Opinion

Love him or hate him, Trump is right about North Korea

Why Trump's strategy is spot on

President Trump is doing the right thing in pursuing peace with North Korea.

It feels odd to type those words, and you probably will not hear them repeated by members of America's foreign policy establishment over the next few days, as Trump meets with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Vietnam. A lot of smart people — including Trump's own aides — fear the president will do anything to proclaim the summit a success, even if it means trumpeting an agreement that somehow lets Kim keep his tiny nuclear arsenal largely intact.

They are right: That is a likely outcome — it is what happened, in fact, the first time Trump met Kim. But that's OK. Because not going to war with North Korea is better than going to war with North Korea. And Trump's strategy with regards to Kim, whatever its faults, makes war with that country less likely.

For more than a generation, American policy toward North Korea has been aimed mostly at keeping that country from obtaining or keeping a nuclear arsenal. That mission failed in 2006, and American presidents have been scrambling ever since to obtain denuclearization. That goal has never been achieved, and there is no reason to believe it ever will be.

No, it is not good that Kim has nuclear weapons at his disposal: The more such weapons that exist in the world, the more likely it is that one will be used — and that would be a disaster. But it is unlikely the United States can ever convince Kim to give up his weapons because he has one very important incentive to keep them: his personal and political survival. (As if to emphasize the point, Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio this weekend posted a picture of a bloodied Muammar Gaddafi to Twitter — a warning to Venezuela's leaders during that country's crisis, but no doubt also a reminder to Kim that giving up a nuclear program can make a leader more vulnerable to his rivals, internal or external.)

If Kim will not voluntarily give up North Korea's weapons, there are two options remaining for Trump:

  • Decide to live with the weapons, pursue peace, and find a way to declare victory anyway. In other words, take steps to reduce the likelihood North Korea will ever decide it needs or wants to use its powerful weapons in anger.

The second track appears to be the one that Trump is taking — even if he still talks about denuclearization — and thank goodness.

Again, it stinks that North Korea has nuclear weapons, which are a moral abomination no matter who possesses them. Kim is unequivocally a bad guy. But the United States has done business with villainous nuclear states before — we practiced détente with the Soviet Union during the 1970s, and we remained trading partners with China after the massacre at Tiananmen Square. There were compromises involved in both cases. But you know what? The Cold War stayed cold, by and large.

All of this is complicated, of course, by Trump's involvement. He has a thing for murderous autocrats, and his unending flattery of Kim is — and should be — cringe-inducing for anybody who loves liberty, human rights, or basic decency. Trump being Trump, there is also an element of dishonesty involved: No, the United States was not about to go to war with North Korea before he became president. But those qualities, for once, might make Trump the perfect man for this moment. Only Nixon could go to China; it may be that only Trump can go to Pyongyang.

Of course, efforts to get other countries to stay nuclear-free might stand a better chance if Trump had not recently withdrawn from the INF Treaty. He also appears intent on enlarging America's already-substantial nuclear arsenal for the first time in decades. "Do as I say, not as I do" is generally a poor strategy, no matter the issue.

Some problems get so big, they can't be solved. They can only be managed. The U.S. foreign policy establishment has not admitted that North Korea's nuclear program has moved into that category, but it should be apparent to just about everybody else. So it is time to try to move to a world in which we live with North Korea having nukes so that, well, we can live.

The process may be messy, America's hawks will complain endlessly, and it will get tiresome to hear Trump promote himself for a Nobel Peace Prize over the next year. But if the result saves lives, so be it. Pursuing peace with North Korea is the right thing to do.

More From...

Picture of Joel MathisJoel Mathis
Read All
Why Trump's 'guilty mind' could make or break his prosecution
Donald Trump.
Opinion

Why Trump's 'guilty mind' could make or break his prosecution

The limits of the Geneva Conventions
Soldiers.
Briefing

The limits of the Geneva Conventions

The morbid fates of presidential assassins
John Hinckley, Jr.
Feature

The morbid fates of presidential assassins

Bear markets, explained
A bear.
Feature

Bear markets, explained

Recommended

Trump Jan. 6 adviser John Eastman says FBI seized his phone
John Eastman
The plot thickens again

Trump Jan. 6 adviser John Eastman says FBI seized his phone

46 people found dead, 16 hospitalized in hot tractor-trailer in San Antonio
46 dead in tractor-trailer
'nothing short of a horrific human tragedy'

46 people found dead, 16 hospitalized in hot tractor-trailer in San Antonio

Officials: Russian strike on Ukrainian shopping center kills 13
The shopping center in Kremenchuk, Ukraine, after being hit by missiles.
attacks

Officials: Russian strike on Ukrainian shopping center kills 13

At least 3 dead, dozens injured after Amtrak train derails in Missouri
An Amtrak train car.
accidents

At least 3 dead, dozens injured after Amtrak train derails in Missouri

Most Popular

What we pay for when we pay for a gallon of gas
Money.
Briefing

What we pay for when we pay for a gallon of gas

Why isn't Lightyear taking off at the box office?
Lightyear.
Opinion

Why isn't Lightyear taking off at the box office?

Pfizer says Omicron vaccines produce stronger immune response
Man walking past Pfizer ad
another shot

Pfizer says Omicron vaccines produce stronger immune response