Cancellation of US-South Korea military exercise: Will untangling the knot create a breakthrough?

Goodwill gesture

The United States and South Korea have decided to postpone joint winter air exercises to boost ongoing diplomatic efforts with North Korea. South Korean Defense Minister Jeong Kyeong-doo and his US counterpart Mark Esper made the announcement on the sidelines of the 6th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Defense Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM+) in Bangkok, Thailand, on November 17. Speaking at a press conference, US Defense Secretary Esper affirmed that this move is not a concession, but a goodwill effort "to give peace a chance".

US Defense Secretary Mark Esper and his South Korean counterpart announced the decision to postpone the exercise during a joint meeting in Thailand on November 17. Photo: Associated Press

Esper had previously left open the possibility of adjusting the upcoming military exercise schedule between the two countries based on conditions that are favorable to diplomatic efforts. Esper stressed that the US and South Korea remain flexible in providing ways to support diplomatic efforts with Pyongyang, so the two countries are not closing any doors that facilitate progress on the diplomatic front.

The US and South Korea have planned to conduct joint air force exercises later this month, dubbed the Combined Flight Training Event. This is a scaled-down version of the two countries' original winter exercises, called Vigilant Ace. However, North Korea has criticized the plans for the exercises, warning of a "greater threat" if the US goes ahead with the planned exercise.

The US and South Korea made this decision in the context of the possibility of resuming bilateral nuclear negotiations between the US and North Korea becoming increasingly dim after the summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un ended in Hanoi in February without any results. Since then, the two leaders met again at the border between the two Koreas in late June 2019 and a working-level meeting in Sweden last month, but did not achieve any results. In fact, Pyongyang has recently increased pressure on Washington to come up with an acceptable proposal by the end of this year, hoping to lift sanctions and get security guarantees in exchange for abandoning its nuclear program.

US and South Korean Air Forces during the Vigilant Ace 2017 exercise. Photo: Reuters

For its part, North Korea has also repeatedly urged the US to take action. On November 14, the North Korean Foreign Ministry called for direct dialogue with the US "anywhere and anytime" in response to Washington's new proposal for nuclear talks in December. Ambassador-at-large and top nuclear envoy Kim Myong-gil said the US State Department had sent Pyongyang a message suggesting that officials from both sides meet in December through a third country. Kim Myong-gil also warned that if the US does not come up with a fundamental solution to end its hostile policies toward Pyongyang, the issue of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula will not be resolved. According to Kim Myong-gil, Washington is not ready to give Pyongyang a satisfactory answer and its proposal for further talks is just to "buy time". North Korea has set a year-end deadline for the United States to come up with a realistic and acceptable deal.

Is it true that "haste makes waste"?

In fact, putting aside the tough statements of both sides, the US-North Korea nuclear negotiations are not as "dangerous" as they appear. The problem is that both sides need to make reasonable proposals and persevere with the plan to reach an agreement. Slow progress in recent times does not mean that the Donald Trump administration is no longer interested in the North Korean nuclear dossier. 2019 is almost over while the US is still struggling with too many problems, from the impeachment of President Donald Trump to the complicated US-China trade war. The time and enthusiasm of the current US administration for the North Korean topic are also significantly challenged. And that is what makes public opinion impatient. However, it is also necessary to see that both US President Donald Trump and South Korean leader Moon Jae-in want to negotiate to find a long-term solution for peace on the Korean Peninsula. Perhaps the North Korean leader also sees a higher chance of reaching an agreement with Mr. Donald Trump than with other US presidential candidates. The evidence is that the White House owner once fired National Security Advisor John Bolton, who had a very tough stance on North Korea.

South Korean TV news about North Korea's missile launch in October 2019. Photo: Reuters

Therefore, it is easy to see that North Korea's decision to set a deadline and continue to make tough statements about the US-South Korea joint military exercise is to increase its leverage and pressure the US to change its stance. Even short-range missile tests are part of this goal. In addition, considering the US presidential election next year, North Korea naturally understands that, in order to score points with US voters by resolving a world hot spot, Donald Trump can make quick concessions to reach a historic agreement with leader Kim Jong-un.

“Trump wants a foreign policy victory, and Kim Jong-un needs sanctions relief,” said Frank Aum, a longtime North Korea expert at the US Institute of Peace. The question is how bold each side is to reach a deal. President Trump may be satisfied with the status quo, with North Korea not conducting any nuclear tests or launching intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching US territory, but according to expert Aum, “Trump also does not want to wait for North Korea to conduct a more provocative action before taking stronger actions against Pyongyang.” And Trump also does not want his policy toward North Korea to fail before the US elections. That is the crux of the problem, requiring perseverance from all sides.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un met US President Donald Trump at the border between the two Koreas in late June. Photo: Reuters

In that light, it is argued: Ideally, the two leaders would agree to greater flexibility, after which the US and South Korea could signal to Pyongyang. The first option is for the two sides to accept a smaller deal, including some sanctions relief in exchange for closing North Korea's main nuclear facility in Yongbyon. The second option is for the two sides to reach a comprehensive agreement and then implement it in stages. But this option requires time and risks if negotiators fail to find common ground.

Meanwhile, Bruce Klingner, an expert on Korean affairs at the Heritage Foundation, said that since the second US-North Korea summit in Hanoi, the two sides have lacked working-level negotiations, a factor that can determine the success or failure of high-level negotiations. Therefore, the high priority now must be to restart low-level negotiations to find common ground on the list of concessions of both the US and South Korea.

The common point for all options must still be a diplomatic dialogue solution to resolve the nuclear deadlock on the Korean peninsula. The question now is how ready are both the US and North Korea for a mutually acceptable agreement.