| Per my understanding of game theory, games can be run for different amounts of time. Additional rounds just naturally balloon the possibility space. But your logic seems sound for "We play the NK game out over the next 30 years, making a decision every 5 years." They've made technological progress. They will continue to make technological progress. Therefore, the status quo for 30 years leads to an untenable situation. And the options then are worse than the options now. Also, NK's political system makes Iran look like Switzerland. I agree that the Chinese are going to determine in a large way how this plays out. Since the US government seems to publicly be expressing a hard line, the Chinese are going to have to pick a side. Which is probably what the assassination of Kim's half brother was all about: given that regime replacement with a moderate (who would agree to suspend development in exchange for guarantees of sovereignity) by the Chinese would have been the obvious first option. My expectation is that the Chinese are going to attempt regime change with the US's tacit agreement. The US, Japan, and China all don't lose if a Chinese proxy is allowed to continue to exist there. All other options end with a NK-controlled peninsula (unlikely, and unacceptable by China-suspicious regional powers) or a SK-controlled peninsula (unacceptable by China). Not to mention China could use an outlet for their bloated construction industry. "We will rebuild North Korea for humanitarian reasons!" would obviously play well. |
Nothing.