The U. S. must leverage resources and relationships wisely, rather than rely on force when it comes to North Korea.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s first visit to China came to a conclusion this weekend, having visited South Korea and Japan earlier in the week as part of his East Asia tour. As expected, policy options regarding North Korea were a top focus.
Pyongyang’s recent set of missile launches, including a more advanced ballistic missile which landed in the Sea of Japan, tested not only Washington’s patience but also that of Beijing. Indeed, just hours prior to Tillerson’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Sunday, North Korea’s state media reported the testing of a new high-thrust rocket engine, overseen by Kim Jong-un himself who declared it “a new birth” for the isolated country’s rocket industry. So what is the likelihood of China supporting changes in U. S. policy toward North Korea?
Soon after visiting the demilitarized zone during his recent trip to South Korea, Tillerson declared that the U. S. policy of “strategic patience” with North Korea has ended. The remark came after Tillerson’s meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Kishida, when Tillerson pointed out that “diplomatic and other efforts of the past 20 years to bring North Korea to a point of denuclearization have failed” and that “it is clear that a different approach is required.” This is in line with Deputy National Security Adviser K. T. McFarland’s request , according to a Wall Street Journal report earlier this month, for an overhaul of U. S. policy toward North Korea, including the option of regime change and the possibility of “direct military conflict.”
There is little question whether Japan or South Korea would back a “different” U. S. policy response toward North Korea. However, China’s reception of a new U. S. policy toward North Korea is as of yet unclear, particularly from the perspective of some Washington policymakers who are still trying to determine whether China is a “strategic partner” or a “strategic competitor.”
This is not a new question for Washington. The Obama administration was ultimately unable to formulate an overarching and cohesive policy on Asia, despite its much-heralded attempt at a “pivot to Asia.
