The content of this article is written with authoritative sources, and the source and screenshots of the literature have been marked at the end of the article, please be aware.
In the first 20 years of the 21st century, the world witnessed how U.S. military power flexed its muscles on a global scale.
Their determination and strength were demonstrated by the Iraq War that raged in 2003 and the military intervention in Libya in 2011.
Both conflicts quickly rewrote the fate of the country, overthrowing long-time rulers and leaving a deep international political footprint.
In Northeast Asia, however, North Korea has consistently provoked the United States.
What is it that makes the United States slow to impose sanctions on North Korea? What exactly is the United States afraid of?
The Iraq War: The Beginning of Unilateral Military Action
In March 2003, the United States launched a military operation codenamed Operation Iraqi Freedom, which was not directly authorized by the United Nations Security Council.
United States President George W. Bush announced a military strike against Iraq on the grounds that Iraq possessed and continued to develop weapons of mass destruction and supported international terrorism.
Despite opposition from many countries in the international community, including France, Germany, and Russia, which hold veto power in the Security Council, the United States chose to bypass the United Nations and join Britain and several other allies in starting the war.
The first wave of attacks of the war was fierce and began with night air strikes by cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions.
The attacks were mainly aimed at government buildings and military targets in major cities such as Baghdad, with the aim of quickly destroying Saddam Hussein's command and control center.
U.S. and British ground forces then rapidly advanced into Iraqi territory, facing sporadic resistance from Iraqi forces.
Over the next few weeks, Iraq's defenses quickly collapsed due to the overwhelming technological and firepower superiority of the U.S. military, despite resistance from Iraq's regular army and special forces.
The U.S. military uses a plethora of high-tech weapon systems, such as drones, for reconnaissance and air strikes, while special forces carry out precision strikes on the ground.
The use of these high-tech tactics has greatly increased combat efficiency and shortened the duration of warfare, but it has also led to a large number of civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure.
The U.S. military presence in Iraq not only quickly overthrew Saddam's regime, but also forced the Iraqi army to declare defeat in about three weeks.
Despite the fact that the US military expressed satisfaction with the initial successes of the war, over time the situation did not turn as positively as expected.
Post-war Iraq was plunged into chaos, with violent clashes between various factions and religious groups.
Although the U.S. government initially claimed to have conclusive evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, they were not located after lengthy searches and investigations.
This result has seriously questioned the credibility of the United States in the international community, and has also intensified controversy and criticism of the legitimacy of the war at home and abroad.
The question of the legitimacy of the war and the fact that weapons of mass destruction have not been found have had a long-term impact on the international image and foreign policy of the United States.
The Libyan conflict: the involvement of the international community
In 2011, people in Libya's major cities began taking to the streets to demonstrate and demand political reform and greater freedom.
These protests quickly turned into a direct challenge to the long-ruling regime of Muammar Gaddafi.
As the protests escalated, the situation in Libya deteriorated rapidly, with armed clashes occurring in several cities.
The opposition not only took control of Benghazi, an important city in the east, but also established interim governments in several parts of the country.
In the face of increasing domestic pressure, the Gaddafi regime began to crack down on protesters, using heavy weapons, including air strikes, which drew widespread attention and condemnation from the international community.
Against this background, the United States and its Western allies began to push for action in the UN Security Council.
They successfully pushed for a resolution aimed at imposing a no-fly zone over Libya to stop the Gaddafi government from using fighter jets to bomb the population.
In addition, the UN Security Council resolution includes freezing the assets of Gaddafi and his cronies and referring the entire situation to the International Criminal Court, accusing the Gaddafi government of atrocities against the population.
At the end of March, NATO began military intervention in Libya with the authorization of the UN Security Council. NATO's actions are mainly focused on enforcing the no-fly zones and protecting civilians.
NATO warplanes began patrolling the skies over Libya against Libyan government forces trying to attack civilians.
This intervention directly weakened the military power of the Gaddafi regime, allowing the opposition to gradually regain control of more areas in the coming months.
The conflict escalated further, and by August, opposition forces had successfully entered and eventually taken control of the Libyan capital, Tripoli.
This action marked the de facto collapse of the Gaddafi regime.
In the days that followed, the opposition began to purge the city of the last few forces loyal to Gaddafi, while searching the city for Gaddafi and his family and cronies.
Finally, in October, Gaddafi and his son were shot dead by opposition forces as they tried to flee Libya.
This event put an end to Gaddafi's 42-year rule once and for all and marked a complete change of regime in Libya.
U.S. policy toward North Korea is cautious
Although the United States demonstrated its military strength and diplomatic determination by massively intervening militarily in Iraq and Libya at the beginning of the 21st century, the United States has been very cautious in its approach and tactics in dealing with North Korea.
Much of this caution stems from North Korea's unique historical background and geopolitical complexities.
The Korean War was one of the important events of the Cold War era. In this war, the US army fought fiercely with the Korean army and its allies, the Chinese People's Volunteers.
The U.S. and United Nations forces intervened to counter North Korea's southern invasion and try to end the war quickly.
But in the end, the war came to a stalemate, and the two sides engaged in a three-year tug-of-war near the dividing line between the north and south of the Korean Peninsula.
The U.S. military suffered significant human losses in the war, totaling more than 36,000 soldiers killed and more than 103,000 wounded, one of the deadliest battles in U.S. military history.
The Korean War is known in the United States as the "Forgotten War" because it had less influence in American history and public memory than World War II and the Vietnam War.
Because of the historical legacy of the Korean War and the strong military system that North Korea built after the war, the United States has been very cautious about its policy toward North Korea.
North Korea's nuclear weapons and military capabilities
Since the late 1990s, North Korea has been actively developing its own nuclear weapons program, and by 2006, North Korea had conducted its first overt nuclear test.
The test not only marked an important milestone for North Korea to become a nuclear-armed state, but also fundamentally changed its strategic position in the international arena.
North Korea's nuclear test was not an impulsive act, but part of its long-term strategic plan.
Since then, North Korea has continued to conduct several nuclear tests, each of which has demonstrated technological advancements and demonstrated its growing nuclear technology capabilities.
In addition to nuclear tests, North Korea has invested significant resources in the development of missile systems of various ranges.
These missile systems include short-range missiles, medium-range missiles, and long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), the latter of which have a range sufficient to threaten the continental United States.
Each successful or partially successful attempt to launch a North Korean missile has significantly enhanced its military deterrent, forcing the international community, especially the United States and its Asian allies, to reassess its security strategy in Northeast Asia.
North Korea, for example, has successfully tested several intercontinental ballistic missiles that are clearly designed to be able to carry nuclear warheads and strike long-range targets, including U.S. bases in the Pacific and even the U.S. mainland.
North Korea invests and tests these weapons systems not only to demonstrate its military capabilities, but also to gain a stronger position in diplomatic negotiations with the United States and its allies.
Each nuclear test or missile launch, despite condemnation from the United Nations Security Council and widespread criticism from the international community, has allowed North Korea to maintain a degree of control and voice in international politics.
This growing nuclear threat and missile capability make North Korea a non-negligible part of U.S. foreign and defense policy.
The United States and its allies, such as South Korea and Japan, have had to strengthen their own missile defense systems and military preparations in response to a possible nuclear attack from North Korea.
In addition, the United States must also take into account North Korea's military strategy in its regional security deployment, which includes deploying more advanced weapons systems in the Asia-Pacific region, increasing joint military exercises with allies, and taking diplomatic action if necessary to deter further North Korean weapons development.
Advances in North Korea's nuclear program pose a direct challenge to the security of the United States and its allies, forcing them to find a delicate balance between maintaining regional stability and preventing nuclear proliferation.
Geopolitical implications
North Korea's geographical location adds another layer of significance to its complexity on the international stage.
Located in the heart of Northeast Asia, the Korean Peninsula is bordered by Japan to the east, China to the west, and Russia to the north.
This means that any decision that involves North Korea is not only related to North Korea, but also to the security and territorial policies of neighboring powers.
Both China and Russia, as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, are highly concerned about the stability of the Korean Peninsula.
China, in particular, has been North Korea's most important economic and political ally, not only because of its geographical proximity, but also because of its deep historical ties with North Korea.
China's support for North Korea is driven in part by the need for stability on the peninsula and the avoidance of any scenario that could lead to the collapse of North Korea or even war, a situation that could force a large influx of refugees into China while creating instability close to China's borders.
Russia also attaches great importance to its relations with North Korea, which, despite fluctuations after the Cold War, have increased in recent years in the economic and security spheres.
Russia's strategic layout in Northeast Asia sees North Korea as an important pawn to prevent the United States and its allies from overextending their influence.
Therefore, Russia usually aligns itself with China in dealing with North Korea, supporting political and diplomatic means to solve the security problems of the Korean Peninsula rather than military ones.
In such an international environment, any military action taken by the United States against the DPRK must be carefully considered.
U.S. policymakers are well aware that any potential military intervention in North Korea could provoke strong opposition from China and Russia, and could even lead to a direct conflict with these two countries.
Under such circumstances, the United States must consider how to balance engagement with avoiding large-scale military conflict on a regional or global scale in its policy toward North Korea.
References: Li Qingsi, Zhang Tengjun. U.S.-North Korea policy and Sino-U.S.-China game under Asia-Pacific rebalancing[J].Northeast Asia Journal,2013(4):28-34.)