The idea that nothing is justified until we can prove with a court-level of clarity that a country has WMD is proven to--again--be a ridiculous standard by our experience with North Korea that may have blown past that "imminent" threshold with nukes:
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said on Tuesday it would not be easy for reclusive North Korea to destroy its nuclear arsenal quickly, even if wanted to, given its weapons programs were so developed.
Sadly--and predictably--we were unable to determine with enough clarity to persuade leftists that North Korea was on the cusp of nuclear weapons and so justifying a preemptive strike campaign during the Obama administration.
And yet somehow North Korea blew threw that stage and now has so much of a nuclear weapons industry and arsenal that dismantling it will take a lot of time.
So if North Korea agrees to give up nukes, I guess we need to go through with inspections and international scrutiny to complete disarmament with Kim Jong-Un just as we did with Saddam and Assad (and as we are foolishly trying again with Iran). Wonderful. Which is the only reason North Korea might sign an agreement to give up nukes. North Korea could believe that like Syria (and Iran) they can play the system, and unlike Iraq avoid conventional war consequences.
Have a super sparkly day.
UPDATE: North Korea tested an ICBM that demonstrated their ability to fire an object if not their ability to make a warhead capable of surviving reentry and detonating:
Wednesday's test of what the North called a new ICBM capable of hitting the entire U.S. mainland was, like all the others, calibrated to both convey defiance and boast of a dramatically improving military capability to Washington.
Yet from other sources I hear that the test doesn't demonstrate reentry survival technology needed for an actual nuclear weapon.
But I think the author's speculation that North Korea may be ready to "declare victory" and stop further work on nuclear-armed ICBMs is a dangerous fantasy:
The North, some speculate, may announce that since it now considers itself a nuclear power equal to the United States, it can put more effort into Kim's other priority of trying to fix one of the world's worst economies.
In short, could the end be near for North Korea's years of headlong, provocative nuclear development?
Even if North Korea does that, so what? We're to trust them?
We're to believe that North Korea won't hand off the job of perfecting the reentry survival problem to their Iranian partner which pushed back international scrutiny with that farcical 2015 Obama-Kerry-Lavrov nuclear deal?
Iran continues to test ballistic missiles to carry nuclear warheads one day and denies that they are violating any agreements to do so. It makes sense for this rump Axis of Evil to trade places on this step to allow the heat on North Korea to dissipate before America leads an attack campaign.
We don't have a North Korea problem. And we don't have an Iran problem. We have a North Korea-Iran problem.
UPDATE: Here we go!
North Korea only needs to perfect a nuclear warhead that can survive re-entry into the atmosphere to have a credible nuclear threat against the U.S. As Michael Auslin, a fellow in contemporary Asia at the Hoover Institution, told me this week: "That's only a matter of time. It's a technical issue at this point. They are going to get it."
So it's time for a new approach: Give up. America should never "accept" North Korea as a nuclear weapon state. But it can end the pointless cycles of pressure and negotiation. The North Koreans have used all that posturing to buy time to perfect their nukes, and the Chinese have artfully used that dance to distract us from countering China's own predations.
Pity we missed that "imminent" window when every reasonable American on the left or right would support military action as a last resort; and the prized global test would be passed to get world support for American military action.
And yes, if this was a bilateral issue only, I'd be willing to discuss whether we can deter North Korea. I have a long history of being in favor of that. North Korea is not "crazy" and I've never believed that. Their rational isn't our rational, that's all.
But unless we can figure out how to stop dirt poor North Korea from selling nuclear weapons to Iran--which I have little confidence can be deterred meaningfully if those nutball rulers get nukes--accepting (and yes, not striking is "accepting" even if you don't like the word) North Korean nuclear status risks Iran getting nukes.
So the only possible way to accept North Korea as a nuclear state (and that acceptance has to include accepting potential targets of North Korea going nuclear to deter North Korea and not rely on our extended deterrrence) is to overthrow the mullah regime in Iran and get a state that either doesn't want nukes or is no more of a threat to the world than France is with nuclear weapons.
Have a super sparkly day.
