How Dangerous Is North Korea?

• Share

(5 of 5)

The U.S. has so far failed to devise a strategy to thwart Kim's ambitions before he realizes them. Many Korea watchers in Washington say the White House's rhetorically bellicose approach toward Pyongyang--underlined recently by Bush's declaration that "I loathe Kim Jong Il," made to the Washington Post's Bob Woodward--has heightened the regime's paranoia about a U.S. attack and accelerated its nuclear rush. Says Derek Mitchell, who worked on Asia policy in the Clinton Pentagon: "People talk about North Korea being crazy, but it's not. It's purely rational for a nation with no assets being threatened by the world's major power to develop insurance against attack."

Kim's moves also betray a mounting desperation. Some North Korean defectors believe Kim is trying to stockpile nukes before the U.S. can coordinate an attempt to topple him. Other defectors say that few North Koreans would rise up to defend the regime if it came under threat. Since taking over upon his father's death in 1994, Kim has overseen a collapsing economy and a famine that killed more than 2 million people. The government cultivates a cult of personality around Kim--citizens are told to treat him as a demigod, and pictures of father and son hang in every public building in Pyongyang--but popular disgruntlement is growing, as North Koreans returning from China's boomtowns dispel any notion that life is better inside the Hermit Kingdom.

There are even reports of rising dissatisfaction among the elite as the regime stumbles from crisis to crisis and corruption increases. A U.S. intelligence source says a Washington-led embargo against Pyongyang would take time to loosen the regime's grip on power, since Kim has already shown that he's "willing to let a lot of people die off." But eventually sanctions might take their toll, as even top government officials and members of the security services began to feel the pinch. "If the regime can no longer maintain the lifestyles of [those] people," says the source, "it could be in serious trouble."

A hard-line containment policy, though, would also erode Washington's moral credibility, putting the U.S. in the position of starving a country into submission. Even if the White House figures a way out of the current standoff without resorting to sanctions or military force, the U.S. may at some point have to face the prospect of outright confrontation. Administration officials concede that the White House may wind up engaging in a direct dialogue with the North Koreans, while never calling it that. But the U.S. will demand assurances that North Korea keep its commitments this time. If it doesn't, the White House may yet decide that, as with Baghdad, the only way to disarm the regime in Pyongyang is to change it. --Reported by James Carney and Mark Thompson/Washington, Donald Macintyre and Kim Yooseung/Seoul, Andrew Purvis/Vienna and Hiroko Tashiro/Tokyo