2jBVKVf

asia policy
a second nuclear test in May 2009. Although the Kim regime no longer
desires negotiations with Washington to achieve denuclearization, it does
seek negotiations to conclude a peace treaty that would shore up its internal
and international standing.
Indeed, there are a number of Korea watchers who argue that
President Obama’s policy of “strategic patience” and strategy of sanctions
have failed and that it is time to return to negotiations with Pyongyang,
even without preconditions. 4 Some of these critics also argue that it is time
to negotiate with the North over capping or freezing its nuclear weapons
development rather than seek denuclearization, which they believe is
no longer a realistic goal. They advocate that the United States should
conclude a peace treaty with North Korea because only then would the
North feel secure enough to denuclearize. 5
As well-intentioned as these arguments are, following such advice
would be a mistake. Engaging with the Kim regime prematurely is not likely
to lead to either denuclearization or, in the long run, peace and stability
on the Korean Peninsula. All U.S. administrations dating back to the Bill
Clinton presidency in the early 1990s have tried to address the North Korean
threat through various means, including engagement and negotiations
sweetened by economic aid to Pyongyang. The North Korean leadership
has been happy to pocket the aid, but it has not delivered on promises of
ending its nuclear program. The Obama administration even negotiated a
freeze in 2012, dubbed the “Leap Day deal,” in which North Korea agreed to
a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests. Almost immediately
after the deal, Pyongyang violated it by launching a new satellite using
ballistic missile technology banned by the United Nations. Moreover, the
question remains, even if there is another deal to cap the North’s nuclear
weapons program, how would we know that the Kim regime will apply the
freeze to all of its facilities? We even lack the knowledge of where all the
North’s nuclear facilities are.
A similar problem exists with the argument for a peace treaty. There is
not a shred of evidence that a treaty would solve any of the problems created
by North Korea’s policies—from its nuclear program to human rights
violations—and it would be difficult to monitor. The long history of dealing
4 See, for example, Jane Harman and James Person “The U.S. Needs to Negotiate with North Korea,”
Washington Post, September 30, 2016; and Joel S. Witt, “How the Next President Can Stop North
Korea,” New York Times, September 13, 2016.
5 See, for example, Leon V. Sigal, “Getting What We Need with North Korea,”
Arms Control Today, April 2016 u https://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/2016_04/Features/
Getting-What-We-Need-With-North-Korea.
[ 24 ]