The risks of a military conflict with North Korea is growing day by day. Not talking has not slowed North Korea’s advance, and sanctions alone will not achieve the desired result.
It is necessary to be clear that the United States will retaliate if North Korea provokes an attack on the United States or its allies, but containment and deterrence remain preferable to an unacceptably costly military intervention.
There’s no reason the United States cannot pursue a diplomatic track while at the same time deterring, defending, and containing the North Korean nuclear threat to America and its allies.
Kim Jong Un is likely to view President Trump much like his predecessors—as a president who doesn’t like North Korea’s nuclear capabilities but with few realistic options for stopping it.
To prepare for future nuclear crises that will affect Europe, the next German government must double down on its role of building bridges in the nuclear realm.
Christopher Ford, special assistant to the president and NSC senior director for WMD and counterproliferation, delivered remarks regarding the U.S. position on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
North Korea’s motivations for pursuing nuclear capabilities have changed over time, but are rooted in a sense of existential threats coming from outside the regime.
The North Korean nuclear crisis is far from over, and foreclosing escalation pathways is in the best interests of the United States, its allies, and Pyongyang.
Tensions continue to mount between the U.S. and North Korea, prompting questions on the deterrence relationship and the reliability of North Korea's nuclear capabilities.
As North Korea makes steady progress in its nuclear program, the United States must continue to strive for stability in the Korean peninsula.