Memorandum on US policy on relations with North Korea


TO: President Donald Trump
FROM: Matt Fitzgerald
DATE: March 4, 2018
SUBJECT: Memorandum on US policy on relations with North Korea
For years North Korea has isolated itself from the rest of the world. It is a small country with no real allies anywhere in the region. It is also a rouge state that has nuclear capabilities and has threaten numerous times to use them on the U.S. and allies. Presidents throughout the years have tried many different tactics to deal with the issue.
President Clinton’s Attempt
The Clinton administration attempted a “dovish” (Lohschelder 2016) approach in which resulted in an agreement in 1994 in which the nuclear powerplant, Yongbyon, was closed down and sanctions gradually phased out. In return for closing the powerplant down, the U.S. would give oil deliveries to North Korea and help build “a light water reactor for energy production.” however, due to the lack of follow-through, the agreement failed and the powerplant was reopened. 
President George W. Bush’s Attempt
               The second Bush administration took a completely different turn in their dealings on the issue. they took a more “hawkish” (Lohschelder 2016) approach, seeking to decrease not only their nuclear program but also their conventional weapons production. The Bush administration worked hard to diplomatically and economically isolate them, but in the end, the efforts to denuclearize North Korea failed due to underestimating the regimes stability as well as also dealing with the Iraq War.
President Obama’s Attempt
               The Obama administration had new strategy called “strategic patience” (Lohschelder 2016) meaning that the only way the U.S. would be open for negotiations is the complete denuclearization of North Korea. Another strategy was allowing China to exert their influence and pressure on North Korea which has ultimately failed due to the fear of pressuring them too much resulting in an unstable country on their border. North Korea did more successful bomb testing as a result which resulted in tougher sanctions imposed on by the UN Security Council.
Solution
               This administration should keep up the Obama administration’s “strategic patience” (Lohschelder 2016) strategy because it is “least bad, least costly way for the United States to deal with North Korea” (Lohschelder 2016). This strategy has not given anything away that could be irreversible and would not waste resources on fruitless talks or other actions. During the Obama administration, things never escalated too high and there was no threat of a nuclear attack from either party involved. The way this administration has handled North Korea so far has been contradictory at best and saber rattling at worst.
Works Cited
Lohschelder, Sarah. “Three Presidents Facing North Korea - A Review of U.S. Foreign Policy.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 27 Feb. 2016, www.huffingtonpost.com/young-professionals-in-foreign-policy/three-presidents-facing-n_b_9335546.html.

Comments

  1. UnknownMarch 8, 2018 at 8:19 AM

    I agree with your analysis on strategic patience, i believe that North Korea is viewed as a much greater threat than it actually is. In my opinion Kim Jong Un wants to possess nuclear weapons in order to be considered a powerful nation on the world stage. I believe that he has the intelligence to realize that starting a nuclear war would only lead to the disintegration of North Korea, and therefore his power. While I believe that denuclearizing North Korea is important in the long run, however, it does not have to happen over night. Attempting to force North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons through military force will only cause tensions between us and China and Russia. North Korean weapons are not an immediate threat and should not be treated as such. Therefore I strongly support your argument for strategic patience.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownMarch 9, 2018 at 1:35 PM

    I enjoyed reading your memorandum on United States foreign policy on relations with North Korea and I found your approach to be very interesting! I definitely agree with your argument that the United States should continue Obama’s foreign policy strategy of “strategic patience” because any kind of military force in North Korea would only escalate our tensions with them. Although I do strongly support your argument for the continuance of strategic patience, I am unsure as to whether or not President Trump would favor this foreign policy outlook regarding North Korea. It seems as though President Trump might push for a more aggressive approach to the denuclearization of North Korea. If President Trump were to actually read your memorandum, do you think he would follow your advice?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

U.S Foreign Policy towards Middle East

After World War II, the overriding concern of American foreign policy was finding a new way to check Soviet expansion and influence throughout the world. The Middle East, specifically, was a vulnerable target for the U.S. and Soviet Union after British and French colonialism. That said, US foreign policy towards the Middle East was not completely linear during the past century. Instead, it can be divided into two periods — during the Cold War and after the Cold War. During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was mostly a reaction to Soviet strength, position, and action. [1] After the Cold War, the Middle East — being considered as part of the Third World, was to be “exploited” for the needs of the industrial societies and to “fulfill its major function as a source of raw materials and a market.”[2] In other words, peace and oil have been the main focus of US foreign policy in the Middle East after the Cold War.  During the Cold War, the Soviet goal was to achieve strategic pari...
Read more

Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement

TO: President Donald Trump FROM: Matt Fitzgerald DATE: April 29, 2018 SUBJECT: Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement Introduction Climate change has been increasingly affecting Earth ever since the industrial revolution. Earth has been becoming warmer every month. Sea levels have been rising, and coastlines have been disappearing. Something needs to be done so that the effects of climate change do not become permanent. There have been many failed global attempts to decrease our carbon emissions, and many countries including the three largest polluters, the U.S., China, and India are reluctant to do so. Only one attempt looks promising to help start the trend towards using green energy. The Paris Accords might not be perfect, but it is a good start to the world using green energy. Option 1 Pulling out of the Accords will be a reckless long-term decision. The U.S. needs to be the leader of the free world. The U.S. is the largest polluter in terms of population. W...
Read more

Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea

Memorandum Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea To: President Donald Trump CC: Professor Shirk From: Foreign Policy Analyst, Victoria Hassan Subject: The North Korean Nuclear Arsenal Dilemma Issue: If not already, North Korea is very close to achieving nuclear armed international ballistic missile capability that is capable of reaching the United States and other regions of North America. Even to experts, North Korea’s motive and intentions for building up a nuclear arsenal have been quite unclear and unpredictable. Recently, there has been much debate as to whether or not the United States should take military action regarding North Korea’s reluctance to denuclearize the entire Korean Peninsula. However, U.S. military action and complete U.S.  inaction are not the only options for dealing with North Korea. Option 1: Trump-Kim Summit Peaceful Negotiations Avoiding military action and possibly the use of nuclear weapons agai...
Read more