By Jonathan S. Tobin
Wednesday, September 06, 2017
So far, the assumption that Trump is bungling or
exacerbating the crisis with North Korea isn’t justified.
Ever since he came down the escalator at Trump Tower that
fateful day in June 2015, President Trump’s critics have worried that his
anger-management and impulse-control issues would be exposed in an
international crisis. Everything we’ve learned about him tells us that he is
temperamentally unsuited to diplomacy or putting forward the image of quiet
strength and confidence that is synonymous with traditional ideas about good
leadership. In other words, he is exactly the type of person you wouldn’t want
in control of the nuclear codes, or leading the meeting when an American
response to a foreign provocation is required.
Yet now that such a crisis has arrived in the form of
North Korea’s nuclear escalation, the most interesting thing about the U.S.
response is that President Trump has not proved to be the liability that his
critics assumed he would be. As with everything else he does, Trump has not
behaved the way any of his predecessors or election rivals would have done. He
has tweeted and boasted and at times has demonstrated that his command of the
issues is far from complete.
Nonetheless, the criticism that has rained down on him
for this is off the mark.
For all of his flaws and unorthodox behavior, the
president is listening to his advisers and actually sounding the right themes
about the need for our allies to stand fast and for those who do business with
North Korea to join the West in completely isolating the regime.
If that isn’t the impression one gets from most of the
coverage of the North Korean crisis, it’s due in large measure to the way Trump
has conditioned us to view him. He prides himself on being a “counterpuncher,”
but a better description might be a vindictive, thin-skinned egotist who will
lash out at anyone who criticizes or thwarts him. That’s why many jump to the
conclusion that what Trump does or says about North Korea is as much a mad
distraction from the real work of government as his unscripted rants on other
issues have often been.
While every tweet Trump has issued on North Korea tends
to produce howls of anger from the mainstream press, their content has actually
been generally accurate and often quite helpful to the cause of restraining
Pyongyang.
Even if one takes the most notorious of his statements,
in which he threatened Kim Jong-un with “fire and fury,” that language (which
echoed a statement once issued by President Harry Truman during the Korean War)
merely articulated the same policy affirmed by every U.S. administration since
the 1950s. Some criticized that line for being an empty boast, but after
decades of weak responses to outrageous actions from the North Koreans, the
problem with U.S. policy in the region is the very idea that there is something
strange about an American president’s reminding a dictator that it is possible
for him to go too far. To the extent that Trump impressed upon Kim and his
Chinese enablers that if North Korean threats escalate, the U.S. has the power
to endanger the survival of the Communist regime, it can only be helpful.
Nor is there anything wrong with Trump’s not treating the
Chinese or the South Koreans with kid gloves.
The Chinese may hold the solution to this problem in
their hands, since they are North Korea’s only allies and the key to its
economic survival in isolation. But for too long, they too have been operating
under the assumption that there is nothing that Kim Jong-un can’t get away
with, even if his destabilizing actions threaten their interests as much as
those of the U.S. and its allies.
As for the South Koreans, their nervousness about North
Korea’s ability to devastate their capital and kill countless citizens in the
first moments of any military conflict with conventional weapons is
understandable. But here again, mere deference to their fears won’t necessarily
contribute to a diplomatic solution. Trump is correct that appeasement of the
barbarous North Korean regime — and that is not too harsh a word to describe
the instincts of the current government in Seoul — only makes Kim Jong-un
believe that he can play nuclear chicken with the West and win.
There are no good options for the U.S. in dealing with a nation
and a leader that think they have little to lose and much to gain by
threatening war. But the critics’ assumption — that Trump’s attempts to impress
upon Pyongyang that his administration will not be as easily cowed as those of
Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama are a mistake — underestimates the damage
done by previous unsuccessful efforts to bribe the North Koreans to behave.
Moreover, as much as Trump has given us good reason to
question his temperament, the one real exception to his predilection for
ill-considered actions has been in decisions involving the use of military
force. Whatever else one can say about him, the president appears to have a
commendable caution about ordering the military into action. Just as important,
his conduct of the conflicts in Afghanistan and against ISIS in Iraq and Syria
has demonstrated an equally commendable deference to the judgment of his
commanders rather than the sort of White House micromanagement and
second-guessing of the military that characterized Obama’s record as commander
in chief. Which is to say that if the North Koreans were mad enough to actually
seek to directly threaten the U.S. with a nuclear weapon, then what we’ve seen
of Trump so far would indicate that he would listen to his military advisers
rather than shoot from the hip.
Although the media have seized upon every Trump tweet as
if it were a casus belli for more North Korean outrages, that instinct is the
reverse of the truth. Trump may not be communicating in the ways we expect a
president to speak, but he is not the problem here. We should all pray that he
will never be put to the supreme test of leadership in a crisis; and, as with
more-even-tempered presidents, worries about how he will handle himself then
are not unreasonable.
But the effort to shift blame for the escalation in the
Korean peninsula from Kim Jong-un to Trump is unfounded. To date, the president
appears to understand that more urgency than has been applied to this problem
in the last 20 years is necessary if the worst-case scenario is to be avoided.
Like his able and articulate United Nations ambassador, Nikki Haley, Trump has,
in his own unorthodox manner, been signaling the world and the North Koreans
that a stronger stance is needed, rather than more of the futile bribery and
hand-wringing that we got from Clinton, Bush, or Obama. You don’t have to be an
admirer of the president to realize that at least in this case, Trump’s
behavior is not the problem when it comes to North Korea.
No comments:
Post a Comment