Warning Shots
We can also fire warning shots into the East Sea, also called the Sea of Japan. I think this is something Trump would like to do. We’d have to give plenty of notification in advance, and no matter what we say, North Korea will think about responding, but our many ships in the region will deter them because A) they may not be able to handle a counterretaliation and B) China will likely tell them it’s not quite time for all-out war. Therefore, it won’t go further than our warning shots. In other words, they shoot missiles into the water, we should missiles into the same water. We shouldn’t shoot missiles within Japan’s maritime border, but we can shoot at other places North Korea has launched missiles in that Sea.
This will strengthen our show of force and let the international community know that we are serious about this and that we ask for their support. This will allow our allies to, for example, disavow our actions BUT do something lighter that, compared to what they do now, is actually in stronger opposition to North Korea but not necessarily stronger support of the United States.
Cleaning Up Slavery
Earlier, I mentioned that there are many North Koreans working around the world. The money gained from this work is being sent directly to Kim Jong Un and his military. Therefore, another way to cut off North Korea is to deport these workers or shut down the operations where they work. Ideally, we should rehabilitate them and give them asylum, but other deals can be made that would still cut off funding to the North Korea’s nuclear program. It would also help unify the international community in a humanitarian effort to assist the victims of the Kim regime.
Sanctions on China
We have tried to sanction China. In fact, we succeeded in doing so without much of a problem, but they found a way around it anyway, sending telecommunications equipment to North Korea via their ZTE operation. China even pled guilty to that. They paid a settlement of $900MILLION.
We can certainly sanction them more. However, I have a better idea.One of the benefits of backing out of the Paris Accord is plausible deniability that the federal government would agree when certain states deciding to block the sale of Chinese products if there are environmental hazards stemming from China along the supply chain. Most countries would be in support of those states standing up for ethical sourcing and would be happy to use that action as a way to bash Trump and the U.S. federal government, while Trump obviously tells China he disagrees with those states. Additionally, rules have changed such that you can even sue another country. That changed when 9/11 victims pushed to sue Saudi Arabia. So, again, the federal government simply has to say that our system of government is such that these lawsuits don’t flow through the White House or the States Department and that both lawsuits and state-level sanctions are a separate issue.
One of the benefits of backing out of the Paris Accord is plausible deniability that the federal government would agree when certain states deciding to block the sale of Chinese products if there are environmental hazards stemming from China along the supply chain. Most countries would be in support of those states standing up for ethical sourcing and would be happy to use that action as a way to bash Trump and the U.S. federal government, while Trump obviously tells China he disagrees with those states. Additionally, rules have changed such that you can even sue another country. That changed when 9/11 victims pushed to sue Saudi Arabia. So, again, the federal government simply has to say that our system of government is such that these lawsuits don’t flow through the White House or the States Department and that both lawsuits and state-level sanctions are a separate issue.