Does Kim Jong-un Even Want Negotiations?

By J. James Kim

J. James KIM is the director of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies (Washington, DC) and research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies (Seoul). He is also an adjunct lecturer in the SIPA Executive Master of Public Administration program at Columbia University. Previously, he was an assistant professor of political science at the California State Polytechnic University (Pomona).

President Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in met for the first time last Thursday to discuss trade, stationing U.S. troops in South Korea, and most importantly, finding a common approach to halting and dismantling North Korea’s nuclear program. Then, just days later, on July 4th, North Korea successfully tested a new type of missile considered to be its first ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile). While North Korea continues to commit provocations and advance its capabilities, the U.S., South Korea, and other nations are still at a loss on a successful path to negotiations and denuclearization. The Cipher Brief spoke to James Kim, director of the Asan Institute’s Washington, DC office, about the new approach to North Korea proposed by Moon and whether it stands a chance when so many previous attempts have failed.

The Cipher Brief: Broadly speaking, the U.S. and South Korea have the same goal for North Korea: denuclearization and have outlined a phased approach. Can you describe what this phased approach looks like and highlight any differences or sticking points in either the South Korean or U.S. position in pursuing this goal?

“The Cipher Brief has become the most popular outlet for former intelligence officers; no media outlet is even a close second to The Cipher Brief in terms of the number of articles published by formers.” —Sept. 2018, Studies in Intelligence, Vol. 62

Access all of The Cipher Brief’s national security-focused expert insight by becoming a Cipher Brief Subscriber+ Member.

Subscriber+


Related Articles

How Safe Would We Be Without Section 702?

SUBSCRIBER+EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW — A provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that has generated controversy around fears of the potential for abuse has proven to be crucial […] More

Search

Close