Insight: Questioning Trump's Denuclearization Commitment
Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un Signed the Peace Agreement in Korean Peninsula - Photo by AP

JAKARTA (TheInsiderStories) – President of the United States (US) Donald Trump announced the second meeting with North Korean Leader Kim Jong-Un at the end of February in Vietnam.

He said, the cessation of nuclear tests and the absence of North Korea’ missile launches in the past 15 months were a sign of progress in negotiations with Kim. Trump also praised himself who was called successful in avoiding a major war on the Korean Peninsula.

At the first meeting on June 2018 in Singapore, both leaders discussed the issue of denuclearization, although there was no concrete progress in the US effort to persuade the North Korean to halt its nuclear program.

We believed the issue of denuclearization is still an important agenda at the meeting followed Trump’ planned to to get out of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty agreement with Russia which began in 1987.

The denuclearization agreement should not be difficult to achieve if seen from North Korea’ interests. Economic factors, for an example, could be the main reason for Kim to release his nuclear program.

Well-known, that the United Nations (UN) sanctions continue to be imposed until North Korea’ total denuclearization is verified and cannot be cancelled. Since 2006, UN has imposed various economic sanctions on North Korea.

UN’ members are prohibited from exporting and importing military products and coal, copper, nickel, zinc and silver. Sanctions freeze individual assets and companies, search for cargo, ban investments, stop transferring money and close Pyongyang from the international financial system.

As a result of these sanctions, its estimated to cut one-third of North Korea’ annual export income of US$3 billion. While the cost of nuclear development demands a very high cost to the North Korean treasury.

Kim apparently realized that total denuclearization was a way to escape UN sanctions. That can be seen from the letter Kim sent to Trump before. It was reported, the contents of the letter, among others, confirmed North Korea’ commitment to carry out total denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula. So that the meeting will be discussed in concrete steps North Korea to release its nuclear weapons program.

On the other hand, we should question Trump’ commitment to a world without nuclear. With “American First” policy, Trump does not seem to care too much about international security stability.

Less denuclearization ambitions echoed so far only prohibit developed countries from developing their nuclear power. Even international sanctions are often applied to countries there always have a potential to balance US security forces.

Trump’ regional ambitions can be seen from some of his controversial policies after becoming a US leader. In 2015, Trump decided the country to withdraw from Iran’ nuclear agreement signed by six countries such as United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany and Iran. Trump blatantly calls the agreement an agreement that is rotten and smelly.

Despite being criticized by the world and even US allies in Europe, Trump argued his decision to curb Iran’ nuclear ambitions. To that end, Trump also ordered a tightening of sanctions against Iran.

His ambition to make the US as the sole ruler of the world can also be seen from his decision to get out of the INF Treaty agreement with Russia. INF Treaty prohibits the ownership of 500-5,500 kilometers of medium-range missiles, both nuclear and conventional.

This decision shocked the world. Many countries condemn this policy because it threatens the global system of strategic stability. But Trump did not budge and even threatened to increase his nuclear arsenal to pressure Russia and China.

Therefore, Trump’ policy on nuclear is indeed questionable. With all of its decisions, how big is Trump and US commitment to create a world without nucleus? As a superpower, will the US commit to maintaining the stability of global security, or just thinking about its national interests?

Written by Lexy Nantu, Email: