US move on Iran not to impact Korea talks

The Trump administration no doubt hopes that the North Koreans will shake with fear and come to the negotiating table with full transparency and obedience to Washington’s will now that the United States has withdrawn from the Iran nuclear deal. But the White House is confusing Iran with North Korea (DPRK) and ignoring key geopolitical differences between the two countries and regions.

Unlike Iran, the DPRK is a nuclear state with a complement of missiles – short-range, mid-range, cruise, and ICBM – and between 20 to 60 nuclear warheads. The stakes are much higher if the United States fails at diplomacy with North Korea, since buying time to stall its nuclear advancement has failed.

Moreover, North Koreans already experienced the mercurial nature of US leadership and political partisanship: the Agreed Framework of 1994, which was aimed at freezing, and thereby slowing, militarised nuclear capability (similar to the JCPOA), was abandoned by the George W. Bush administration amid Congressional infighting.

Also unlike Iran, North Korean regime is more consistent in ideology, hostile rhetoric and diplomacy. They will be vigilant about preventing any deal that allows Washington to back-pedal or renege. Those who worry that the administration’s break with the JCPOA sends the wrong signals to Pyongyang on the eve of a first-ever meeting between the leaders of both countries overstate the impact of the US withdrawal.

DPRK officials will not have been surprised that the White House did an about-face on the Iran deal given Trump’s previous decisions, like the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Climate Accord, which was signed by nearly 200 countries, and from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Washington had initiated and led. Additionally, Trump has threatened to forgo or diminish the United States’ over- 50-year-long military alliances with Japan and South Korea.

In addition, the Middle East is divided over Iran, while the East Asia region is coherent in its support for US-DPRK diplomacy. South Korea, historically the most immediate and vulnerable target of the North’s animus, has become its primary supporter for ending hostilities and making peace. South Korean President Moon Jae-in stands in stark contrast to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, Iran’s sworn enemy. Both Israel and South Korea are long-time allies of the United States, but Netanyahu would prefer to fight or destroy Iran and its proxies whereas Moon prefers peace and prosperity for the North.

The other major Asian powers – China, Russia and Japan – all are seeking diplomatic engagement with the DPRK. The differences between Iran and North Korea are clear. But there are two similarities that deserve attention. One involves a part of Trump’s domestic political base. Christian Zionists, mostly pro-Israel white evangelicals who believe the biblical notion of Jews as the chosen people, pushed hard against the Iran deal during and after the negotiations.

This group of evangelicals might oppose peacemaking with Kim because it views North Korea as an un-godly place for its human rights abuses and opposition to religious freedom. The other similarity is that the leaders of Iran and North Korea are proud, tough and do not shy away from a fight. If the Trump team doesn’t play its cards right, we could end up with more of the war rhetoric – and even military actions – that dominated the Korean peninsula in 2017. (Writer is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Washington, DC)

By Katharine H S Moon