2018 Preview: History shows that diplomacy is the only weapon that will help solve the problem of North Korea

Military rhetoric is not having an effect, so the US needs to formulate a clearer strategy

Kim Jong-un has so far shown no signs of reducing his country's nuclear programme (Getty)

How do you solve a problem like North Korea? That is the question that US President Donald Trump and his administration has been wrestling with for most of 2017.

Through a mixture of the increase in missile tests by Pyongyang as it continues its march towards nuclear weaponisation, and a similar lift in the intensity of the rhetoric coming out of Washington, a sensible resolution appears to have gotten et further away over the past 12 months. With places like Hawaii again beginning to test their nuclear missile warning systems – for the first time since the Cold War – it is easy to believe that a full-blown crisis will be difficult to avert.

To avoid that scenario moving into 2018, it is up to Mr Trump and his advisers to set a clear course that others can follow. As with many other aspects of the Trump administration, decisions have becomes muddied, with allies having had to cope with two lines of thought – one emanating from Mr Trump’s fingertips and one from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the State Department.

While the constant chorus of those in Washington is that they are all “on the same page”, there have been multiple occasions where that just hasn’t seemed true. The State Department has had to defend improvised moves Mr Trump has made, such as going off-script in threatening to bring “fire and fury” down on North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, while Mr Tillerson has been chastised for making moves of his own.

One recent example in mid-December was Mr Tillerson having said that the US “has no preconditions” to starting talks with North Korea, only for White House officials to brief that that was not the case the all. Three days later, Mr Tillerson was back out in public and suggesting that Pyongyang would have to “work its back” to the negotiating table by halting its missile tests for a prolonged period. A position more in line with the White House.

Mr Trump himself has been mostly consistent in his position: threats of military action if North Korea doesn’t halt its provocations and no return to the negotiations until Mr Kim heeds his words. However, it is the way that position is expressed – another constant issue for the US President – that has set allies like South Korea and Japan on edge.

Answering questions in the wake of each North Korea missile test with “we’ll see what happens” – one of his favourite non-committal answers – or “we’ll take care of it” are not what others want to hear. While a pragmatist like Mr Trump wants to keep options open, including military action, vague statements open the door to miscommunication. While he has had some personal success on a visit to the region in rallying those to his cause, officials in the United Nations have often sounded exasperated as they repeatedly urge caution and a return to negotiations.

It is the fact that Washington has often matched the hackneyed “death to the enemy” rhetoric that has been heard out of Pyongyang for decades that seems most troubling to many critics of the administration. Creating a villain easy to hate is exactly what Mr Kim requires of Mr Trump. Whatever the state of his own famine-ridden lands and suppressed people, the cult of Supreme Leader needs a fully formed enemy so that Mr Kim can portray himself as the land’s saviour. While the threat of military action has no doubt caught Mr Kim’s attention, such rhetoric alone is unlikely to rein him in.

So, we return to diplomacy, the route Mr Trump has said is his preferred option. A recent report by Lisa Collins – a fellow at the Centre for Strategic International Studies – on 25 years of diplomacy by the US with North Korea suggests that provocations from Pyongyang have slowed during times the country has been invited to the negotiating table.

Yes, previous attempts have ultimately failed and a reduction in provocations does not indicate that the North has halted its nuclear ambitions during those periods but it at least shows a lack of aggression that would allow some space for air in a situation that often seems breathlessly heading for possible nuclear war.

What will bring that return to any negotiations – direct or indirect – will likely be pressure. Mr Trump has backed the strongest UN sanctions ever imposed on North Korea, having previously suggested that such moves don’t work. He has also rightly turned his attention to China and Russia to being more pressure to bear on Pyongyang.

However, the situation with China and Russia is complicated. Mr Trump lambasted Beijing for its trade practices with the US during his presidential campaign. He called China out for not doing enough to bring Pyongyang to heel despite being its biggest trading partner.

Mr Trump seemingly buried any ill-will during a very chummy visit with China’s President Xi Jinping as part of his Asia tour, having put a lot of stock in his brand of personal diplomacy. That visit appears to have gifted Beijing some slack, with China having also signed up to the UN sanctions. However, Washington has asked Mr Xi to cut off oil exports to North Korea – one of few diplomatic moves that could help force Pyongyang back towards discussions.

At the moment there seems little chance of such a move, particularly as the situation with North Korea is distracting from what was the biggest issue in the region during the end of former President Barack Obama’s tenure – the South China Sea. Beijing’s claims swathes of the territory are disputed by other countries. That has not stopped China building on islands in the area as it looks to expand its naval and air capabilities. While officially the US decries any moves Beijing makes in the South China Sea, the issue will never be top of the agenda while China is allowing Pyongyang to quietly go about its business.

As for Russia, it shares a lot of the same negotiating positions with Beijing. It considers the US and South Korea’s joint military exercises to be provocation against North Korea and has suggested they cease in order to bring Pyongyang to the table. The US sees the drills as non-negotiable and a key part of its strategy against the regime of Mr Kim.

Mr Trump recently turned his attention from Beijing to Moscow, claiming that China is now being more helpful while Russia is not. For its part, Russia has said that it is ready to bring North Korea to the negotiating table but the US needs to show willingness. It is unlikely that Russia, and President Vladimir Putin, who delights in taunting the US, will agree to much Washington could put forward even if it was willing to compromise.

Diplomacy looks like the only viable option in 2018, will little rhetorical space for more threats from either Pyongyang or Mr Trump. The UN appears united in agreement that action is required, which is a start. The speed at which North Korea tests missiles suggests that Pyongyang’s nuclear programme is currently moving is another spur.

The one thing that unites all parties dealing with North Korea is that nobody wants a a conflict involving nuclear arms – so the odds are on movement on the diplomatic front this year, as the alternative is much worse.