Geostrategic Media Political Commentary, Analysis, Security, Defense
Esma Torani
If Kamala Harris secures the presidency in 2024, she will inherit a problem that has stymied every U.S. president for decades: North Korea’s unwavering commitment to its nuclear arsenal. Despite various strategies by her predecessors—ranging from diplomatic overtures to severe sanctions—North Korea remains more entrenched in its nuclear ambitions than ever before.
Each of the last four U.S. presidents approached the North Korean issue with a mix of hope and determination, believing they could either resolve or significantly mitigate the threat. Yet, each left office having passed the same unresolved challenge to their successors.
President George W. Bush, skeptical of the Clinton administration’s “Agreed Framework” with Pyongyang, dismantled it and pursued a sanctions regime through the U.N. Security Council, aiming to coerce North Korea into giving up its nuclear program. The result? A failure.
President Barack Obama initially sought engagement, willing to negotiate with adversaries willing to “unclench” their fists. The 2012 “Leap Day Deal,” which temporarily halted North Korea’s nuclear and missile activities in exchange for U.S. aid, quickly unraveled, leading Obama to abandon diplomacy in favor of increasing sanctions—a strategy that proved equally ineffective.
Donald Trump, despite his initial bluster, saw top-level diplomacy as his best chance to achieve a breakthrough. However, his unprecedented summits with Kim Jong-un ultimately yielded no tangible results. And President Joe Biden’s approach? Little to nothing of significance has changed.
Should Harris take office, she will face an even more complex and entrenched North Korean challenge. Not only has Pyongyang expanded its nuclear stockpile, but it also possesses advanced intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and a range of new launch platforms. Moreover, Kim Jong-un appears less interested in engaging with Washington than ever before, bolstered by stronger ties with Russia and China—two powers increasingly resistant to U.S. influence.
Unlike in 2017, when the U.N. Security Council was united in addressing North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, today’s geopolitical landscape is more fractured. North Korea has capitalized on Russia’s desperation in Ukraine, becoming a key supplier of munitions to Moscow, and has deepened its strategic partnership with Russia. This burgeoning alliance could also serve as leverage with China, prompting Beijing to increase its support for Pyongyang in exchange for regional stability.
Given these dynamics, Harris is likely to continue Biden’s policy of deterrence, doubling down on the U.S.-South Korea alliance and strengthening trilateral security ties with Japan. This would likely involve more high-profile military deployments, such as visits by U.S. nuclear-powered submarines to South Korean ports and strategic flyovers of the Korean Peninsula. The rhetoric will remain unchanged: denuclearization of North Korea as the ultimate goal.
But as the saying goes, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. U.S. policy towards North Korea has been stuck in this cycle of insanity for years. It’s time for a new approach—one that acknowledges the reality that the Kim regime will never willingly denuclearize.
Instead, the U.S. should focus on achievable goals, such as negotiating a suspension of North Korean nuclear and ICBM tests, re-entering the 2018 military de-escalation accord with South Korea, and working on risk-reduction measures to prevent conflict. This shift would require tailored economic and political concessions that align with what North Korea might actually accept, moving away from the all-or-nothing approach that has consistently failed.
If Harris truly wants to make progress on the North Korean issue, she must break free from the patterns of the past and pursue a strategy grounded in realism, not wishful thinking. The old approach has proven ineffective; a new one is long overdue.
