Video Interview: Crisis in Korea and the next Secretary of the Army

May 8, 2017 Topic: Security Region: Asia Blog Brand: The Skeptics Tags: North KoreaPyongyangSecretary Of The ArmyAbrams Tank

Video Interview: Crisis in Korea and the next Secretary of the Army

What is next for North Korea and the U.S. Army?

Editor's Note: In our latest Facebook Live interview (please like our Facebook page to see more of these events) Harry Kazianis, Director of Defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, sat down with Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis (Ret.), a senior fellow at Defense Priorities, to discuss the ongoing crisis in Korea and the future of the U.S. Army.

Daniel Davis recently wrote an article on the lessons Donald Trump could gleam from Dwight D. Eisenhower, especially in how Eisenhower was tough on China and North Korea. An excerpt of the article can be found below:

Former president Dwight D. “Ike” Eisenhower was the supreme commander of Allied forces during World War II and he intimately knew the brutal, devastating nature of all-out war. Ike was a believer in maintaining overpowering military strength—including a stated willingness to use nuclear weapons—but more importantly, he was a strong advocate for peace and diplomacy. Before it is too late, let us hope President Trump can learn from the policies of Eisenhower.

Since taking office, Trump and his senior advisors have advocated for the significant expansion of military power across the globe: more troops in AfghanistanIraq, SyriaLibyaSomaliaSudanPolandNorwayHungaryLithuaniaEstoniaRomania and elsewhere. The administration has increased support to Saudi troops in Yemen, including U.S. drone and airstrikes. At various times during its first hundred days, the administration has made threatening statements towards nuclear powers China and Russia. Now, the president and his senior advisors are dramatically expanding the war talk on North Korea, building up military power in the region and categorizing the threat in North Korea as “urgent.” There has been precious little evidence, however, of a commensurate emphasis on diplomacy and a desire for genuine peace.

Eisenhower signaled a get-tough stance towards both North Korea and China. He reportedly suggested that “he would ‘unleash’ the Nationalist Chinese forces on Taiwan against communist China,” and “use any force necessary (including the use of nuclear weapons) to bring the war to an end unless peace negotiations began to move forward.” But at a meeting of his National Security Council in April 1952, the president told his closest advisors, “We cannot tolerate the continuation of the Korean conflict,” and that he would seek a negotiated settlement. Senior administration and Republican officials strongly protested.

Both his secretary of defense and secretary of state stood in opposition to the president. Yet he would not budge. After his visit to Korea, he was convinced that the war was unwinnable at an affordable price and that diplomacy offered the best chance to end the war on terms favorable to the United States. Then South Korean president Syngman Rhee was livid when he found out Ike was not going to seek to defeat the Communists, and sought to derail the negotiations Ike had ordered with North Korea and China. Eisenhower remained firm in his position and, according to a 2009 New York Times observation, made a remarkable threat to President Rhee.

“If the South Korean government did not accept the armistice,” the article relates, President Eisenhower said “he would withdraw all American forces from the peninsula, discontinue military aid to the South Korean Army, and terminate all financial assistance. Rhee backed down.” The negotiations continued, and on July 27, 1953, an armistice was signed that ended the war in Korea, put a stop to major U.S. military casualties and greatly reduced tensions with China. The president’s party and advocates of the military instrument, however, were not satisfied with this positive outcome.

Image: Flickr/The U.S. Army.