A third Trump-Kim Summit unlikely despite Moon’s efforts

With this in mind, Moon relayed his request to the White House but is yet to get any positive response. However, Steve Biegun, the deputy US Secretary of State, Washington’s point man on Pyongyang, opined that another Trump-Kim summit was unlikely before November in part because of coronavirus concern. Washington however remains open to engagement with Pyongyang and that it has not abandoned its ultimate goal to achieve the "final and complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula." Though Biegun is scheduled to visit Seoul this week to discuss this possibility with Moon tentatively scheduled on 7 July, at the moment however, this lofty optimism remains a will-the-wisp.

Since the last summit in Hanoi in February 2019 that failed, North Korea has gone back to the business of what it knows best – missiles firing to escalate tensions. In his New Year address, he threatened to unveil his “strategic weapon”, without clarifying what that meant. Since then North Korea conducted frequent missile tests and lobbed more threats and insults, mainly at its southern neighbour. Despite that, Trump has claimed more than one time that his personal relationship with Kim remains strong and that he is open for another summit, which is why probably Moon feels emboldened. But with presidential election in the US just months away, another summit does not look feasible. There is also no clarity if Kim would be ready for another summit any time soon.

Despite Moon’s consistent efforts, Kim remains upset with South that it failed to implement a series of 2018 agreements related to economic cooperation and reduce military tensions. But Kim overlooks the fact that sanctions have prevented South Korea from moving ahead with the deals. This has not deterred the left-leaning Moon to prioritise revitalising inter-Korean ties during the final two years of his presidential term. It seems that both for the US and North Korea, a third summit before November does not appear to be a priority as domestic priorities override foreign policy concerns.

Korean analysts are not too optimistic that a third summit could be a possibility. Trump faces huge domestic challenges as the US faces prolonged recession caused by the coronavirus pandemic and also racial tensions. The remainder of his first term is not enough for him to look away from domestic issues to foreign affairs. Trump just does not have  space to accommodate North Korea in his priorities. Even Kim might be prioritising that Trump might not be re-elected and would not like to invest much at this time on Trump. Therefore, keeping the present status quo until a new President is elected seems to be the realistic possibility. Even if Seoul grants a waiver of self-quarantine procedures upon entry, as mandated to all incoming foreign nationals at this time, to Biegun to undergo to facilitate a third summit, Moon’s wish is likely to remain an expression of what should be done, and not what could be done. No high ranking American official has visited Seoul since the time the coronavirus started and Biegun’s visit could also be a non-starter at this time. He might return empty-handed without making any breakthrough.        

In the meantime, Kim Jong-un is utilising this critical time to further consolidate his domestic position and secure his younger sister Kim Yo-jong’s position as his successor. This could be the reason why the regime called on its people to rally behind Kim Jong-un, marking the fourth anniversary of his rise to chairman of the State Affairs Commission, the highest leadership institution in North Korea. The post was established in 2016 as part of branding the communist regime as a legitimate member of the international community. As chairman, Kim undertook a series of diplomatic breakthroughs including the summits with Trump and Moon and therefore laying the roadmap for his sister for the future. The demolition of the inter-Korean liaison office and to reinstall anti-Seoul propaganda loudspeakers as part of its promised initial steps to strike against Seoul was a demonstration of Kim Jong-un’s objective to accord his sister greater legitimacy in the country’s power structure as she was in charge of all these activities. The intention was to project her as the country’s future leader. 

Voices within South Korea are not always sympathetic to Moon’s peace overtures towards North Korea. For example, Cho Tae-yong, a former South Korean nuclear envoy and deputy national security adviser feels that inter-Korean relations under the Moon administration were never going to work, as they were built on a misguided belief that North Korea would relinquish its nuclear arsenal for peace. In fact Moon himself alluded to this in 2018. Cho’s views are also similar to what former US national security adviser John Bolton noted in his now-leaked memoirs about Trump’s fragile diplomatic advances on the Korean issues. Noting that Pyongyang has not moved even an inch over the last two years on its stated promise to denuclearise, Cho observed: “As long as leader Kim (Jong-un) refuses to dismantle the nuclear arsenal, Washington-Pyongyang relations as well as inter-Korean ties would not see progress.”

Taking a critical view of Moon’s contentious military agreement of September 2018 with the North signed at the third inter-Korean summit, Cho observed that Pyongyang is ready to fire any minute on Seoul its long-range artillery, which is as much a threat to South Korea as its nuclear weapons. He further remarked: “Our unmanned reconnaissance drones however have become obsolete because of the no-fly zones enforced by the military accord.” He, therefore, recommended Moon to come out with fresh strategies.

There is a counter-argument on the meaning of the 2018 agreement, however. For example, Kim Byung-joo, former deputy commander of the ROK-US Combined Forces Command, says that South Korea should manage military tensions to prevent them from getting out of control. The Commander-turned-law maker who is a member of Parliamentary Defense Committee opines that “Returning to confrontation would further jeopardize the safety of our people here, and scuttle the hard-won momentum for dialogue the PyeongChang 2018 Winter Olympics ushered in”. Belonging to the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, Kim praised the 2018 military pact, saying that it could be instrumental in stopping accidental military encounters at the border from spiralling into armed clashes. 

Despite such optimism, an ever unpredictable Kim Jong-un announced pulling out from the pact and sent troops to restore border guard posts it had removed under the deal. Though either side avoided any visible military clash, North Korea resumed its old tactics and opened fire on 3 May on one of the South’s guard posts in the Demilitarised Zone, provoking retaliation from the South Korean side. Playing the role of peacemaker, the United Nations Command which handles DMZ affairs handled the incident deftly, saying that both sides had violated the armistice agreement and that the North’s action was probably accidental and unintentional. Seen objectively, the 2018 military accord helped to prevent additional confrontations from developing into a major crisis. Subsequent reports that Kim Jong-un punished the soldiers who opened fire by suspending him for six months and the commander received warning, if true, speaks of Kim Jong-un’s desire to avoid escalation at this time. Whether Kim’s action, again if true, was sincere not to escalate or to send a false message to confuse South Korea is difficult to say.

This leaves seeking answers to the question of whether the US and South Korea should resume their annual military drills confused and unclear. Pyongyang has always seen such drills as rehearsal for eventual invasion of the North and therefore always objected to it. As always there are some who argue for its resumption while others hold contrarian opinions. Taking a long-term view, it appears desirable that the joint drills need to be kept in abeyance at least till when a liberal President stays at the helm in Seoul, allowing him another shot to seek a long-term solution to the Korean imbroglio. This does not mean to suggest that a third Trump-Kim summit before November is a possibility.

---------------------

Pic Courtsey- Professor Rajaram Panda

Dr. Panda is former Senior Fellow, IDSA, New Delhi.