Embargo or military reaction? This is the crossroads facing the US administration after the new H-bomb test by the North Korean regime. After yesterday's meeting of the National Security Council, the American military policy control room, Defense Secretary James Mattis read a statement that leaves various options open: "We are not aiming for the total destruction of North Korea - he said - but we have the ability to defend ourselves and to defend our allies. We have numerous military options." The USA, continued Mattis, insists on the unity of the international community to obtain the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. The UN Security Council will meet urgently today.
THE DIPLOMATIC WAY
The options on the table are diverse. The first is to continue along the diplomatic route. South Korea is asking to completely isolate Pyongyang and the EU would like to tighten the economic sanctions already in force. The idea circulating in Washington is that of an embargo affecting any country doing business with North Korea, starting with China, with which 90 percent of Pyongyang's foreign trade is concentrated. A commercial retaliation would mean trying to force Beijing to discipline Kim Jong Un, rather than continue to support him with economic aid. Trump's electoral base would agree, but US multinationals would not. A tightening of relations with China would seriously damage their turnover.
THE MILITARY OPTIONS
Then there are the military options. These are also different. First of all, the US could opt for a containment action, which would mean equipping Seoul with a missile defense system. The next step could be to launch targeted raids, an area in which the United States can boast the most sophisticated technological equipment in the world, with submarine-launched Tomahawk missiles or stealth stealth aircraft capable of bombing very specific targets. The most extreme hypothesis is to hit targets of the North Korean nuclear program with high-penetrating bombs. However, this option would be a gamble, since it is not clear what the North Korean anti-aircraft response capacity is.
General Michael Hayden, former head of the National Security Agency, warns that "the military options are not impossible but they are all very bad". Senator Lindsay Graham, however, assures the support of the republican right in a possible attack: the preventive attack would be legitimate if it were a question of stopping Kim before he is able to strike the island of Guam (where 29% of the territory is occupied by US military bases) or the West Coast of the United States.
