Security challenges for the US in Asia The Excelsior 20 Dec 17
In his remarks on ‘meeting the foreign policy challenges of 2017 and beyond’ Rex Tillerson commented on North Korea and Pakistan as the US’s two major challenges in the coming year. These two have remained on the US agenda for some time, but there has been no forward movement by any government. Trump has adopted a more stringent approach than his predecessors and been very vocal in his views. Whether the approach would produce results is wait and watch.
North Korea has always been a problem for the US. The US desires a regime change, creating within the ruling elite, a fear for its survival. It is this fear which has compelled it to go nuclear. The present ruler, Kim Jong-un, has witnessed the removal of dictators who opposed the US, but lacked nuclear weapons, Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi, while observing nuclear powered nations like Pakistan, supporting terror groups and neither being threatened nor punished, hence has realized that the only way to ensure survival is possession of nuclear weapons with delivery means. Thus, no amount of sanctions or threats would force North Korea to give up its nuclear program.
The North Korean leadership has remained in complete control of the country, even employing brutal means and has ignored citizen welfare while ensuring military might. It possesses outdated military equipment whose operational readiness remains in doubt. The only factor which has compelled the world to take note of the state is its desperation to develop nuclear weapons for its survival. The fact that South Korea and Japan are within its nuclear reach already, while it seeks to develop missiles to target the US mainland, has the west worried.
Tillerson has even offered North Korea talks without any pre-conditions, but there appears to be no response. Trump on the other hand continues to threaten to wipe out the country, compelling Kim Jong-un to enhance speed of development of nuclear delivery means. The US, under pressure from allies is unwilling to accept the fact that North Korea will never give up its nuclear program.
The US has limited options against North Korea. It cannot plan and launch any attack on North Korean nuclear installations as these are based close to the Chinese border and the fallout would impact China as also lead to retaliatory strikes. Sanctions in every form have been adopted, but to no avail. The national leadership is willing to allow its populace to suffer, while its nuclear preparedness continues unabated. It is clearly following the words of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who stated post India’s nuclear blast, ‘we’ll eat grass but build the bomb.’
Hence, its only options remain of convincing the North Korean leadership of its willingness to accept their nuclear program, assure it of not considering any regime change and seek discussion while they continue with development. The only rider which it could place would be requesting North Korea to limit their tests during talks. This implies creating an aura of confidence prior to commencement of talks. Can it do so in 2018, amid Trump’s rhetoric, is the mute question.
Pakistan had been an ally which the US had nurtured over the years. In fact, the US kept pumping arms and aid to Pakistan, hoping it would change and curb terror groups, which it failed. It used US funds to sponsor those groups itself which target US and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Thus, US was indirectly funding groups which attacked them itself. It took a straight-talking Trump to finally clear the air. The US knows it cannot walk out of Afghanistan, leaving it in a mess as it would become the next hub for the IS. It must create a semblance of order within the country.
For any progress towards peace, the Taliban and Haqqani network leadership must be convinced that it cannot win and should open dialogue. This is only possible, if the leadership is hounded out of its safe havens in Pakistan into Afghanistan, where they can be relentlessly targeted by US air and drone strikes.
For this strategy to work, it needs Pakistan to cooperate, which it has been unwilling to do. Visits to Pak by senior members of the US government, threats and restricting coalition funds has still not produced results. Pak has, like earlier, promised but failed to deliver.
Winters are generally the period when the Taliban regroups and reorganizes for its spring offensive. Thus, this is the time when the US would need to reconsider its strategy and act. It again has limited options when dealing with an unrelenting Pak. It must keep in mind its dependency on the Karachi port for its logistics requirements, while considering options.
Its first option is to enhance drone strikes across the border, even deep within the country, targeting the Taliban and Haqqani leadership, ignoring collateral damage. The next option would be to announce an enlarged role for India at the strategic level within the country. These could impact Pakistan as it fears Indian role in fuelling anti-national activities from Afghan soil. For a nation, which openly supports terrorism as an instrument of state policy, only threats impacting its internal security could bring about a change in its approach.
There are other challenges which equally impact the US, mainly due to Trumps myopic view. These include growing Iranian influence in West Asia and an anti-US alliance brewing post Trump’s announcement to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. While these could be handled diplomatically, North Korea and Pakistan remain major headaches.
Tillerson was right when he mentioned about these two major challenges, continuing into 2018. Unless the US takes a pragmatic approach to North Korea and a sterner approach to Pakistan, there would be little progress. It needs to win the trust of North Korea and apply greater pressure on Pak. Time would dictate whether it succeeds or continues to flounder akin to 2017.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army