Would the US Actually Attack North Korea?

Could U.S. President Donald Trump be gearing up to take military action against North Korea?

On a visit to South Korea in April, Vice President Mike Pence warned Pyongyang not to call the bluff of his boss, whose administration has made some of the strongest threats yet about striking Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile facilities should it continue to defy international sanctions.

“Just in the past two weeks we witnessed the strength of resolve of our new leader,” said Pence after a meeting with Hwang Kyo-ahn, South Korea’s caretaker president, in a clear reference to recent military strikes on Syria and Afghanistan. “North Korea would do well not to test his resolve.”

Just where the president’s resolve might lead him, however, has been complicated by a flurry of mixed signals out of the White House, which in recent weeks has variously talked up and played down the likelihood of military action.

On April 14, NBC, citing anonymous officials, reported that Trump was “prepared” to launch a preemptive strike to stop Pyongyang from carrying out its sixth nuclear test, which is widely expected in the near future. Within hours, however, unnamed officials were being cited in an Associated Press report that described Trump’s strategy as “maximum pressure and engagement," meaning further sanctions and renewed efforts to get China to use its leverage over Pyongyang.

Two days later, Trump’s national security advisor, H.R. McMaster, told media that “all our options” remained on the table, a common refrain during Trump’s short time in office. Later in the same interview, McMaster clarified that it was time for Washington to use all available means “short of a military option, to try to resolve this peacefully.”

Although the lack of a coherent message could be taken as a sign of confusion within the White House, it could also be part of a more deliberate strategy.

Nam Chang-hee, a professor of international relations at Inha University just outside Seoul, said a leader could wish to “appear irrational and compulsive” to intimidate an opponent, but warned such an approach risked provoking a rash response from the other side.

“This unfortunate misperception dilemma can amplify its risk when the two parties simultaneously see each other as unpredictable and dangerous,” Nam told The Diplomat.

Nam said there appeared to be a “small but a growing chance” that if the threat of force did not force Pyongyang to the negotiation table, the United States could carry out a limited strike. But even then, he said, such a move would likely be calibrated to avoid all-out war.

“Unless U.S. citizens residing in Seoul are evacuated in advance, Pyongyang knows that America is not ready to face a breakdown of the armistice and to resume the second Korean War on the peninsula,” Nam said.

Many analysts see Trump’s aggressive and sometimes uneven posturing as aimed at least as much at Beijing as Pyongyang. North Korea relies on Chinese trade to avoid complete economic isolation; Trump and members of his Cabinet have repeatedly emphasized that China should do more to rein in its ally’s behavior.

“I think the main thrust of these comments has actually been designed to motivate greater action by China to cooperate with the U.S. on North Korea so as to forestall the prospect of military action against North Korea,” said Scott Snyder, a Korea expert at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. 

Publicly at least, China has insisted it shares Washington’s goal, with President Xi Jinping recently quoted as telling the U.S. president that his government was committed to “realizing the denuclearization of the peninsula.” Up until now, however, Beijing has been widely seen as unwilling to apply serious pressure on its neighbor for fear of causing instability on its border, such as a regime collapse that could send refugees flooding into its territory.

“The Trump administration will face a difficult choice in the coming weeks on when to switch its engagement with China to confrontation, namely sanctioning Chinese banks and companies,” said Anthony Ruggiero, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “China will not put the kind of pressure on North Korea that is necessary to make a difference without pressure from the U.S.”

For now, the specter of force looms large, even though observers are practically unanimous that it would be reckless, possibly catastrophic to hit North Korea militarily.

“South Koreans are told by the press that the attack on the Syrian air base and on the Afghanistan target are possibly related to President Trump's coercive diplomacy,” said Nam. “Local pundits in Seoul voice warnings on the gloomy scenarios, but since these kinds of crisis warnings have been repeated over time and sometimes wasted for political motives, compared to international observers, South Koreans look less worried than they should be.”