Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / North Korea / Op-ed in The New York Times: The price of war with North Korea
North Korea, Asia

December 6, 2017

Op-ed in The New York Times: The price of war with North Korea

By Barry Posen

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
December 6, 2017
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—The New York Times today published an opinion editorial by Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science and Director of Security Studies Program at MIT and author of Restraint: A New Foundation for U.S. Grand Strategy. In this piece, Posen outlines the sacrifices the United States would have to make in order to deprive North Korea of its nuclear capabilities and missile systems. He concludes that the complexity, risks, and costs of preventive war against North Korea are too great—thus deterrence paired with diplomacy is the best available policy option.

The key problem for the United States is the likely possibility that North Korea has the missiles to deliver nuclear bombs to South Korea and Japan. If one of these weapons were to reach its target, an entire city would be annihilated.

And even if an American first strike knocked out North Korea’s nuclear capacity, millions of South Korean civilians, and American and South Korean soldiers, would be vulnerable to retaliation with conventional or chemical weapons. Pyongyang could devastate Seoul and kill tens of thousands of people.

North Korea may have as many as 250 mobile missile launchers, some of which could fire nuclear-tipped missiles. If some of these mobile units were dispersed at the time of an American attack, it’s unlikely that the United States could destroy all of them before one fires a missile.

An American attack that truly caught North Korea by surprise could minimize the effectiveness of a North Korean counterattack—but not eliminate the possibility. And surprise would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

The complexity, risks and costs of a military strike against North Korea are too high. A combination of diplomacy and deterrence, based on the already impressive strength of South Korean and United States conventional and nuclear forces, is a wise alternative.

Read the entire op-ed in The New York Times.

Author

Barry
Posen

Ford International Professor of Political Science, Security Studies Program

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

More on Asia

op-edAsia

The Trump administration cools off India-Pakistan conflict — for now

By Daniel DePetris

May 13, 2025

op-edChina, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power, Taiwan

China tariffs deal could backfire on Trump

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 12, 2025

op-edAsia, Air power, Nuclear weapons

Will India or Pakistan resort to the nuclear option?

By Rajan Menon

May 8, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power

The Pentagon Is Ignoring Its Own Strategy

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 7, 2025

ExplainerMiddle East, China, Europe and Eurasia

China can’t dominate the Middle East

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 5, 2025

In the mediaChina, Asia, Taiwan

Trump fires national security adviser, signaling new China line

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

May 2, 2025

Events on North Korea

See All Events
in-personNorth Korea, Asia, Deterrence, Diplomacy, Nuclear weapons

Past In-Person Event: Ending the North Korea standoff

March 5, 2018
in-personGrand strategy, Iran, North Korea, Nuclear weapons

Past In-Person Event: Managing nuclear proliferation crises

October 30, 2017

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved