[INTERVIEW] Seoul, Washington forced to maintain greater discipline: Council on Foreign Relations

U.S. Air Force B-1B bombers, center, F-22 fighter jets and Republic of Korea Air Force F-35 fighter jets, bottom, fly over the Korean Peninsula during a joint air drill in South Korea, Jan. 1, in this photo provided by the South Korean defense ministry. AP-Yonhap

This is the third in a series of interviews with security experts at leading think tanks in Washington and former U.S. officials on the implications of the escalating arms race in Northeast Asia and South Korea's growing nuclear ambitions. ― ED.

US-NK summit would require departures from both parties' current default policies

By Kim Yoo-chul

A few days after joint air drills by South Korea and the United States, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un ordered his military to ensure the regime's readiness for war.

According to the North's official Korean Central News Agency, Feb. 7, its leader Kim attended a Central Military Commission gathering of the Workers' Party and asked his military to boast its strength.

The point of focus is how North Korea may leverage unfolding developments regarding the possible creation of a "missile department" purposed with the development of smaller nuclear warheads and advanced ballistic systems. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol confirmed that Seoul will not back away from the country's commitments under the nuclear Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

Still, despite U.S.' concerns over rhetoric from the South's ruling party officials and think tanks on the domestic development of nuclear weapons, there remains a possibility that Seoul might move forward with the idea of pursuing a nuclear arsenal if the security situation with North Korea further deteriorates.

Scott A. Snyder, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

Leading think tanks in Washington were arguing for more effective and efficient measures in breaking Pyongyang's nuclear escalation which aims to drive a wedge between the U.S. and South Korea. Such measures will require the commitment of both the Yoon and Biden administrations to commit to expanding on the "original bargain" underpinning Washington-Seoul nuclear defense cooperation.

Speaking to The Korea Times, Scott A. Snyder, a senior fellow for Korea studies and director of the program on U.S.-Korea policy at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), said Seoul's pursuit of nuclear weapons would distance the country from the international community and risk severely damaging its export-reliant economy. Headquartered in New York, CFR is an independent nonpartisan think tank.

Snyder, who served as the project director for CFR's independent task force on policy toward the Korean Peninsula, went on to say that North Korea was clearly seeing the potential frictions and the estimated costs South Korea would take on by pursuing nuclear armament.

Because North Korea's objective is to break the alliance and peel South Korea away from its dependence on U.S. protection, the CFR expert said Pyongyang is aware of the potential economic costs Seoul could incur by violating the NPT.

Mainstream thoughts behind North Korea's repeated missile threats are that the Kim regime's intention is for his country to be recognized as an official nuclear power and to initiate possible arms-control talks in the hope of better economic concessions.

"I do believe that both Seoul and Washington will be forced to exercise deeper consultation and maintain greater discipline to instill confidence that they are on the same page going forward," he said in a recent interview.

"I believe that current speculation in South Korea is way ahead of the actual discussion between governments on deepening of extended deterrence and the development of joint planning to deal with contingencies involving North Korean use of nuclear weapons. Most of the current speculation and perceived friction between the two sides is media generated," according to the expert.

A photo released by the official North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows a new Hwasong-17 missile displayed in a military parade held to celebrate the 90th founding anniversary of the Korean People's Revolutionary Army (KPRA), at Kim Il Sung Square in Pyongyang, North Korea, 25 April 2022 (issued 26 April 2022). EPA-Yonhap

He stressed he does not believe Yoon is "intentionally trying to generate tensions" with the U.S. or to pressure the U.S. with his public comments over the necessity of the country's own nuclear weapons developments.

"My reading of President Yoon's comments is that he faces domestic political pressure to take a tough stance, but he remains committed thus far to working closely with the United States to strengthen the credibility of extended deterrence," Snyder responded.

The U.S. stationed tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea from 1958 to 1991. Presently, neither nuclear weapons nor nuclear-related facilities are under consideration for redeployment here because stationing tactical nuclear weapons presents North Korea with an extra high-value target. Rather, the U.S. maintains full control over its nuclear weapons, rather than "sharing" them with South Korea.

Washington and Seoul have agreed to joint nuclear planning including the upcoming tabletop exercise (TTX) as described in last November's Security Consultative Meeting (SCM).

"President Joe Biden was asked about joint nuclear exercises, which would go well beyond what has been agreed to in the SCM and, which the White House clarified is something that would only be able to occur between two nuclear states," Snyder said. "Because there is a lot of potential for misunderstanding around the phrase and meaning of 'nuclear sharing,' it is important for both sides to define and explain clearly the steps being taken, and it is wise for both sides to avoid publicly discussing hypothetical scenarios and possible responses."

US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin, left, meets with his South Korean counterpart Lee Jong-sup in Seoul on January 31, 2023. UPI-Yonhap

Unfavorable conditions for dialogue

Nuclear diplomacy between the U.S. and North Korea has been stalled since the collapse of the rare summit between North Korea's Kim and then U.S. President Donald Trump in Hanoi, Vietnam. Kim asked Trump for the lifting of economic sanctions against North Korea as a prerequisite to advance steps for nuclear disarmament. The requests were refused.

Given the deepening tensions on the peninsula, Snyder painted a rather pessimistic outlook for any future dialogue between the U.S. and North Korea on denuclearization.

"U.S. policy has not changed and North Korea's policy of not engaging in a denuclearization dialogue with the United States has not changed. Therefore, it is hard to be optimistic about the resumption of U.S.-North Korean dialogue under current circumstances," the CFR expert said.

Because North Korea is shifting to prioritizing the preemptive use of nuclear weapons, decision-making pressures will be high.

"The holding of a U.S.-North Korea summit this year would require both Pyongyang and Washington to depart from their current default policies, which leave virtually no room for the possibility of summit-level dialogue under current circumstances," according to him.

Regarding the possibility to revise a defense cost-sharing agreement signed by South Korea with the U.S. in 2021, Snyder said he is doubtful that Seoul will be asked to reopen the negotiations as the signing doesn't reflect the needs of the current situation.

"I think it is highly unlikely that negotiations to revise the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) arrangements concluded in 2021 will be reopened. I am doubtful that the Biden administration will seek a direct financial contribution from South Korea regarding positioning of strategic assets in the Korean theater," he responded.