Almost everyone agrees a war would be catastrophic, with the potential use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.<\/b>
\nOne of the most serious issues of 2017 has been what to do about North Korea.
In September, Kim Jong Un’s regime tested a large nuclear weapon underground, claiming it was a hydrogen bomb.
North Korea also demonstrated this year that it has the missile technology to deliver its warheads pretty much anywhere in the world.
Kim\u2019s regime in Pyongyang has also deployed inflammatory rhetoric, even threatening to bracket the U. S. territory of Guam with missiles.
The Trump administration has responded with threats of its own, raising fears of a war in Northeast Asia.
Former CIA director John Brennan has estimated the chance of war at 20-25%, while Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, puts the chance at 50-50%.
Others are more sanguine, noting that the United States and its allies have not mobilized for war, or even begun moving the masses of weapons platforms, ammunition and other supplies that would be needed to prosecute an all-out conflict.
Almost everyone agrees a war would be catastrophic, with the potential use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons that could cause the deaths of millions in North and South Korea, and possibly in China and Japan. The impact on the global economy \u2014 and even the climate \u2014could be severe.
North Korea says its nuclear weapons program is designed to deter any U. S. attempt at regime change. Many analysts agree. Joseph Cirincione of the Ploughshares Fund argues the world needs to learn to live with a nuclear-armed North Korea, just as the western world contained the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
There are reports that the Trump administration is considering limited military action. Again, though, those reports could be messaging to convey the appearance of coercive diplomacy to Pyongyang.
Pentagon war-gamers have repeatedly found that a limited war with North Korea is not a realistic option, while the player representing North Korea consistently chooses to escalate the conflict in such war games. Most analysts add that conventional weapons are unable to take out underground missile sites, making the only realistic U. S. option for a pre-emptive strike being a nuclear attack.
\u201cI\u2019m going to go with no war (in 2018),\u201d predicts Isaac Stone Fish, an international affairs analyst for PRI\u2019s The World. Stone Fish is a senior fellow with the Asia Society, and a former Newsweek correspondent in Beijing.
He said his prediction is based \u201cin part because I\u2019m optimistic in the holiday season. And in part because all the sides recognize that they have more to lose with a war than without a war.\u201d
He believes \u201ccooler heads will prevail.\u201d
Stone Fish said it also depends on how you define war. \u201cOne could see the likelihood of a small shooting skirmish, with a few soldiers dead on either side, as far more likely.\u201d
He also points out that North Korea has the capacity to simply ignore an attack. \u201cOne can imagine a scenario where the U. S. has a surgical strike on North Korea \u2014 I don\u2019t think this is a good idea \u2014 but one can imagine them doing so; killing North Korean civilians; killing North Korean soldiers; and Pyongyang decides to just completely cover it up.»
Stone Fish cites as a precedent the exchange of fire between North and South Korea in 2010. \u201cThe North Koreans shelled a South Korean island, killing four people. The South Koreans responded; we don\u2019t know exactly how they responded \u2014 but presumably, North Koreans died as well. And then the North Koreans basically just dropped it.\u201d
Stone Fish has another concern. \u201cMy biggest worry,\u201d he said, \u201cis that Trump faces a more serious domestic crisis, feels like he\u2019s really losing the grip of his base, and decides to do something against North Korea to regain popularity.\u201d
But he said even that is not likely. \u201cI just don\u2019t think he (Trump) or the people around him will ever be in a situation \u2014 and again maybe this is just me being hopeful \u2014 where they feel their best option, or their only option, is to attack North Korea.\u201d
MORE FROM PRI:<\/p>\n

\n

Similarity rank: 9<\/div>\n

Sentiment rank: -1.5<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n