February 12, 2018

Frustrations at the White House and the Pentagon

By Loren DeJonge Schulman and Julianne Smith

In early February, months-long tensions between the White House and the Pentagon over how to address North Korea spilled out into the public scene. As officials revealed to the New York Times, National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster had demanded that the Pentagon provide a menu of detailed military plans, including a “bloody nose” strike against North Korean nuclear facilities, in order to bring credibility to President Donald Trump’s threats. But the Pentagon, these officials noted, appeared reluctant to deliver on the request, seemingly worried that the White House lacked an appreciation of how quickly a military strike could escalate.

The reality is more nuanced. The Pentagon’s apparent refusal to deliver the White House’s desired military plans most likely derived from a number of factors unrelated to the Department of Defense’s feelings about the president or his foreign policy. In this case, the parameters likely set by the White House—low risk to U.S. forces, low risk to South Korea, low risk in provoking a North Korean response, but high damage to Pyongyang’s nuclear program or broader conventional force—may have simply been untenable. There is, after all, no effective surgical strike option for North Korea, no “bloody nose” that could reliably inflict determinative damage on military facilities without prompting devastating retaliation. The Pentagon always works more slowly than desired in the development of military plans, but ultimately cannot deliver on an impossible request—and is likely disinclined to offer less robust options. 

Read the full article in Foreign Affairs.

  • Reports
    • January 6, 2019
    The Financing of WMD Proliferation (JCE TEST)

    The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is a critical threat facing the international community. Numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) place b...

    By Jonathan Brewer

  • Commentary
    • The Hill
    • November 16, 2018
    Leverage the new US International Development Finance Corporation to compete with China

    The United States has a unique opportunity to up its game in the global economic competition with China. In early October, even as Democrats and Republicans in the Senate enga...

    By Daniel Kliman

  • Video
    • November 16, 2018
    On GPS: The future of US-China relations

    Former Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell breaks down the factions and relationships shaping US-China relations. View the full vide...

    By Kurt Campbell

  • Commentary
    • War on the Rocks
    • November 15, 2018
    Assessing America's Indo-Pacific Budget Shortfall

    Budgets are policy in Washington. Setting new trends in Pentagon and State Department funding is a tall order, so when they do emerge, they are the strongest indication of a g...

    By Eric Sayers

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia