[Interview] US expert sees potential Kim-Trump summit as being one of high risk, high reward

Posted on : 2018-03-12 17:34 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Frank Aum of the United States Institute of Peace sees the meeting of two leaders as being “a drastic measure to reach a solution”
Frank Aum
Frank Aum

Frank Aum is the Senior Expert on North Korea at the United States Institute of Peace. Prior to that, he was a Visiting Scholar at the US-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. From 2010-2017, Mr. Aum served as the senior advisor for North Korea in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. During this time, he advised four Secretaries of Defense on issues related to northeast Asia and the Korean Peninsula. Mr. Aum also served as head of delegation for working level negotiations in Seoul with the Republic of Korea (ROK), and received the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service.

Aum was interviewed via e-mail by the Hankyoreh on Mar. 10 to provide his thoughts on the potential summit in May between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump.

Hankyoreh (Hani): What do you think is the historical significance of US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s summit?

Frank Aum (Aum): This would be the first meeting between a sitting US president and a leader of North Korea. Unfortunately, this historic meeting is not taking place because the United States and North Korea are close to an agreement but rather because the two countries are so far apart that it is taking a drastic measure to reach a solution. The risks of the meeting are high but so are the rewards.

Hani: What is the general emotion of Washington experts regarding US-NK summit?

Aum: The general consensus in Washington is that any engagement is preferable to war. However, there is considerable skepticism that North Korea will agree to denuclearize despite a Trump-Kim meeting, and that if Trump cannot secure the outcome he is looking for, he may turn to more extreme measures.

Hani: North Korea reportedly asked for nothing in return for suspending nuclear and missile tests. Why do you think North Korea changed from its former approach such as “action for action”?

Aum: It may be that North Korea believes that it has already achieved a sufficient level of nuclear weapon capability and so a temporary suspension of nuclear and missile tests is not really a significant concession. It could also be that KJU was concerned about the "bloody nose" strike rhetoric and didn't want to provoke President Trump. Don't worry, when it gets to the actual negotiation phase, it will certainly be "action for action."

Hani: What does Kim Jong-un hope to achieve from a US-NK summit?

Aum: KJU may have multiple goals: achieving a propaganda victory by demonstrating he is on an equal footing as a US President; seeking some relief from sanctions and the maximum pressure campaign; and/or negotiating an agreement with President Trump that buys him time to survive and plan next steps.

Hani: What does President Trump hope to achieve from a US-NK summit?

Aum: President Trump wants to achieve North Korea's denuclearization and probably wants to see if talking directly with KJU is the best path to reach that goal.

Hani: Do you think Trump accepted the North Korea’s offer “impulsively”? If so, what would be the impact of this impetuous decision by President Trump?

Aum: No, he has consistently said that he was willing to meet with Kim Jong-un. President Trump probably feels like the maximum pressure campaign has forced KJU to seek a meeting, and he wants to test whether KJU is now willing to consider denuclearization.

Hani: A second analysis is that North Korea offered Trump something beyond what was reported in public. Blue House National Security Office director Chung Eui-yong said to Korean correspondents in the background briefing that there was more in NK’s message that was delivered to Mr. Trump beyond what he said publicly, although he refused to discuss this in detail.

Aum: I've heard this report but I don't want to speculate on rumors.

Hani: What are the advantages and disadvantages of the so-called “top-down” approach to negotiations, especially in the case of North Korea nuclear issue?

Aum: It is difficult to change North Korea's policy without a direct order from KJU so there is some logic to President Trump meeting directly with KJU first to see if they can agree on the broad framework of a comprehensive deal. The disadvantage with this top-down approach is that if that Trump and KJU can't reach a deal, there is nowhere else to go and it may make it seem like a military option is the only one left.

Hani: What are the challenges on the road to U.S-NK summit on May?

Aum: Washington needs to figure out what the scope of the agreement would be, what outcome it would consider a success, what it would be willing to give to North Korea to reach a deal, and what happens if a deal can't be reached. Even if a deal is reached, Washington needs to make sure that the details are specific enough to prevent misinterpretation and what the remedy is if North Korea is slow to implement the deal. There are also many logistical, protocol, and political considerations that need to be considered as well.

Hani: What are some possible locations with regard to the appropriate place to have a summit?

Aum: I think a relatively neutral location, such as Geneva or Panmunjom, might work best. However, President Trump may feel like he wants a more audacious, bold choice and could decide to go to Pyongyang directly over the recommendations of his staff.

Hani: What could be the agenda for the May summit, and the possible range of agreements?

Aum: The upcoming summit will not be a negotiation but rather a preliminary meeting between two leaders to see whether North Korea is willing to commit to denuclearization and if yes, what Washington would be willing to offer to secure this deal. So the agenda will likely be a broad strategic discussion of what the elements of a deal might be and what timeline would be acceptable.

I would think that North Korea's nuclear and missile program would be a part of the deal as would a peace treaty, normalization of relations, sanctions relief, and economic and energy assistance. But both sides could also be thinking bigger: Washington might even consider the implementation of human rights norms and the elimination of chemical and biological weapons. Pyongyang may try to include the withdrawal of US forces from the Korean Peninsula. We will have to wait and see.

Hani: Are you pessimistic or optimistic regarding both sides’ ability to reach a mutual agreement?

Aum: If North Korea sticks with some of the more extreme things it has demanded in the past, such as a withdrawal of US forces from the Korean Peninsula, an end to the US-ROK Alliance, or even US denuclearization, then I'm very pessimistic. But if North Korea only demands things like a peace treaty, economic assistance, and sanctions relief, than a deal is possible -- and even then, it's still difficult!

But I doubt these things would provide the security guarantee that North Korea is seeking. And even if the two sides reach this type of agreement, there will be many opportunities for it to fall apart due to issues we've seen in the past, like North Korea's verification of freezing and dismantling and the timely provision of assistance by the United States and other countries.

Ultimately, complete denuclearization is impossible to verify with 100 percent certainty given the lack of access to and intelligence about all of North Korea's nuclear, missile, and underground facilities. For an agreement to persist, it may require a "fig leaf" of compliance. This being said, there are things that we can observe and counteract, like proliferation of nuclear material and technology.

Hani: What is likely to be the process in advance of the summit going forward? Perhaps a working-level negotiation and then a visit to Pyongyang by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson?

Aum: There will probably be working-level meetings to address logistical, protocol, and policy details and maybe even a more senior level visit by Tillerson to Pyongyang or a North Korean official to Washington.

Hani: What are some potential trust-building steps that could be taken by both US-NK sides?

Aum: A release of detained American citizens would be helpful. Also, there are already reports that no US carrier strike group will participate in the upcoming military exercises, though the US military claims that this was already planned months ago. It would also help if the US-ROK combined forces muted any messaging of provocative operations, like decapitation exercises.

By Yi Yong-in, Washington correspondent

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories

Most viewed articles