There will be no great clamor for anyone receiving a Nobel for peace, having seen what could possibly go wrong with Myanmar and the reputation of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, just to review. The mess in Myanmar, where nukes are not and won't ever be, is fully as complicated and intractable as NK.
Trump, simpleton that he is, is probably the least relevant player here because his knowledge of Korea and its history is as vacant as that of Myanmar, which he could assuredly not locate on a map with labels. Trump also lacks the discipline and intelligence required to read and comprehend the entire body of a comprhensive agreement between all the parties; it's certain to exceed one page.
If a good solution were to exist, it would cease to be anything as soon as it became public; too many powerful players (China for example) have a huge stake in a continuing stalemate. Our correspondent is probably correct in relying now on great skepticism with a dose of openmindedness. It's really all we have.
12
Someone tap me on the shoulder when Kim agrees to independent inspection and observation of the destruction of the first nuclear bomb.
In the meantime, China continues it’s steady incursion into the international waters between the mainland and Taiwan. Tell me what Trump is doing about that.
The reality is that Trump’s presidency is the greatest threat to peace and stability in any and every region on the planet and that every zone of conflict has become more unstable on his watch.
I’m certain that Xi and Kim and Putin are doing everything they can think of to ensure Trump gets a second term, because he is giving them everything they want - Kim especially.
In two years America will have hundreds of thousands of troops confronting Iran on the borders of Iraq and Afghanistan, Kim will have all his nukes and China will have 3 aircraft carriers at sea.
Trump’s stupidity is only matched by those people who think having a Russian puppet in the White House is likely to generate great outcomes for the free world.
13
From another angle. Have been reading other boards.
North Korea saw what happened to Libya and Iraq (which did not have a nuclear weapons operation in the first place) also presently the try at Iran in rearranging that agreement.
North Korea understands countries with the nuclear weapon do not get invaded.
So, denuclearizing is off the table.
Reunification visits by families might be?
5
'Common culture'?
Sorry, have not read too many stories of South Koreans taking the chance at getting shot running over the border to get to North Korea. And the part about remove China from the equation?
Never remove China from part of the equation in that part of the world.
4
Trump wasn't lying when he said he was a "very stable genius." Obama actually did the hard work of negotiating an agreement to get Iran to put aside its nuclear weapons program, which most observers say is working, and Trump and his cronies have convinced half of America that it's the worst deal in the history of diplomacy. Meanwhile Trump may or may not have caused Kim Jong-un to step over a bump in the road dividing North and South Korea and half of America is demanding Trump receive a Nobel Peace Prize.
Say what you want about Trump, he really is brilliant at belittling others' hard work while getting himself endless credit and applause for doing nothing at all.
18
Gee Nicolas, maybe confronting a dictator is working?
Not the previous 16 years of total neglect.
4
Excellent tutorial for us, thank you @NickKristof
3
Relieving the tension on the Korean Peninsula would also allow Trump and his National security team to ramp up the rhetoric and focus 100% on Iran and the Middle East - the area of the world that causes their greatest paranoia.
2
Nobel Peace Prize for Trump.
4
If Kim Jung-un wants to retain power for the remainder of his life, the NK's economy must improve. His people have sacrificed likely losing infants and elderly parents to starvation. Such sacrifice can only continue so long before Kim's people rebel (whether they leave the country or rise up against him). Perhaps Kim would agree to a "deal" like Iran's (horror of horrors for the Trump admin.!) where they stop making nuclear material and allow inspection. But, Kim is not going to give up the weapons he has. They are security for dealing with an unpredictable world leader such as Trump. Not even France or Germany, let alone Iran know whether Trump will agree to continue the Iran nuclear agreement. Why would Kim totally denuclearize with a man as vain and unreliable and undependable as Trump?
8
I hope Mr. Kristoff is right, but I have my doubts. President Trump genuinely believes that he is winning against North Korea and is in no mood for face saving compromises. My hunch is that North Korea has to agree to some very concrete terms for denuclearization if the summit is to succeed. The question is what will they want in return. I think they will ask for the gradual removal of American troops from South Korea --something that they have always wanted. I wonder if President Trump would agree to that in order to secure a win on denuclearization?
1
The status quo is preferable to all, and the only reason alter it would be to have "quasi-access" and opening as a low-cost manufacturing center, a la Myanmar recently. Kim will profit, global corporations will profit, and the (North) Korean people will be worse off.
Is a terrible life in North Korea, with nothing that looks like normal human rights, a reasonable price to pay to prevent a major war in Asia? The world seems willing to make that trade off in Syria.
Kim Jong-un is not stupid. He understands and knows what the US has done all over the world - basically everything that Kim is accused of. If we are skeptical of Kim, so is he of us. He has suddenly extended his hand in diplomacy because his country is hurting with all the sanctions. But he is not going to barter his only strength without getting a lot in return. The US has a history of reneging on promises and conditions, Iran being the latest. If the US demands Kim may just dispose. His denuclearization and allowing American presence in the Korean peninsula are concessions only to bring South Korea and the US to the table, nothing more, nothing less. He is no Saddam, Rouhani nor Gaddafi. He has only one trump card and wily as he is he will not let go of it. The only concession from him would be he will not use his nuclear capability or blow his neighbors - with the caveat that he is not threatened by sanctions or war. The sooner the US recognizes and understands Kim, the better it'll be for our allies in this region. The Middle East scenario will not be repeated. All the moral and mighty reasons I am reading for the US to get involved is hypocritical. Our involvement has only brought catastrophe and destruction. Kim will set the agenda and demands for his people. He will free the three Americans, a small price to pay. He is playing for higher stakes. He will annihilate his neighbors before he himself is destroyed!!
1
" Mr. Pompeo told ABC News in a broadcast on Sunday that the Trump administration’s objective is “complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization” with North Korea, and that Mr. Kim was prepared to “lay out a map that would help us achieve” denuclearization."
So this is the plan that Trump will pursue and if Kim balks Trump will " respectfully" walk out. Sounds like an ultimatum to me, especially since the hawkish views of Pompeo and Bolton are well known.
Trump, Pompeo and Bolton want regime change in N. Korea and Kim is well aware of this goal. He understands that the US cannot be trusted and that belief will be re-enforced when Trump abrogates the JCPOA.
What is amazing is people who should know better are falling for Trump's con. The US is spoiling for a fight and what better way of getting it than by making demands that Kim will not accept.
6
Personally, I'd like to see Trump stay in a room with Kim negotiating a deal until 2020. At least with the two of them together neither will use their button. After 2020, Trump won't have a button and we can all sleep better.
5
It is dangerous to give any credit to Trump here -- belligerent and bellicose, grandstanding and petulant. If there is any real progress (remains to be seen), and I hope so, it is likely happening for reasons unrelated to Trump (stifled economy, loss of nuclear facilities, chance to get sanctions lifted).
6
You say the U.S. won't give up on South Korea. But I think Trump would. What does he care about South Korea? Why should we have our soldiers there? (He'd say). I wouldn't be surprised if he offers to quickly withdraw our troops as part of a deal.
7
If you credit Trump's bluster and threats for the peaceful encounter between the leaders of North and South Korea, then why not credit Kim Jung-un's bluster and threats as well?
North Korea always regarded the presence of America's military forces in the South as a threat, underscored by the death and devastation inflicted on them during the Korean War. Denuclearization of the of the entire Korean peninsula sounds great. Does the United States have nuclear weapons, both tactical and strategic under its control in South Korea? Would it be willing to remove them?
Kim may have manipulated Trump into a corner. How could the United States justify maintaining a nuclear arsenal in South Korea if North Korea gave up its nuclear weapons?
4
So the deal is signed and Trump wins. That's the scenario that will be presented. And then Trump will start with Twitter "He's a loser" and "Look how he caved." And then make the regime collapse and force the Chinese to clean up the mess. Look how well that's worked in other parts of the world. You know the guy who walks through the grocery store knocking jars from the shelves to the floor as he goes through the aisles. Grabs his steak and heads out the door. Not paying for it. The other customers appalled. Except for a few here and then that wish they could bring themselves to do it too.
2
Nixon acted the part of crazy man in the car playing chicken with Vietnam and in the process extended the Vietnam way by 4 years and countless lives.
Trump plays crazy man chicken and in the process scares China so much they finally put meaningful ( greater than U.N. stated) sanctions on North Korea and then luck of luck North Korea’s nuclear test site collapses and is a rendered useless and a possible environmental disaster.
Let North Korea have some game saving face to end this stalemate and maybe they will walk away from an expensive nuclear program.
And when talking human rights the US should have the courage to compare North Korea’s political prisons with their own “Prisons for Profit” that incarcerate In similar conditions Economic refugees
1
Kim Jong-un is a ‘smart cookie’ and Trump is a reality show character. To suggest that he personally had any strategy concerning the goal of denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula is laughable. Kim, just like Abe, the Saudis, and Macron has Trump’s number; they know he can be manipulated, for better or worse, by emotion because it’s all just sensational theater in his twisted mind. The cold, conventional, diplomatic reasoning of Merkel doesn’t cut any ice with this reality show President; he wants tantrums, fist pounding, insane threats and apologetic kisses on the cheek. Feed his ego and you may change the course of history. Never mind the personal sacrifices we’ll make as Americans.
6
There's another very plausible incentive for Kim Jong-un to reach some sort of agreement. He's almost certainly calculated that it is in his interest to give Trump some sort of phony accomplishment that Trump can brag about and use to win re-election.
Trump is more easily played than Obama, Bush, or Clinton. As has been so often demonstrated with this president, stroking his ego is cheap and valuable.
7
The analysts have done a wonderful job nibbling around the edges of what's going to happen next in the North Korean saga and yet the main course remains. What is to become of the dear leader when the real world starts it's journey into the hermit nation and it's people begin to see the tyranny they have been living under? Certainly the rest of the world will cry out, along with the North Koreans, that that the final course of justice be served up on a cold platter to Mr. Kim and his court.
1
Here's hoping the two Koreas are successful in their efforts to de-nuclearize that part of the world.
The US should be next, the only country to have used them against another people!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_weapons_of_mass_destru...
4
Is it possible, the blathering donald on a recent phone call to the morning show at Fox News; the idiocy in a 30 minute conversation is the same person that will orchestrate a successful denuclearization of N. Korea?
Any talk of a Noble Peace prize regarding the Korean peninsula should go to the South Korean president Moon, for all his efforts, starting with the invitation of N. Korean athletes to the Olympic games.
Rest assured, donald would not stand for this, ranting and raving on being cheated due recognition.
Mr. Kristof, you have more knowledge of the Korean political culture both north and south, then probably most in donald's administration that could be of benefit to this administration, but will never be considered as useful.
2
A brilliant end-run by Kim. If, in a year, he is not fully-armed and out from under sanctions at least substantially, I will eat my keyboard.
3
We must all hope that Trump continues to demonstrate that he is far smarter than the NY Times and disregards these silly recommendations. The idea that pressing NK on "Human rights abuses" and demanding access to it's gulags would accomplish anything but to make the Norks even more suspicious than they are and thus preclude any progress on the nuclear issues is completely specious.
I doubt very much that Trump will do more than focus like a laser on the issue of stopping and unwinding the NK nuclear program and arsenal, nor should he.
What folly Kristof espouses.
1
Who cares, the oceans are dying. If anyone truly believes NK will verifiably give up its nukes is delusional. And again, who cares, we are killing our oceans. Party on.
Oceans are dying? People are needlessly dying by conflict. Not to worry, the oceans, just a body of water as the earth is a clump of dirt will adjust and carry on without humans. We humans, which you propose to ignore, will be a clump of nuclear ash.
1
Trump is an evil man Kim is an evil man. They both deserve each other. I DON’T hope for any “peace” deal — its fraudulent. It’s all spectacle ( two crazy people vying for attention) and our Infant-in- Chief is enjoying this charade to its fullest. It’s another episode of Survivor. Trump wins again! And people will forget Mueller, Climate Change and Stormy Daniels and...
5
Anyone who thinks Kim Jong Un isn't playing us and the rest of the world is an outright idiot. Trump is putty in his hands. Kim has been seeking a face-saving pivot, and this is perfect timing. Be warned, this is life-and-death serious, and Trump is blowing this.
5
Am I alone in wondering whether Kim is smarter than we give him credit for? A nagging part of me can’t help but wonder if his gestures toward peace and Donald Trump don’t come from a shrewd place that is inspired by Russia’s foray into US elections. Perhaps he is thinking, “this nuclear program is time-consuming and expensive, and I’m no idiot, I know that the second I actually try to use one of these warheads, the DPRK is toast. Maybe a better way to destroy America is to follow the Russian model...if I make it look like Donald Trump is a great diplomat who brought peace to the Korean Peninsula, that should help to keep him in power...and President Trump does more to destroy America than any of my warheads ever could! America will fall, and my good friends next door in China will be ascendant.” [insert evil laughter here].
4
Kristof says the "United States will never give up South Korea." By what right is the U.S. entitled to or not to give up the south? Incredible arrogance that enable pundits like Kristof to state as fact that the imperial U.S. project is unassailable.
3
I have a hard time believing that Trump's belligerent tweets have had anything to do with Kim's peace offensive, other than to convince him that this American president can be played. Trumps' tweets did not change the strategic fact that the US has no viable military option in Korea. Any unprovoked US attack on North Korea would result in a horrific number of casualties on both sides of the DMZ, would cause America's streets to erupt, and would cause the world to unite in opposition to America's stupidity. Our military leaders know this and Kim knows this. Whatever Kim's game is, it's certainly not being driven by Trump's empty threats.
5
It is ironic that Trump says "he won't be played" by North Korea because of course he's profoundly the most easily manipulated man ever to sit in the WH.
Any hostile leader with a brain cell knows this is exactly the right time to be making these moves. Do you think the Chinese encouraged him to proceed with his gamesmanship now? I do.
6
You say these abuses are well documented. Why have I never seen them? How do they compare to China, Russia, Africa?
Kim can easily release the 3 prisoners and stop his testing. His testing site can no longer be used so he isn't giving up anything. Everything will be in grandiose generalities because that's all Trump can understand. Trump's base will proclaim him all powerful. Kim will get some sanctions lifted but give up nothing but a bunch of promises. The media will proclaim it a huge success and Trump will have a public relations success.
In the end everything will still be the same but the bellicosity will be gone and Trump will be telling us what a wonderful person Kim is.
4
Acknowledge these facts: The people of Korea have endured more than a century of misery that began when the U.S. endorsed the Treaty of Portsmouth that handed Korea over to the Japanese at the end of the Russia-Japanese war in 1905. Four major powers -- the U.S., Japan, China and Russia share responsibility for the division of Korea and for fueling the ongoing hostilities for decades. These four powers need to negotiate a treaty pledging to respect the integrity and independence of a reunited, disarmed, and neutral Korea. All four would likewise pledge economic aid to support the reunification process,
Let's trump (pun intended) Kim and throw this card on the table -- the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces on the peninsula in return for his commitment to initiate not just peace negotiations with the South, but reunification talks that would begin with a withdrawal from the DMZ and internationally supervised disarmament on both sides of the border.
China has grudgingly supported the Kim regime rather than face an American ally on its borders. Withdrawing American forces from the peninsula removes the biggest single rationale North Korea and China have for continuing hostilities. Call their bluff and shoot for a real peace, a reunified Korea, an Asian Switzerland, neutral and free. Peace.
3
Timing is everything... It could be that Trump's success with pressuring NK and his verbal threats, the Olympics and Kim's demonstrated missile technology and multiple warheads creates the opportunity to sit at the table. Trump's willingness to do so without apparent conditions could be a boon.
Yet, is it at all possible that the calculus includes helping keep Trump in office? That Kim needs Trump. Dotard Donald has been willing to put any multilateral coordination aside in preference for unilateral talks, opines his affection for autocrats, is free of the burden of truth, and continues to kindle divisive rhetoric throughout the US. If Kim does comply, my hat will be off to Dissembling Don. My guess, though, is that Kim will find a way to give nothing while making our esteemed leader look good to his base and tease our undecideds in to keeping him and his Republican cohort in power.
3
Shocking and annoying talk of regime change. Again and again and again. Will the American desire for regime change never diminish ?
It would appear that Trump realizes he wasn't "in the room where it happened," and he will backpedal or claim he designed whatever comes of it until. If it is a total failure, he will say he knew it all along.
I just want a smart, thinking president.
1
Since the U.S. government ushered in the nuclear age, conscientious persons have wondered how to prevent the mass murder that is now a perennial question about such weapons. This is exacerbated by the disparity between the interests of the rulers and the ruled, an age old problem in political science.
Kim is using his nukes and missiles to gain status comparable to that of other rulers with nukes, status he would not have if he didn't have them, while the ruled suffer from sanctions.
As long as the nuclear age persists, and the perennial disparity of interests persists, this danger of mass-murder will persist.
3
Trump proclamation that Korean war to end “After a furious year of missile launches and Nuclear testing, a historic meeting between North and South Korea is now taking place. Good things are happening” is both premature and juvenile, usual inability to see beyond his nose!
Outside world is convinced of US disdain for globally shared and negotiated rules and none of the self respecting countries will trust US word on any international issues.
The attitude is that American citizens are subject only to laws and regulations made by the US government – not rulings made international bodies.
The belief that America’s security and economic interests can be achieved through American actions alone rather than the sum of the actions of all of the world. Accordingly US has little interest in what other countries are doing.
There is the unmistakable faith in “US primacy,” the idea that the US can protect its interest through its power alone, without the need to rely on international rules and international law.
Kim Jong-un a very shrewd leader knows fully the pitfall of trusting US leadership. He will proceed accordingly with carrot and stick policy.
He knows perfectly well the sad fate that befell Libya and Iraq. He will continue his efforts to divide S. Korea alliance with US.
One can always trust to time. Insert a wedge of time and nearly everything straightens itself out.
3
We do not know how this will all play out at this moment in time, but shortly we will have an idea of the direction the Koreas, China, and the US will be going. I think the end of Nicholas' piece says it all, and it needs to be the focus...that we are capable of avoiding another war which would be far worse than what we are presently enduring in the Middle East.
One thing we have to remember is that long-held hostilities do not get resolved in a few months. The one example that comes to mind is Northern Ireland. Years of diplomacy, set backs, and then more diplomacy. One other point, and I know that it is controversial, are the many months, many leaders, and meetings required to achieve the Iran Nuclear Deal. Say what you will but having that Agreement is one less thing to be concerned about when it comes to the aggressiveness of Iran. Perhaps, this very fact should be uppermost in Pompeo's mind. If we pull out of that multi-lateral accomplishment, I feel it would be a death sentence in an effort to denuclearize North Korea.
3
"But the U.S. won’t give up the South."
I realize this is highly improbable, but if N Korea agreed to fully give up its nuclear arsenal, I think Trump would be willing to remove US troops from S Korea. Trump would spin it (rightly, I must admit) as a huge win - peace, a denuclearized Korean peninsula, and he gets to bring the troops home. I imagine S Korea and Japan would not be too happy in such a scenario, but since when has Trump taken allies' concerns into consideration?
As for the US raising human rights considerations....It's hard to raise such issues when you commit human rights abuses in your own country. An ethnic minority - African Americans - is routinely brutalized by police forces all across the country. And the actions by ICE - imprisoning people in camps without due process, tearing apart families - are the sort of thing we would have decried in authoritarian governments once upon a time (the American media, to its shame, has paid little attention to the havoc and cruelty ICE has wreaked). The time of the US as a champion of human rights are over. I certainly hope that whenever we try to play that card on the world stage, other parties throw our own abuses back at us.
6
"If N Korea agreed to fully give up its nuclear arsenal" they would be lying. That's how it works with NK... Get it?,
1
Russia is the pachyderm in the room, given Russian interference in our democracy and Mr. Trump's troubling and possibly treasonous behavior vis-a-vis Russia. If Russia were controlling Trump, what would that look like in the North Korean context? Could it look like this? A complete reversal of Trump's prior bellicosity and a smiling diplomatic Mr. Kim?
Experts agree that recent North Korean missiles look like Russian technology. Both Russia and China very much want the US off of the Korean Peninsula, and China very much wants the US out of the western Pacific region. Our many allies and territories in E and SE Asia very much want no such thing. During the Korean War, China sent a massive number of soldiers to the peninsula. 600,000 were killed. US pilots skirmished with Russian planes and pilots.
4
"President Trump’s tightening of sanctions and his belligerent rhetoric genuinely did change the equation."
That's all that matters.
Trump got ahead of the curve with tweets and rhetoric.
He etched in America's memory, that if there ever was peace in Korea, it was because of his "blessing," much less because of anyone else.
NYT and other liberals can keep downplaying Trump's hand. But America knows. That's all that matters.
1
China needs Kim to remain in power in N. Korea as a buffer against US influence. And nothing is going to change that arrangement.
2
All I can think of now is - at least he did not interfere in our national elections, change the results and install a fake President. So Kim has the nukes and full of bluster and threats to his neighbors and us. Nothing has happened as yet and perhaps may not. Maybe he is another bombastic Saddam Hussain or maybe not. But we have to give him benefit of the doubt. As you have pointed out, Kim has committed humanitarian atrocities which can be never condoned. But let's not be hypocrites, so have we. We do not have any moral standing to get involved in any part of the world after the debacle of the Iraq war and the existence of Guantanomo. Kim understands this and he knows America is in a very vulnerable state becoming isolated, nationalistic, unreliable, distrusted. Yes, the sanctions are hurting, therefore, the charmed diplomacy. But he will play hardball. Let's not make the mistake of underestimating Kim. He will suddenly walk away like his father and grandfather along with his concessions. And this time around, NK has a wily, young smart leader and actor who really has nukes and not shy to use it.
1
To summarize: a series of game plays that will keep us from war while giving Trump credit even though his pugnacious and obnoxious tweets did not work as he expected.
2
In diplomacy and international affairs, patiently doing nothing is doing something - it's waiting for a more favorable opportunity to act, while also not getting involved in a bad situation.
But for Trump and his Trumpsters, doing nothing is weakness, not intelligent and responsible strategy.
So Trump will try to do something, and make the situation worse. When it goes wrong he'll transfer blame and say "at least I tried," and the Trumpsters will cheer his strength and courage.
5
So Kim will get to keep at least some of his nuclear missiles, sanctions will be lifted, foreign aid allowed to flow in, and he gets direct meetings with world leaders, making him look like a person of major importance. It appears he's already won a major victory, before the US president even arrives. Really, what else could he want?
2
The economic power and technologies of the SK; now,it is just a matter of time!
China and Korea will rule the SP, too bad for Japan and Taiwan.
1
An excellent article.
Let's also ask ourselves why we care so much about Kim's having a few low-grade nukes when the US and Russia have thousands of high-grade nukes, and why we have any right to ask Kim to disarm when we won't.
And let's remember that Stalin told Kim Il-sung to start the Korean war to make the US and China mutual enemies. That worked for 20 years.
6
Highly unlikely that Stalin pushed North Korea into war with the South. Had Stalin done so, his representatives would have been prepared to block the UN's involvement in the war.
Instead, the Soviet Union was busy boycotting the UN over China's seat on the security counsel.
A huge strategic mistake and strong evidence that Stalin was completly surprised by the start of the war.
Sure, why worry about a totalitarian regime tossing a "low grade" nuke or two onto San Francisco or L.A?
Not quite flyover country but really not much of concern there for an East Coast liberal!
With the prospects for a peace between North and South Korea, we have three columns in the NYT today expressing skepticism about any success.
I imagine the Aerospace/Defense sector isn't too happy with the prospects of losing all those DMZ contacts, housing 35,000 Americans and all their weaponry?
Then there's the "influence" we have in that whole region for more Business with the adjoining countries.
https://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/markets_sectors/sectors/industr...
It's hard to remember the last time the US Govt was part of a Peace treaty anywhere... maybe peacemaking is not good Business goal?
6
North Korea - the world's largest Gulag - is armed to the teeth, honeycombed with countless deep fortifications, and has a programmed population that will die on command. If any country can withstand a nuclear war and come out smiling it's North Korea.
Kim is no fool, and despite his charm offensive, is not to be trusted.
Trump will give some material concession for an illusory gain that he can trumpet as a great success compared to the failures of past presidents. The result will be a more dangerous North Korea.
Kim knows this and will play along - because he's already won.
5
If any country can withstand a nuclear war and come out smiling it's North Korea. What would they be smiling about? (I mean, beyond being not dead.)
Remember, the US is the only country that has ever used nukes on another people.
How did we ever get to be the Decider on who has nuclear weapons?
2
Kim plays us all like a kid who constantly misbehaves.
When he stops for a few days, we think we've hit the jackpot because it's such a welcome change.
We reward the kid, we give in to his requests, because if we refuse we'll just get the bad behavior again. And, we want to avoid that at all costs.
And, we won't push him too much.
We won't insist that we be let into his room.
Cause he'd resist that and insisting on it would make him mad and the bad behavior would start up again. We don't want that!
His room contains all kinds of stuff that he uses to make trouble but we can't get in there.
Even if we could, the kid is still who he is.
He'll make trouble somehow again and again.
Would you declare the situation solved just because the kid makes nice for a while?
Even signs some agreement with you?
What if he had done exactly the same before and faked you out then?
Would you, with a straight face, say you deserved a peace prize?
The kid knows this:
Anytime he pauses acting like the little devil he always is, the pause will stand out and be so welcome a contrast that he will be able to get all kinds of stuff from you.
Because you are so momentarily overjoyed that he, even for a little while, gave you some peace.
Enjoy it cause it won't last.
5
Exactly. Having nukes in your pocket (or for that matter, the capacity to level your potential opponent's capitol city) tends to let you think you can get away with stuff. That's one of the reasons why he went for them so strongly. Our own relative abundance of military threat has let us engage in our versions of this phenomenon, time and time again. Don't like what's happening? Sanction, destabilize, overthrow, or even invade ('if necessary')!
1
"But the U.S. won’t give up the South." Really? What is our interest in the peninsula if the two Koreas unite and China, Japan, Russia and the UN approve?
Or do we intend to maintain colonial status?
2
Didn't the Donald say that "Fire and Fury" would rain from the sky if NK developed a nuclear weapon?
1
Many believe President Moon of South Korea deserves much of the credit for the apparent easing of tensions on the Korean penninsula. Is he being overlooked?
5
The end of a war requires a peace treaty. And what exactly does "denuclearization" of the Korean peninsula mean? The devil is in the details. Very much hope the Koreas can work this out. Will they be able to? Past history is not encouraging. But one point is 100% certain. If they do, Trump will claim credit. If they don't Trump will accept none of the blame.
14
South Korea’s leader is the real statesman and hero — and he deserves whatever credit is due.
4
Agreed, Trump's increased pressure played a part in initiating what is happening today, but it seems that many commenters and pundits overlook the central role of Moon Jae-in of South Korea, in starting actual talks with his so-called Olympics diplomacy. He is a fresh voice in Korean polity, and had the independence to recognize that the school yard spat between the Dotard in Chief and Rocket Man was getting dangerous, and to act on that concern by offering Kim a path to greater legitimacy.
The devil will be in the details in the months ahead, and if we know anything about Trump, we know he's a devil, but not much for details.
2
"President Trump’s tightening of sanctions and his belligerent rhetoric genuinely did change the equation."
Threatening to attack another nation is in violation of international law, not to mention reckless when that nation's neighbors are two nuclear-armed nations with poor relations with the US.
But, when it comes to war, the so-called "resistance" melts away. Both parties have now embraced Bush II's endless war (and endless profits) doctrine: Trump's tough talk brought the North to the table but the talks must be portrayed as doomed to fail because endless war means diplomacy is not a useful part of the affairs of nations.
2
The biggest problem in the world democratic order is the economic polarization which has occurred, with a kleptocracy pulling most of the strings at the expense of public policy, rendering it essentially ungovernable.
China does not have this problem too much yet. Those who say follow the Chinese influence on North Korea are correct. Trump is a puppet.
3
Kim is looking to trade promises of unverifiable denuclearization for removal of sanctions and some economic benefits.
Trump's ego could be fed and he can be lead to trade something for nothing. His administration - Fox and Friends - would declare a complete victory, and Trump would declare he accomplished something that President Obama failed at.
Trump could remove sanctions, the maintenance of which could topple the North in time, which will result in a more economically and politically stable nuclearized North.
A complete win for Kim.
1
Lately there have appeared a number of editorials denigrating the peace talks even before they begin. This is not helpful, and I am surprised that Mr. Kristof is a participant in this effort.
All the negative things said about North Korea may have some truth to them, but most of the countries we do business with, and have agreements with, could be regarded as shy of democratic utopias.
So let’s give it chance, and save the negative comments for a later date.
3
I would love to have hope for the North Korean people, but every time I see Kim laughing or smiling I think of that poor American student who died at the brutal hands of Kim and his military.
2
Imagine this....Kim, Moon and Trump at the negotiating table. Trump declares that the Korean Peninsula must be nuke free. Kim counters that the world must be nuke free if N. Korea is to be nuke free. Kim says that N. Korea will give up nukes if all other nuke stockpiling countries also join in. Kim proposes an international sit-down of all nuke power players to bring the nuclear bomb era to a final, and necessary, end. Win/Win for Kim... should Trump refuse, then Kim can say he tried. As a sovereign, N. Korea has every right to have a nuke. Trump could agree to the sit-down and talks can start to free the world from nuclear bondage. Kim wins the Nobel Peace Prize with something in it for Trump.
We'll see who has the courage, will and leadership to make a truly historic step for all mankind...
4
A nuclear-free world would be wonderful!
It all starts with US to set the example... as the only country who has ever nuked another!
2
The largest army in the world.
1
Trump would get a Nobel prize for calling Kim Jon-un "Rocketman" and boasting about the size of his nuclear button. It is difficult to believe that a Nobel prize would be awarded based on acting like a 5 year old.
2
A wise chicken does not negotiate with an untrustworthy fox.
1
Between yours and Bret’s choice of words, why wouldn’t readers just download The Weekly Standard app and get the full version?
20th Century Hawk-light Posture 1.0 is bait for old GOP frames.
Six months from midterms observers might presume you starting out as MLK or Gandhi and working your way from there.
Give Trump credit where credit is due. Kim and Moon would never be talking now if he had not taken a hard line. 30 years of appeasement, by both Democrats and Republican administrations made the situation worse, allowing Kim to build up his nuclear arsenal and ballistic missile capabilities and threaten his neighbors and the US. A Hillary administration would have gone down the same appeasement road. That is why this time these negotiations feel different and could lead to substantive change and peace. Root for success and leave your cynicism behind, this could be a game changer for the world.
3
I don't know, nor does anyone, how these negotiations will go. However, those on the left who are bashing Trump are delusional. As the great leader Obama told Trump, NK was the biggest threat we face. Of course, he didn't do anything about NK. However, Trump has done a great deal. And it is fair to recognize (through the progressive delusional haze) that he has moved the needle a great deal. There may be other factors, of course, that have moved Kim to negotiate. But I suggest the biggest factors are harsh sanctions, the threat of more to come PLUS the ominous threat of military strikes if Kim doesn't de-nuke.
The left screamed -- you must negotiate -- when Trump tightened the screws on Kim and rolled out the military. Now that Kim has shown a willingness to bargain at least, the left screams that it won't work. Give me a break. You can't have it both ways.
The calculus is simple. Because the US has ignored NK's development of a nuke capability, we now face the risk he could strike one of our cities and our allies in the region. The only way to eliminate that risk is for Kim to de-nuke or to eliminate Kim. It's one thing for a major power to have nukes because they have something to lose in a nuclear exchange. It is entirely another for a rogue state with little economic capability (at present). As long as Kim and enough of his people can take shelter (lots of mountains and caves in NK) a nuke exchange is not the same threat it is to us.
2
Trump's bombast certainly propelled the activity between China, N Korea and S Korea - " The Three - but in the end Trump will be isolated. No one trusts him.
Trump's meeting with Kim will be ceremonial as the neighborhood sorts itself out prior to his arrival. No one can depend on him to do anything other than muck things up.
If Trump rips up the Iran Agreement, there will be no meeting and The Three will carry on with their realignment. Every scenario has been accounted for while the WH can't even get out a policy paper.
Trump will humiliate himself begging Kim for a meeting in the desperate hope it would assure a Nobel Peace Prize. You don't get it for threatening to erase a country from the planet. He is also jealous of Pompeo for having met with Kim; Pompeo will pay dearly for this.
China, N Korea and S Korea will all get what they want: Kim will get economic relief , Moon will get to relax and Xi will declare itself the region's peacemaker. Our longtime ally Japan will pivot towards Beijing.
Meeting or no meeting, Trump has been marginalized. It's not about him anymore and that's especially dangerous for the world.
2
No one trusts him. But they are paying close attention because they fear him.
2
Like selling their tax cuts as the greatest thing since sliced bread, Trump will will fail to achieve legitimate denuclearization ... but he'll hard-sell that failure, and his electorate will swallow it down like manna from heaven.
4
NK is no Iraq or Syria. I am just puzzled by all the statements. There is another party involved, which is China. NK can give up its nuclear weapons because it can count on China for "protection". The alternative is a total destruction by US military force.
Speaking of human rights in NK, the issue didn't just start after Trump became President. Since Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize (while NK was abusing its own people), the bar has been lowered and the prize has been cheapened. If the committee is "fair and balanced", Trump will have a great chance! Kim and Trump for Nobel Peace Prize!
1
Total destruction by US military force might easily cost a million or more lives, including severe destruction to Seoul.
It might require a tactical nuclear first strike.
That is not an easy choice, even for Trump and Republicans.
For the sake of those Korean War veterans still living 65 years after fighting a war with no declared END, and the 35,000 who lost their lives fighting what Uncle Sam said was yet another 'good fight', and those veterans who didn't live to see 'Peace' in Korea, Kim had darned well better stand by that historic step across the divide, and live up to his words of NO MORE WAR!!
What President Trump has achieved in just over 1 year, is more than every other administration has achieved in 65 years . . . disgraceful years of appeasement, groveling, and inane diplomatic 'niceties' . . . all achieving NOTHING but more misery.
The trillions of taxpayer $$'s spent on the Korean peninsula is disgraceful enough, but far, far more despicable and disgusting is the ineptitude of the American leadership over the past 6 decades. A slap in the face to all those brave men and women who fought the fight and deserved to have their life & death efforts rewarded with a final PEACE.
We can only hope and pray that this will finally be the PEACE- through-strength that should have been declared a long time ago.
1
Trump's only related achievement to date is descending to Kim's level, truly a level to which no other US administration has lowered itself in the past decades.
The North has often talked peace before, gotten some concessions and then reneged. That's their MO.
We should wait to see how much Kim gets from Trump before judging Trump's relative success.
2
I realize Trump is already claiming credit for "denuclearizing" the Korean Peninsula but lets wait and see what kind of deal the smartest man in the world actually comes up with. That Fox and Friends segment whose embarrassed hosts had to hang up on Trump's unhinged stream of rants, boasts and claims of walking on water may convince Kim Jong-un that he is indeed dealing with a crazy dotard who bought his declaration that North Korea's decision to stop nuclear testing was a voluntary expression of good will rather than an involuntary cessation brought about by the fact that its nuclear tests had collapsed a mountain on its test site.
3
There is a United States theatrical production under way as well as a N Korean one, and the professional, as well as the propagandists media, is in on it. This production is dramatized the conceit forthcoming talks offer of hope of a world free of grave North Korean threats. At best bet offer a little restraint of the North Korean nuclear state from madcap development and marketing its nuke and missile industry, and from military invasion of (as opposed to militarily conditioned encroachment upon) South Korea. Most likely, they break down in collusion with a Trump/Pompeo/Bolton resolution about their fanciful denuclearization demands and this results in none of the foregoing compensations. At worst this breakdown provokes catastrophic military result ranging from million of East Asian dead and a world depression to nuclear obliteration of human life in at least most of the Northern Hemisphere. The Trump administration might in early 2016, via a military solution so ruthless it was derided by Bannon, have averted the "worst" outcome. No longer.
Perhaps extensive media cheer leading for Trump administration success realizing the "best" plausible outcome provides a useful spectacle, albeit at the cost of obscuring our real prospects.
We have been fed defeatism and appeasement for so long that some of us can't imagine anything different.
Trump policy propably is either (a) defeatism disguised as on non-appeasement, albeit with talks, or (b) talks as a pre-war ploy when the prospect for any non-catastrophic military action vanished with DPRK attainment of strategic (if not simply regional) nuclear weapon capability.
Count me among the skeptics.
Kim Jong-un achieved his elevated international status because of NK's nuclear capability. If he gives up that capability in a real, verifiable way, he won't be able to get it back quickly. The basis for his legitimacy, his power, and possibly Kim Jong-un himself, is gone. He goes from hero to zero. Being able to shell Seoul is not the same as dropping a nuclear device on Tokyo or San Francisco.
The same principle applies to Kim opening up NK to the Red Cross or the UN High Commission on Human Rights.
There is no outcome acceptable to the US where Kim Jong-un manages to hold on to power.
Shall we dance?
1
My reading of the situation: The Chinese leaders saw Kim Jong Un and the current Republican president blustering away at each other and became alarmed, because any nuclear exchange would send deadly radiation their way, devastate their major trading partner, South Korea, and blanket their other major trading partner, Japan, with radiation as well.
I suspect that they "took Kim Jong Un to the woodshed" and told him to cool it.
That's fine with me. I actually think it would be great for the U.S. to lose its status as THE world superpower so that our government could come to its senses and stop pouring money down the military sink hole.
5
Why no mention of a very practical reason Kim Jong-un could be giving up on nukes? His most recent test destroyed their test facility.
3
I think Nicholas Kristof has given a very plausible summary of current and likely future events on the Korean Peninsula. The involvement of Trump and his administration misses a critical point. South Korea is completely driving this process. They should. Trump placed 10 million South Koreans in grave danger with his uniformed, belligerent and reckless remarks. Although South Korean leaders would never admit it publicly, they think Trump is an incompetent, dangerous person. He has no concern whatsoever about the lives of South Koreans. That's when the South Koreans took charge. Going forward, as Kristof points out, North Korea is playing a smart game, South Korea is laying the groundwork for some small steps toward decreasing hostility. The U.S. with the Trump-Bolton-Pompeo axis on the sidelines not understanding the situation will continue to make war threats.
2
This is a ludicrously one-way reading of the history of North Korea's actions. The fact is that the direct talks between Clinton and Pyongyang did produce genuine progress, including a freeze on nuclear tests, on all the North’s plutonium facilities, and nearly succeeded in retiring their missiles and halt production of their entire plutonium facility and plutonium fuel rods, until George W. Bush destroyed the agreement. If that agreement were still in force, North Korea would have no plutonium, so that was a master stroke, and it showed what can happen through direct diplomacy between the President, or previous Presidents, and the North Koreans.
9
I saw other reports in the Times describing the diplomatic steps of Kim to the current situation as masterful. I find it disingenuous to think that a country so inward looking would have developed that skill. I find that what has transpired so far, is more the result of chance and Moon Jae-in's encouraging the development in the current direction.
1
As I understand it, there is no winning here unless North Korea agrees to destroy its existing nuclear stockpile and missiles, given that Iran will demand equal treatment. If Korea keeps those weapons but sanctions are removed, Iran might decide to accept Trump's actions to void its current agreement and proceed to develop its own weapons. It can then negotiate a similar agreement from a stronger position - keep its nuclear weapons but remove any sanctions. Given the state of war in the middle east, Iran can make a decent argument for a strong defense capability.
Trump's refusal to abide by the current agreement would give them an opening to go ahead with their nuclear program. This would also further destroy the US's relationship with Europe, Israel and others. Given that the consensus is that North Korea will not agree to destroy its nuclear weapons, I don't see a good outcome for world peace no matter what agreement is reached.
7
It’s so arrogant and so Trumpian to even suggest that Trump would deserve a Nobel should a peace agreement hold. This is the work of a President Moon and (surely) Xi pulling strings behind the scenes.
10
After watching Trump get played by Macron via obvious appeal to Trump's vanity, here's the way "the very honorable" Kim Jung-Un could play our reality show POTUS:
Just give Trump the appearance of a PR win via the appearance of a "deal."
Trump immediately brags about "my winning deal" (which Kim once again cheats on down the road). If that gets out, Trump will predictably double down on reality denial...because he cannot appear to have been played.
15
The most likely outcome.
Two fundamental questions in North and South Korea peace deal are - (1) how Kim regime maintains its hold in peace with or without nuclear weapons, (2) how China and US balance their interests in Korean peninsular in a peaceful Korea. I did not see any discussion on these two fundamental questions in the Pandits opinion columns or press discussions. I also could not yet find any answer myself. North Korea communist party is not China - it is communist rule with dynastic policy. This system can not adopt Chinese style capitalism. Only way the system can work is by family dictatorship. The economic prosperity in that system will be limited - very much like Mugabe in Africa. The elephant in the room in peace deal is not denuclearization , it is the type of political regime North Korea adopt in the peaceful Korean peninsular.
1
How sad is it that the Kim looks like the savvy player, and everyone in the White House looks like bears of very little brain? Kim is playing everyone, but has no plan to give up his two major industries which are nuclear proliferation and regional, possibly global, nuclear blackmail.
But off we go to make it look like we have put the little guy back in his box.
North Korea exists because China wants them to. Why are we bothering with negotiating with NK when China is our problem?
11
China entered the Korean conflict when it saw that NKorea was losing the war.
China had NKorea's back then, and still does. Trump can say and do anything he wants to concerning China's interactions with NKorea, but when push comes to shove, China backs NKorea, reluctantly, with caveats, but still backs them.
3
I understand the fear Kim has of regime change. We have a history of going in pre-emptively to topple governments we feel are not in our best interest: Iran, dozens of Latin American countries, and now Syria. Libya is a perfect example. Gaddafi give up his nuclear ambition and we overthrew him. As Hillary infamously chortled afterwards "We came, We saw, We killed." Is it any wonder Kim wants nuks? And why are we told that talking to Kim only legitimizes him as a leader? He IS the leader. Who else would you talk to. Isn't it better to get the principle actors together in one room and hash out an agreement. It's always lower level diplomats "laying the groundwork" that never seem to get anywhere, and just give cover to the leaders to walk away. I have no idea what these talks will result in, but at least these guys are talking and avoiding war. A war that would literally kill millions of civilians. The Pentagon's latest figures show that we spend $250 million A DAY on our military and armed conflicts. And the fear and war mongers still want more. Trillions of dollars literally blown up. That's money that could be used here educating our children and building our country.
5
Ah yes. Denuclearization, Kim cannot allow that to happen. It is his everything. The peace treaty will be little more than a highlight.
If the sanctions can be lifted or lessened to a point that human rights can be encouraged and the people given a better quality of life, that would be a great step. But don't make the mistake of equating that with diplomacy.
Kim has a far greater and most likely way better thought out end game than Trump who lives for the moment.
Their combined bluster did get to this point in negotiations but the congratulations must wait until these two bams bams actually sit down.
4
It may be Kim's everything, but I think he is smart enough to figure out that something is better than nothing.
1
The direct talk between The 2 Korea's was always the way to progressive. China, Russia. Japan, and the USA, all have too many side issues that muddy the water. If open travel between the Koreas can be attained , reunited families, trade, and information, will open more doors to reunification.
Reunification will be difficult between 2 very diverse economies and political systems and will take years and possibly generations to achieve.
Patience will be required by the foreign governments mentioned before, as well as a willingness to increase free trade.
In the meantime prayers wouldn't hurt!
Note that Trump's declaration of an end to the Korean War is yet another example of his persuasion for getting us to 'think past the sale' as Scott Adams would say. So that we are no asking if the Korean War will now end, just when will it end. Trump rightly sees a number of the issues that he is dealing with as psychological barriers for past presidents rather than real ones.
3
If anyone is to receive a Nobel Prize it should be South Korea’s president, Moon Jae-in. I agree that DJT likely moved the needle toward peace talks but a bully can always move the needle. Sometimes, bullying has a good outcome, most of the time it causes more harm. And always, it's a dangerous and unpredictable tactic. A bullying tactic does not deserve a Nobel Peace prize, offering an olive branch does.
5
The once-great Nobel Peace prize has been given to Barack Obama and Yasser Arafat. It would be demeaning for President Trump to accept it if awarded.
5
Wrong guy. Without Trump the meeting wouldn't have happened and if it succeeds, Trump should get the Nobel Peace prize.
And why not--Obama got one for just being Obama, soon to be not much more than an interesting footnote to American history.
2
IMO, the Nobel Peace prize would be demeaned if they offered it to Trump.
Kristof's sober, longer-term perspective is a refreshing counterweight to the meaningless cotton candy put out by the White House, lacking in wisdom and credibility both.
Ultimately, this entire circus seems designed only to prevent war. That's not a bad thing, but it only became critically necessary after Trump threatened to destroy the North. It's not likely to result in real denuclearization and makes regime change even less likely in the foreseeable future. What was the point?
9
Mr. Kristof, I wish you had also raised the issue of human rights for Iranian people when Obama was about to make a deal with that criminal and murderous regime.
6
I can see that all kinds of experts share deep skepticism, and provide good reason for their doubts.
Because I am not an expert on any matter N. Korean, I can make a naive prediction. If the young cherub does begin to make nice with the South Koreans and the US, his own generals will conduct a military coup.
Kalidan
One possible solution to the N. Korean mess is to offer them to become the Switzerland of the East. Totally neutral. Protected by China, Russia, USA, Japan and Australia. They give up their nukes, totally. Then they develop a banking center. They have to deal with their human rights issues. China certainly isn't, from our viewpoint but are doing just fine from their viewpoint.
Maybe in 50 years the two halves combine as a totally neutral estate. Not my idea. Credit Scott Adams of Dilbert fame.
What we'll see, once again, is Trump presenting a "solution" to the "problem" that he himself created.
5
Trump and Kim are two con men are negociating with each other, and each is looking for a way to double-cross the other. What will happen to the bystanders?
3
Just give trump an " A+", in anything, and he will be happy.
2
There is a report that the hill or mountain from which North Korea launched its missiles collapsed. Is It possible that the North Korean leader is becoming more conciliatory, because his program has stalled?
4
Good article.
IMHO Taiwan and Japan will get very scared of a strong nuclear Korea...
Xi will make a move on Taiwan and Japan may gets it own nuclear weapons in a near future.
South Pacific is no more a stable area...let's see how fast it will happen.
1
When NK brought its representatives home from the Olympics they immediately put them into a brain washing isolation to inoculate them against S Korean influence. Is this a society that will accept a democratic society like the south on a peninsula they consider their own? The North Korean people starve so that Kim can play games with his war weapons. The Dupe Trump will not change this, and to think that he could by his 'great' deal making skills alone is insanity.
6
Which country is more warlike, spends more on weapons, military, etc. ?
Which country kills more people yearly, it’s own and others. ?
Which country has the greater philandering leader.?
Which country has the greater number of poor. ?
Which country has the greater number of those with greater wealth.?
which country has the most threatening leader. ?
6
I think you are referring to the country whose pax Americana has made possible humankind's most prosperous half-century in history.
2
Nick, "typical" would be an understatement.
Here we have the area most likely to erupt in nuclear war, talking about denuclearization, and you want to talk about human rights!
Maybe you think North Korea should be open to immigration from Darfur?
Remember that little nugget you shared about being wrong about the "imminent" North Korean collapse in the 90s? Well, that should provide humility on predictions, interference and "but what about including...."
The Koreans have been stuck in a fear, hatred, not understanding the other time warp. They are the same people, separated by an artificial barrier (BTW, remember East and West Germany?). Give them a chance to break out of the lunacy! Don't shoot down their efforts and hopes with your "reality check" that has a precedence, on North Korea and other matters, of being not nearly as closely connected to reality as you imagine.
American "realism" is far too often a combination of American ignorance, misunderstanding, prejudice and arrogance. In other words, wrong. Very wrong! Again, remember your assessment of the 90s, no doubt based on the best "expert" analysis, about North Korea's impending collapse. Any day now.
5
Trump has the amazing capacity to irritate progressives to the point where their mouths become disengaged from their brains. Nick Kristof tells readers that Kim and Trump will sign a face saving deal that won't solve anything but will allow them "to back away from the precipice of war."
No, no, no! If we are truly on the brink of war, it is because of Kristof and his ilk and their craven policy of peace at any cost.
Kristof's policy of kicking the can down the road has been tried again and again, most recently in 1994 and 2005, and it has failed every time, and every time the stakes have gone up. That is how we got to the point where North Korea may soon have ICBMs with nuclear tips that can reach Washington DC. Let me spell this out: Peace, if it doesn't mean real denuclearization, would be a war crime.
Not only is Kristof dead wrong on policy, but he also could not be more wrong in his reading of Trump. Where does he get the idea that Trump would be willing to settle for the fake deal advocated by Kristof? Trump has made clear that that sort of deal is unacceptable. He won't repeat the mistakes of his predecessors. I can't see any reason not to take those statements at face value.
6
How did you write a column about north korea and only mention china in passing? China is more important than the u.s. and south korea to the behavior of north korea.
3
Kim, Trump, and Moon...and the Nobel Peace prize goes toooo...Kim? I would hold off on the Trump Nobel Peace prize as they should have done with Obama. Don't get me wrong, I love all things Obama and I'm sure the medal looks good on his mantle piece along with the check in his account. And he did more to diplomatically change America's penchant for endless wars and occupation around the world. And it's also not that I'm against ALL things Trump. It's just that Trump, the Great Negotiator, is already patting himself on the back (surprise, surprise) and showing his cards before the first round. Does he know Kim can see him? Kim saw where all the Rocket Man stuff was going (point Trump); took Moon's Olympic invitation to reset the dialog and pop Trump's bluster (advantage Kim); and now Kim knows he can TALK denuclearisation until Tump....well...until Trump officially declares victory and moves on to Iran, Moon can get re-elected, and Kim can deliver kimchi for every pot (set & match Kim). Besides, his test site is caving in.
3
"Did more to diplomatically change America's penchant for war"?? Are you not aware that he bequeathed Trump U.S. Military involvement in 7 shooting wars?
Mike, Maybe you missed the withdrawal from Afghanistan against criticism from the right and not starting military actions in Syria or Libya for which he's been criticised. His direction was towards diplomacy not bigger guns such as the Iran deal.
So does the US have to maintain a military presence in South Korea anymore?
Could it be North Korea is tired of pariah of the world? All of this Cum Bye Ya moments could be a ruse or could it be that Bombastic Trump has given North Korea a way to come out of the cave its been living in for over half a century.There are still Cold War Warriors on both sides of the fence who would love for the status quo to remain the way it has since the Korean War was put on pause.A friendly North and South Korea must be causing a lot of sleepless nights in the region.If there is no light at the end of this tunnel we can always go back to our illustrious leaders thumping their chests.
Geologists at the University of Science and Technology of China have presented evidence suggesting the mountain directly above North Korea’s Punggye-ri nuclear test site has collapsed, reports the Associated Press. The incident happened following the September 3, 2017 detonation of a nuclear bomb estimated at around 100 kilotons, which is 10 times stronger than any of the previous five tests conducted by North Korea. By comparison, the bomb used at Hiroshima in 1945 produced about 15 kilotons of explosive power.
I’m no diplomat, but I think even a strange little fella like Kim Jong-un might suspend his nuclear program if an entire mountain fell on it.
3
Kim murdered his uncle with an anti aircraft gun. Enough said.
2
Great analysis, but perhaps it underestimates the role of Pres. Moon Jae-in of South Korea? He has been pretty committed to peace and seems to have been smartly strategic in all this. Many of the latest developments seem to have started after he took power.
6
Nick Kristof hopes that „Trump will also raise human rights issues” in North Korea, when he meets Kim Jong-un. Forget it. The Saudi Crown Prince, Xi Jinping and Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines felt comfortable in Trump’s company, because he didn’t remind them of their human rights records.
It’s true that “Trump and Kim both badly want a meeting” for writing history, even if it will just be a flash in the pan. Trump may not succeed where his predecessors have failed, because he has neither the acumen nor patience to handle the intricacies of geopolitics and diplomacy. Besides he surrounds himself with hawks like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo.
Kim will benefit from such a meeting, because he is keen to be accepted as leader of a nuclear power on the world stage, while hoping to have sanctions lifted and to focus on economic development.
He is offering an olive branch, because he thinks about his future. His main objective may be to have a dynastic regime like the one in Syria. So he wouldn’t want to reunify with the South, given the enormous challenges. Besides young South Koreans have no appetite for such a union. Perhaps the world should let the future take its course, allowing the two Koreas to sort out their differences before they reunify.
7
Hope you are right, that a lasting peace will emerge; but impetuous ignoramus Trump is not to be trusted, clueless of the beauty of diplomacy, seeking applause at every turn, and ever more evident of an awful selection of counsel. The concern is that any shortcoming in this future deal may wake up Trump's vindictiveness once again. The real 'bull in a china shop' is the one sitting in the Oval Office, not in a far-away Peninsula.
4
"How does this end? The West’s plan is to drag things along until the North collapses."
At this point in the Trump Presidency, when days seem like weeks, The West is most likely hoping to buy some time until the Dictator of North America is impeached or thrown in jail.
Of course the recent theater of reconciliation is a huge relief after all those terrifying episodes of infantile acting-out coming from the two principal characters, but Trump's tantrums probably had nothing to do with China's desire that the testing cease for the time being because of environmental concerns. In fact, Donald Trump's extreme stupidity, rather than his clumsy bullying, probably encouraged China to urge Kim Jong Un to enter into negotiations before Trump is removed, if only to take advantage of that naivete and ignorance while he's still on the scene.
Kim Jong Un's sister is proving to be an excellent propagandist and has the ear of her brother; she might in fact be assuming the role of puppeteer more than we realize, possibly having had more of a hand at bringing North and South together than anyone in the current Administration.
Bad theater is better than no theater - hopefully this will be a long running show, but with cautious and measured reviews.
5
The politics of a deal with NK for the president are pretty plain: his major concern is not nukes (because he does really believe we can outnuke them, as if this were actually an option!); his concern is always avoiding being a loser. The November election and the likely Mueller report loom; how better to distract and trump those two looming threats than to denuclearize NK. Of course, they won't give up the nukes, but by the time we find that out, the elections will be over and the Mueller probe will be lesser news than the NK deal.
Call me cynical, but I see this as a Trumpian ploy to outsmart those he considers his real enemies, his political opponents and a non-political prosecutor.
3
Yes, the best that can be hoped for is "a freeze for a freeze" but will it have the stringent verification agreement of the Iran agreement? And does it not entail throwing the regional allies under a bus? And what confidence can the Koreans or any one else have that that the next president will not renege on any putative agreement that might be reached? All in all Trump is a walking disaster and should called out for it by everyone not just the European allies.
4
>
Say what you will but at the end of the day N Korea will have nuclear missiles and a program to improve them over time, all of which puts us right back where we started from.
Day trading is easy.
2
Watching todays videos (events), I am more hopeful than the author.
I see this meeting differently.
I believe that Trump made a big mistake in pledging to set higher import taxes on South Korea's export to the United States. This pushed Moon Jae-un to allow North Korea to participate in the Olympics and treated Kim's sister with welcome and respect. Unlike Pence, who completely ignored Kim's sister. That is a slap in the face by the Vice-President of the U.S. to Kim.
Moon Jae-in now distrusts our Government to keep its agreements.
Kim Jong-un seized this opportunity to open North Korea to a meeting with South Korea. Thereby creating an atmosphere where both countries will have, at the very least, Diplomatic relations.
If South Koreans and North Koreans can travel over the border freely this will be a big win for both Countries.
Furthermore, because of Trump's rhetoric and actions towards South Korea our Military bases might be removed from South Korea. This is a very precarious position that Trump has put us in.
That said, it would be great for both North and South Korea to finally have peace. In addition, if this happens I can see China moving in to work with both Countries, once peace is secured.
If anyone should receive the Nobel Prize it should be Moon Jae-in.
Tump deserves the Nobel Prize for his nasty and bullying Rhetoric.
Pence deserves the Nobel Prize for Rude and Un-Diplomatic Behavior.
1
I can't believe I'm reading cautiously admiring articles about the posturing of this malignant dictator, not to mention talentless trump. I am deeply alarmed and skeptical of these developments.
4
It's worth noting that Mr. Kristof failed to mention the Pompeo/Kim meeting. Perhaps it's because he suspects it never happened.
The handshake pictures offered as proof raise a number of questions. Why did it take so long to produce them? Why no video, not even one of the two men sipping a cup of tea? Where are the entourages of the two men? Why does Kim appear to be not looking at Pompeo in the side shot and not looking into the camera in the frontal shot? Why is there a floor covering in one shot but not visible in the other? Why are there different decorations on the wall over Pompeo's right shoulder and Kim's left in the two photos--while the mural in the arched panel directly behind them appears to be the same?
Here's my theory. Trump was furious when it appeared Pompeo lacked the votes to be confirmed as Secretary of State. So he simply made up a whopper, telling the world that Pompeo held a secret meeting with Kim in a crazy attempt to burnish the nominee's image. Chief of Staff John Kelly must have thought: "OMG, this is Trump's most outrageous lie yet! And it's not one he can weasel out of. We have to make this trip 'happen.'" It took a few days, but they were finally able to forge a couple of photos.
Then Trump goes on Fox & Friends and declares in his liar's voice that Pompeo actually had no intention of meeting Kim when he flew half way around the world. Huh? Why else would he bother to go?
Who knows what Trump has promised Kim to play along.
1
whatever participation trump had in brokering this meeting was purely incidental. it was in fact the pyongyang olympics ... i mean, the pyeongchang olympics that set this deal in motion.
1
Nick, I love your unrelenting focus on human rights, but a Trump demand in that direction is more than unlikely. In years to come our horrendous treatment of refugees and border crossers, including our expanding practice of tearing infants and toddlers from their mothers, will stain our reputation and standing in the world for generations.
We have finally, under this moral excrescence occupying the White House, sunk to a level quite comparable to that of North Korea. I am ashamed.
3
By virtue of the use of stones, clubs, knives, axes, guns, bullets and bombs, the world in general has been forced to follow the rules of those among us who have no hesitation to use any of them.
It is no coincidence those less hesitant are, overwhelmingly and overbearingly, men. Men who apparently suffer a disconnect between the force of their arms and the center of their reasoning ability
If the problems accompanying the use of force are to be reasonably considered this factor of the peace equation is a radical which must be addressed.
Peace prizes, commissions of inquiry, labor camps are all devices which do nothing to solve a problem which at heart is the peculiar male unwillingness to accept the reality of death.
Rather than attempting to control other's mortality, lets try to stick that thought in our well crafted meerschaum and smoke it.
This reader gives Mr. Trump no credit for events unfolding on the Korean penninusula. I give credit to those who work quietly, behind the scenes; whose intelligence -in all its forms- diligence and commitment to promoting democracy, human rights, and peaceful interaction remain consistent over time. These are career people whose efforts not merely make us look good, but can make us good stewards of values that improve the state of humankind worldwide.
Erratic behavior is just what it is - erratic. It may give pause, and may cause parties hostile to others to consider modifications to behavior for unmeasurable periods of time. But the hard work has been done, again, consistently over time, and it's been one-sided. Without the "deep state" understanding of what North Korea is today, and how it came to be what it is, none of this would be possible.
2
It seems that shortly before Kim announced that he'd end nuclear testing at the Punggye-ri test site, the actual system of caverns there suffered a collapse of some sort. A Chinese study, referenced e.g., on CNN, CBS, The Guardian, and WaPo, says that there is strong evidence that this key site is now unusable, and worse, it may be a source of leaking radiation. Apparently the latest test there caused a 6.5 magnitude earthquake.
The CIA probably informed Trump of this, yet he takes credit for the promised hiatus in NK nuclear testing. Trump has built a persona on so-called reality-TV. Many a slip twixt cup and lip; and don't count your chickens until they're hatched--Trump has skirted around such advice, but the truth will out. We hope that Moon and Kim go on forging peace, but it will be a slow process. Let's be glad for the progress but let's hope Trump's advisors can finally get him to shut up. This now is a Kim-Moon project, as they circle the wagons against the common enemy in the White House.
4
Perhaps Kim has figured out what the Chinese have known for decades namely that in the 21st century, real power stems from economics as much as weaponry. The Chinese are on their way to becoming the dominant world power as a result of their robust economy. They are beating the West at their own game. In addition, you can be sure that Chinese leadership has been leaning on Kim of late to tone down the rhetoric. Perhaps he has gotten the message. Out of it all, Kim is likely to get what no other US administration has been willing to provide and that is some guarantee of sovereignty in return for "denuclearizing".
7
I agree that Kim is likely worried about his country being toppled by the U.S. or a coalition of countries, along with fear for his life, as well as the unpleasant squeeze from U.S. sanctions (although he does not seem to care much about his citizens starving or having any kind of quality of life). But North Korea's track record with regard to agreements is very poor, and its horrendous treatment of its people and prisoners, including stoning them to death, raping then executing women and feeding their infants to guard dogs -- just to name a few practices for which the nation in known.
The fact that Kim did a 180 after launching missiles and hurling threats at the U.S. makes me wonder if President Trump's visit to China demonstrated how easy it is to get him in the palm of one's hand with a little flattery, attention and first-class entertaining. China is surely involved in North Korea's about face.
So what are they up to?
4
Jeanne: "a few practices for which the nation in known." Known how? And if you're right, how come Kim is now an honorable man--according to Trump?
2
The reports are out there for you to read -- starvation, torture, rape, stoning and slaughter of newborns -- by United Press International, Fox News, Doctors Without Borders to name a few sources with the most recent reports. They are largely based on intelligence reports as well as interviews with North Korean defectors. But North Korean human rights atrocities have been reported for years. While North Koreans are not allowed access to the free press, we are.
As to your second question, you are quoting Trump, so the answer should be obvious.
Another issue that ought to be brought up is the NK hacking squad that is actively attacking financial institutions in the west and stealing where it can.
6
This is interesting, while reading this article an ad comes up from Banggood. What is Banggood you ask? A Chinese company. What next, maybe North Korean ads! I find all this amazing, Kim is accused of having ordered his brother murdered, has a horrible human rights record and now gets to sit with the big boys. In 1986 we bought 8 billion dollars from China, now around 590 billion. Most of all its from a country that's not that different as Korea when it comes to policy on human rights! Americans have sold themselves out. Our electric grid is owned by foreign nations. Our government buys product from China, is all this good for us and the world? I wonder that maybe while our country and big business are worried about loosing all this money if we don't trade, countries like China will keep filling Americas closets with things we really don't need, while they use this money to build their military. Hey maybe China told Kim to do the same thing and that would be like killing two birds with one stone.
4
In the boardrooms of the richest companies there are only capitalists, and no one who is, primarily, American.
3
Kristof omits all mention of a 400 lb. gorilla in the room: John Bolton, who killed the last nuclear detente with North Korea in 2001 (by basically demanding that the North make all the concessions the US wanted in advance of any negotiations), and is detested and distrusted by the North. He and another hawk, Pompeo each have one of the neophyte President's ears. That doesn't leave many.
9
"Relieved, skeptical and hopeful." Wow, way to hedge your bets, Kristof.
3
It is fair to be skeptical, although one can't help but feel your skepticism is amplified by a dislike of the president. But why, if you've adopted such a real-politik perspective, do you continue to think the Iran deal was a good one? Every criticism you make of North Korea can be applied to that fascist state.
2
"How to Understand"--how nauseatingly arrogant.
The cosmos is so much more complex than NYT Opinion Kingdom, e.g., Kristof, can conceive. They haven't a clue where it's going or how it got there. They just know--but are unwilling to admit--Obama was a loser and Trump seems to be moving things along. So painful.
Fortuitous or not, Trump's in the White House. Despite the visceral hatred the Opinion Kingdom has for Trump--"History has no alternative."
But like good Stalinists the rewriting of history begins with Kristof et al.
1
"I hope Trump will raise human rights issues."
Yes, I'm sure Trump will raise human rights issues, just as he has done on our southern border, separating infants and small children from their parents before locking them up in for-profit concentration camps.
This journalistic guile of posing as a naif is so tiresome. It's like the days in the USSR when people whose lives were being destroyed by Stalin lamented: "If only Stalin knew!"
The days when the U.S. could credibly "raise human rights issues" are long over. We became a torture regime under Warpresident Bush, murdered civilians with rockets and bombs under Obama, and are now destroying democracy under the Putin/Trump regime.
Human rights? Get serious!
3
I used to think the United States needed to keep the world in order, but that sure doesn't work. Savages.
I hope this results in the United States leaving Asia. There is more than enough of a military presence with Russia, the Koreas, and China. Let them have at it like we should let the Arabs deal with radical islam. The Unites States should setup protective zones for humanity instead of bombing while focusing more on this country. We obviously got our own problems to deal with.
I'm not understanding how trump should be praised for this nor do I buy Kim has changed. Kim was launching rockets 6 months ago. Must be the art of the deal and above my head.
2
One would suspect any credit offered Trump in this matter, from NY Times, CNN, WaPo etc would certainly not denounced as “fake news”.
1
Thank you Mr. K
1
Do not try to understand what is happening on the Korean Peninsula. Let them steep in their own juice, but you, "Dwell in the land and you shall be fed" (Psalms 37:3).
And they gave Obama a Nobel Peace Prize - for exactly what?
1
If Donald Trump finds that his infantile bullying has allowed him to stumble upon some successful, he’ll sa “I told you I was, like, smart.” A stopped clock gets it right twice a day. His blowing up of the Iran deal will show Kim Jong-un that he governs by panic and spite. And Kim will never—ever—give up his nuclear potential.
8
Is Kristof implying he knows ?
1
When Trump mentions human rights Un can bring up how the head of the CIAs torture program is being promoted to the head of the whole of the CIA, how racial minorities are imprisoned and forced to work for private profit for crimes which white people would be given probation and how unarmed African Americans innocent of any crime but standing in their yard or sitting in their car are routinely lawfully shot dead by the US police.
4
This is all we need to know:
The deal with North Korea is the most spectacular, greatest, most confirmableistic, most peaceful, most strongest militarily macho deal that has ever dealed in the known universe that will keep every American safe and ensure that they have jobs and jobs and jobs.
The deal with Iran is a complete disaster, negotiated by our former stupid leaders who are weak and dumb and stupid. It makes us give all our money to Iran, and will ensure that Iranyite nukular bombs will be flying over New Mexico on their way to South Dakota by way of Mississippi. It doesn't... It also... Well, I haven't actually read it, but I know for sure it does bad things because Obama.
Now that's how to understand what's happening in North Korea. Don't you people know anything?
8
Hate Trump all you want but we've come to this point ONLY because of Trump.
1
It is the beginning of a new era in the Pacific;tthe US pivot is now terminated.
Trump is a buffoon for Xi and the Pacific countries;Taiwan and Japan are doomed...
4
btw, this is surely some master devious plan by Russia. Russia is in business with Kim. Russia provides fuel and other goods. Kim sends chemical weapons to Syria. Do you think Assad can accept any shipment without Russias help or approval? Russia wants the world to think that it's something other than a third world prison and would love to pull a burn like this.
I'm to believe Kim has all of a sudden had a change of heart? LOL! LOL!
3
Kim wants Trump to look good!! I wonder why?
3
N Korea economy is tanking and to survive, Kim puts on an agreeable face with the hope that sanctions will ease. Trump knows this and, ever the opportunist, decides to talk tough. But it was the S. Koreans who invited Kim to the OLympics and negotiate the end of Korean War. Once N Korean economu recovers, Kim will go right back to belligerent self. Trump will shout "Fake news".
1
I want to see permanent peace in Korea. Trump will ruin it. If he had a shred of intelligence and decency he would stay away from the negotiations. I fear that Trump will make this backfire and cause a nuclear war. Trump is far too stupid and egotistical to handle this.
4
Trump acted like an idiot (on purpose? by accident?) and Moon Jae-in got a bit worried; his country could soon be nuked and/or invaded. It would hardly matter who won, in that case. So he started serious talks with his opposite number...
Is this the new normal, now? Nuts...
1
I got about halfway through this article and realized that Mr. Kristoff was writing about. Israel. The Middle East. Vietnam. U name it! Anywhere at all where US Foreign Policy has been involved in the 60 years of my lifetime.
Nothing Changes! Just a bunch of taxpayer dollars ($Ka-Ching$!) spent on some really excellent diplomat's meals!
$Ka Ching $! Nothing changes...ever. Except the menu, which is NEVER bologna or Spam.
Yasser Arafat got a nobel Peace Prize. So did Obama! Trick or treat, time time to hand out some more!
Time for more Filet Mignon & Lobster. NOT bologna
I share Nicholas's skepticism and want regime change much more than denuclearization, which seems to me inevitable to avoid confrontations.
The reason is that if they once acquired the nuclear technology then it won't go away in elites's mind and if they once relish the taste of human rights and democracy then it won't go away either but in people's mind, and hopefully as a system. And I certainly want to see them happier rather than brutalized by the regime and sanctions. If we (two Koreans and Japanese) share the same feeling (as people living under the influence of China and the US), that will be the peace. (Here is a problem: Japan still has a king under whose name Korea was colonized, which is the thing China never did. Whether Koreans accept the present Japan is another problem.)
2
What is so interesting about Kristof's perspective is that there's no awareness of Korea's desire to unify itself. His North Korea is US, not a South Korean, construct, and his viewpoint is "locked outside the gates". This US-centric distortion of reality is emblematic of US foreign policy opinion-writers at a time when the Pax Americana is collapsing, thanks to the world's awareness of US involvement in war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria.
1
Everybody used what leverage they have.
North Korea: Has nukes and missiles, hooks the fish (South Korea and the U.S.) with offers, however unlikely, to give them up.
U.S.: North Korea is not really scared of U.S. threats, but South Korea is. They are petrified crazy ol' Trump and Bolton will actually start WW III in Asia. I believe all of Trump's chest beating and threats were really aimed at scaring South Korea, not the North. So South Korea invited the North to the Olympics and now this historic meeting, to try to get something done before the U.S. (read: Trump) messes things up.
South Korea: Sanctions are truly killing the North. The South is wealthy, has food, and can invest in the North. That's what they have to dangle. Also, the South offers the potential for the North to be able to wean itself off the China mother's milk, which the North would love to do.
The only one not invited to the party was China. This must have caught them flat footed. For decades they've had it both ways--propping up the murderous regime in the North, while denying that they had much influence to change their behavior. If a miracle happens and a deal is cut, they could be left out in the cold, and worried that the North could become part of a unified Korea--which could mean U.S. troops on their border.
Who knows if this goes anywhere, but this is only the second remotely positive development of the Trump presidency (with the first being the exile of Steve Bannon).
2
The thing is that Trump has a term but Kim Jong-un doesn't. All Kim has to do is to pretend performing a good behavior for (most likely) 2.5 years. Then a new US President will come, who will be more like Clinton, Bush, and Obama who were not able to make decisive actions against N. Korea.
Your focus on Kim’s advantages and cleverness is one-sided. I think you underestimate Trump in this diplomatic adventure. He will certainly get a Trump Pyongyang casino built with cheap labor. Maybe get some good advice on how to make this country more like North Korea.
So you mean the President scores a political win without actually doing anything? That definitely sounds like Trump's agenda. Punt team punt!
I certainly enjoy avoiding war with North Korea as much as the next person. I'm not giving Trump any credit though. He wants to pat himself on the back for fixing a problem he created. Actually, he's not even fixing the problem. North Korea is already a de facto nuclear power and will probably remain that way indefinitely. Trump is sacrificing American international precedent in order to save face. Every oppressive, third world, dictatorship is going to want the same deal as North Korea now. Trump couldn't accomplish this embarrassment on his own either. As noted, Moon Jae-in is really the one that defused the situation.
I'd honestly rather see the deal fall apart. We can go back to situation normal without easing sanctions on Kim and giving China a pass on their black market supply chain. The tension has passed until either Trump or Kim start stoking the fire again. We aren't getting rid of Kim but hopefully Trump has a short shelf life.
All true, except for the Nobel Prize part. Certainly Mr. Moon is the one who should be nominated, if anyone. But that doesn't matter. This will all work out to everyone's satisfaction as long as Trump doesn't wreck it. The North Koreans will hold on to nuclear weapons which they would never use as they know the US retaliation would be the end for them - Pakistan, too, is a nuclear state and no threat to the US.
1
It's amazing to read how much the demands in this article mimic the complete failure of past administrations the rid North Korea of its nuclear weapons. Mr. Kristof wants Trump to declare in a meeting to denuclearize the peninsula that Kim Jung Un and his pals have "committed crimes against humanity." Maybe Mr Kristof missed the idea that a bunch of nukes landing in Japan, Guam, and California represent a significant "crime against humanity." That doesn't even count the ones we will kill with revenge and more crimes against humanity. We need to keep focused on the goal of ridding all of Korea of nuclear weapons. As far as Libya goes, why did we help get rid of Gaddafi. He wasn't even pointing a BB gun at us. We ended up with turmoil and a breeding ground for jihadists. Trump is the first president who will meet Kim Jung Un. It is the first time in decades that a North Korean president walked across the border and shook hand with the president of South Korea. Their stated goals are to rid the peninsula of nukes, sign a peace treaty, and formally end the war. We can only hope there are no Kristofs in the negotiating committee to destroy those goals.
Wow, Trump to get a Nobel Peace Prize? For what? Calling Kim a name and bullying him? Ok, maybe Trump had some small part to play, but certainly not on the level of a Nobel. And by the way, the deal has to happen. My concern is that Trump will tweet or rant something that blows up the potential of a peaceful Korean peninsula. He needs to step back and let Kim and Moon work out the endless details as it really is all about them. NOT about Trump. But Trump is sure to congratulate himself for his small part.
There have been exactly two uses of nuclear weapons in warfare, and we all know how those were done by. So why is it such a horrible thing to have one more member of the club?
India and Pakistan both had nuclear weapons during their last war. Did either use them? No. Israel has had nuclear weapons during am unknown, but guessable number of their wars. Did they use them? Again, no. The main purpose of nuclear weapons is to deter other states from messing with one's own, and they do that very well. If this means that we cannot threaten North Korea with intervention, that can only save American lives that would be lost in another Korean War.
1
To amplify this, isn't it a bit odd for the only nation who ever used nuclear weapons to be the decider as to who can have them?
Sobering! But will pugnacious, tweet-taunting Donald Trump with his two new, inexperienced, but very hawkish aides in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John "Blowtorch" (as referred in these pages) Bolton go for the "make nice," but accomplish little scenario you depict. I can just as easily see the blustering bully cutting short the meeting and going on a nuclear rampage pushing us to (but, hopefully not over) the brink. Either way it looks as if the world is in for a "raw deal" in Korea.
1
So what deal are we going for?
US pulls troops out of SK for Kim giving up his nukes?
Sorry, not going to happen.
Merging SK and NK is fantasy.
Kim is just stringing us along, hoping sanctions will be diminished. Later, in desperation, he may SAY he's going to give up missiles capable of hitting California, but don't believe it.
We are not going to do nuclear regime-change and everyone knows it. Kim is still holding most of the cards.
Our troops for his long-range missiles seems to be the most realistic deal we could get.
Sorry, SK and Japan.
But, give the Nobel to Moon.
1
It may true that Trump's "threats" nudged something to change. So it's a good thing that having an unhinged narcissist as US president is a good thing? Oy.
However, Kristof mentions the Iran deal. Question: if the two Koreas do broker some sort of end to hostilities, and the US was part of a de-militarization, de-nuclearization plan, how likely is it that North Korea would believe anything the US agreed to?
A nation that tears up a nuclear deal when a new leader comes to power is untrustworthy and suspect.
2
This piece seems ignorant to me, a non-North Korea Expert, mainly because the columnist does not understand or take into account the differences between 2000, 2007, and 2018, which are both subtle and conspicuous.
Take, for instance, the talk of denuclearization. It was one of the main agendas during the 2007 summit, or least, South Korean officials wanted to treat as one. But the North Korean leader (the father of Kim Jung-un) simply ignored the demand of the South, and therefore there was only a vague mention of denuclearization in the statement that came out after the summit. Compare that with the 2018 statement, where they express their will to work toward the "complete denuclearization" (which is of course open to interpretation).
Try also to read what Kim Jung-un said during the official dinner after the summit. There he makes quite candid remarks about the limits of the joint statement and the need to overcome them on the basis of mutual trust and will to peace. He says he is aware of skepticisms, but he is ready and eager to work toward peace in the Korean peninsula. It sounds as though he is speaking to people like the columnist...
Korea was a single independent country for several thousand years before being annexed and governed by Japan. The victors over Japan in WW II, divided the country into a Communist North Korea and a UN Democratic South Korea.
Meanwhile Mao had secured China as a Communist governed country. Stalin then incited North Korea to invade South Korea with support from China. The South, with the aid of the USA fought to a draw and the present 1953 Armistice agreement divided the North and South along the 38 th parallel.
Since 1945 the USA has led the establishment of a democratic, free trade world order that has raised the standard of living for much of the world. The Russian Communist system could not keep up and has failed to enrich it's people.
But the Chinese Communist system has been a staggering success and China is slated to become the World's largest economy. Their goal will be to return Korea to one governed by a single entity.........one that is a Chinese client .
China is now led by a committee composed of systems engineers. The plan over the next 15 years is to shape the World economy with China being the lead and the most prosperous. South Korea conversion will be one of the first steps and China is already making nice with Japan.
Trump has already voluntarily pulled out of the Pacific Trade consortium and will likely find the USA completely out of the aerea in 5-10 years. The battlefield with Communism is now economics and not with military might.
4
I think the real mystery in all this is what does Kim Jong-un really want. Obviously he wants to stay in power, but what else does he want, if anything? Does he really care about his people? If so, why does he not pursue economic policies that would benefit the masses, and why does he shoot citizens who try to flee the country? Perhaps in some ways he's much like Trump: a narcissistic, power-hungry, autocratic, megalomaniac. If so, maybe all he wants from this round of negotiations is attention, power, and admiration, and nothing more will come of it.
2
Something not mentioned in the article is the Bolton-Pompeo affect. What advice will they give the President? Unfortunately I don't see much good to come from these talks. Too much negative rhetoric from the Presidents of both countries, and the new NSA and SOS are hard right warmongers.
And Trump is only in the game to see himself as the winner, and if for one heartbeat he thinks he's been taken... all bets are off.
1
This is a China play. Remember, Kim went to see Xi before this meeting. and Xi most likely guaranteed Kim's regime survival. Without a threat from N. Korea, S. Korea will move closer to China for greater access to the Chinese market and away from America because of Trump's America First Agenda. S. Korea sees growth opportunities in N. Korea and China while America is turning inward. Trump's attack on China's tech ambition is forcing China to calm this issue down and focus on its core tech industry. We have to look at the bigger issue of tech dominance. Developing N. Korea will create jobs for China while giving it a market for its goods. It means more $$$ to finance China's tech ambition. Its a win for China.
1
When a foundation weakens or gives way the structure collapses. The Arab Spring activist voiced their displeasure over the support the US gave to Mubarak, revealing to observers that in a world that balances power the status quo is preferred. While democratic states champion human rights and processes, they prefer to do business with authoritarian leaders because it beats fighting them. Somebody gave the DPRK missile technology to threaten the US. Consequently, business will increase in the North and the US Troops will move farther South. China and Russia remain the guardians of the old world that is attached to the threat of Armageddon.
So here's the million dollar question, Mr. Kristof. If the Korean War is finally brought to an end with a peace treaty and North Korea begins verifiable denuclearization, will you champion Donald Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize?
2
I’m curious to know what Pompey promised on his secret mission, but I’ll give Trump as much credit as any other president who tried to get the North Koreans to become good world citizens. For that we must wait 10 years or so.
“As Kim Jong-un stepped into South Korea on Friday — the first North Korean leader to do so — let’s acknowledge that he has played a weak hand exceptionally well.”
And for the United States, Donald Trump played a strong hand exceptionally poorly because he is a weak president.
Trump will take anything he can get with a North Korea deal because he will see it as his “unique” achievement. He will go ahead and tear up the Iran nuclear deal because it involves success for President Obama.
In the short run, tensions will be defused with regard to imminent war. In the long run, all bets are off for any lasting accomplishments from these talks.
China knows that North Korea has always served as a buffer zone and a distraction. China will gain the most from this charade as it continues patiently playing the long game in its quest for global domination.
Mitigating North Korean human rights abuses as a corollary to these proceedings would at least provide one emergent ray of hope to the world.
3
Will any deal be likely to halt or delay North Korea's development of ICBMs?
Trump haters need to acknowledge that a lot of progress has been made. It states with Otto and continues. This will be an enormous victory for the world.
1
I have to agree with all the pessimism. The biggest problem is Kim himself. How exactly do you have peace with a nation who shoots its own people trying to cross the border? What do you think a nation of starved, brain washed people would do if they discovered their government have been lying to them for generations?
There is no way the DMZ would de-arm if Kim continued to hold his people hostage. China and South Korea would never just step down. Do you think Kim would allow for reunification, if there was no safe out for him? He is still a young man, where would he and all his accomplices go?
How many people remember what happened to Erich Honecker the last leader of East Germany before the Berlin Wall came down? I'm pretty sure Kim Jong Un's inner circle reminds him everyday of what happened.
You are leaving out the fact that North Korea has been asking for the direct talk with the US for a while now. So, yes, Trump should get some credit, but not for bringing them to the table. It is for accepting their demand for the talk that his predecessor Bush and Obama ignored in favor of the failed strategic patience.
As for the outcome, the removal of the nuclear threat should be all we care. All others should be left for North and South Koreans to work out on their own: they are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves without the US patronizing.
15
The show is just to keep the US on the side for the next couple of years. It is clear that Trillion dollar deficit Trump is a loose canon in search of a war; no one in Korea is interested in being the target.
Facebook could be the need of many citizens of the non English speaking world, but for God's sake not Beyonce. All these countries have outstanding music traditions which reflect their rich cultures, histories and aspirations.
I don't get the hype, and I really think Mr. Kristof is seeing this right.
What was there to gain for the South Koreans in being so generous to the North? Does the Moon government think a peace-declaration will actually bring real peace in the Korean peninsula? Does the Moon government actually think that "ending the war" will actually bring peace? I think it only puts NK on a strategic advantage to attack South Korea if they wanted to in the future. (Ending the war would also imply the U.S. forces leaving Korea too)
It's sad how the media is portraying this as a huge success- did we forget why we wanted to get rid of the Kim regime? (Hint: Human rights? Dictatorship? The NUCLEAR BOMB?)
I have no clue why the current South Korean government is trying to make "peace" and legitimize a criminal regime. And watching what happened yesterday, I was actually amazed at how witty and skilled NK is at diplomacy (and how bad SK is).
If you think about it, if the past SKorean presidents offered a "peace treaty" like Moon did, do you think NK wouldn't have accepted it? Offering peace to NK is the equivalent of promising a criminal that's about to be captured "freedom" and amnesty.
Having said all this, I would be amazed (and VERY happy) to see NKorea actually opening their borders, improving human rights, and switching to a more democratic peaceful system (like some of the commentators commented, how KJU could be like Gorbachev). I highly doubt it though. Why would they?
North Korea's missile program gave the United States the pretext for deploying THAAD to South Korea, which China vehemently protested. The Chinese even went to so far as to break off diplomatic relations with South Korea in protest. It's conceivable that these events are part of some grand Chinese plot to readjust the balance of power in Northeast Asia.
China was unwilling to abandon the Kims in the 1990s when their nuclear program was really picking up steam. Had they done so, we wouldn't be in the predicament that we are in today. China deserves a lot of the blame for the situation. They are attempting to use North Korea to force an end to the US presence in South Korea and to weaken the strength of the ROK-US-Japan alliance.
Anyone who opposes Kim in North Korea gets sent to a labor camp or killed. He is not surrounded by people who might question his judgment. If he comes to believe that his rule or his personal safety are at risk he could lash out against the world in a truly horrific way. It's all well and good to have the leaders of South Korea and North Korea shaking hands, but there is only one kind of peace North Korea is likely to agree to, and that's peace on its terms.
Had North Korea said "we'll close the labor camps and end the murders in return for economic aid" it might be possible to have some sympathy for them. Instead they chose to develop weapons capable of killing millions so they could demand aid - or else! That's who we are dealing with here.
2
If we deport the Dreamers would that be a human rights violation? 800,000 violations.
Who are we to pontificate to them?
While POTUS may take credit it was the South Korean leader who pushed for peace relentlessly.
In the meanwhile, the leaders of China and India are having multiple meetings this week and we are not part of the discussions. A disappointed Japan will follow next.
We, with our walls, our trade wars, can at best "ask" them about human rights or as you put "raise" but can no longer demand such rights. We abandoned our own poor, we have no mental health services while a opioid epidemic rages. We no longer have a moral high ground. We ceded it last election. Lets hope 2020 is different!
4
There are a lot of human rights abuses going on in a lot other countries. Its best to ignore those and do business with those countries. Hopefully at some point in the future, those countries would have made enough money to stop bothering with human rights abuses. Like, for example, China? No regime change happened there and they seem to have a happy happy relationship with US and the rest of the western world? Hopefully the North Koreans would learn from them and expand their economy while hanging on to their nuclear weapons for insurance against a sudden "regime change".
2
While I hope Kristof is right, I suspect that Kim's "game plan" is a bit more Machiavellian than simply negotiating toward a vague, non-verified halt to nuclear activities. A more likely scenario is that Kim has already planned out exactly how he will cheat on the sanctions while feigning enough compliance to keep sanctions away (or at least reduced) for several years. He will then violate the terms in some spectacular manner.
In this darker scenario, what brought Kim to the bargaining table is neither Trump's sanctions nor Moon's Olympic diplomacy. Instead, it was a combination of a catastrophic failure at North Korea's main nuclear testing facility (as reported in Chinese media) and Kim's view of Trump as not only gullible and ignorant of North Korea but also so hungry of a "win" that he will be easy to manipulate.
In this scenario, the "breakthrough" that Pompeo reported from his meeting with Kim (the North Korean dictator's comment that he understands that US troops in South Korea add to regional stability) was actually a trial balloon to see how ready the Trump Administration was to accept longed-for ‘good news’ uncritically. A critical look at Kim’s statement would have shown that every generation of the Kim dynasty has been particularly adept at lying to foreign leaders in such an erstwhile manner that the leaders walk away believing that it was their own prowess as negotiators and influences that caused Kim to change policies.
12
"How will it all end?" is indeed the right question.
We are trading off the short-term goal of avoiding nuclear war in the present situation for the long term cost of permanent nuclear proliferation. Sooner or later that will come back to haunt us -- to the tune of tens of millions of deaths and planetary devastation.
When will people learn? We must commit to complete nuclear disarmament, under a world-wide, long-term plan. It's difficult, and against the conventional wisdom. But it's really our only sane option.
6
Nobody really understands what is happening in North Korea. I suspect Kim was told that keeping nuclear weapons might end his rule, while giving them up and making peace would help him. I don't know and only time will tell.
1
I am far more concerned about the horrific human rights abuses - indeed crimes against humanity - taking place in North Korean labor camps and prisons than I am about their nukes, which I find highly improbable that they'll ever use against any foreign entity. (So sue me.)
Unfortunately I have little faith that Trump will raise these issues, much less take concrete steps to address them. Mr. Kristof seems to have some hope that he will, so I suppose I shouldn't give up hope either. Probably, though, we will have to wait for our next, hopefully Democratic president, to address this.
4
I too condemn these actions, but they are in a hostile foreign country and as such we can do almost nothing about them. They really are not our business, now nukes could effect our country or our allies so they must go.
2
Yeah, my guess is that Trump isn't going to plan anything at all. He'll just shake hands, say whatever comes to mind...it's the picture that counts: Trump making history.
1
PS. ....through diplomacy of course, not through military actions.
Personally I have a hard time giving Trump credit considering that he hasn't done anything other that bluster a bit, call Kim names, and talk wildly. Sanctions are hardly new - they have, at times, been tightened until folks were starving in the NK countryside. Trump, of course, already claims that he has done more than any other predecessor ever.
The game is Kim's. The timing likely tied to Kim's having developed the arsenal he feels that he needs for now far more than it is DT tweeting about 'fire and fury.' Trump and his fans will think that his tough talk made Kim buckle, but that is foolish and empty headed. It will be a good thing if the peninsula calms down for now, but, as noted, any agreement will look good until it doesn't. Agreements have been made and broken over and over...
11
He worked with China and your "talk widely" is perhaps the only thing that Kim understands. There was a credible threat to his future, that got his attention, or at least I think so.
4
Or maybe DJT’s wild, erratic talk just signaled to North Korea how very easy DJT is to bamboozle. DJT has already publically stated that Kim Jung Un is an “honorable” negotiator. Let us pause to imagine the sound of all the conservative heads exploding if Barack Obama had ever said such a thing - why, Republicans in Congress would have filed articles of impeachment that very same day! However, pointing out the blatant, shameless hypocrisy of the GOP is easier than finding flies on a dung heap, so let’s go back to the original point, which is that DJT is vain, ignorant, and desperate for attention. Slather him with fake admiration, and use judicious flattery, and North Korea will have DJT kissing their boots on command. Best of all. The angry eruption that is sure to follow when DJT realizes he was played will give North Korea the perfect cover to withdraw from whatever agreement was determined. Game, set, match to North Korea.
2
From what Kristof says, many countries want nuclear weapons primarily to stand toe-to-toe with the US. Maybe everybody should just denuclearize so nobody feels they need to be a nuclear power to be safe.
1
It is not just our nuclear weapons. We didn't use nuclear weapons in Iraq and Libya. It's our use of the military that worries these countries. To them having nuclear weapons makes sure the US won't use the military to attack them.
So in order to be safe, the US would have to stop attacking other countries. Good luck with that.
11
Mr. Kristof acknowledges that this will mean accepting a North Korea which a full pledged nuclear power, which is refreshing and realistic. He also describes it as a dynasty, and says it is unwise to predict when it will fall. I agree the deal is cause for hope in the short term. But what are the long term implications of this? What’s to prevent the next princeling from being even more unhinged and using preemptive nuclear war to try to unite the peninsula, or to bring the U.S. some fire and fury? Deterrence does not work as well when your people are just implements of your power, or when your dealing with a completely unchecked and god worshiped autocrat who is truly insane. There are non nuclear historic examples. I‘d like to see such concerns discussed candidly as well. I’m not saying I’m necessarily opposed to the deal, just like most very worried. Remember that it is ultimately Trump making these decisions, and that he is far less concerned with the long term interests of the US than Kim is with NK’s. Neither care about the stability and peace of the world. Trump just wants to divert from the investigation of him at home and feed his ego. I don’t believe he is capable of genuinely caring about other people or the fate of the world after he’s dead. He’d like to get the peace prize and say he’s better than Obama of course, as you say. I really hope its not at too great a cost.
4
"But the U.S. won’t give up the South."
South Korea is an ally, not a dependency or colony.
We should support them as long as our support is needed and desired. We have no other inherent rights to be there.
(Note: I fully respect the sacrifices made by U.S. soldiers in the Korean War. My father and both of his brothers fought there.)
If North Korea truly gets rid of nuclear weapons, which is still far from certain, and limits its conventional threat against the South, then we should vacate the peninsula.
7
The brilliance of all this is that two highly volatile and unpredictable egomaniac leaders managed to realize they were on a collision course and changed direction before it was too late.
I remember when the wall in Berlin came down we were all ecstatic, screaming new world order. Suddenly all world problems look solvable. The real results were actually very different. I suspect the final Korea solution is not known to any of the parties present today.
However great win for the president. He has managed something that may have eluded some of the greatest minds. We should all thank the folks at twitter for keeping the channels of communications open. Now let’s turn this new found pragmatism to Cuba. There will be a new guy soon and I am sure if we can ignore the Floridans we could fix that too!
The most likely hypothesis is that Mr. Kim is playing Mr. Trump. Trump's shortcomings are well known, especially his ignorance, his impulsiveness, and his susceptibility to flattery and adulation. With Trump, Kim believes he can get everything he wants and keep his missiles and nuclear weapons. After all, Trump has already agreed to meet with Kim without setting any conditions at all. When has Trump ever "changed direction before it was too late?"
Frederick wrote:
"The brilliance of all this is that two highly volatile and unpredictable egomaniac leaders managed to realize they were on a collision course and changed direction before it was too late ..."
1
A far more believable hypothesis is that Mr. Kim decided he could play Mr. Trump. Trump is ignorant, impulsive, and susceptible to flattery. Both Kim and Mr. Moon know they can manipulate him. In fact, they have already done so. Under this scenario Kim believes he can get out from under the sanctions, keep his nuclear weapons, and trick Trump into making any number of unconditional giveaways. The planned meeting between Kim and Trump is one such unconditional giveaway.
Frederick wrote:
"The brilliance of all this is that two highly volatile and unpredictable egomaniac leaders managed to realize they were on a collision course and changed direction before it was too late."
Here we are living in a world where "liberals" are questioning meeting with and peace with North Koreans, and "conservatives" are saying we shouldn't be so tough on Russia. Amazing! And this shows how partisanship when it is "your person" in office is reigning supreme. Remember all the uproar when Obama said he'd meet with Iran or other world leaders from conservatives? Remember the praise Obama and Hillary were given with the Russian "reset" in relations (and scorn from conservatives).
This is all bad for our country. Everyone needs to be honest with themselves. If it was "your person" in office would you praise them? If so you should support the person even if you totally aren't on board with them. Vice versa as well. Criticism needs to be given when the person or party you support is doing the wrong thing. What are we about? Political parties? Or are we for what we think is right, and fair?
14
As a liberal, I was glad to hear that they would talk face to face. It's far better than the threats of war Trump kept issuing.
I hope that at the least some peaceful measures will be signed to lessen the chances for war. As for full peace, I will cross my fingers and hope.
If you set off a whole series of nuclear bombs in the same place, eventually you blow it up. That is what happens to nuclear test sites. Whole islands have been blow apart that way.
It is a mistake to make more of it than it is. They can just dig another hole in the ground. If in the meantime they can get credit for "closing the site" they blew up, well then they will try. That would be a mistake too.
Kristof notices another mistake, then just does it anyway. "Denuclearization" does not mean that one side alone will disarm and leave itself helpless before the other. They must give up their weapons completely? Sure. For what? Nothing, and then we come for them? Not gonna happen.
Human rights are important, and the North Korean prisons are awful. Nuclear war striking large parts of the world including us is pretty bad too. Don't make perfect the enemy of the good. We don't need to solve both at the same time. Just don't do a nuclear war. That is enough for today.
Many of those who demand more are really trying to prevent anything at all. Don't play at that game, because there be dragons there, in the form of nuclear war right here in River City (Music Man).
11
What Kristof and other liberal/globalists do not understand is the power of a common culture. Trump won the election on it, and now we are seeing him apply it on the world stage. Take away the Soviet Union and the wall comes down and East and West Germany are united. Take away China and call the bluff of North Korea's hardline generals, North and South Korea will reunify very quickly.
4
Such a reunification would be even more costly and difficult that the German one. But as a goal it's worth pursuing.
1
"Take away China"? China is too big and too powerful to be left out of any equation and I sincerely doubt any of the players are thinking that way.
Take away China? Not going t happen in my lifetime or yours. China's wealth and power will grow through the end of 21st century and beyond.
North Korea is likely to move forward as a totalitarian state on the Chinese model.
Yes, to step back from the precipice, even if it's all just theater, is good. (Air kisses to all.)
4
The United States really shouldn't lecture any nation on human rights, as its government is actively trying to deprive many of its citizens of health care, does nothing to prevent gun violence, and makes takes giveaways to the wealthiest fraction of its population while doing nothing for the poor.
106
Check the Federal budget. Line items of interest to the poor: Medicaid, monthly welfare checks, HUD subsidized housing, free meals at school, etc etc etc 4 trillion goes a long way.....
"Check the Federal budget," indeed. Anti-poverty spending is significantly less than $1 billion, and much of it goes to children, the elderly, and the working poor.
Read $1 trillion, not $1 billion.
The great fear North Korea has had is an attack from the United States. Now that they have a small nuclear arsenal, they feel safe from us. As Mr. Kristof points out, they saw what happened in Libya and Iraq, and now they have protected themselves against that threat. Kim Jong-un has played his cards extremely well. He has nothing to lose in meeting with Moon Jae-in and everything to gain meeting one-on-one with Donald Trump. President Trump is over confident and badly needs some kind of success — an ideal situation for Kim to get what he wants in return for empty promises. Whatever they agree to, Trump will claim it to be a breakthrough — one of the greatest deals he has ever made, he'll say. Which is saying nothing.
11
In actuality the question is probably what kind of war and under which conditions would we want to wage. Do we prefer a war with a country that is a credible nuclear threat to the mainland United States or a war where our military takes the battle to the enemy? Delays and posturing only make sense when the stakes aren't constantly rising for us.
If we must have a war, I prefer a war with a North Korea that has fewer and more primitive nuclear weapons over the alternative.
I hope and pray that a war is avoidable. But if it's not then let's it have under conditions most favorable to us.
Why the heck would you go to war with North Korea? Because they say they hate America? Thats it? Have they DONE anything to the USA?
"Hard-liners will fume that we’re being played"? Bear in mind that in our case at least the hard-liners are among those directly involved. Luckily, looking good takes precedence over everything else for Trump (which I'm sure Kim understands) so form will probably win over substance and we'll get peace for a while at least.
3
It is better than looking bad in every way, with dictators running amuck, as they were a couple of years ago.
Everyone gets what they wanted from this peace overture except Japan. Kim gets legitimacy for his regime and the loosening of economic sanctions. President Moon gets temporary peace and new markets for S. Korea, and Xi of China gets Trump off his back now that Kim is behaving. Trump gets only a verbal promise from Kim that N. Korea will denuclearize. Meanwhile Japan which always shares the longstanding American policy of getting tough with the North is left holding the stick and feeling more irrelevant than ever for trying to be a loyal U.S. ally. The tripartite alliance of the U.S., South Korea and Japan which Obama has tried to set up to counter China and North Korea is now in disarray along with the pivot to Asia. We're getting a preview of the future where we're no longer at the driver's seat and are reduced to reacting to events as they develop.
22
If North and South Korea are able to reach a peace agreement that both sides can live with the world will be a much safer place. Regime change should be off the table as it's up to the people of North Korea to change their leadership not outside influences. Time will tell if this time is different but I'm hopeful that we've reached a crossroads and all sides are beginning to realize that the states quo just isn't working. Holding onto the past keeps us from moving forward.
1
"Regime change should be off the table as it's up to the people of North Korea to change their leadership not outside influences. "
Except that's like saying it's for the mugger and his victim to work things out for themselves because it's not for outside forces to say that mugging is a crime.
When it comes to culture, South Korea has the North beat by a mile. South Korea has KPOP.
2
Sir, there is little chance that you would ever be mistaken for an "expert" on North Korea -- what with your columns over the last several months in which you warned that a nuclear war might break out between the US and North Korea and replayed North Korean propaganda in an effort to shape public opinion in the US.
6
If it wasn't for the south korean president who pushed for peace, this would not be happening and the threat of war would still remain. And if this deal falls through, then war talk will ratchet up once again.
And most of the sane people in the world were worrying about Trump starting a nuclear war. Trump was doing everything he could to convince the N. Koreans he was going to attack and start a war.
Do you think the South Korean president operated in a bubble? He was responding to events around him, largely initiated by Mr. Trump, for whom your hatred eclipses all rational thought, it would seem. Besides, what on earth does that have to do with comment about Mr. Kristof?
Trump raise human rights issues? You've got to be kidding. The only thing that moves Ttump is money and power. He and Kim Jong-un have a lot in common.
13
Kristof is predicting that sometime in the future they'll be calling for Trump to receive the Nobel Prize.
Welcome to the future, because there are 3 articles on Fox News right now calling for exactly that.
10
No, please reread the article. That's NOT what he's saying, and not what he is predicting.
Nobody loathes Trump more than me. But if he is instrumental in making real peace on the Korean peninsula, he (and Kim) would probably deserve the Nobel peace prize. But that is still a very big if.
What else can US corporate media pundits offer but pessimistic views of the current events on the Korean Peninsula, taking their cue (possibly even subconsciously) from Washington and its "endless war" doctrine?
There are tens of millions of dollars at stake with possibility of peace breaking out, as the website Government Executive explains it, "North Korea is making the world uneasy with its missile launches. It’s also driving business for defense contractors."
https://www.govexec.com/contracting/2017/09/us-defense-contractors-north...
That assessment occurred at a time when Washington and its servile media were attempting to argue that a North Korean test of an ICBM, which aimed for “maximum distance”, flew for 47 minutes and 12 seconds while travelling 998km (620 miles), indicated that their missiles could reach US targets, including NY City.
The fact that this assessment was offered unanimously throughout the US media - all with a straight face - meant that there are no comic heights to which Washington and the media won't ascend for the purpose of convincing us that the world is a dangerous place.
And any government that spends over half its discretionary outlays on war MUST convince its citizenry that danger lurks around every corner and that attempts for peaceful resolution of conflict must be looked upon with complete skepticism, for therein lurks sinister motives.
Peace now frightens our politicians and media.
19
You nailed it Ed. The military industrial complex thrives on induced fear and failed peace negotiations. Peace on the peninsula is not good for the apparently necessary US "dominance" of Asia or the sellers of weapon systems and fear.
2
Agree with the commenter below. Perhaps the reports in science news about the collapse of Mantap due to nuclear testing precipitated this sudden interest in nuclear peace?
http://www.iflscience.com/policy/this-could-be-the-real-reason-north-kor...
4
The real diplomacy was done by the South Koreans, but Trump is shameless so he'll take all the unmerited credit...
14
Let Kim sit at the table with the big boys. It's what he really wants and hopefully peace will prevail. We can all pretend he's good little man.
2
I’m sure that President Trump, if asked, would extend his gratitude to Kristof for writing that “… and President Trump gets some credit …” for what’s happening on the Korean Peninsula. Big of Nick. By now Nick should be aware that a groundswell is emerging among congressional Republicans to formally nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize if a constructive peace emerges between the Koreas that denuclearizes the peninsula. The truth is that if not for Trump’s inspired brinkmanship, in-between Big Macs, there wouldn’t BE the chance of peace on the peninsula.
We should recognize that absolutely nobody outside the Koreas has the slightest idea of “how to understand” what’s going on there. Even China is signaling concern that “stuff” is happening whose end-state they can’t foresee and over which they have inadequate influence. It would be inspired at this point for Trump to invite President Xi Jinping to join him around a hotline connecting them to the two Korean presidents, and spring for the popcorn.
The good thing about all this is that just about the only thing that matters to Trump is that Kim Jong-un verifiably DOESN’T get to keep his nuclear infrastructure. You guys want to declare peace and eliminate the fortifications? Fine. You want to kick 90% of American soldiers out of Korea? Fine. You want the South to underwrite economic growth in the North for its own purposes? Fine. You want to standardize recipes for the “perfect” kimchi? Fine.
1
But get rid of the nukes. That’s really all that matters to Trump, and it should be all that matters to all of us. And, by the by, it legitimately should be all that matters to Xi – if Kim can hit a West Coast U.S. city with a nuke, he can hit Beijing.
We don’t know if this is real or pageantry. Wait a month, and we may know.
But NOBODY outside the U.S. government, and possibly China’s presidential office, as well the Korean presidents themselves, know “how to understand what’s happening in North Korea”. That includes Nicholas Kristof.
3
Kumbaya. Nixon went to China. Two years later...
6
The truth is that Trump's truculence only inspired action because is was so frightening to Moon that he took an initiative. Kim isn't there because Trump did anything but because Moon did and because Kim's own test site collapsed.
3
This is welcome news.
I expect that Trump will (and should be) nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Obama won it for far less.
5
Why wouldn't the Nobel prize go to Kim and Moon? They're the ones (under the watch of China's Xi) that are making things happen. I suspect things are unfolding pretty much how the Western educated Kim planned and anticipated, regardless of who sits in the oval office.
You underestimate the Norwegians (they give the Peace Prize) They are willing to deny Moon (who deserves the prize) his prize in order to deny Kim and Trump theirs.
First of all I'm shocked that you actually give any credit at all to President Trump, isn't that blasphemy in the NY Times? But you are right to be skeptical about any deal with North Korea as all past deals have failed through typical diplomacy. But note this,
Kim can end up a real hero if he can bring his people into the 21st century, by slowly easing in improvements to his people, they will embrace him as a progressive, as silly as it sounds. But the low bar that exists for his people, should be easy to show slow improvements and rise the tide in North Korea. But Tim, you just can't be optimistic in any way can you?
4
Thank you for this.
We always have to remember that NK, in the form of nuclear weapons and other missiles, has a real leverage against the rest of the world.
Ignoring this or pretending that this will somehow magically become untrue because Kim would value world peace more than his own survival would be just silly.
As much as we are disgusted by what the NK regime has done and is doing, we have to accept that they have bargaining power and would continue to use it.
1
Oh come on, Kristof. If this were the Obama Administration behind it, you'd be writing with fawning praise and all warm and fuzzy about the "symbolism," the "great step forward for diplomacy over rancor," the "historic hope to an end of a decades-long, seemingly intractable conflict." Geez, what a bore.
13
I am no fan of Trump. but, just for a mental exercise, what if his bombast and bullying actually worked in getting NK to the table? where's the harm?
4
If is a conditional and in logic conditionals are but that: CONDITIONAL.
IF The Kim gets what he wants, this time, he's not going to do anything different than the last time.
Heredity despots endeavor only to hold and retain power.
That's what I keep thinking. What if it took finally answering their talking smack with smack talk of our own (love the "my button's bigger" retort). Clearly the "we have to 'act diplomatic'" narrative has accomplished zip these past decades. The simple thing is, when the other side is playing _their_ game by _their_ rules, you're never going to make progress insisting on you playing by your rules. If it takes Trump to get that, get _their_ game and finally play accordingly for the win, then so be it.
just like only the republican Nixon could have gone to china, only the republican trump could have make these overtures to the north without the preconditions that have made it impossible for democratic presidents to achieve a similar diplomatic opening. if say Obama had done what trump has done the republicans would have been screaming for his impeachment. so give trump some credit for doing what no president before him would have been able to do.
what can we hope for as a result. the US and the South can live with the north in possession of a limited number of nuclear weapons. what the US cannot accept is the North having a delivery system capable of overwhelming US defenses and hitting any US territory. that should be the minimum goal of the talks. if we can get rid of the nukes as well so much the better.
3
Wrong.
Nixon happened to be president, despite, as we now know, his blatant TREASONOUS actions regarding Viet-Nam at the right time.
Corelation is not causation.
Had any Democrat been President during that time, the same thing would have occurred.
While Mr. Kristof may be right, I'm much more optimistic.
Here's the reality; Kim knows intimately the disaster his nation is, it's never a few days away from famine or other calamity, and it's people while mostly supportive of Kim, they want peace and a viable future for their children.
For Kim to throw away the opportunity to become a member of the community of reasonable nations, would label him as the North Korean leader who chose to remain in a miserable past, and willing to watch as another generation of North Koreans realized no benefit in their arduous lives.
When peace, prosperity, and a bright sustainable future is the alternative to slow suicide, I believe Kim, with some prodding from China, Russia, and current on-going secret talks with the United States of America, will do whatever it takes to end the pariah status of North Korea.
He may in fact be the second Gorbachev.
Too optimistic, possibly, but looking at todays' developments, I feel the North and South will unite, denuclearize, and be welcomed into the community of nations, as one Korean nation.
3
When peace, prosperity, and a bright sustainable future is the alternative to slow suicide....
.....despots pick slow suicide.
Just like Bashar Assad.
I agree, reluctantly, with Mr. Kristof. What's happening now is definitely better than the alternative of war on the Korean peninsula, or worse. Trump has been ably suckered into abandoning his threats of nuclear annihilation by Xi Xinpeng of China and Kim Jung Un, and that is a good thing.
What is happening in North Korea is profound and in your understated way I guess you recognize that, and even grudgingly give Trump his kudos. More to the point, this is something that no previous President, not Clinton, Bush or your favorite Obama, could even dream of. So admire it. Relish it. It's historical. And you can thank Trump.
39
No, you can thank the collapse of the North Korean nuclear test site for all of this activity.
56
As Kristof pointed out, the progress emanating from Trump's actions was unintended by him. He essnetially scared Moon so much with his volatility that Moon took a diplomatic initiative (helped, as has been pointed out, by the collapse of the North Korea test site).
35
It is a bit premature to take a bow. I certainly hope that you are correct that things on the Korean peninsula are (finally) going the right direction, but the process has barely begun.
As things proceed, both in direct negotiations and then in the first few years afterwards, it would be wonderful if the optimistic read you have on what has happened thus far is proven correct. It is at least equally likely, however, that Kim Jon Un is following in his father's and grandfather's footsteps by luring in foreigners with the words they want to hear, all the while planning for the day that he will pull the rug out from under them -- probably in spectacular fashion. Kim's grandfather did it to China. His father did it to both Russia and the USA. Maybe, Kim Jong Un is cut from a different cloth, or maybe he too is going through the motions in order to buy time and a respite from sanctions that he will use to push his nuclear and missile programs forward.
I vividly recall conversations (from more than a generation ago) with Russian officials who assured me with 100% confidence that their purely civilian nuclear cooperation with North Korea would prevent rather than advance Kim's father's nuclear weapons ambitions.
Later, I recall conversations inside the White House about the Clinton Administration's North Korea initiative. There was less optimism then; just a consensus that "buying time" was the only workable option and still worthwhile. What will Trump's plan lead to?
7
He had me at "deeply skeptical."
6
Obama said that North Korea was our largest problem and that it kept him up at night. Now it is much less of a problem. This is now better. Much better. Thank you Donald Trump.
4
Remember, Obama laughed at Romney, when Romney suggested we should be very wary of Putin and Russia. Now, our benevolent politicians are not laughing anymore.
3
"It's better than war." That seems to be the measure of "success" for anything that gets done now and in the future. Well, there never was going to be a war. Can we stop pretending there was? Sure, Trump scared the American people and Congress as well as the whole world with his childish taunts and posturing, but only because he is ignorant and impulsive and a bully who loves the power of our military he never served in. Invading North Korea would be a human, political and international disaster of epic proportions, with or without Kim's small nuclear arsenal. Please, stop giving Trump credit for bullying Kim and Moon to the peace table. Give him credit for opening dialogue and that is all.
1
A thoughtful even handed piece by someone who knows what he is talking about. I'm not sure I can bear Trump bragging endlessly about what a deal making world leader he is but buffoonery is better than war anytime.
2
Trump is horrible but he deserves credit for this one. It may have required the antics of a child in the WH to reach the child in Pyongyang. Kim Jong-un and Trump are similar - among other reasons - in that they both put themselves first before country. I hope this eventually leads to some improvement in the lives of 25 million North Koreans. They have suffered way too much for way too long.
3
It sounds great. But it's predicated on Trump having an actual policy and position, and keeping his word. We have suffered plenty of demonstrations that he is neither capable of, nor interested in, doing either.
And we don't know Kim to be any better.
I hope you're right, Mr. Kristof, but the evidence isn't on your side.
5
Please, let's give peace the benefit of our doubts.
1
There was not going to be a war. Kim was going to get his nuclear weapons. He already has them and will develop greater delivery mechanisms sooner or later.
It's amazing to read how much the demands in this article mimic the complete failure of past administrations the rid North Korea of its nuclear weapons. Mr. Kristof wants Trump to declare in a meeting to denuclearize the peninsula that Kim Jung Un and his pals have "committed crimes against humanity." Maybe he missed the idea that a bunch of nukes landing in Japan, Guam, and California represent a significant "crime against humanity." That doesn't even count the ones we will kill with revenge and more crimes against humanity. We need to keep focused on the goal of ridding all of Korea of nuclear weapons. As far as Libya goes, why did we help get rid of Gaddafi. He wasn't even pointing a BB gun at us. We ended up with turmoil and a breeding ground for jihadists. Trump is the first president who will meet Kim Jung Un. It is the first time in decades that a North Korean president walked across the border and shook hand with the president of South Korea. Their stated goals are to rid the peninsula of nukes, sign a peace treaty and formally end the war. We can only hope there are no Kristofs in the negotiating committee to destroy those goals.
4
Both Russia and China really want trump to keep holding the American Presidency hostage. As long as he is in the White House he will continue to do more, grave, structural harm to the US than they could ever hope to achieve by any other means short of a shooting war (which would devastate them as well).
So I bet one day we'll find out that Putin and the Chinese went to Kim with carrots and sticks to get him to set up a scene where trump can have a 'foreign policy win', anything to help him survive the mid-terms.
7
Basically agree with everything you say but like to add two points.
Don't overlook the probability that Trump's plant in the WH, Putin told Kim to play nice to help Trump in the mid terms that at the moment look dire for Trump.
Also, if any of the serious allegations against Kim are true, ie crimes against humanity, starvation, torture etc., etc. he should be hauled in front of the War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague.
4
I disagree with the notion that Trump deserves any particular credit though one can expect that he will take all the credit.
As with all people with narcissistic personality disorder, he will claim everything good in the world is his doing and everything bad in the world is someone else’s fault. As with the economy he was the beneficiary of years of effort by the Obama administration that first helped revive our economy and then was helping revive other economies which then further benefited our economy.
With regard to North Korea the fact is that it was crushed under years of economic sanctions that had markedly increased under Obama thanks to getting China and Russia to finally cooperate with sanctions. Other then some school yard name calling – Trump’s one note actions for everything - the fact is that North Korea has already achieved its nuclear goals.
Keep in mind that North Korea is sustained by such a house of cards that Kim Jong Un can not afford even the smallest crack without it collapsing. Any deal will have meaningless impact but needless to say Trump will take credit for saving the world.
7
I think the bare fact of Trump plays into any overall credit for this turn of events, but I decry that he deserves any positive credit. The overtures by North Korea during the Olympics set the stage for this, and Mike Pence’s abominable lack of diplomacy at those games was a slap in the face to his hosts and underscores the reality that this is not a Trump achievement. What’s truly remarkable in this entire scenario is that Kim rises as the more credible leader: he reached out to the south and has offered concessions toward a lasting armistice and reunification. As far as credit to Trump, at best his adolescent belittling dared and empowered Kim to accomplish his mission to become a nuclear power- something that he had tread relatively lightly working toward with every other US leader until this freak found his way into the White House. I think we are going to find that, however reclusive Kim has been, he is not as crazy as we have led ourselves to believe and may be much more internationally and systemically savvy than we ever thought possible.
2
Here's some wisdom I remember from The Princess Bride:
Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
3
There are many reasons to doubt that these maverick leaders can come to a reliable nuclear deal.They both are masters of theatrics and cleverly entwine fact and fantasy.We must hope that there will indeed some U.S. experts who are involved in the talks including some American interpreters who can translate exactly what the North Koreans say. After many stops and starts the devil will be in the details to make this an agreement that will last.Mr.Trump always wants foreign leaders to be his "friends".Mr.Kim will not be anyone's friend as long as he operates prison camps and has relatives killed.
3
"and agile with a pirouette. "
This describes Kristof's article perfectly.
Kristof, don't shy with kudos to yourself. It also sounds like you would be a great hedge fund manager.
The human rights issues are far larger than indicated here. Yes, more than 100,000 are presently in the North Korean political prisons where torture, rape, murder, etc. are common. How many more North Koreans, however, have been sent to or perished in those prisons during the three Kim regimes? And how many North Koreans have starved during the various unnecessary famines, or otherwise met an untimely and unnecessary death due to the three Kim despotic regimes? The total number is certainly more than 1,000,000. In fact it could be two or three times that number.
5
This is unsurprising. trump is a once in a lifetime (dynasty?) opportunity. Kim will get what he wants -- a final deal with security for his regime free from pesky restrictions and sanctions that threaten his dictatorship (those aimed at his citizens which strengthen his hold on them and can be used to cause them to circle the wagons will be fine). No other US president could have signed off on that deal -- leaving the citizens of NK to their fate -- imagine if Obama did so. But Trump will sell the NK citiziens and their humanity down the river and paper it over with nothing more than a MAGA hat -- and dine out at the Nobel ceremony, hinting he "earned" the Nobel, where obama was just given his.
4
Are we supposed to be grateful to Trump for leading us to the precipice of war and then backing us away from it?
9
I could and will never support a racist, however, a bully understands another bully and perhaps Mr. Trump's bellicose threats and sabre rattling may certainly have had some positive impact on these developments. If this in fact leads to the release of three American detainees, as bizarre at it seems, he might in fact be as deserving as Obama was in his receiving the esteemed award.
2
Is it possible to possibly understand what is going on in this moment in N. Korea. One would hope that the media would stand aside and let them, together, write their own summary and conclusion.
I am surprised that Kristof does not mention two relevant and recent developments on the US side. First, dramatic changes in Trump's cabinet and national security advisors with the appointment of John Bolton as National Security Advisor, and yesterday's confirmation of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State. Both are known hawks on North Korea. Bolton has advocated preemptive bombing of North Korea and Pompeo advocated regime change as recently as last July stating “As for the regime, I am hopeful we will find a way to separate that regime from this system." These appointments may have applied more pressure on North Korea, but these are the men that have the President's ear at the moment, and I doubt either of them is as changeable as the President.
Second, the President has pulled out of the Paris Climate accord, TPP negotiations, and is threatening to do the same for Nafta and the Iran nuclear deal. If I were a foreign leader negotiating with the U.S., I would wonder just how much I could trust any agreement with the U.S. short of a Senate-ratified treaty.
So all this seems more of a Kabuki theater performance. If that will allow all sides to "save face" and dial down the rhetoric, fantastic, but I am skeptical of any real change.
7
Fine, but Trump only care about human rights in so far as it concerns his human rights. Anything is better than a war, even if it means we have to watch him running around telling everyone who has to listen what a grate diplomat he is.
Let's stop ignoring THE most pressing issue for the entire world: Human rights abuses in North Korea. The blind eye turned by all of the most powerful and wealthy and democratic countries needs to see.
The people of North Korea are being systematically tortured and killed. Haven't heard Trump say much if anything about their plight.
Human Rights for all North Koreans, now.
2
I agree with Mr. Kristof's conclusion: not much may come out of these meetings, etc., but it's better than war, and that's a good start.
2
What Kristof misses is that prior deals are of limited relevance. North Korea now has a bargaining chip that it didn't have before, namely the ability to hit the US with an ICBM, if not now then in the near future. If Kim is sane (and he is) he will use that bargaining chip.
Kristof also misses (or at least does not mention) that the nuclear and ICBM capabilities are a major drain on the North Korean economy. Kim therefore has incentive to give them up now, provided what he gets in return is worthwhile.
A deal in which North Korea verifiably gives up its nuclear capability and the US withdraws all military from the Korean Peninsula would be the interest of both countries, as well as South Korea, Japan, and China. It is therefore possible it will happen. Possible. No outsider can judge the probability.
8
North Korea will never be able to hit an American city with a nuclear warhead without extensive testing. And they now realize that a sequence of tests leading in that direction would certainly lead to a US attack on them (and it would have under ANY US President) So the threat of a NK nuclear missile attack on a US city is hypothetical and totally unlikely to ever happen.
Trump always wants a "win." So I expect he will meet with Kim and agree to something - not necessarily good - that he will then claim as a win.
5
The circumstances that led to the present olive branch initiative are totally fortuitous, both in the choice of the venue in South Korea and in the timing of the Olympics. The timing was played to perfection by Kim. In order to initiate any conciliatory response he had to make sure that he would be able to speak and eventually negotiate from a position of strength. He needed bargaining chips, and he developed two 24K gold chips through his development of both nuclear bombs and ICBM's. I suspect that he saw well in advance that the Olympics offered him the platform to launch his initiative, but it required the rapid completion of his weapons programs. This resulted in the frantic testing and rocket launchings during 2017, but with the consequence, probably not unexpectedly for Kim, of strong international condemnation and an increase in sanctions. Although these are hurting, Kim's initiative is being widely applauded by the international community. Kim also counted on the willing cooperation of South Korea's president Moon, who at prior times had reached out to the North. Without this trifecta of circumstances the present set of meetings most likely would not have taken place. Kim has achieved his respect and ascending international status so far without giving up much. Even if things don't quite work out, as long as Kim refrains from testing bombs and ICBM's, he will gradually whittle away the sanction with the help Russia, China and perhaps an anxious South Korea.
41
Agree completely. Kim may be evil but he is not dumb. He played his card with the Olympics to perfection. That is why I hate the idea of Trump meeting with him any time soon. He is too dangerous to put in a room with Kim. Wait till all the details of a comprehensive deal are worked out and let Trump go in for the signing ceremony and give him all the credit then. That would be fine with me. Of course, if Trump pulls us out of the Iran deal, Kim will never agree to a final deal; instead he will seek temporary concessions for as long as possible.
12
@Rudy...
I have trouble with this statement you made, " he developed two 24K gold chips through his development of both nuclear bombs and ICBM's." From what I read, and I may be mistaken, it is Russian/Soviet technology. Maybe Chinese as well. We are in another proxy war/power play we don't understand or the experts choose not to tell us.
The Politicians and "foreign policy experts" play a game that we, the Russian, Chinese and probably the Korean people (both North/South) don't understand or even know.
I, for one, have taken a fatalistic view. I am convinced one "nutter" leader, quite possibly Trump with a bruised ego and the support of more "martial" foreign policy/national security/military "geniuses"and go nuclear.
If that happens, I hope there's a few minutes warning and I'm home and not commuting, I want to put my lawn chair on the sidewalk, open a nice bottle of Champagne (the real stuff) or if I am rushed a Bordeaux, sunglasses, sit back and wait for the "big one."
1
Not a Trumper here but I would not be surprised if he pushed the button on Kim if things collapse in the talks. That is the reality and why Kim is at the table. Hold your breath.
" ... North Korea's military showmanship and threats of nuclear war usually come when the nation is desperate for food aid or other forms of economic assistance ... North Korea is one of the most miserable places on earth. 'The standard of living has deteriorated to extreme levels of deprivation in which the right to food security, health and other minimum needs for human survival are denied,' according to a recent report by the Korea Institute for National Unification, a research group based in Seoul." But they do lead the world in percent of GDP spent on the military. The same blueprint Mr. Trump has in mind, by "fully funding" the US military, which already costs more than the next half dozen or more countries combined. Meanwhile, tearing down anything set up to help the citizens: EPA, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Affordable Care Act, etc., etc. Mr. Trump doesn't see any need for that stuff, he says from Mar-A-Lago.
22
Given the Trump administration's shunning of diplomacy, Mr. Kristof is our de facto Ambassador to both N. and S. Korea, and the only one pressing human rights concerns, which should always be at the forefront of a democratic society. Thank you!
With any reconciliation, abolishing a police state should be the first order of business for the North, or for a combined government, should that be the case. If reunification, which is the preferred outcome for both the North and the South, socialism combined with Adam Smith economics and the will of the people--what is lacking in communism--will make the prison camps an historical artifact. China is building electric buses; a Kia factory in the North could build electric 980s for all of China. Cooperation and capitalism mixed with socialism will go a long way.
Again, thank you Mr. Kristof. Your reporting here over the years has been exceptional.
69
Wrestlemania Diplomacy. Trump understand this as only an entertainer can. It's loud. It's spectacular. It demands to be taken seriously as it delivers nothing at all of lasting substance. There will be another one next year.
24
Didn't Rex Tillerson suggest talks with North Korea and got shot down by his boss?
205
In all his years as Exxon CEO, Tillerson didn’t learn that his subordinates often let him take credit for their ideas. As a result he didn’t “plant the seed” and let Trump suggest talking to North Korea.
1
Ya... cuz that plan would have given more credit to rex than donny
3
More Nobel Peace Prizes for Trump’s growing collection.
5
My guess is recent analyses that indicate the physical collapse of the mountain-based primary North Korean nuclear test site could be the real source of Kim Jong-un's benevolent movements at this time. A giant obstacle has presented itself in forward progress in his nuclear program, so my guess is he has decided to make the best of what he presently has.
I too agree with Mr. Kristof that Kim Jong-un is never going to trust the USA regarding the rewards of totally disarming, given the history of Iraq and Libya, (with Iran pending).
Events are moving quickly, but it seems giant economic fruits are hanging low for the easy picking by Mr. Kim.
It's obvious to me that such offered rewards are absolutely based on the premise that he has capable nuclear missiles at this time.
I can only hope Trump advisers realize it is ludicrous to think Mr. Kim would give up such a strong hand for a signed piece of paper, and preparations for the meeting and subsequent negotiations are looking beyond such simple thinking.
26
China has showed that a communist country somehow can become thoroughly capitalistic. So since communists can be capitalists, and the West has shown capitalism's deep penchant for authoritarianism, perhaps all these regimes have tacitly agreed that while we'll call our authoritarian reductionst economic determism "capitalism" and put Adam Smith on the poster, they'll call theirs "communism," with Marx on the poster, it will all coalesce into the same authoritarian capitalist communism, in which all are enslaved to wealth production, with of course "some pigs always being more equal than others." The underlying conflicts, as Marx would have said, have been dialectically "superseded."
The world is being united under the religion of monaay. For now.
Oh wait, that was the Francis Fukiyama "End of History" thesis, widely embraced until such shocks as 2001 & 2008. Marx also observed that all calamities revist us twice, first as tragedy, then as farce. Also: those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
I suspect this new convergence will hold for a while, just like the *relatively* unbellicose 1814-1914. But in 1914 the illusion evaporated.
11
Sorry for my typos: determinism, revisit.
2
Egads: determinism, revisit, reductionist!
What I understand about Korea is what I have understood since I was draft bait (who got snared) way back in 1950-1953. We gain nothing, and stand to lose much by getting involved militarily in Asia. If the US had not meddled in China, Japan and the Philippines, dating back to the 19th century, most of the problems we have now never would have developed. Our further meddling since the WWII years have helped none. The same holds true of The MIddle Eastl.
When will we ever learn? Now I understand that we are meddling in Africa.
167
You are right about our type of meddling. Meanwhile, the Chinese are "meddling" in Africa, as well as South, and Central America now. The difference is that they are building roads, bridges, and hospitals, developing future economic alliances, and securing interests in vital natural resources. Their meddling does not involve firing a single shot.
28
"Now I understand that we are meddling in Africa."
Not half as much as European colonial powers once did, or China is currently doing.
6
Being personally familiar with Africa as well as Asia, my prediction is that the Chinese will live to regret that meddling.
If elimination of all nuclear materials is not included (highly likely), are we not opening the door for N.Korea to sell their technology world-wide?
7
In no way should our racist in chief be credited Nikolaus. As a journalist you are rewarding bellicose bullying and moronic outburst with diplomacy! Please!
North Korea's test site has collapsed and is spewing radiation towards China. Now that's a good reason for North Korea to claim its Nuclear Ambition are diminished if not over.
But please don't celebrate the beast in the White House. He is out only for lucre. That's it. Story over (hopefully soon).
56
I had hoped you would include the apparent geological collapse of NK's nuclear test site in your analysis. https://mobile.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/04/25/world/asia/ap-as-china-nk... This seems to me to be relevant to Kim's calculations.
54
It appears that the leaders of North and South Korea are chipping away at their standoff but Trump will no doubt take all the credit.
5
"Over 100,000 people ... are effectively consigned to die in North Korea’s political prisons .... The forced abortions, infanticide, persecution of Christians, torture, and summary executions that regularly occur in those various facilities are well documented."
And we are to just overlook this ongoing tragedy? What a world! We smile, shake hands, eat a sumptuous dinner, conduct honor-guard military displays, and sign legal, honorable, and binding documents with the creator, financer, and maintainer of these death camps.
Our situation reminds me of the sick joke: "Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?" But here we are, hat in hand, bearing gifts.
15
Kim played Trump with deft skill, a bit of grace and perfect timing. Trump took the bait, elevated Kim to an international prominence challenging the realty-star president's own relevance, and with a single photo-op turned the Trump Circus into a side-show. Bravo Kim. It's not often we see the con-man get conned.
110
Trump always assumes he's the smartest guy at the poker table. He tells you exactly what he wants to hear and thinks that when he does, he has won. By the time the others are done he'll be sitting at the table alone, flat busted.
8
Maybe the Trump Presidential Library will be located in the new Pyongyang Trump Tower. It will be huge and beautiful, like the Mexican Wall!
9
You know who are the "North Korean experts"? The South Koreans. Let's let them handle this. I mean, clearly given US achievements in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somali, Afghanistan and Ukraine etc...... the US and its "best and brightest" are brilliant foreign policy analysts and obviously really good at this geopolitical strategy thing but you know as much as we need the "indispensable" country's fine minds directing this exercise the rest of the world would really appreciate it if the US maybe sat this one out. Just don't try and torpedo the deal when the inevitable request to reduce your military foot print in South Korea comes.
16
For most of the Republic of Korea's existence, its relationship and engagement with North Korea has been managed in concert with the US, so even with the current US-skeptical government it is unrealistic to say things like leave it to Koreans, since it does not work that way in reality.
The US military footprint in Korea is not an isolated one either; the US's Far East presence is a framework involving Japan as well, built after the WW II. Leaving South Korea means the US is changing completely its approach to the Far East. Given how the framework has served as a force for stability in the region that benefited all parties--US, SK, and Japan--the problem becomes if any can come up with a more beneficial and better system.
7
Interesting Kristof did not mention the reported collapse of one of the North's key nuclear test sites. Could this event be a factor behind NK's pledge to halt nuclear testing in exchange for peace and ease of sanctions?
8
“A commission of inquiry suggested that North Korea has committed crimes against humanity ‘on a massive scale’”
You don’t say! Well, worry all you need to about nuclear weapons. We know NK has them and everybody agrees they won’t give them up. It is sickening that we must tolerate the abuse of 25 million people just to say “phew, we avoided war.”
3
"North Korea doesn't have Facebook and Beyonce" -- well, that is off to a pretty good start in my books!
5
There are only two American analytical journalists worth reading when it comes to the DPRK; one of them is Nicholas Kristof and the other is Evan Osnos of the New Yorker.
This piece by Mr Kristof is the first analysis to hit the mark, write off all others as 'pomp and circumstance'.
But even Mr Kristof does not write of the primary motives for Kim Jong-un to shake a hand with Moon Jae-in: the United Nations sanctions which have really hurt the DPRK's already pitifully small economy, and secondly, national pride.
In spite of historic enmity of the political systems in South and North, many Koreans want to have access to long separated relatives. Koreans speak the same language of culture (not the same as political culture).
4
Kim is saying to himself why should I bother to attack anybody
right now when the U.S. is busy destroying itself politically and socially.
All I have to do is stick around for a few more months or years until Trump finishes the job; and then do anything anywhere I want to do for the rest of my life.
22
Only one man in the USA was capable of backing the world away from war and bringing security to the Korean peninsula. With his leadership, peace may be within our grasp.
Thanks, Dennis Rodman.
15
Mr Kristoff thought we would be at war with Nirth Korea. But, he is going to tell me what is going on now?
4
And he admits that he was wrong. Fancy that! Possibly has learned from his own mistakes.
I don't know if he's right or wrong here, but the fact that he brought it to our attention that he made the wrong judgment in the past is a point in his favor, not something to sneer at.
1
If they don't have Facebook, North Korea can't be all bad.
3
Already Trump's acolytes are hailing his efforts in bringing about this meeting, neglecting the fact (as Kristof points out) that South Koreans' alarm at Trump's saber-rattling is really what set the plan in motion.
This time Trump's belligerent and misguided rhetoric seemed to work out. Next time, will we be as lucky?
6
Peace through strength. Thank you President Trump. The media doesn't want to acknowledge your efforts here. The sanctions were decisive. Exports to China from DPRK down 86% year over year in 1Q, making DPRK effectively bankrupt. It's sad the media and Mr. Kristoff ignore the facts and downplay your success. It must be maddening for Hillary and Barack to watch you make such direct progress without even having a working State Department. The left will continue to root against peace and our President, especially when it exposes the Obama administration's failures.
6
Total bunk. It was precisely Obama who emphasized to Trump that his most urgent problem would be North Korea. That message resonated. So if you want folks to give credit to your hero, I demand you give credit to ours. Instead of lies about the "left."
2
You’re so off. The USA didn’t add sanctions the United Nations did. Trump has not succeeded yet. I truly hope he does for the worlds sake but I doubt it will happen. Trump failures over the past year prove he doesn’t understand the complexities of politics. He’s going too get played. When that happens will you admit his failure or just carry on blindly?
It was kind of inevitable at this point. Kim has successfully reached the status of nuclear power and this will never be taken away from him. Now he works to ease the sanctions and feed his people more than a morsel a day. I never doubted that war was in his plans. But he learned by past dictators mistakes and will continue to rule his country with iron fist and now a backing from our own dictator wannabe.
3
Thanks, China. THEY are playing Trump like a fiddle, to get what they want. Which is complete hegemony in Asia. Fine with me, but THIS is the true beginning of the Chinese Century. The USA is diminishing daily, literally selling out to foreigners and the Rich, of all nationalities.
Thanks, GOP. November.
47
There is nothing on earth that changes its attitude so quickly. North Korea's inherent character has for years been one of overt belligerence; and should remind us of the Scorpion and the Frog Fable.
That belligerence has not only been one of global consequence, but often one that is reminiscent of small town bullying: In South Ealing, West London, a barber next to the underground station once ran an advertisement that depicted Kim Jong-un's hairstyle, explaining that he could fix it. Half a mile away, on Gunnersbury Avenue, in a classic, unobtrusive, detached house, sat the NK embassy, which sent three thugs around to physically threaten the English barber.
Just like with the Russians, you don't rid the world of that sort of character inside of a generation. So beware of what game these tyrants are playing. People still die in his work camps. Russians still kill their defectors. And will for a long time yet.
7
Excellent article. This circus is calculated to give political leeway to leaders in democracies and time for dictators. Leaders can kick the ball to the next elected President.
2
"President Trump’s tightening of sanctions and belligerent rhetoric genuinely did change the equation."
Excuse me but Trump did not tighten sanctions, the UN did, after successful ICBM tests started during the Trump Administration, threatening many nations. The US has never traded with NK, whose primary trading partner is China, for both food and energy.
Moreover, it was more effective enforcement, especially by China but also through interceptions of ship-to-ship oil transfers that violated sanctions.
Make no mistake, China has all of the cards here but they don't want to show them. China was clearly concerned about Obama's pivot to Asia, especially with 6 out of 10 US Naval vessels now in the Pacific. China saw the belligerent action of NK missile and weapons test as justification for further US militarization of the East and South China Seas, a huge threat to their long term strategy to dominate the region.
The NK leader went to China first, before signaling any potential concessions. He almost certainly received security guarantees from President-for-Life Xi and the possibility of renewed trade with China in return for a freeze of provocative actions.
China's one worst nightmare is a collapse of the NK regime and millions of NK refugees fleeing into China. Their other worst nightmare is a growing US military presence in the Pacific, especially around Taiwan.
Watch China and Xi, not Trump.
242
The Korean War was always going to happen as a consequence of the Cold War; the U.S. will not pull out of South Korea any time soon; North Korea will not give up its nuclear weapons; China wants it this way as North Korea serves as an important geographical buffer zone.
Let's hope that North Koreans get some food and humanitarian aid out of these talks, that will be a good near-term step forward.
14
Best comment/analysis in this series.
The US administration did not broker this situation, in spite of the RoK leadership paying lip-service to their US ally.
"The US has never traded" with the DPRk. Other nations did, and they stopped with the UN sanctions.
15
Splendid comment. Trump will avoid including China. Trump will want the talks to be a stage for his own brilliance. Xi will be content to control Kim and present Trump with a dilemma. Trump can either accept a fatally flawed deal or suffer the indignity of failing to negotiate a peace treaty. Then Xi can enter, deus ex machina, to rescue the talks and succeed where Trump has failed.
14
This historic date is no reason for Trump to back off now. We must verify de-nuclearization at all costs - this is our sole vital interest in Korea - and the world is watching. Trump must remain forceful and focused. But wait, there's more - a win in Korea makes it easier to keep Iran nuclear free and China amenable to a new trade regime.
I didn't vote for Trump and like many, had lost interest in politics because it accomplishes so little. Trump simplistic world view is a welcome respite because it has enabled him to identify only a few vital issues that he actually understands. His personality does the rest.
But for those who hate Trump, he will be gone soon and we will be back to do-nothing business as usual. The rest of the world knows that, too.
3
Only people ignorant of history can assert that "politics accomplishes so little." Sit down with a history of the US and read it from cover to cover. You will soon see how wrong you are. And then vote in every elections and encourage others to do so.
1
"A path away from war, for which we skeptics should be grateful," I agree. We are not there yet, however. If anyone can ruin this moment it will be trump. He intended to push Kim and pushed Moon, instead. South Korea is where the work has been done, and they should receive the credit. If trump doesn't get ALL the credit, he will blow the deal, however.
22
The game changer here is that a formal Peace Treaty is on the table, not just a 'peace declaration' as has happened before.
The other overlooked factor here, I believe, is Kim Jong Un's age. Commentators all mention how young (34) he is, as a sign of his inexperience and immaturity, but it also means his calculus is much different than his father or even many of his advisors.
He still has half-a-century more to live, and as a de-facto-ruler-for-life, his only chance for survival and peaceful death is to raise the living standard of his people. He can't just bid to ride out a wave, wait out the passing of time, like his father or grandfather did when they were in power.
To hold on to power till his old age, Kim needs to revive his crumbling country and raise his impoverished people. He has seen how China has survived (and thrived) by doing so.
This is the calculus and opening for a formal Peace Treaty, which is a game changer, and that makes this time different.
141
nice comment Thank you
3
they said the 6.15 and 10.4 declarations were supposed to be game changers; in fact, i specifically recall kim dae-jung crossing the korean border announcing that "now there is no more war". the drama with US-DPRK-ROK is almost always tautological but the snake never quite gets to eating its own tail.
2
That's great thinking. He is in a fundamentally different position than his forbears. There is an Internet now, and he knows that the world knows about him, but if he changes his ways the world's opinion of him will change too.
I think we can have some cautious hope here. Thank goodness the South Koreans got the ball rolling on this.
I think we need to accept the presence of the nukes and move forward from there. Obviously if he starts making nuclear threats again we're back to Square One.
1
Excellent opinion on the situation and I would assume it will go as described, Trump and Kim share similar ego and personality traits so they will be blowing up like puffer fish in claiming "peace in our time",
There will likely be a timetable and both will hope no one watches that too closely for now while they bask in their glory,
South Korea may be a bigger issue than Trump expects, Suppose they take the chance of telling Trump to start withdrawal of US troops before a final point of proof that the nukes are gone?
I still think, as correctly mentioned in the article that Kim will always remember Khadaffi and Hussein and for that reason will never get rid of the nukes he has. He also has likely done HYUUGE research on the manic Trump and likely has absolutely no trust in the word of a conman, Trump has aided in pushing us this far, one must admit, but neither he nor did Obama really deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, In fact, if Kim actually gave up his nukes He, ironically would be the one who deserves it,
We will get a calming period but don't expect this to truly end the divisions as they stand.
26
Thank you for this thoughtful, rational, hype-free analysis. You always deliver from hands-on experience. Kudos.
128
I'm more than glad to defer to Mr. Kristof's expertise here as it's rather substantial, certainly more than many of our current "diplomats".
As is pointed out here, there should be a lot more on the table than just denuclearization, wherever that means anyway. And of course, don't ever expect promises to kept without out some sort of enforcement/compliance mechanisms.
If this works and Mr. Trump wants credit for it, who cares, let him have it. If it mean millions more people eating regularly, avoiding work camps and maybe even the threat of a nuclear war gone, he can have all the credit he wants.
36