get a little murky is if North Korea were to launch a conventional attack on the U.S. or its allies. For example, say Pyongyang struck islands with artillery fire along the border between North and South Korea — like they have done in the past — what would Washington and its allies do?
I would argue Team Trump, along with South Korea, would likely take out the offending weapons platforms that launched the attacks and potentially escalate things a notch. Allied forces, for example, could decide to use this opportunity to destroy all of the 11,000 or so artillery tubes pointed like a loaded gun at Seoul and their accompanying missile batteries. This would not exactly "totally destroy North Korea," but it would exact a heavy price on them for their actions — something that has not happened recently when they have lashed out by sinking South Korean naval vessels or shelling South Korean islands.
There is, however, a clear danger here. Having to "explain" Trumpisms is itself a challenge. Other nations, especially North Korea, might take such threats at face value. They might think Washington's bluster is actual policy. In fact, Pyongyang has already declared it will speed up its nuclear weapons and missile research in response to recent sanctions and allied actions. I would not be shocked if Kim Jong Un in the coming days decides to live up to his new nickname and tests another ICBM, this time splashing one down a few hundred miles off the U.S. West Coast.
Tuesday seems to be the day President Trump declared his own "red line" when it comes to North Korea. Let's just hope Pyongyang does not cross it — and our own president refines his own terminology. Otherwise, we could be in for a world of trouble.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Harry J. Kazianis is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, founded by former U.S. President Richard M. Nixon.
-
Ukraine's Olympians: going for gold in the line of fire
Under the Radar Hundreds of the country's athletes have died in battle, while those who remain deal with the psychological toll of war and prospect of Russian competitors
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Democrats now have a chance to present a vigorous, compelling case'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
What has Kamala Harris done as vice president?
In Depth It's not uncommon for the second-in-command to struggle to prove themselves in a role largely defined by behind-the-scenes work
By Theara Coleman, The Week US Published
-
ICJ ruling: will 'damning verdict' stop Netanyahu?
Talking Point The UN's top court has ruled Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories breaks international law
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Venezuela election: first vote in a decade offers hope to poverty-stricken nation
The Explainer Nicolás Maduro agreed to 'free and fair' vote but poor polling and threat of prosecution pushes disputed leader to desperate methods
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The Tamils stranded on 'secretive' British island in Indian Ocean
Under the Radar Migrants 'unlawfully detained' since 2021 shipwreck on UK-controlled Diego Garcia, site of important US military base
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The campaign of destruction against 'sea gypsies'
Under the Radar Malaysia targets traditional seafaring Bajau Laut tribe in crackdown on undocumented migrants
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
New Panama president vows to halt migration
Speed Read José Raúl Mulino will stop migration through the Darien Gap
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Bolivia general arrested after coup attempt
Speed Read Gen. Juan José Zúñiga led what appeared to be a bid to unseat President Luis Arce
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Who will win France's election of extremes?
Today's Big Question Voters face a stark choice between far-right party and left-wing alliance as centrists lose ground
By Rebecca Messina, The Week UK Published