The Trump Administration is looking for a chance to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un during President Donald Trump’s visit to South Korea for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum, according to CNN. However, a summit between Trump and Kim that focuses on key issues like denuclearization and human rights looks less likely than ever.
Kim has said he’s open to meeting President Trump again if denuclearization, the president’s priority issue, isn’t part of the discussion. And U.S. leverage in securing a potential summit has changed since Trump’s first term, as Kim can secure economic and political backing from his authoritarian allies like Russia and China without making concessions to the United States.
Rapidly changing geopolitics, driven by the efforts of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea (CRINK) to challenge the international order, create new opportunities for Kim. The prospect of denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula is an even more distant reality than during the Singapore and Hanoi summits of 2018 and 2019. So, unfortunately, is the idea of calling North Korea to account for a growing catalog of human rights abuses.
Historically, Pyongyang has asked for diplomatic normalization with the United States and sanctions relief in return for denuclearization. But Kim now wants to secure these objectives through North Korea’s ties with Beijing and Moscow without giving up its nuclear weapons. Kim also doesn’t want to talk about another issue that has long been important to the West – Pyongyang’s human rights record.
The United States traditionally made human rights a condition for normalizing relations with the Hermit Kingdom, especially during President George W. Bush’s Administration, which enacted the North Korean Human Rights Act, creating a pathway for North Korean escapees to start a new life of freedom in the United States.
Trump changed that approach at his previous summits with Kim, where he strictly focused on nuclear weapons.
But pressuring Pyongyang on human rights is a strategic imperative because Kim maintains his grip on power through repression, fear, and coercion. American efforts to improve the human condition in North Korea would ultimately weaken the regime by supporting the North Korean people.
Doing so would be morally right, empower the North Korean people, and demonstrate U.S. global leadership. It would also send a message to other authoritarian powers that the United States remains a champion of freedom. Ignoring human rights damages Washington’s credibility as a global actor.
The North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act (NKSPEA) and Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) are U.S. laws stipulating that sanctions on North Korea can only be lifted if improvements in human rights are verified. So, even if Trump someday wants to make a deal with Pyongyang, lifting sanctions would require action from Congress. Failure to follow those laws would also undermine other legislative tools, like the Global Magnitsky Act, that might be used against Kim and other dictators.
It also sends a terrible message to American allies and adversaries that the United States is unwilling to follow its own laws or protect democratic values.
Putting these challenges aside, there is no reason for Trump to resume negotiations, particularly given the most recent belligerent tone from North Korea. At best, renewed negotiations could result in a freeze agreement, one in which Kim keeps his nuclear arsenal but pledges not to expand it.
But even a deal like this would be unwise. It would signal to other authoritarian regimes that the United States isn’t serious about Nonproliferation Treaties (NPT) and open the door for other dictators with nuclear ambitions.
Still, Kim has little incentive to resume dialogue with Washington since both China and Russia are motivated to provide their political and economic support to Kim. Growing tensions between the United States and China have increased North Korea’s value to Beijing more so than in the past. At the same time, Russian leader Vladimir Putin and Kim have strengthened their alliance.
Kim has become a key figure in the CRINK coalition and uses this international spotlight to bolster his legitimacy at home.
In September, he visited China for the first time since 2019 for 80th anniversary celebrations of China’s victory over Japan. He received VIP treatment, standing alongside Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Russia’s Putin, and more than two dozen other heads of state. Xi conferred a measure of legitimacy on Kim by elevating him as a strategic partner while providing economic backing.
Russia, meanwhile, is providing the North Korean regime with access to hard currency and military technology in exchange for troops and munitions to support Putin’s unjust war in Ukraine. Reports indicate that Kim has supplied Putin with as many as 15,000 soldiers, along with artillery shells, missiles, and other ammunition. In fact, Pyongyang may now provide up to 40% of Russia’s ammunition.
In this context, the regime’s past attempts to normalize relations with the United States or seek global recognition as a “normal state” are now less attractive, and perhaps even counterproductive.
And other dictators are being emboldened to coordinate against the United States and undermine the current international order.
The George W. Bush Institute examined the challenges posed by CRINK and offered the administration and Congress ideas for responding to them. This includes a focus on human rights as part of an integrated strategy to address the comprehensive challenges these regimes pose using strategic tools like NKSPEA, CAATSA, and others that penalize human rights abusers.
When the United States compromises on human rights in negotiations with dictators like Kim, it loses its competitive edge in the strategic contest between democracy and authoritarianism. Instead, the administration should strengthen America’s democratic alliances around the vision of integrating human rights and security in the fight against CRINK and empower democratic advocates from these authoritarian countries to unite around their shared struggle for freedom.
Ultimately, the threat posed by tyrants like Kim will remain until they are made accountable to their people. Making human rights an important part of U.S. foreign policy alongside security signals to allies and adversaries alike that the United States will not compromise its values for quick gains.
Kim has fewer incentives than ever to cooperate with the United States, and the administration shouldn’t weaken the American stance on denuclearization and human rights. That will reinforce the United States’ status as a global power capable of leading against the threats posed by CRINK.
