The ‘Fire and Fury’ Can Wait

Don't start an unwinnable war.

On Tuesday, the Washington Post reported, citing a confidential Defense Intelligence Agency assessment, that “North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles.” Given North Korea’s rapid progress in building ICBMs, that means that it will soon have the capacity to nuke any American city.
That’s alarming enough news, but just as concerning is President Trump’s impromptu response. North Korea, he said,  “has been very threatening beyond a normal state, and as I said, they will be met with fire and fury, and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”
There is no indication that Trump consulted with his advisers before issuing that chilling threat, nor any sign that he is aware of the extent to which it echoes Harry Truman’s ultimatum to Japan after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima: “If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.”
The parallels are nevertheless real, and they raise ominous questions about what the president is up to. Is he actually prepared to launch a preemptive war against a nuclear-armed state?
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tried to tamp down concerns, saying that the North Korean threat is not “imminent” and that “Americans should sleep well at night.” But Tillerson has often been out of sync with the White House, and no one imagines that he speaks for the mercurial president.
Even if Trump does not actually intend to launch a war, his incendiary rhetoric raises the risk of miscalculation and, therefore, of conflict. Indeed, shortly after Trump spoke, Pyongyang threatened to strike the U.S. base at Guam.
What is truly scary is that Trump may convince himself that North Korea cannot be deterred once it has acquired nuclear-tipped ICBMs and that there is no choice but to strike now while the U.S. is still immune to nuclear blackmail. Sen. Lindsay Graham, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, and other hawks in Washington have been pushing this position, and Graham has hinted that Trump agrees with him.
In reality, while the  North Korean president is a brutal dictator who does not hesitate to murder his own family members to strengthen his grip on power, there is nothing to indicate that he is irrational, much less suicidal. He is developing nuclear weapons for defensive, not offensive, reasons. He saw what happened to Moammar Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein—both overthrown by the U.S.—and he does not want the same thing to happen to him.
Concerns that Kim is undeterrable have no basis in fact. North Korea has had nuclear weapons since at least 2006. It has not used them because it knows that if it does so, the U.S. will retaliate in kind, destroying the North Korean state and killing its leaders. That threat will not go away once North Korea achieves the capacity to hit the U.S. with a nuclear missile. North Korea may have 60 nuclear weapons; the U.S. has 6,800.
It’s worth remembering that Russia also has roughly 7,000 nuclear weapons and that we have lived for almost 70 years with the possibility of nuclear annihilation without ever seriously contemplating a first-strike. Our policy toward the Soviet Union was deterrence and containment. That should be our policy toward North Korea as well.
By all means ramp up sanctions, as the United Nations Security Council did on Saturday in a rare diplomatic win for the administration. Also, step up efforts to undermine Kim Jong-un’s authority by piercing the wall of censorship he has erected around his hermit kingdom. Make clear that the U.S. will retaliate with devastating force to any North Korean attack on us our or our allies. And then sit back and wait for North Korea’s eventual collapse.
It may take seven months or seventy years—no one knows. But a failed state lacking in legitimacy cannot last forever. Sooner or later the Korean Peninsula will be unified under a democratic, pro-Western regime in Seoul. In the meantime, the U.S. should not fall prey to fantasies that a “surgical” strike can excise the nuclear threat.
The U.S. doesn’t know the location of all of North Korea’s nuclear weapons and cannot count on removing them with a first strike. Launching such a strike would be, as John F. Kennedy said during the Cuban Missile Crisis, “a hell of a gamble”—and one that could trigger the very nuclear war it is designed to avert.
I do not doubt that National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and other foreign-policy professionals in the administration realize this. I would sleep better at night if I had more confidence that our president—who as recently as last year had never heard of the nuclear triad and who now traffics in North Korea-style hyperbole–did as well.
Google+ Print

The ‘Fire and Fury’ Can Wait

Must-Reads from Magazine

What Trump Voters Heard

What Trump supporters heard on Tuesday.

When the president of the United States passed on his third opportunity to condemn unequivocally and without caveats Nazi sympathizers marching in his name, John Podhoretz dubbed it “one of the most disheartening facts of my lifetime.” This gut wrenching display of wounded, bitter petulance turned the stomachs of observers on all sides of the political aisle, and it has catalyzed the most concerted backlash to Trump among Republican lawmakers since the “Access Hollywood” tape. For cynical Trump critics, though, this is all posturing. They await deliverance from the age of Trump. They know that hinges on GOP lawmakers turning on their own president—an extraordinary prospect—and that won’t happen until Republican voters have had enough. The cynics are right. This will not break Trump’s base.

Google+ Print

A Smart Step Forward on Infrastructure

What Trump could have said.

Completely lost in yesterday’s journalistic typhoon of virtue signaling after President Trump’s highly impolitic, but, as Powerline pointed out, basically accurate statement about the tragedy in Charlottesville, was his statement on infrastructure. It is well worth looking at.

Google+ Print

The Alt-Right’s Victimhood Pimps

Social justice in a funhouse mirror.

White nationalism is identity politics. Indeed, it is identity politics in its most primordial form. The leaders of the violent white supremacists in Virginia this past weekend may preach confidence-building and self-actualization but, like so many identity-first movements, they and their followers are steeped in historical grievance—because that grievance conveys authority. In their minds, that sense of oppression entitles them to compensation for the indignities they or their forbearers endured. There are now social incentives in place to claim victimization, and such claims have proliferated as a result. This phenomenon is almost universal to identity politics m movements, and the alt-right is no exception.

Google+ Print

Trump Will Always Disappoint His Conservative Apologists

Waiting for a mature Trump.

It took fewer than 12 hours for Donald Trump to effectively retract his condemnation of the white nationalists behind the weekend bloodshed in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Google+ Print

The Proliferation of America’s Enemies

Controversies come and go so fast in the Trump administration that it’s all too easy to lose sight of individual issues. It is, therefore, worth remembering that before the events in Charlottesville grabbed public attention on Saturday, the president had been making news with his bellicose statements against North Korea and Venezuela.

Google+ Print