Two obese ego-driven leaders who lack empathy for their own people. Hard to believe anything good can come of this meeting other than a televised “spectacular”.
17
Trump getting this would be a joke right up there with Kissinger being awarded the prize.
Handing the most dangerous fool ever to lead any nation ever a Nobel Laureate would be consistent with the circus we live in, though.
20
What a joke. So far these two autocrats have done nothing to advance peace except to have a few photo sessions.
if those in charge of selecting Nobel Peace Prize winners want the prize to remain credible they will pass on this selection.
14
I think it would be entirely appropriate for Trump to be given the Nobel Peace Prize gold medal - as long as it's made out of fool's gold.
8
The way I see this is, "the United States would relax sanctions on inter-Korean projects involving tourism and manufacturing", and in return , Trump is allowed to build his first golf club in Pyongyang.
5
If our president and the North Korean president can work together and TRULY earn the Nobel Peace Prize, what a wonderful world it would be!
3
Our press must give far more attention to the cause of Trump's madness. He suffers from acute narcissistic disorder, a serious mental illness. He thinks only about what can enhance his image of himself. Nothing else matters. He gives no thought to any strategic considerations in any internaitonal diplomatic mattter. He cares not about Mexican immigration, the wall, the dreamers, climate change or any other domestic issue. His acute narcissism has resulted in him being completely ignorant of any facts or issues because he just doesn't care. He thinks solely about what enhances his self-image. How many accounts of this obvious behavior must we hear before we address this problem. Trump is seriously ill. And it may prove catastrophic to our republic.
25
Everybody, act now.
Read Admiral Turner Joy’s book, How Communists Negotiate, written after the Korean War.
Spoiler Alert...a Peace Treaty was never reached.
3
I can hear the protestations already: “Trump didn’t win a Nobel Prize due to a vast, leftist conspiracy!”; “Trump being robbed of the Prize is just another example of socialism’s bad mojo!”; “The Nobel committee was obviously made up of Democrats!”
In addition to the low-information quality of such retorts and the facts they gloss, I suspect MAGA supporters will be blinded to the central, objective reason why Trump in all likelihood would never win a Nobel Peace Prize: It’s not merely because he’s done precious little to cultivate lasting peace; it’s because he so obviously, so, well, narcissistically, WANTS it. It’s his utter lack of humility. After all, his own administration twisted Shinzo Abe’s arm to nominate him (tellingly, it is against the rules to nominate oneself for a Nobel), and Trump himself is unabashedly, publicly campaigning for the Prize.
Can you imagine past Peace Prize winners publicly campaigning for themselves? Jimmy Carter? Nelson Mandela? Mother Teresa? Neither can I. Though campaigning for oneself may not be against the letter of the Nobel’s laws, surely it is against the spirit.
14
President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize was absurd. Awarding this prize to Trump would be obscene.
2
Let's not join in this alternative reality fantasy. Kim will play Trump's narcissism for all it's worth. At the end, we'll all be less safe. It may be worth an Oscar for Kim, but Trump only deserves the Ig-Nobel Booby Prize.
3
The bottom line is that Trump has to come up with a real show stopper for "The Summit" Episode 2. No emmy award for the opener as the script was lacking.
Trump needs another bigly, huge ratings gold headline. What will he promise to get that headline? Kim gets oscars galore at home for doing nothing and that's fine with him. Kim knows Trump is once again the actor desperate for his part.
This is all a Trump show. Why he is being allowed to talk to Kim all alone again? Weak Pompeo won't contain him.
Let the adults work behind the cameras.
5
It's too bad that there isn't something like the Ig Nobel Prize for peace efforts, Trump and Kim would be strong contenders for that Ig Nobel award.
Perfect. A Nobel Peace Price for a ruthless dictator who imprisons, starves, and murders his citizens, his uncle and half brother. And a President of the United States who, at least on a monthly basis, declares the press is the enemy of the people. Alfred Nobel is rolling in his casket.
2
Sure, anything might work by sheer chance. That doesn't mean we are likely to benefit from having an ignorant madman in charge. Any understanding of this situation, and any appraisal of Trump's effect on it, would depend on a good understanding of what the status quo ex ante was here. In the main, it was a good old-fashioned game of Mutually Assured Destruction, and as you say, Trump begat a real risk of nuclear war which those who know what happened but laugh at all who understand that something else very well might have will never understand. I said Trump begat. Singlehandedly.
Thinking that the 'unconventional' (juvenile and arbitrary) negotiation strategies of of this demagogic know-nothing of a president will work where the work of better and more educated people have failed is an example of the sort of logical fallacy Trump thrives on. First, you assume there was no reason for the way things were done before, and avow to clear a swamp of irrational waste. Then, you watch bemused as Trump does something unheard of and conclude that something-or-other dramatic has happened. Then, if the world stays in one piece, you credit him with some intangible and incomprehensible skill. All the while, under the spell of this showman and the world affairs pornography he invites all to watch, you have forgotten all you once knew about the world. This is how he gets the crowd beyond the rally monkeys to latch on. Pure evil. Pure garbage.
2
What is wrong with this world ? The letter from Abe was ("The Asahi Shimbun and The Yomiuri Shimbun, reported that Abe’s letter was written at the White House’s request) requested by Trump just like the old days in New York when he would call the nytimes and not reveal who he was , and report grandiose accomplishments by donald trump. Nothing new here.
To even think he could come close to be considered for the Nobel Peace Price is unimaginable and laughable.
5
The 46th President of the United States may well be a good candidate for the Nobel Prize, at least if he or she manages to reverse at least a small part of the devastation inflicted upon the US and the world by the 45th.
9
At first glance, I thought the headline said "Waiting for the Trumpkin" Nobel. I cannot imagine anything substantive coming out of this, and even if it could possibly happen, Trump is still a crook and Kim is still North Korea's leader by virtue of his family connections.
Of course, let us not believe in President Trump's skills at negotiatating or what has happened thus far. No, don't believe anything he says. Only believe Nic Kristof. After all, we have this proof which he has written:
"On my last visit to North Korea, in 2017, officials spoke of learning from Libya that if you give up your nuclear program, America may then topple your government. So I suspect Kim has zero plans to give up his nuclear weapons."
HIS visit to North Korea, Nicholas Kristof's visit, is what's relavant and believable.
2
No, their delusions about a Nobel Peace Prize are not going to lead them to a better nuclear deal. Trump only wants the prize to bolster his ego; Kim only wants the prize to cover his true nuclear ambitions, in the same way the Soviets wanted Arafat to win the prize to cover his true terrorist ambitions. Kim is playing Trump like a fiddle while increasing his nuclear capability.
3
Since nuclear weapons cannot be used without harming innocent people, and their mere possession by about a dozen governments threaten innocent people, such weapons are ethically wrong.
Hence, the rulers talk of the "goal" of denuclearization, whether the U.S. government under Obama of a "goal" of a nuclear free world,
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/01/obama-claims-nuclear-weapons-reductions-start-treaty
or, in the case here, of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula. Talk about getting rid of nuclear weapons is a cover story government uses to camouflage its evilness.
While the U.S. government has reduced its number of nukes in agreements with the Soviets, they still number thousands, and the U.S. government is spending a lot of your money to modernize its arsenal. Its also developing new missiles that are nuclear capable.
The irony is that while some claim government prevents life from becoming "nasty, brutish, and short" (Hobbes), government has already done so for many millions, including children in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. And we can rationally expect more of the same, For example, Kristoff wrote some articles about what the Saudi government is doing in Yemen.
While Kristoff is hopeful about a "plausible deal", we need to remember what is ethically correct. Kristoff's "plausible deal"doesn't reach that standard.
If only I could be an editorial cartoonist to capture the utter absurdity of these two "leaders" cradling the future of the Earth in their little hands!
Of course there is hope. There is golf. Kim's father had five holes in one in his first round and Trump cheats in every round.
Ping-pong diplomacy worked for one crooked president. Perhaps golf diplomacy is the answer.
4
Is the Nobel for peace even relevant anymore?
Obama's was silly, and I was a huge Obama supporter. But a Nobel, right after he's in office...followed by 8 years of a rise in drone strikes, civilian casualties, and various foreign policy fumbles in war zones...?
The 2018 recipients, shared by two people, one male one female for the prevention of using sexual violence as a weapon of war was commendable, but their efforts did not end the use. Not by a long shot. I'm not against the efforts being made, but when the efforts do NOT actually end anything I dont see the point.
And in the case of Trump and Kim...giving them one would absolutely discredit the prize forever. Which would be 100% true to everything else Trump has done to the office of president and the US in general. Discrediting and demeaning across the board.
Kims not giving up his nukes. Why would he? Without them he's not at the big-boy table. Without them, he has nothing to bargain with. What does North Korea have that we really,really want and/or need? Really good kimchi?
And if Trump, et al, actually negotiates the peace, ends the conflict - we all know we're gonna lose more then gain. Neither Trump or Pompeo have the US best interests at heart. Period. Its all about a win for Trump. Period.
1
There was a time when it was delusional to think that Trump
would win the presidency. If the likes of Kissinger and Arafat can win the prize, who knows? "The world is grown so bad that wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch."
Trump is among the most insulting of humanity, a given. But to insult Nobel Peace Prize recipients is pretty unforgivable. And that’s exactly what he’s done now.
3
I will print out the Peace Treaty these two negotiate and hang it next to my B.A. from trump University. I will celebrate with a glass of Trump Champagne the same way I celebrated my winnings from his Atlantic City Casino which I paid for with my Social Security check.
1
Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite and worried that would be his legacy, established the Nobel prizes. I very much doubt that Nobel would want his Peace Prize turned into dynamite. The award going to Trump and Kim would be high tribute to barbarism.
Don't be surprise, if at an upcoming rally, Trump will tell his screaming audience, that, yes, he won the Nobel Prize--with the sign, I made Nobel great again. The fans will go wild--when told by a CNN reporter that he did not win the prize--Trump will declare that fact fake news. These last two years of this presidency will be truly a walk through the pages of 1984.
3
Trump only regrets he cannot maintain domestic peace and stability by machine-gunning his political opponents like his pal Kim.
1
Nick, don't crush their dreams.
I'm truly hoping Trump wins an ig-Nobel Peace Prize (actually, there isn't a peace category, but Harvard could introduce one for these two, tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee). Our POTUS would be oblivious.
Learning of this delusion of Trump/Kim first makes people laugh, and then make them cry (to paraphrase Harvard's award rubric).
1
So, the bone spurs will not prevent Trump from going to Vietnam now. Gee, what a shameful excercise insulting the 58,000 Americans killed, 300,000 Americans wounded and the 2.7 Million who served in Vietnam and those vets still suffering from their experiences.
For the record: I served in Vietnam from 12/67 - 11/68.
2
"If he and Kim pursue a painstaking peace process"??
Nicholas Kristof honestly believes that these two con men, Trump and Kim, are capable of forwarding the interests of humanity? Or have any desire to do so?
Or this column just an indirect apology for Kristof's vilifying the initial critics, mostly Democrats, of the first "summit", as partisan hacks?
I will read this Opinion, but its headline,'Waiting for the Trump-Kim Nobel Peace Prize', is so funny I couldn't resist commenting right away. It is an Opinion by itself, a smart critique of our reality. Is it funnier than 89% of Republicans approve of Trump? What's more, did Shinzo Abe, the Prime Minister of Japan, nominate Trump for the Noble Peace Prize? Let's invite Abe to spend a few weeks in the USA, so he can see how peaceful it is.
If the US nuclear arsenal is no bar to Trump--or Obama--receiving the Peace Prize, how can we hold Kim's against him?
I will never understand why people care so much about the Nobel Prize.
In science this award is debatable.
In economics it’s a joke.
In litterature and in « peace » it’s beyond ridiculous.
Maybe awarding it to Trump and Kim would cure everybody from the bizarre obsession with this prize.
There is something wholey within Donald Trump’s power that would merit my support for his receiving the prize—he could resign, thereby removing the single greatest threat to peace and stability in the world today.
1
Anyone else think it’s odd that suddenly Trump can get to Vietnam when he seemingly couldn’t find it throughout the 60s-70s?
2
The Nobel Peace Prize means so little still even mentioning Peace and Trump in the same sentence is awkward.
Even Yaser Arafat and Menachem Begin had less resonance with the name than Trump’s.
"It is, of course, delusion to think that either Trump or Kim will win the Nobel Peace Prize." We thought the election of Trump in 2016 was laughable as well. How's that working out? In addition to Abe, 2 right-wing Norwegians have put Trump into consideration for the prize. While I acknowledge that the award to Obama was undeserved, aspirational hope notwithstanding, giving this prize to Trump would taint the honor irreparably.
Not even in jest should those words be used in a sentence. Both men are in it for the photo ops and there will be no nuclear deal. Both lie virtually every time they open their mouths. Both have self interests beyond any nuclear agreement. Delusion or not, please, don't even let those words reach the ears of their respective bases, it has the ring of "Don't worry, Donald Trump will never be president."
These editorials can all be summed up in a few words. "We Hate President Trump and will never give him credit for anything positive that results from his efforts. Can you imagine the love fest that would be occurring from the press if the prior occupant of the office had accomplished anything close to what President Trump has accomplished? Personally I would have applauded President Obama if he had accomplished more because it would have been very good for our country. Sad the far left cannot view the positive economic news with the same feelings.
I would think that Trumps hate speech SHOULD negate him from consideration. I would normally think that...but nowadays...I'm not sure others would.
Trump no more deserves the Nobel for peace, then Alex Jones would.
1
It would be nice if, for once, when Trump tries something positive, instead of lacing commentary in snark and arrogance, media would just provide even-handed analysis and the sincere wish for success. It is clear some would rather perpetuate the suffering of the N. Korean people and risk nuclear conflagration than risk Trump succeeding on anything. Liberals have a lot of nerve lecturing conservative voters about voting against their interests, when they would rather eat fire and drink poison than credit Trump for improving anything on their behalf.
1
@Mike Roddy,
Agreed. The only way to report on trump is with ridicule. Thank goodness for Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers, et al, for doing exactly that, and helping preserve my sanity over the last two years.
2
In our recent relations with North Korea over the terms of the last four Presidents, Obama, G. Bush, Bill Clinton, H.W. Bush, please remind me of any positive progress made while missiles were flying over our allie Japan and into the Pacific with increasing range.....can't can you Mr Kristof.
American Presidents have received the Nobel for far less, the last President coming to mind being President Obama getting the Prize for just being him.
It's true the Nobel committee decisions are highly political and that they've been misguided at times (e.g. Kissinger), but I can't imagine for a second they'd be considering these two narcissistic adult-wannabes for the Peace Prize. A nod to these two and both, the Nobel committee and the prize, would lose all credibility.
Won't happen, won't even will it make a difference. Both are too self-absorbed to care or comprehend his counterpart's needs; Trump, vapid and delusional, is hopelessly ignorant of the subtle and complex issues and Kim, captive to his win-or-die stakes. The differences between them are irrelevant to the end game for each side.
Democratic Party operatives will do whatever is necessary to prevent Trump from being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, including discrediting and scuttling peace and denuclearization talks with North Korea.
So, nine months after taking office, Pres. Barrack Obama was named the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize laureate for... let's face it, not being George W. Bush. It proved to all the world how political and subjective the Nobel Peace Prize is, and how it isn't necessarily based on any action of the recipient. In this case, we have a president who has broke through more than 60 years of stalemate aggression from North Korea, and while the Nobel Peace Prize Committee may not like how it was achieved -- through aggressive bravado (the language Kim Jong-un understands) -- it should recognize the accomplishment and reward it.
Never say never. How people kept on saying no way could Trump won? Even how absurd and scary the idea is, never know what might happen.
The Nobel Peace Prize seems to have been rewarded to people who didn't seem to expect it.
I didn't know that someone could "run" for the prize as in a political race.
You know what's likely to happen? Trump will not -- ever -- win the Nobel Prize. But he will win the eponymous Trump Prize, given each year to the world's most astounding and healthy looking world leader. It will compete with the Nobel Prize for world attention and prestige, some people are saying.
The first winner's identity is already known, No, not the President (fooled you, didn't I). Jared Kushner and Mohammed Bin Salman, for achieving peace in the Middle East.
"Donald Trump wins the Nobel Peace Prize"...Yeah Right! The day after hell freezes over. As for Kim; anther latter day Stalin; complete with all the charm. If this is not a 100% farce of the worst order; I do not know what is.
7
When hell freezes over
4
And, no doubt, hell will freeze over sometime. Maybe?
2
Pass the barf bag!
3
Trump has spent the last two years undoing as much as he can of Barak Obama's legacy. What's good for the country be damned.
Barak Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. As soon as Trump gets one too, his revenge will be complete.
Never. Never. Never.
7
Mr. Krstof, you sound like you too have been sucked in. NK has given up nothing they wanted, and who can blame them. Trust the U.S.? How stupid do you think they are???
2
Come on. Let's be real.
This is going to be an ego-kissing schmooze-fest just like the last one.
Not much is going to get accomplished.
Kristof is right that its a good thing that all the childish macho talk is not happening, but that was accomplished last time. In that sense it is better to have them drooling over each other.
The only accomplishment will be the burning up uf several news cycles around the time of the "summit".
4
I am speaking up for Africa. Anyone who calls them s___ -hole countries should not be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize!
The prize is for people who want lasting peace and meaningful change in our world. Anyone who belittles other countries clearly is not a peacemaker!
9
We have truly reached a low point in our history, when We are unsure just which of them is more delusional. To be polite. I feel embarrassed for the Japanese, and I feel ashamed for America.
It’s undeniable, everything and everyone Trump touches is contaminated, most can never recover, just wither and DIE.
Who could have guessed ?
4
Trump enables dictators because he wants to be one and is so ignorant he actually admires dictators. America is not too far from Trump either - most everyone is too ignorant that they get taken advantage of and probably admire dictators.
2
Alfred Nobel is probably already turning in his grave, at the thought.
The committee would be nuts to award this to either Trump or Kim; it would forever tarnish the award.
2
I'm afraid I agree with this crazy take. Whoever forged Abe's signature did us all a service. Pence? Jared? Don Jr? Good on you all.
In 1950 it was about Japan. Now it is about South Korea.
Trump on Kim Jong-un: 'We fell in love'
The US president told a rally in Wheeling, West Virginia that the North Korean leader had sent him "beautiful" letters. The pair met in a landmark summit earlier this year after previously exchanging threats.
You can’t make this up.
6
I admit I know very little about North Korea. But what I do know for sure is: Donald Trump has no idea what the Nobel Prize represents. He couldn’t name one other person who got a Nobel in ANY field, except Barack Obama. He doesn’t know who Alfred Nobel was, or why there are prizes awarded in his name. All Donald Trump wants is a big fancy party with applause and a big check and that I know for sure.
5
For all those who laud Trump of achieving a lot with Kim, it is important to note that he is ( in his own words) "in Love" with a tyrant. None of you delusional people seem to care about the sad state of affairs in the terrible country of N Korea. Wake up and smell the Kimchi folks. The difference between North and South Korea is spectacular. One is a dictatorship and the other is free, thanks to the hard work of previous US Presidents. When we see the same freedom enjoyed by the south, in the north, then only can Trump claim that his "lovely" relationship has achieved some success. Otherwise is all smoke and mirrors!
5
Kim can't trust trump anyway. If he did give up his nuclear weapons and materials. trump would immediately invade North Korea, wipe out everything, and declare himself a "winner".
3
The real story is this. N. Korea has offered a seat in their upcoming Rocket to Mars, and the chance for Donald to be the Pilot. He would be a Beautiful Star in History Shows; and his family debts would be erased and also, the impending 3500 lawsuits and prosecutions, and his golf courses would be exempt from tax, that comes with it.
It's the role of a Grateful Humanity to Recognize this Homeric Destiny of Donald. The Moon is At His Feet. Don't wait! Fortune Favors the Bold!
7
The split screen next Wednesday will be must-see tv, definitely popcorn time with Michael Cohen at Congress dissing on Trump and Trump and his new love Mr. Kim being delusional together, though I fear Mr. Trump is way delusional and Mr. Kim is semi-delusional and both want to be known as Dear Leader.
And is this meeting with Mr. Kim going to all by Mr. Trump's lonesome or is there going to be any eye witnesses to the historic meeting? And will all translator's notes be ripped up by Trump? I do not understand how our national security people can allow that to happen. It should never happen again, not with Kim, not with Putin, not with Xi. Trump's insecurity must not be allowed to run roughshod on this point. He doesn't want anybody else to know how defective he is in the negotiating department. That's how his mental illness works. No witnesses. And then he can live another day.
11
That should never happen, if it does then Nobel Peace Prize Committee will diminish to the eyes of the World.
4
If Trump and/or Kim were to win the Nobel "peace" prize, I would hope it would incentivize any previous winner of the award to toss the medal out and give back the money. Who would want to be in the same category as these two half-wits, both bent on destruction? Although, now that I think about it, and any reader familiar with Alfred Nobel and his work would know, Nobel himself made armaments. His inventions included dynamite and ballistite, both of which were used violently during his lifetime. Perhaps Trump and Kim are the best candidates afterall...
3
Many people will feel like fwowing up if Trump and Kim win the Nobel Peace Prize as a result of their Summit in Hanoi, next week. Vietnam was North and South Vietnam till we got in there and did our bloody tragic business in the South and now it's a united country under Communist rule. North Korea and South Korea have been a divided peninsula since 1953.. Chances of Donald Trump winning the Nobel Prize (notwithstanding Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's "beautiful letter" nominating him to the Norwegian Nobel Committee - unconfirmed by Abe), are slim to none. Chances of uniting one Korea under Kim Jong-un are less than slim to none.
There's no way - no way at all - that the White House simply "requested" that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. The same Trump who called his lawyer Cohen a mob-style "rat" for cooperating with the Mueller prosecution must have made the Prime Minister "an offer he can't refuse."
5
I met someone in a line the other day with a great idea - the Nobel Committee should give the Peace Prize only in years when there is an extraordinary peace maker to give it to: Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela.
3
Abe had written to nominate him.
Japan flattered Mr. Trump hoping he would help with releasing abducted Japanese citizens by North Korea on the next summit.
For Japan, nomination is carrots for his ego- Nobel prize .
Also, flattering may do well for up coming trade talk between two countries.
Obvious apple polishing.
3
Let's see. Before the Summit Japan and South Korea were in full out panic mode. Kids in Hawaii were practicing hiding under their desks. No launches and no nuclear tests since. Obama got a prize for doing nothing. If peace and denuclearization come then they deserve it.
1
Speculating on whether Donald Trump will win the Nobel Prize is silly. That's not important. Barack Obama won it just for being the first black president. How silly is that?
What is important is what happens at the summit. Donald Trump has made his position clear -- you can keep your nuclear weapons or you can make economic progress. One or the other. Not both.
Which will Kim Jong Un choose? We don't know. Many think they do, but they don't. Neither does Donald Trump. But shrewd negotiator that he is, he's made it clear that a choice has to be made. Then we'll see what happens.
2
Kristof thought the idea of Trump becoming president was delusional, too. At least he's already accomplished more than Obama ever did for his prize.
2
In this bizarro world we are now living in, I would not write off Trump receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. Two years ago, I thought the idea of him becoming POTUS was absurd and basically impossible. I won’t make that same mistake again.
3
Those who think that Trump is above using this - what’s the opposite of “Summit”? Reality TV- grade entertainment? - as a cheap attempt at diversion from Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony, they have another think coming. Kim knows how pathetically desperate Trump is for a “win”. He can throw him any little bone, and Trump will leap at it, just like last time.
And, it will be up to the Democrats to eventually repair all the damage done by another Republican know-nothing. Like usual.
2
In Kim's case, there a Nobel Prize for family murders?
In Trump's case is there one for most lies?
There is a Peace Prize, but one for either of these is turning the Prize on it's head; it would be like giving one for not starting a war.
I can't think of anything more appropriate than Trump getting a medal for the Nobel Peace Prize - provided it's made out of fool's gold.
Nicholas, you just ruined my day. What a totally depressing thing to even contemplate.
I loathe Trump. I detest Kim. If North Korea verifiably gives up its nukes, opens its economy to relieve the suffering of its people, signs a peace treaty, normalizes relations with South Korea and the world then go ahead and give Trump and Kim a Nobel.
1
If Trump starts a nuclear war, it will be where Putin tells him to. Probably either the Capitol Building or FBI headquarters, would be my bet.
1
The same Nobel committee that gave Obama the peace prize for replacing W will give a similar prize to the next Democratic president who rids the world of Trump. He will never see that prize, and I predict Trump will have to build his own presidential library from scratch because no university will want to affiliate with him in any way.
Delusional to think Mr. Trump could win the NPP? I thought it was delusional to think he could become president of the United States.
After basically giving Obama a Nobel prize, in anticipation of his greatness, the bar is pretty low. Trump easily meets the new metric.
2
Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize for his "potential." Eight years in office and he did nothing to warrant the award.
Trump could convince Kim to denuclearize, empty his prisons and call for free and fair elections within five years, and Trump would not get the Peace Prize.
Think about that for a moment.
2
The Nobel committee or whoever it is that determines winners might just award it to them. After all they gave it to a warmongers like Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho. Tho at least had the good sense to refuse while Kissinger, of course pocketed the cash.
Asked by David Remnick of the New Yorker what he thought of Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize, Philip Roth said, “It’s O.K., but next year I hope Peter, Paul and Mary get it.”
Being that this is a down year for the country, Dylan could now do his reputation a good turn by relinquishing his Nobel to Trump and Kim.
2
Nobel Peace Prize winners are customarily announced in October.
But no great harm would be done by citing Mr. Mueller as the winner now and awarding it to him early.
3
What else would you expect Kristof to write. I could have predicted almost every word of this column. It’s this kind of cynicism that has stalemated North Korean-American relations for too long now. Trump may have found a way of dealing with Kim that was never deemed possible before. If he can forge a deal to denuclearize the north, restore relations between the two countries and remove the thousands of American troops which have cost us billions, why would he not qualify for a Nobel..After. all, his hero Obama got one for what?
2
During the Korean War we bombed North Korea flat. Ever since we have kept the North Koreans confined above the 38th Parallel. The North Korean regime claims (to its home audience) that the South, instigated by the U.S., invaded the North. Of course it was the other way around. The North Koreans, backed by the Soviets, invaded the South. But the North Korean leadership has nursed a dream of revenge since then, for the bombing and for having been sanctioned and locked up as though in a prison. My guess is that during the eighties Kim Jong-il began planning to acquire nuclear weapons. His plan, which is still official, was apparently to use atomic (and now thermonuclear) weapons as a screen or shield while they subjected the South to a continuing pressure, using military incidents for example, to weaken the South psychologically—and to play on Korean racial nationalism, a very strong force in both Koreas that Americans seem unable to appreciate. His son, Kim Jong-un, appears to be pursuing the same aim, using the same strategy.
North Korea is not going to denuclearize. Readers wishing to follow the action should consult B. R. Myers’ blog (Myers is an expert on North Korea who teaches at a South Korean university): http://sthelepress.com/
Why is it a delusion? Far worse payers with far smaller even nonexistent, achievements have been awarded the Peace Prize, including Yasser Arfat and Barack Obama for example.
2
The picture accompanying this article is one of the most sickening I have seen of Trump.
He is giving a platform, an honored place, to one of the true evils of our time, a murderous dictator who is only concerned with his accumulation of wealth and watching the blood of his enemies flow, and laughing at democracy.
Strange how pictures show Trump massively engaged and thrilled to be in the presence of evil, like when he invited some of his Russian pals into the White House, or when he stood next to Putin.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
Dear Nic, Obama received the Nobel Prize for doing VIRTUALLY NOTHING. In fact, the Nobel Prize might actually redeem itself a little bit by awarding Trump the prize. Not just for these N. Korean talks but for wiping out ISIS and getting China to actually sit down and talk for the first time in modern history. And lets not forget what is happening in Venezuela was largely led by Trump.
3
I think we are being duped into thinking the upcoming meeting will be about peace and denuclearization. It'll likely have more to do with Trump trying to build a golf course and resort in North Korea.
2
I imagine the only topic of discussion these two engage in is making the optics look good enough to attempt to scam the Nobel Peace Prize committee. Two egotistical con artists negotiating with each other is a recipe for disaster.
1
The usual suspects herein simply cannot stomach the thought of the appalling DJT getting a Nobel Peace Prize.
Maybe we should just keep the hostility in Korea on-going. You know, so Democrats and ‘progressives’ can continue to posture and self-validate. (Dems opposed to Trump can join the military and man a post in Korea)
Meanwhile, the sainted Barack Obama got his Novel for doing exactly nothing and shamelessly hasn’t even thought of giving it back...
2
"...to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses.” https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/History
Maybe you can live with it, but the whole idea is outlandish. The whole of the Nobel Prizes has had enough problems, and the peace prize is one of the worst: https://theweek.com/articles/654348/problem-nobel-prizes .
Trump lives in a fantasy where he is six feet seven and 180 pounds. He is the healthiest, smartest, better at everything "Dear Leader" that the USA has ever had. He has little contact with reality or the truth. When he succeeds at anything, it brings to mind the old saying " Even a broken clock is correct twice a day."
6
It was Trump who averted a nuclear war? What a bunch of baloney. He almost created it! And the US - North Korea summit was a success? Definitely. For North Korea! N.Korea gave away nothing really but got plenty in return including making Kim Jong-un a world statesman. Although it's no surprise when only one Leader knows what is denuclearization
As for the Nobel Peace Prize? I just hope the Nobel Prize Academy is extremely discerning as always. It's reputation and worth of the ultimate recognition on this Planet will be sullied if the Peace Prize goes to either of these obnoxious leaders. Nelson Mandela and Mother Theresa will be turning in their graves.
4
We always opined that the President's spokespersons had an audience of one. So to regarding Mr. Trump's audience - the Nobel Committee. His jealousy of Pres. Obama remains constant and unabated.
5
Kim keeps dissidents, activists and orphans in gulags like a contemporary Stalin while Trump embraces the underbelly of American nationalism. Neither is any kind of prize.
3
It's crazy to think that Trump would win the Nobel Peace Prize. But then again, Henry Kissinger won the prize in 1973 . . .
1
Who cares really. Trump is just trolling.
Obama got it for no reason at all he had done nothing except keep the USA in more wars than at other times.
The Nobel Peace prize is over rated. At least Trump is trying to avoid war with North Korea. Obama wanted to launch a war with North Korea but fortunately his presidency was at an end.
Clinton was ready to go to war.
Maybe the prize will go to AOC for her Green New Deal. It's all about "intentions" now.
2
Two deluded leaders negotiating in bad faith, and one of them is being investigated as a possible Russian agent.
The real progress toward peace is being accomplished by South Korean President Moon Jae-in. There are some signs that Kim Jong-Un is tiring of the dangers associated with being a despot. He may settle for money and protection in exchange for ending the armed stand-off. That would send a shiver down Xi Jin-ping's spine.
Would someone please explain to me the following: why is Trump traveling to meet with Kim Jung Un over the denuclearization of North Korea while Jared Kushner is "secretly" assisting the Saudis in their efforts to go nuclear? Are we just robbing Peter to pay Paul, or have I missed something?
9
Trump winning a Nobel Peace Prize would be absolute proof that we are living in the Twilight Zone. Up is down. Right is left. Bad is good. Day is night. Insanity and narcissism are the new norm. God help us.
6
The Crazy Train is full steam ahead, powered by big, beautiful, Coal. It’s very sad when you really can’t discern just who is more delusional.
Seriously.
1
The world is closing in on Trump. (Mueller report due soon, Manfort getting ready for jail, Cohen about to testify, Putin threatening to target the US with missiles, tariffs putting a hurt on US farmers, Trump’s BFF’s Robert Kraft and Jeffrey Epstein in the news regarding prostitution (Kraft) and sex with minors (Epstein), House of Representatives getting ready to subpoena Trump for his tax records…) Trump will not be negotiating from a position of strength – and may give away the store in a effort to say that he (thinks) he dismantled North Korea’s nuclear program. No good. When all else fails, move the doomsday clock 1 minute closer to midnight.
This one day meeting of a despot , and a wannabee despot will produce nothing but another of frumps empty boasts. One day the “love” will wear off . America is almost complete in the dumbing down thereof .
1
\\In some sense this is Kabuki. On my last visit to North Korea, in 2017, officials spoke of learning from Libya that if you give up your nuclear program, America may then topple your government. So I suspect Kim has zero plans to give up his nuclear weapons.//
Ah yes, the Obama foreign policy. Destabilize Libya, a country that had capitulated to our nuclear demands and was willing to work with us; turn Iraq over to ISIS; announce a withdrawal from Afghanistan and then renege; award and kowtow to Iran, the foremost state-sponsor of terrorism in the world. (Dems wanted to impeach Reagan for that.) Not to mention going all schizophrenic vis a vis Russia and appeasing Castro's Cuba, the most subversive, totalitarian government in the Western Hemisphere.
In other words, Obama got the Nobel Prize for nothing. You'd think the Committee would at least consider Trump if he brings peace and prosperity to the Korean peninsula, the most intractable problem along with Israel in my lifetime (I was born in the year Israel was created and just before the Korean War, which took 2.5 million lives).
2
It’s hard to measure success when DJT meets with foreign dictators in private.
No one ( no one) really knows what has been promised to or discussed with un and putin.
Just another con!
Oh well, time to move forward with DJT’s removal from office
2
Kristof is optimistic because Mike Pompeo appointed Stephen Biegun to oversee Trump's negotiations with North Korea? You mean the same Biegun who served as National Security Council under George W. Bush? You mean the same Biegun who served as a foreign policy adviser to Sarah Palin? This is is the "steady hand" expected to contain Trump? Oh boy... We're in worse trouble than I thought.
3
The Nobel prize in physics is given for work done many years earlier, when there has been a lot of time for its significance to be appreciated. The Nobel prize for peace is given out almost real-time for events that have not had time to mature. It is farcical that anyone would even think of nominating these two criminals. (Kim, I note in fairness to Trump, is the far worse, mass-murderous criminal, compared to whom pathological liar, money-launderer and election-corrupter Trump is a piker). But even much better people have been given the Nobel peace prize for efforts that did not, over time, yield peace. And Obama got it more for charm and good intentions than any even short-term actual accomplishment. So, unfortunately, the Nobel peace prize just doesn't mean that much. If it means little now, it will mean far less than zero if either of these creeps gets it.
For Trump to trump Obama he needs this big time.
"But delusions can be helpful if they make each side more willing to make concessions and pursue an arduous peace process. "
No! Two crazy pathological liers with nuclear weapons should never be meeting in the first.
Neither of these men have never keep their word about anything.
2
Sure Donald, imposing a U.S. policy at the Mexico border that separated children from their parents. You most definitely got the attention of the Nobel selection committee. But if they do not choose Kim, maybe you can share the prize with Maduro in Venezuela.
1
trump can earn the prize by resigning and going to jail.
3
What a crazy topsy-turvy world it's become.
• Donnie trump for a Nobel Prize?
• The WH "asked" Shinzo Abe to nominate Donnie boy for the Nobel, and Abe did as told.
• Abe won't confirm it - or admit being bullied.
Who will stop all of this nonsense?
The media surely can..... if they refrain broadcast of any video from trump's bromances and fights. Showing any videos will only enable more nonsense from the Grand Wizard Narcissist.
It's time we stop donnie, and his perpetual menagerie.
1
So there'll be a pudgy, delusional dictator with a bizarre haircut, and also Kim Jong-un. I'm afraid that Trump is going to find that unlike the American presidency, the Nobel prize is not for sale.
4
Only a Nobel Committee as corrupt as the Trump Administration would award a criminal like Trump an award. Since the Nobel Committee is a Scandinavian Institution where corruption is unheard of, that seem very unlikely. Maybe he should look at rotten tomatoes.
The Russian connection continues. Trump is for sale and can be manipulated with golf courses and real estate. We are tenants in America for Trump, customers of his persistent sales and marketing pitches. There is only hope in the coherence of this delusion not in its actuality.
https://www.cfr.org/blog/russias-role-north-korea-more-important-you-might-think
1
Trump has a better chance of getting the Nobel Prize by persuading the Swedes to take it away from Obama and giving it to him. That way, he kills two birds with one stone -- diss his "archenemy" and claim a prize.
2
Are Nobel Peace Prizes given to people who solve the problems they create?
3
Well lets make a list of some interesting Peace Prize winners:
Arafat (terrorist)
Begin (also terrorist, don't forget the Irgun)
Kissinger (kind of a second hand mass murderer, remember Cambodia anybody?)
Sure ,Trump is a megalomaniacal malignant narcissist and a danger to the Republic, but if he actually gets North Korea to denuclearize, he'll deserve a Nobel. Certainly more so than Obama, who got it for what exactly? Being reasonable and cool maybe?
1
Trump bamboozled? Twice? Unthinkable.
Well, Henry Kissinger got one.
1
Well, you have to remember the Swedes awarded the Peace Prize to Obama, because . . . well, because he wasn't Geo W Bush. So, perhaps they'll award the Peace Prize this year to (name to be filled in later) opponent of Donnie the Dumbbell, POTUS 2020.
2
Since Obama received the peace prize for doing nothing, it has become meaningless.
4
No need to worry about what happened to Libya. Hillary Clinton did not become President Donald J. Trump WON the Election!
3
When the Nobel committee awards their Peace prize to someone else, I'll bet the farm that Trump will start tweeting that the system (a) rigged, (b) dishonest, (c) controlled by Hillary/Obama, (d) a deep-state plot, or (e) not fair. Probably all the above.
2
NEWSBREAK ! The White House just released a list of the "many other people" who feel that Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. To protect their privacy, I'll only share their first names: Eric, Ivanka, Donald Jr., Melania, Jared, Sean, Rush, Tucker, and a guy named Mike from Indiana.
2
I am sure that the Nobel Committee will welcome the prospect of Kim and Trump blatantly gaming a Peace Prize selection process that has been around since 1901.
1
Take off those rose colored glasses nick. Trump is a bumbling fool driven by his ego. He’s incapable of negotiating anything and Kim is way smarter than him.
2
War crimes in Venezuela.
Children dying in Yemen ignored.
Khashoggi's death ignored.
Families fleeing US meddling separated.
Children kidnapped in cages still with no identity.
Puerto Rico used, abused and kidnapped.
Federal workers held hostage.
Yeah, lets give him an award posing in a photograph.
2
The Nobel committee would be fools to give the prize to Trump. Their reputation would be permanently damaged, as is anyone who associates them with Trump. Run away!
3
How strange is it for the man who disparages European organizations to aspire to a prize given by a European Organization.
Of course it’s prize given to Barack Obama (without any coaching from that WH) so the BBITWH (big baby in the White House) wants it.
3
The Electoral College/Trump University president has fallen visibly in love with North Korea's Kim. Is this a good or bad thing? He also fell in (and out) of love with three wives, and at least an equal number mistresses before and after.
So, the only thing we can be sure of, is that something of a "pre-nup" agreement has been fashioned. But I don't think Kim is so needy and such a pushover for such lopsided conditions.
More likely, we will gladly see a softening of relations between the North and South territories. And why not. If they unite, with the help of China and Russia, what useful purpose can Bolton, Pompeo, Trump and Company provide? Next week will be like a 3-ring circus. as the various stresses in the administration begin to crack.
2
A total of 329 candidates — 217 individuals and 112 organizations — are being considered for this year’s Nobel Peace prize. The identities of the candidates are kept secret, and the Norwegian Nobel Committee is forbidden from divulging any information about its deliberations for 50 years, and even then, only for scholarship purposes and at its discretion.
In February 2018 Olav Njolstad, the secretary of the five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee, said that a nomination of President Trump appeared to be a fake. He added that it appears the same person was responsible for forging nominations in 2017 as well.
Was the "beautiful letter" from Abe sent with the express purpose of improving Trump's chances for nomination? If so, this seems to be in direct violation of the nomination protocol. Who else may Trump dig up to boost about his candidacy in his desperate quest for the coveted prize? He better tone down his ego and refrain from announcing them outright. The committee may be more vigilant this year given his past two questionable nominations.
2
Trump's envy and bitter resentment of Obama has no bounds.
6
Please someone reality check me on this, cause I find all the rhetoric confusing. There was never any chance of NK not developing nukes, and later "denuclearizing". The problem for some time now has been how to "welcome" NK into the nuclear club, right? And that's a serious problem, right? After all this time of insisting that they not make nukes the US couldn't just turn on a dime and admit defeat, right? And we still want to limit what they do with them. Unindicted Co-conspirator, whether by design or not, is just doing what Bush and Obama were worrying over. NK puts it's nukes under wraps, everyone implicitly accepts that they're there, and everyone declares victory. Next step is continuing the now more complicated task of clandestinely delaying the spread of bombs and tech, which NK will certainly be involved in whatever they say.
But in the meantime we have Cadet Bone Spurs claiming that NK is "giving up" ... stuff, cause he's so great. If I have that right why is the rest of the world outside of the White House and Fox News still making statements about a denuclearization deal?
I have attended three summits of Nobel Peace Prize laureates. What no one talks about: winning the Nobel Peace Prize (except for the responsibility it confers). What everyone talks about: working toward peace. I doubt that any of them thought about what they could do to win the prize.
The trophy is not the NPP; it is peace.
6
And give our dear leader ( DJT ) the Nobel for Economics; and why not the Nobel for Literature (for his brilliant tweets)?
8
@Unconvinced
What about his book? Oh wait, a ghost writer did that?
The prize is ridiculous anyway! Thich Nhat Hahn who was nominated by MLK in the 1960s has been ignored forever by this silly inane group of people. He DESERVES that prize probably more than anyone on the planet--let alone President Obama and Aung San Suu Kyi. Those 2 peace prize winners are complicit in murdering millions on the planet. It's a PEACE prize after all, no?
1
The Nobel Committee is still being roiled by multiple accusations of sexual assault by the husband of one of its members, which came to light in 2017, and which resulted in the cancellation of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2018.
I can think of nothing which would further sully the reputation of the Nobel Committee more, than for it to award it’s Peace Prize to a mass murderer and a serial sexual predator and climate change denier. It would be obscene.
4
Maybe if there's a Nobel prize for tweeting...
5
The Nobel Peace Prize should never be given again. It is a joke, with winners like Kissinger (who had Allende assassinated), Obama (right after his election) and the civilian leader of Burma/Myanmar who has done nothing to stop the carnage in her country.
2
This is the 'president' who thinks that starting a war with, say, Venezuela, becomes his path to re-election. Yikes!
1
What idea candidates for the Nobel Prize - one Trump who is complicit in the cover up of the murder of a reporter for a Saudi prince and access to the prince's money. The other outstanding candidate is Jung-un is a murderer of family members and fellow country men. What a pair for the Nobel committee. Bet the committee is sharping their pencils right now laboring over what Nobel prize to offer them-none is the answer we all hope is committee's answer.
1
To award the Nobel Peace Prize to these two dangerously unqualified buffoons would be to achieve a height of ludicrousness never before seen in the civilized world.
Both of these enormously egocentric individuals do nothing for anyone else besides themselves - they alter facts, they lie, they cheat, they brutalize people.
Why would you give them a Peace Prize when all they do is sow discord and hatred?
Surely the Nobel Committee knows this.
8
Is there a Nobel Hate Prize for Trump? If there were he would win it hands down.
6
Even now, two plus years into this debacle of an administration, I see op-ed pieces trying to find a silver lining. Please stop. There are none.
Instead, the focus of this piece should be Trump's bizarre obsession with Obama's deserved Nobel award.
10
Who is more delusional: Mr. Trump or Kim Kong-un?
Care to flip a coin?
5
@Alan R Brock
Only if you use the commemorative coin from the previous Trump/Kim meeting.
3
If there are two people in the world who could start a nuclear war, it's these two characters.
Speaking as an American, Trump could start the following:
!. Nuclear war
2. Civil war
3. Race war
4. Holy war
5. Gender war
Calling the NYTimes an "enemy of the people" was another low for this despicable man.
I would tell him the Times has been around since 1851, and will be here when he's a box of bones or ashes in an urn.
10
Trump is an awful 'businessman', as shown in his last love affair with someone retaining an intact nuclear war arsenal, dictator Kim Jon-un, and achieving zero concessions, secretive as they tried to keep their mutual cheating...into making us believe progress is being made. Trump's self-aggrandizing is in full display, as usual....while twisting Abe's arm to nominate him for the Noble Peace prize...as a tribute to his 'rabid dog attack mode' on all and anybody calling his bluff. Meanwhile, we must admit, Trump seems comfortable... in Putin's pocket.
2
- Have you stopped beating your wife?
- Yes, I have.
- Good, you deserve an award for being a good husband!
I don't believe for a moment that the Nobel prizes are given to people stopping their ill behavior. On both sides of this "summit."
8
Refresh me. Exactly what did Obama do to get his Nobel Prize?
Show up?
More TDS on display. Trump has made progress with NK. More than than BHO can say with regards to any relations with any country during his 8 years. Unless, of course, you want to count his “off mic” moment when he promised Russia more leeway after the election.
2
@TheRealJR60
Out here in the real world Cadet Bone Spurs isn't doing anything close to what he's claiming. In reality he's implicitly "welcoming" NK into the nuclear club while claiming credit for things that aren't actually happening.
The news may not have gotten down to the little old south, but Obama got the prize for a major diplomatic campaign for peace. Prior to this disastrous administration the US government, including under Obama, was very active in keeping strong alliances and facing down our enemies. That was done with diplomacy, which is very different from bullying. Unindicted Co-conspirator's replacing diplomacy with business deals with, and public support for, Putin is not the work of a patriotic genius.
8
Obama didn’t solicit the prize. Trump just wants one because Obama has one.
4
@TheReal,. Obama did just the opposite of what Trump has been on a mission to destroy from day one. I Googled Wikipedia, ----- The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to United States President Barack Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people".
1
Not to belittle The Nobel Peace Prize but really now, considering who we're talking about, my notion of the Trump-Kim Nobel Peace Prize only stirs memories from my youth of opening a box of Cracker Jack and my excitement anticipating the prize I'd get.
3
Nick, you know what? You, and many American intellectuals, are sometimes naive, if not delusional, about those dictators, especially people like Kim.
3
In the new era of Trump, there should be a Nobel Prize for clowns: Trump would be the king of clowns.
He first insults "Rocket man", then he invites him to have a good time, and that should produce a "Peace Nobel Price" Lol!
5
DJTrumputin has done more than enough wrong in his life, including recently, to disqualify him from winning (or being considered for) a Nobel Peace Prize.
Being an unrepentant (alleged) serial sexual assaulter and misogynist, caging children seeking asylum, and calling murderous, Nazi-sympathizing White Supremacists "good people" being among those reasons.
There are thousands of people more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize (and even if he does sign a peace plan with NK or facilitate one between NK and SK, what kind of "peace" would it be and how long-lives?). I personally feel like vomiting at the thought of Don the con being considered for or winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Will the deciding committee care whether the majority of the American people support granting trump the award?
I fear that the Nobel Prize committee will further sully the name and prestige of their award if they bestow it in such a deeply selfish and non-compassionate person.
3
I see where this is going. If the New York Times can't prevent Trump from getting the Nobel Peace prize, then at least they can push to include Kim to render it meaningless. But Trump became president, Kim enjoyed lobbing missiles across Japan's mainland.
1
Maybe the Nobel committee should take the prize away from Obama and give it to Trump and Kim--Obama certainly never earned it so it would certainly be appropriate to pass it on to The Two Stooges.
Maybe the Nobel committee could create a plastic version of the medal--Trump and Kim might be dumb enough not to know the difference.
The U.S. presidency has already been sullied and devolved into hideous farce, no need for the Nobel to do likewise.
4
How about reunification? Now that would worth a Nobel Prize!
"painstaking' and DT in the same sentence? Oxymoronic anyone?
I guarantee DudDon Chiseler-in-Chief will win The NoBail Prize.
1
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh! He might be reading! Wait, what am I saying...
1
Why is a Trump-Kim Nobel Peace Prize prospect so ‘delusional’ when Barack Obama was awarded the prize merely for being elected president?
1
From Dennis Rodman to Donald Trump wasn't much of a leap for Kim Jong Un. Kim thinks he has now seen America's best and brightest. Expect to see the threesome together at a MAGA rally. Throw in Ted Nugent and Kanye West and it will be SRO, biggest crowds ever.
2
Congratulations! You've found the secret to a very, very, very, long life. Just keep waiting.
Since you have a great deal of time your hands, you might want to do some research on finding another planet to live on.
2
Two pathetic narcissists in love with their own reflections.
Trump being played like a fool by the rocket man for cheap publicity. But of course Trump loves cheap publicity, that’s all he is.
Who could have imagined our country would sink to this level of mediocrity?
Vote my friends,
3
Let's give them the Nobel Peace Prize, if they both promise to retire and continue their love affair privately in North Korea,
With N. Korea and the Kim regimes, it's a diplomatic dance of musical chairs. Think (or better, research) back to 1994 and the Clinton/Kim Jong-Il "Agreed Framework" for slowing - and hopefully halting - N. Korea's nuclear development program.
It was Clinton, not Trump, who favored and instigated direct negotiations with N. Korea... against fierce opposition from a Republican Congress.
The deal was that N. Korea would shut down its main reactor in Yongbyon (sound familiar?) and abandon two others, along with "sealing" its fissile materials. In exchange, the U.S. would build two "light fuel" reactors and provide oil to make up for the power lost by closure of N. Korea's reactors.
For a number of reasons, none of that happened, and Republicans accused Clinton of being scammed. Perhaps he was, but the upshot was that direct negotiations were tried, and failed... 24 years ago.
Now we have Trump, whose grasp of history is roughly equal to my understanding of quantum mechanics (i.e., zero), bragging about being the first president to meet with a North Korean dictator. And from the Singapore meeting we get the equivalent of "peace in our time".
The very idea that Kim and his successors (if any) would give up their nuclear striking capability is preposterous. It's all they've got to lift them up onto the world stage and to fill the "folks back home" with a sense of national pride. (Even dictators have to watch their backs.)
Indeed, this is all Kabuki.
1
Nick,
I don’t suppose that Trump might used this summit to finally (after nearly 70 years) extricate our forces out of South Korea?
Today South Korea enjoys 12X the GDP and 4X the population of Kim’s North Korea. With such advantages in both wealth and manpower, perhaps it is well past time to let the South Koreans take care of their own self defense...ehhh?
Come home America. We are no longer living in 1953.
I don't think "painstaking" and "slow slog" are in trump's vocabulary. He seems to lose interest easily and has a notoriously short attention span. His own rhetoric often includes claims of quick solutions, so fast it will make your head spin, so easy. So, I expect nothing, other than maybe a claim of complete victory.
1
What's actually happening here is that the US is doing what it always does when someone they don't like joins the nuclear club: grudging acceptance. Trump has spun this as a personal success, albeit less skillfully than a different president would have.
It's very possible that Trump's rhetoric actually did nothing more than speed up the NK missile testing process, but either way, now it has both nukes and a missile that can reach the US. Is it a coincidence that they stopped testing missiles after they got to the point where they could demonstrate they can hit us? I will stop short of blaming this on Trump, but rushing ill-prepared to the negotiation table, himself, after his opponent gains bargaining power is on him.
Kristof is right that this will be a long slog of normalization, but I think it will be a fairly predictable process. Trump has demonstrated that he's a paper tiger, so there's little risk of war. Perhaps the greatest risk is to our relationships with our local allies. Trump has no qualms about throwing SK or Japan under the bus to gain prestige by making "deals" (i.e., concessions) with NK. So much winning!
Trump made major concessions such as suspending military exercises in exchange for nothing as significant.
A major concession would be for the US to dismantle its entire nuclear arsenal as well all its other weapons of mass destruction.
There is always the assumption from even serious humane writers like Nicholas Kristof that somehow having the capacity to blow up the world is anything but total insanity.
1
See Charles Osgood, "An alternative to war and surrender"; and Amitai Etzioni "The hard way to peace"
“It is, of course, delusion to think that either Trump or Kim will win the Nobel Peace Prize, and in general it’s not a good thing for leaders to go into a summit delusional.”
Why? After Obama I could win the Nobel, too. I’m also up for the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, but somehow my invitation to the Oscars got lost in the mail.
Trump’s lie that President Obama was on the verge of going to war with North Korea was doubtless uttered to put more pressure on Kim to reach a deal. The reality is that Trump’s own rhetoric, before falling in love with Kim, brought us closer to the nightmare of a war that would result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands—maybe millions—of North and South Koreans.
The very real danger here is that Trump, a narcissist, will inevitably fall out of love with Kim, and may carry through on his underlying threat of total destruction. Lindsey Graham has said that would be a regrettable but acceptable outcome to protect America’s national security.
I strongly disagree with such an assertion and believe that the opprobrium raining down on the United States from the world community should such a nightmare ever unfold is a much greater threat to the U.S. than the threat Kim would assure his and his own country’s destruction by instigating an attack.
While all President’s hope to achieve domestic political gain through their foreign policy, their duty (not always realized) is to put the country’s interest first. With Trump we already have innumerable examples that his interests come first.
We can hopefully survive a Potemkin agreement. But should we see the complete collapse of the relationship between these two star-crossed lovers we may be facing Shakespearean tragedy.
Well, the problem here is that Obama had won an (entirely undeserved) Nobel Peace Prize, so Trump obviously has to win one too.
Though he shoudl have thought of that before pulling out of both the Paris Climate Agreement and the nuclear pact with Russia, both actions that endanger peace.
Wow - if you changed Trumps name to Obama, the author of this editorial would have a much different opinion. The bias and hypocrisy are really starting to get in the way of real and honest news and discussion. Prior to Trumps election, N. Korea was deemed a global threat, and now that has been deescalated. That is good news, the problem is not solved but discussions are ongoing. Give credit where credit is due.
1
I see all the comments by Liberals, criticizing and second guessing Trump's attempt to solve the North Korean issue--which is of course, they have nukes, are still in a state of war with the South, and have threatened their neighbors with missiles.
Well guess what? Obama earned a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing. And yes, he should have refused it--because everyone knew it was not earned, but his own ego and hubris prevented him from doing so.
Obama never attempted to tackle the Korean issue--because he simply lacked the vision, the will and the courage to try. He was both are laziest and one of our most timid presidents. At least Trump has stopped Kim from nuclear testing, firing missiles and threatening his neighbors. Isn’t that more than Obama’s hand wringing? Is there no credit for that?
2
Trump, like other Republicans, mocked to no end President Obama's early receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize. Whatever the merits of that award, it is far more absurd for Trump to be given that honor.
Trump gave himself a feather in the cap for meeting with Kim Jong Un, although nothing substantive has been improved. North Korea hasn't lowered their nuclear ambitions, nor are our allies in Asia any more confident with the situation. On the contrary, Kim Jong Un manipulated Trump's ego - hardly a feat! - to get what he wanted: lavish treatment, international attention, improved quality of life in North Korea, and American pressure off of him. He, not Trump, emerged the winner.
Trump gave himself bragging rights when he lied that President Obama was thisclose to launching war against North Korea. Trump was trying to make himself look like the astute diplomat, and his predecessor the intemperate warmonger. The opposite is true and the Nobel Committee should continue to honor those who work for a safer world. That's not Trump.
3
Neither Trump nor Kim should even think about being nominated. One can say they appreciate Trump policies, I hear that often from friends on the right. But to say he deserves a peace prize??! Laughable. Although, recent history of those awards makes me believe they are purely political; no substance.
1
If Donald Trump believes in anything, it is that there is nothing – no problem of personal unpopularity, no litigation problem of an uncooperative judge, no sexual misconduct problem, no personal financial problem, no risky military problem and no problem of personal ignorance about the national economy or about international trade – which cannot be solved by a secret fix.
The clandestine trick may involve bribes made by using other peoples’ money or it may be coercion by blackmail or threats of physical violence.
Deep down, Donald Trump probably knows that his level of competence is far below that of other world leaders. His answer is to delude himself that he is much shrewder about taking shortcuts. He believes that cheating is not only acceptable behavior, it is the smarter way to go.
1
It’s heartbreaking that our national security has been relegated to the whims of infants at play.
7
Even Nicholas Kristof sounds a little silly when he makes an attempt to explain the actions or thought processes of Trump.
I am, of course, no kind of expert but, to me, Trump doesn't fit into any kind of rational explanation or wish list about anything.
We just have to wait and see what he says or does about anything.
Nobody can possibly predict anything about him.
Nick is sensationally more optimistic about this than I am. The whole North Korea thing is a Putin project. Putin wants the US out of Korea so he can spread his influence thru the southern border without any interference from Americans. Kim is as easily manipulated with flattery and money as trump is. Putin is pushing hard right now because he can see that trump's days may be numbered. It's probably what they talked about secretly at the G20 in Argentina. I can see Putin using the ridiculous carrot of a nobel peace prize knowing what dimwits he's dealing with.
I think that we should all be well past the point where we can ascribe any behavior by trump on the international stage to be of his own volition.
The whole thing is that Trump wants a Nobel prize simply because Obama received one. It's all about Trump. He would gladly give the farm to Kim in exchange for personal aggrandizement and declare a victory.
2
Mr. Kristof excoriates the leaders for seeking peace and calls them delusional. Obama fecklessly ignored N.Korea and permitted it to become a threat to the entire world. But with the precedent of Nick's hero Obama, who got the peace prize merely for being elected, it is completely appropriate these two men should be awarded for their tangible efforts.
1
The central reason why Trump would in all likelihood never win a Nobel Peace Prize is not merely because he’s done precious little to cultivate lasting peace; it’s because he so obviously, so narcissistically, WANTS it. It’s his utter lack of humility. After all, his own administration twisted Shinzo Abe’s arm to nominate him (tellingly, it is against the rules to nominate oneself for a Nobel), and Trump himself is unabashedly, publicly campaigning for the Prize.
Can you imagine past Peace Prize winners publicly campaigning for themselves? Jimmy Carter? Nelson Mandela? Mother Teresa? Neither can I. Though campaigning for oneself may not be against the letter of the Nobel’s laws, surely it is against the spirit.
4
Take a step back and marvel at how we all now revolve around a single personality disorder. We all live in Trump's sick distorted world. The entire country will need a long walk on a beach come November 2020. We need to process how it came to be and how it has felt to live in close proximity to such mental illness for an extended period of time ....
5
I think that this column might be wrong in reporting that "Kim is said to have started driving at age 3." I think it meant that Kim now drives as though he were age 3, putting him two years ahead of our president. If between them they are awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, they will establish an unbreakable chronological record.
Kristof has been issuing advice on how to deal with North Korea for years ... and none of it went anywhere. In fact, I recall during the Bush years when the US was relying on the so-called 6-party talks that went nowhere, Kristof kept urging the US to sit down with North Korea one on one.
So now the US is doing exactly that; but now suddenly it's no good and supposedly delusional. Why, Nick? Because Trump is doing it? Such is life when suffering acute Trump Derangement Syndrome.
1
Sorry but I, for one, feel disgusted at the notion of two seriously-disturbed narcissistic individuals preening themselves in the mirror begging to be given a Nobel prize. All this is happening when the most serious situation before us is the deterioration of the environment due to climate change. How can Kim and Trump congratulate themselves on achieving a fake “peace”, and even think of being rewarded for it, while the real threat to the planet itself is ignored by them? I hope that these two dinosaurs among politicians will be the last of their kind. The earth cannot take anymore of or from them.
1
Both of these men are prodigious liars who believe their own lies and neither is capable of keeping a promise. Whatever "agreement" they announce will never be carried out. It is impossible that any actual benefit will result from this bizzaro world "summit" is a fantasy.
3
September 19, 2017: In his first address to the UN General Assembly, President Trump threatens to “totally destroy North Korea,” if the United States is forced to defend itself or its allies, adding “Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.”
September 21, 2017: Kim Jong Un responds to Trump’s UN speech with an unprecedented statement under his own name, calling Trump’s behavior “mentally deranged” and asserting that “a frightened dog barks louder.” Kim Jong Un further stated that Trump’s words “convinced me, rather than frightening or stopping me, that the path I chose is the correct and that one I have to follow to the last.” He threatened, “exercising...a corresponding, highest level of hardline countermeasure in history” and declared he would make Trump “pay dearly for his speech.”
Unlike Trump, when god-ruler Kim speaks, so it is done.
He will play Trump to the end.
6
Love is never to have to denuclearize.
Delusions can have their benefits.
1
Every time I think Trump's ego has reached the peak of delusional grandiosity, he delivers another ridiculous gift. When he is passed over for the Nobel Peace Prize, let's remind him that Barack Obama won it very quickly in his tenure for doing "nothing", other than being a promising, humane, concerned, intellectual, hardworking, down-to-earth, promising human being.
3
I think anything is possible. The moment Trump sets his sights on something it becomes significantly cheapened.
Why not degrade the Nobel Peace Prize?
3
If China and Russia had not actually backed tough sanctions against North Korea for once Trump would probably be at war there. Probably they deserve more it than Trump does. He still things we have those Nukes why can't we use the? Might burn off some CO2 out of the air too?
Mr. Trump, saddled with historic low approval ratings at home and abroad, is desperate for a win, any kind of win. That's generally not a scenario in which any kind of meaningful agreement is likely to be made, although Trump is sure to announce one as soon as the meetings conclude. Everyone should be skeptical.
1
Mr. Kristoff is naive in thinking that Trump and Kim are pursuing a peace process. Each thinks that they are using the other to advance their own goals. Trump's goals are self-aggrandizement, and laying the groundwork for future Trump-branded development in North Korea. He is not even slightly concerned with the safety of the US, Japan, South Korea, or anyone else. Kim's goals are attaining international stature through nuclear power, and reducing or removing US military presence so that he can pursue Korean unification under his leadership. Denuclearization is in direct opposition to his goals. China will be calling the shots. Trump and Kim are just media fodder. Enjoy the show.
1
Trump seems to believe the Nobel Peace prize: (a) belongs to the US, for its leader to receive or commission -- or both, (b) can be won by someone who solves -- or claims to solve -- a problem that he himself has created, and (c) is awarded in a vacuum, irrespective of a lifetime of exploiting the poor/disadvantaged and a history of wreaking general havoc wherever possible,
Good luck, Sir.
9
The Norwegian Nobel committee will never consider someone for a Peace Prize who foments conflict within other countries in order to create for himself a platform for gaining potential votes in 2020, such as Venezuelan related people in the United States.
Or for stirring up trouble abroad in order to pretend he is a negotiator for peaceful agreement.
And much more deceit.
8
I am actually very worried about what Trump might concede in his effort to try to gain the Nobel Prize. He has no background or understanding of policy and its implications. But he does have an instinctive drive to out-do Obama on every front. So, he might do very unwise things in order to gain the appearance of concessions from North Korea (without mechanisms for verification). He wants the Nobel because Obama got it. He'll give up the store to get it.
13
Trump has essentially the same conditions as all of his predecessors. He has accomplished nothing, and is in danger of being compromised into selling-out all the U.S. allies once again. The only thing that is different with Trump and the claims of his people like Pompeo, is their claim that Trump has a special personal relationship with Kim, claiming that will be the basis for Kim surrendering his nuclear weapons capability; a claim that defies likelihood, and borders on delusional thinking by the Trump administration. Trump and Pompeo simply use the situation to criticize their predecessors to their ignominious base of constituents.
5
A remarkable feat, Mr. Kristof: you've produced an entire piece about the Korean situation where the biggest stakeholder of all - South Korea - is not even mentioned, let alone has its interests considered.
3
That’s not the only piece Kristof has left out: how about Vladimir Putin? After all, isn’t Putin the guy who assured Trump that one of Kim’s missile tests was fake — and when our intelligence agencies assured him they were real Trump snorted and said “I believe Putin”?
1
so, President Trump is finally going to VietNam, after all these years. glad to hear his bone spurs are healing at last. perhaps he and Kim, to make each other feel better, can gift each other with cheap gilded medallions modeled after the Nobel Prize as they sit down to discussing... what? the more we read, the more it sounds like they have two different agendas which share some of the same words but mean completely different things. of course, they both crave a win. does it seem this publicity stunt is likely to produce actual results? which one will play the other? and, last but not least, can't Trump stick around Hanoi and build a Trump Tower there instead coming home once the summit is over?
17
Isn’t it the purpose of the Nobel Peace Prize not only to acknowledge past accomplishments but to encourage future ones?Kristof makes fun of Trump and Kim, but aren’t they doing the right thing in their peacemaking efforts? I can recall how Trump’s threats to NK were condemned for being impulsive and dangerous. Now his accomplishments are being dismissed as “delusion.” What other President has been so successful?
2
Edward, I guess the question is whether these are indeed efforts at peacemaking. Based on the character of the people involved (I am hesitant to call them “men”), it’s more likely that it’s all for show — or worse, for graft. As far as actual reduction of weapons goes, nothing has been accomplished.
7
Seems to me that Kim is out negotiating the " great negotiator" or playing him like a fiddle. Kim has warned Trump not to listen to skeptics about any deal. N.K. released a statement :
“If the present U.S. administration reads others’ faces, lending an ear to others, it may face the shattered dream of the improvement of the relations with the DPRK and world peace and miss the rare historic opportunity,”
This statement demonstrates that Kim understands Trump and they know how to play him. It's a brilliant move.
6
Since trump appears to be the worst negotiator who ever lived, I don't think I would get my hopes up for a good outcome
22
@sjs So why are missiles no longer being launched? Seems more progress was made under Trump than Obama. You might want to check that leftist privy you got there.
This article is completely off-base. The optimism only makes sense if you believe both parties are equally overwhelmed by vanity. Kim is not crazy enough to sacrifice his future to it. Trump on the other hand will give anything for the prize itself and another kick at Obama.
We are in real danger of a war-ending treaty accompanied by a total abandonment of South Korea. With more nice words in place of denuclearization. Not an outcome to be wished for.
8
While some of your points about process, incentives and tactics make sense, I confess I remain troubled by the fact that thermonuclear war or peace may hinge on the whims and egos of two utterly ruthless and unprincipled narcissists.
15
Kissinger got the Peace Prize for agreeing to stop bombing Cambodia and Laos - it would a lesser insult to give it to Trump who, after all, despite appearing crazier than all previous Presidents, has not invaded any countries yet, like GW Bush in Iraq, costing more US lives than 9/11, and even starting talking to the Taliban.
1
President Obama did not warrant the Nobel peace prize so early in his term.
However, awarding it to Trump and Kim would emphasize what an absolute joke it is.
Very few people on the planet are less deserving.
Trump's ego, immaturity, childish bullying (compensating for cowardice), preoccupation with using "his" nuclear weapons, and complete disregard for anyone other than himself (and POSSIBLY his sons) greatly increased the chance of a nuclear attack.
At the first meeting with Kim, his profound ignorance, naivety, susceptibility to flattery, complete disregard for preparation and for the advice of people dramatically smarter and more knowledgeable than himself, led to Kim easily manipulating.
His extreme egotism and need for praise (resulting from a justified inferiority complex) even prompted him to declare that North Korea was no longer a nuclear threat.
10
The Peace Prize is awarded by politicians (The Norwegian Parliament) and when it is awarded to politicians while they are in office you have to wonder... there should be grace period of say, ten years, before a politician, or state official can be nominated. Also, it is part of their mandate to work to achieve peace, we don’t arrest them when they start wars, why reward them when they end one they started in the first place.
Kissinger got the prize for signing the peace accords (his counterpart declined), within two years we had the same war, sans US soldiers, general mayhem, killing all over Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and the horror of re-education camps etc.
Obam got the prize then we barged into Libya (after they stopped nuclear weapons work) and Syria which was far from real threat and he did not end any of the wars he inherited.
It is just such a bad idea, even without the self serving, self aggrandizing favors politician do for one another.
3
Concerning giddiness about North-South Korean trade...Who needs whom? Just a lifeline thrown to the regions biggest threat that will never benefit its people, and then it takes pressure away from the Chinese, and decreases the readiness of the defenses.
Relax sanctions on projects involving tourism? What a hoot. It's those big, beautiful beaches that trump wants to build hotels on. Kabuki, indeed!
9
Delusions of grandeur and requited love between tyrants:
in two years, this is how US greatness has devolved.
11
@John
Trump: "We fell in love."
I simply cannot get over an American president saying such an absurd comment, and especially about a man as vile as Kim.
Love can be toxic and I think this love affair is going to be proven so.
2
It is delusional for anyone to think anything will come of this meeting except racking up bills in five star hotels and an excessive amount of pomp and circumstance. The President can't keep his word to Congress overnight regarding DACA and the fiasco in December the shutdown the American government for 35 days. How is it possible to respect a leader who describes communications with Kim as receiving, "love letters"? As for Kim his penchant for ordering murders of opponents including family members. and promoting the feats and mystique of family members while his citizens starve, he suffers from the same lack of credibility. as Trump. They are both unfit for the responsibility of leading their nations.
11
The major threat North Korea posed to the United States was its attempts to develop of nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile capable of hitting the U.S. mainland. The U.S. Intelligence Community 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment as well as the president. For example, states: “Pyongyang has not conducted any nuclear-capable missile or nuclear tests in more than a year, has declared its support for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and has reversibly dismantled portions of its WMD infrastructure. However, North Korea retains its WMD capabilities, and the IC continues to assess that it is unlikely to give up all of its WMD stockpiles, delivery systems, and production capabilities.” That’s significant progress.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf
If Trump gets the Nobel that's not half as bad as having awarded it to Henry Kissinger who's responsible for countless deaths due to the bombing of Cambodia and in the aftermath of Pinochet's coup in Chile that resulted in the murder of thousands of Allende's supporters by death squads. Or for that matter Obama who got the Nobel for pious intentions but who presided over the mayhem that much of the Arab world is in today.
Trump's just an old fashioned racist who's out to make as much money for himself, his family, and his billionaire buddies but at least he hasn't started any wars thus far. If he defuses tensions in the Korean peninsula, a major nuclear flashpoint, he would be doing the world a favor.
If Trump and Kim can aspire for the Nobel- albeit delusionally -then perhaps Prime Minister Modi of India and Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan can hope to do the same in a region which is the most dangerous part of the world today.
1
The American president is tuft-hunting. He wants another trophy for his mantel; nothing more. He is as far removed from the terrific dangers of a nuclear war as it's possible to be. He has "prize envy," as Barack Obama beat him to it by miles.
The folks at the Nobel Institute are no dummies. They see an American president who has made a dangerous turn in the Middle East by tow-towing to Israel and by unilaterally pulling the United States out of President Obama's six-nation nuclear arms deal of 2015.
Iran is not a choir-boy nation, yet, by all accounts, they have adhered to the strictures put in place so that they could regain access to international markets. Not only have Trump and John Bolton and Michael Pompeo made "perfect the enemy of the good," they have turned a blind eye toward the intransigence of Kim Jong-Un in North Korea for which they have blamed Mr. Obama and castigated the ayatollahs. The Committee deliberating on its prestigious prizes can see that Trump is all bluster and bullying and that he is being blatantly played by the North Korean dictator. And what of an American president who has trashed allies and is eager to disconnect from NATO and is widely seen as being a satellite to Russia's Vladimir Putin? A Nobel "peace" Prize? For one or both of these unlikely bringers of peace?
I don't think so.
12
I was listening to this morning's talking heads and the speculation is that trump will lift some or all of our sanctions on North Korea, in exchange for some minor nuclear gesture. Trump maintains that his real goal is to make it possible for North Korea to be the next big tourist destination in the East (and will certainly require hotels and golf courses). While tourism is usually a great economy booster that isn't as destructive as drilling and manufacturing, my first response is to wonder "Why isn't he making such expansive moves in America? I had to cancel my reservations/trip to Yosemite Valley last month, because of the government shutdown that included all the National Parks, etc., also cost American taxpayers "Tens of BILLIONS of dollars", according to Forbes.
Hey El Presidente Grande, how about helping boost America's sagging economy? Whose side are you on, anyway?
10
You have to at least want to make peace, demonstrate acts of peace, at least. Trump has never done that. He is not a public servant. He has no idea what the Nobel Peace Prize is, only that he thinks Obama didn’t deserve one.
3
Well, well, well...ole bone spurs finally goes to Vietnam...
Having emboldened democracies' adversaries while weakening democracies' military/security ties and treaties, making the world more susceptible to aggression from the less democratic regimes as we have seen in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and in the South China Sea, while sowing generally disruptive chaos and uncertainty hither, thither and yon...even were POTUS to return from Vietnam with a peacefully transitioned, unified around the South, Korean Peninsula allied with the U.S. - Trump would still be in the red.
There are some, albeit few in number, less deserving of a Noble Peace Prize than is Donald Trump! Global Despots' Agent Provocateur might be a lock...
6
Since Trump cannot keep a secret, and is incapable of not stepping in the you-know-what, blurting out something that makes even his most devout and delusional advisers cringe, and making a concession nobody with a micro-gram of sense would make, I fully expect him to be "owned" by Kim Jong Un yet again.
I'm sure the Nobel Committee is aware of KJU is one of the cruelest dictators on the planet, and that Trump has disrupted multiple peace-keeping relationships, has empowered both Russia and China's expansionist tendencies to violate other nations' sovereignty, has aided in speeding up pollution, and has empowered dictators around the globe.
They are also aware they fouled up when they gave Kissinger and Duk Ku Kim the NPP, when they gave Sadat and Begin, but not Carter the NPP for Camp David, and, most recently Aung San Suu Kyi the NPP only to see her turn into a murderous, ethnic-cleansing dictator.
You don't campaign for the Nobel Peace Prize like you do for an Oscar or Golden Globe. Trump doesn't get that , and, apparently, neither does Kim Jong Un. Even if they settle the Korean Peninsula with a Camp David-like accord, giving the Peace Prize to 2 such anti-Democracy leaders will taint its meaning into the foreseeable future.
4
Trump deliberately and methodically verbally attacked and demeaned Kim Jong-un last year, then proceeded to "fix" everything by meeting with him and declaring him a friend. If there was any chance of war, it was because Trump tried to create one.
I suspect that Trump thinks that if he creates a new war, he will be reelected so he can "fix" that too. But most Americans know by now that Trump is no fixer--he's a fomenter instead. Trump is the last person in the world who should be considered for a Nobel Prize.
5
"Trump compounded his diplomatic ineptitude with rhetorical grandiosity."
Mr. Kristof, you give the man-child occupying the White House too much credit. While the first part of this quoted sentence (diplomatic ineptitude) is on point, the second, regarding "rhetorical grandiosity" suggests he knows what rhetoric is, all evidence to the contrary, or that he uses big words with purposeful intent. In fact, he only knows how to speak - or tweet - in extremes, whether it's lavishing praise or hurling insults. Indeed, it is breathtaking how infantile his manner of speaking is. If he were not currently occupying the office he is in (and of course, there's the danger), no one would take him seriously.
4
In listening to Trump's blustering about the Nobel Peace prize, his narcissism comes through loud and clear. That is what motivates him.
10
Wouldn't it be nice to have a president who was not delusional and who did not see the peace process only as a way to grab a shiny trophy and a spotlight for himself?
7
North Korea continues to develop its missile program, perhaps even its nuclear arsenal; it will never give up its programs because they protect the regime; they are doing a Kabuki dance with offers to denuclearize in return for sanctions relief and peace guarantees. Kristof is simply another mouthpiece for 70 years of propaganda that "works" because it utterly fails to acknowledge the unprecedented ravages the U.S./UN forces rained down during the Korean War, the U.S. violations of the armistice agreement 3 years following the stalemate, the creation of one of the largest military encampments in South Korea in U.S. history, and the conduct of regime change military exercises on an annual basis. Is it no wonder that North Korea predicates elimination of its nuclear program on a complete, verifiable, irreversible peace agreement with the U.S.? Is this so hard to understand?
1
Of course North Korea will ultimately denuclearize, it’s simply a matter of half-life.
Time has a funny way of making things vanish.
It is critical to remember that Kim Jon Un continues the cruel and lethal lineage of his father and grandfather with the worst human rights record on the planet. He has no compunction whatsoever in killing his adversaries and enslaving in the most dire gulag anyone even suspected of a free thought. The idea of trusting such a man is hard to fathom. Sadly, it appears all parties are all too ready to take any consideration of human rights off the table every time Kim dangles a promise of de-nuclearlization, which he won't fulfill, or threatens destruction, which he actually could fulfill.
2
The comparison between Trump and Kim is priceless. Kim and his political underlings (the ones he hasn't killed yet) and Trump with his sycophantic Republican enablers (those he hasn't impulsively broken from and tried to destroy yet). The primary difference that I can see is that Trump has to contend with a free press and the Democratic resistance.
2
Don't be so sure about a Trump-Kim Nobel Peace Prize. If Aung San Suu Kyi could get the prize and turn out to be an apologist if not enabler for the Rohinga slaughter and Obama could get one for doing nothing other than not being Bush, anything is possible with that committee.
1
The world would be a better place if peace were to come at last to the Korean Peninsula. And if Donald Trump (despite all his many shortcomings) has a hand in it, he would deserve the prize. Let’s just hope the committee implements a new rule that you have to show your tax returns to receive the award.
3
For a president as mindful of praise and approval as Donald Trump is, it's hard not to imagine that his driving force for getting the Nobel Peace Prize has little or nothing to do with North Korea -- and everything to do with Barack Obama, who was awarded one in 2009.
Besides that, it's hard to imagine that anyone who abrogates an INF Treaty that could potentially unleash a nuclear arms race, would ever be worthy of such a valued distinction.
In any case, he would never share it.
4
Kristof posits that the Nobel Pease Prize somehow signifies something.
As another comment noted, Henry Kissinger got a Nobel Peace Prize, even though he was an enabler of the the US's disastrous continued involvement in Vietnam.
And, let's not forget, Barack Obama receive Peace Prize merely for being elected the US's first bi-racial president. For many Americans, this was so galling. As if the Norwegian Committee, in their beneficences, was lauding America for overcoming its history of racism is one simple act.
Sorry, but the Nobel Peace Prize Committee's pandering means their prize has been very debased.
4
As others have pointed out, it is not likely that the Nobel Committee will give the prize to President Trump. I am just imagining his gracious tweets and congratulatory comments to the winner. Will he say it was rigged? That many of the voters on the committee were illegals? He can always blame liberals and fake news too.
1
The attaboy note that Japan's foolishly obliging leader supposedly wrote at the request of Donald "Emergency" Trump is symptomatic of what those with a mighty inferiority/superiority complex among other failings do.
1
The US president is obsessing about a Nobel Peace Prize only because President Obama was awarded one in 2009. The very thought that his hated predecessor achieved the coveted award rankles #45 in a deeply personal way.
Shnizo Abe and Kim Jong-un are humoring the president, playing to his vanities. The Vietnam summit is merely another photo-op for the president. From "fire and fury" to "we fell in love" doesn't translate to peace on the Korean peninsula or a Nobel Peace Prize.
4
As the forces of repression and war are always advancing somewhere in the world, I believe in a countervailing force. It is this: scoundrels often ally themselves with other scoundrels. This naturally increases their power. But often, maybe inevitably, they turn on each other. The advantage is lost and sometimes more. The fact that they are true scoundrels means that an honest partnership is never possible. One is always playing the other. At the first summit, Trump got played. If a real peace settlement were really in the offing, it would already be know. Each one hopes to play the other. Since we know that Trump is nothing like the deal maker he claimed to be, I'd bet on a repeat.
From Kim's point of view, really handing over his magic bullets to anyone, especially Trumpian America, must be very, very unappealing and probably avoidable with further muddying and stilling the waters. A few cookies to Trump will take everyone back to zero for a couple of years and then who knows.
The world is in dangerous territory here: In addition to a simplistic, narcissistic, delusional U.S. president who covets a vanity Nobel peace prize (he can already see himself on the magazine covers) , there is John Bolton, the hawk who sees no need for a U.N., as his national security adviser.
What may save the day is that Kim Jong - un, easily the more rational and intelligent of the two leaders at the pending summit, realizes how easy it is to stroke Trump's childish ego and, thus, forestall reactionary actions on his part.
2
A country ruled with an iron will and armed with nuclear weapons. A warlord with brains.
A country run with a creampuff of lies and illusion armed with nuclear weapons.
A military cabel afraid their own leader can and would drag them on a whim into nuclear war.
A corrupt failed reality star with a base.
Which one even remotely deserves a peace prize. Let me know when its polite to stop laughing. I enjoyed the comedy in this wonderful opinion piece.
3
"The American and North Korean leaders' delusions about getting the prize may improve their work on a nuclear deal."
Work? I do not see Donald Trump working on anything but a golf swing.
All I see is another photo op.
I am still irked by the American flag touching/rubbing up with the flag of North Korea during their last get together.
3
It would be so wonderful if world leaders focused on making decisions based on how it will help humanity and not on some fatuous award. Probably too much to ask of Trump and Kim.
7
@robert ask BARACK who got one for??
2
The Nobel has rules and logic of its own.
Trump-Kim Nobel Peace Prize.
Stranger things have happened, including the "delusional".
Is there a positive side to this delusion?
Deals made in such a matter, if at all, are rarely sustainable.
2
If the deal was a Trump Nobel Peace Prize for his saying his job is done and leaving office, I would take that in a heartbeat.
Only thing is, of course, because of his history of welching out on deals he would have to quit the Presidency first. Then I would leave it up to the Nobel Committee whether or not to give him a taste of his medicine!
4
While the Korean peninsula has been reasonably peaceful without a shot being fired. South Asia is becoming the most dangerous region in the world. Trump needs to demand that nuclear powers Indian and Pakistani leaders need to have an emergency summit to de-escalate the fall out from the terrorist explosion attack in India. Let us see. Right now it is perfectly timely to talk peace and withdrawal of US troops from around the world that would still keep adequate troops for optimal security but too premature to speculate about Nobel peace prize. Obama was the luckiest president to receive the Nobel prize prematurely and for no good reason.
2
The serious nature of the US President’s partnership with a third world tyrant should not be misunderstood. It does enormous damage to the office, it correctly links the office holder with a tyrannical despot desperately clinging to power by subjugation of his people, and makes a mockery of important historical disarmament negotiations which he discards to buddy up with another more dangerous dictator. The only way the Nobel committee is giving the current US President a prize is on exit! May it be soon. A complete reversal of the one they gave the previous President as on entry as a hopeful sign to the world could come together.
5
Whatever the practical outcome of this "summit" brings, my hope for humanity will diminish if either of these "leaders" wins the Nobel Peace Prize.
2
I don’t know why some people are so blinded by the hatred they have for a person to cloud their judgement. This article/writer fetuses to believe that Trump could do nothing right. There are times we have to be fair and acknowledge the good thing. This is one of them.
4
This article's headline "Waiting For The Trump Kim Nobel
Peace Prize" could and should have been written differently.
A more positive headline---
"There's A Possibility For Peace At The Upcoming Summit In Vietnam Between Trump and kim jong-un"
Mr. Kristof treats this subject as some sort of an airy comedy rather than the serious business it is.
He describes this summit as a "kabuki" dance which literally means it's just " Singing and a dance".
Also, the two leaders, according to Kristof, are simply looking for a peace prize.
He also makes fun of "beautiful letters". to Trump from some Asian heads of state which, to my way of thinking, is better than "ugly or threatening" letters.
The columnist is also critical of Trump saying " North Korea will denuclearize ultimately and that i'm in no rush".
This happens to be better than rushing to war. (Which some of his advisors want)
Obviously, columnist Kristof has it in for Mr. Trump.
I don't agree with the author's tendency to make "lite" of this subject of war or peace.
Trump (not one of my favorites) has somehow managed to come closer to a peace treaty with N. Korea than previous leaders.
This happens to be a good thing and not some kabuki song and dance
Without "Looking into mirrors for peace prizes" these two leaders have a good chance to finally(After 70 years) create a peace treaty with N. Korea. This is good and not a joke which Kristof seems to be making of it.
4
There have been denuclearization agreements with North Korea before & they have all collapsed. There is very good reason to be very skeptical that someone that is so factually challenged as Trump could make a successful agreement.
4
@Mary Sampson
We have been fed so much propaganda about
N. Korea that we see fit to sanction (starve) a bunch of very poor people.
North and South Korea are working better together now and they don't need our outside "help" with continuing war games over North Korea.
FYI--a denuclearization agreement is not a peace agreement. A peace agreement is now possible and pure skepticism has never created anything(including a peace agreement.)
"Kim is said to have started driving at age 3, and his father had five holes-in-one in his first game of golf, not to mention a perfect score of 300 the first time he bowled."
Anything Kim can do, Trump can do better. Trump can do anything better than him.
Is there a jumbo sized Nobel Peace Prize? I think we can all agree that Donald Trump and Gandhi and Martin Luther King aren't in the same league.
4
DJT will declare the Korean War officially over and promise to lift sanctions; North Korea will beam appreciatively and mumble about perhaps dismantling one or two of their nuclear development. They will not allow inspectors. DJT will come home, brag about how he has solved the “Korea problem”; and award himself the Nobel Peace Prize. He will then campaign on his “amazing” deal. His base will believe that a) DJT made North Korea give up their nuclear weapons; and b) that DJT actually did win a Nobel prize. Hopefully the rest of the country (including members of Congress and the national security community) are not so gullible.
6
Trump asking Japan's leader to nominate him for the Nobel Prize is just the updated version of Trump "disguising" his voice and calling reporters as "John Miller" to praise himself. He was a weak and needy person then and he is a weak and needy person now. Only thing is, now he's the weak and needy President of the United States.
10
Of course Trump does not deserve the Nobel Peace price.
For what?
He has not done anything that one way or another contributed to peace at all.
It is bad enough that he now has shamed Abe into losing his face for nominating him.
That alone should disqualify Trump as the rules for even a nomination will prohibit him from marketing himself as a contestant.
But that is Trump, what did you expect?
There is no adoration for him, only his quest to get another few minutes in the limelight.
On the other hand, the Nobel Peace price has been devalued so many times, you might as well sell it to the highest bidder in an open auction.
After being awarded to Obama for "things to come" while Obama was in fact the US president who presided over more and longer wars than any other US president in history and who has ordered more extra judiciary killings than anyone else, this price has been rendered worthless anyway.
So give it to Trump too, for things to come...
Mr. Trump has two standards. One which has resulted in nothing, the one with North Korea, because he wants the Nobel Peace Prize. The other which has resulted in measurable results, the one Obama, Russia, China and Europe did with Iran. But because it was done by Obama and in addition cannot give him a Nobel Peace Prize he immediately pulled out from that agreement.
6
Trump and Nobel Peace Prize in the same sentence boggles the mind. There is NO way this will ever happen when one understands his NON peaceful words and actions targeted at racial minorities, Muslims, women, LGBTQ, educated, etc.
3
@Beth Grant DeRoos
In order to advance a bit of informed discourse, the below provided link may be worth reading and contemplating:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-launches-global-effort-end-criminalization-homosexuality-n973081
Cheers
Trump will not work hard to come up with a real deal. He doesn't know how too. He knows nothing about nukes, negotiating, human nature, or diplomacy.
He can't even admit the hollowness of the previous meeting with Kim.
Everything Trump has done in his life is illusion pasted over a shoddy reality.
We're looking at the diplomacy version of Trump U.
4
Look, I have no illusions that any of this is easy, but as a life-long career sales professional, it's easy to see what Trump is doing - assume the sale, and publicize to the point where the other side somewhat has to go along.
What I really don't get is ankle-biters like Kristoff who 100% gave passes to Clinton and Obama, and didn't really carp much about Bush's failures, either. Now, though, due to virulent TDS, they simply cannot abide by an amatuer succeeding where the "pros" have made hash of this issue for over a quarter century.
Shouldn't we ALL be rooting for a good outcome here? Would not the world be better off if the North Koreans are brought at least a bit into the international community?
3
@Mike Langlinais
Definitely a "sales" job here. Their worst nightmare is Trump's success. It's why they hate him so much. He has a few under his belt.
As Nick pointed out with the Libya reference, Kim will never give up nukes because then he can be invaded.
On the flip side, Kim will never start a war because he knows it would be the end of him.
Kim will not step down from being a god-ruler and submit to South Korean rule.
South Korea will not give up its flourishing society to submit to a brutal dictatorial dynasty.
The one good thing that might happen moving forward is the normalizing of Korean relations, and the tearing down of the militarily imposed border wall whose main purpose is really to keep North Koreans from escaping and to keep information from entering North Korea.
And for this outcome, President Moon would be the likeliest candidate for a Peace Prize, since he's the one willing to work with tyrants to allow families, separated by that border for generations, to reconnect.
As for Trump, we all know where HE stands regarding border walls.
2
Let's be clear neither is going to win the Nobel prize. And Kim is never going to "denuclearize".
Trump, of course, no matter what actually transpires at this meeting, will declare a great victory.
What will happen over the long run is that N. Korea will maintain a nuclear weapons capacity and be recognized as a nuclear power. This will become the new status quo -- in much the same way that a nuclear Soviet Union was an accepted fact for many decades (and still is under the new regime.)
That acceptance is the only path forward to improved relations with NK.
90
@Jeff Laadt
I disagree. If Kristof's prediction of outcome is currect, and I think it is, they both have a chance for a Nobel. There has been more progress in last two years than the previous 20.
6
@Jeff Laadt
I agree. Kim and his father before him spent years screaming "Notice me!" to the world. Now, thanks to Trump's naivety, the "Hermit Kingdom" has achieved recognition as a potential peacemaker, of all things.
Few things are certain in the realm of global affairs, but I think the notion of Kim giving up his nuclear capacity is preposterous. It's all he's got.
22
The delusion is great with this one. The Norwegian Nobel committee will not give the Peace prize to someone who casually threatened global nuclear war, pulled out of the INF nuclear arms agreement, unilaterally blew up the Iranian Treaty, walked away from the Paris Agreement, encourages authoritarians the world over, constantly threatens NATO, and provokes trade wars. Trump's bumbling and belligerence is a threat to peace and a driver of global instability. We're just hoping the world survives his tenure and that sanity returns to the U.S. soon. Is there a prize for that?
489
@Kevin
Well Trump is the king of delusion.
Trump wants the prize because Obama was awarded it and Trump feels that if the likes of Obama can get it someone as brilliant and perfect as he should receive it too. Pure delusion.
51
@Kevin. Apparently they enjoyed giving it to Obama who did absolutely nothing.
2
@Kevin Amen! Very well stated, Kevin!
21
The facts are out there: if Trump wants to believe the rain stopped just for him to speak, then that is what happened. And if Trump thinks a wall is being built, it is. And the Peace Prize — why not!
The Peace Agreement won’t require scrutiny beyond blandishment of the oversize Trump signature. No translation of Korean needed. Or available.
The agreement is really, really great. Really. Already.
Disarmament? It’ll be great too. Really soon now. Really.
5
You want delusional? The idea that Donald Trump could be President of the United States was a 'once upon a time' fairy tale. Putting all that aside, are there not other individuals on the World stage that would be better candidates than our own Mr. Trump and his good buddy, Kim?
4
More than 18 months ago, President Trump threatened Kim with a powerful retaliation if he did not stop his testing of nuclear weapons and missiles and his lurid threats of US nuclear annihilation. Since then, there have been no North Korean tests or threats.
You don’t mention this accomplishment.
As far as the Nobel Peace Prize is concerned, Obama won one when he had been president for just eleven days. Mohandas Gandhi never got one. I don’t think the prize really means very much.
4
You may want to check into N Korea’s proliferation of nuclear materials since then.
1
"It is, of course, delusion to think that either Trump or Kim will win the Nobel Peace Prize..."
Maybe not. If you look at the list of past winners, you'll find some fairly questionable characters. This includes Teddy Roosevelt, who had many fine qualities but was also the shameless champion of American imperial aggression; Henry Kissinger, a Machiavellian strategist and loyal Nixon confidante; F.W. de Klerk, who presided over the last hurrah of South African apartheid; and Yasser Arafat, founder and long-time leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
All these people were narrowly partisan and had a history of embracing violence when it suited their purposes. One might say they were rewarded by the Nobel Committee for exceptional actions that contradicted their essential natures -- some cases in a rather obvious attempt to encourage further reformation of their dubious earlier proclivities. In a few cases the prize may have had a salutary positive effect; in most instances the benefits to world peace were ephemeral.
Awarding the peace prize to Trump and Kim jointly for entering into some sort of high-profile jive Korean peace plan would be fully consistent with past Nobel actions. It would be at least as legitimate and meaningful as awarding a prize to Arafat for bringing peace to the Middle East. And it would offer a delicious irony if Trump were ultimately to be impeached.
1
Mr.Kim not only has nuclear weapons which he uses as a threat, but he has an atrocious record on human rights.He starves his people and throws them in prison.This will not impress the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in Oslo.Trump has cozied up to dictators while he has tried his best to discredit American institutions of Justice,This also will not recommend him for the Nobel Prize.Leaving the aspirations for the Prize aside , it will be surprising if there is enough trust for any progress.I suspect Trump,will give more than he gets-his Wall is in trouble.He is looking for some positive news.
105
I agree with Kristof's description of a possible deal. If we continue to make progress, although incremental, both Kim and Trump have a good chance for the Nobel.
1
I have some doubts that Kim would be interested in hankering after the Peace prize. However, he does have a vested interest to institute something permanent with President Trump that will last beyond this administration. It is unlikely that he will be able to either have the same amount of rapport or support from the next US president, and it is unclear whether President Trump will eke out a second term.
52
From Nobel Prize.org:
“The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
The idea that the current occupant has accomplished or is on the verge of any of those things is laughable. He has done quite the opposite, even stirring up tensions with decades-old allies.
The meeting with Kim is made for TV like everything else he does.
348
@Lost in Translation
"...made for TV...." Yep! Yet another segment of the national soap opera, Making America GRATE Again, airing since November 2016, two years and four months too long!
13
@Lost in Translation. Do tell us what Obama accomplished. The committee has become a joke.
1
I would love to believe this optimistic story, but I can't. Both Kim and Trump tell more lies than truth. In spite of acknowledging the dishonesty of both Trump and Kim, the assumption goes ahead to say that Kim would promise to cease testing, or promise to do anything!
Kim really doesn't trust us enough to actually provide a list of all his weapons and weapons facilities for inspection purposes. He knows what happened to Gadaffi.
As far as testing is concerned, he is either 1) happy with his present weapons designs, or 2) just delaying his testing program until he can scam Trump into valuable concessions. There is no information that NK is ceasing to build nuclear weapons or missiles, just that they are not TESTING new designs.
I don't think we can even trust Trump to allow a written transcript record of his meetings. That subterfuge allows both Trump and Kim to make up any story that they wish in the quest of further bloating their narcissistic egos. Oh boy, that Peace Prize! (Trump instructed his translator in the Trump/Putin meeting in Helsinki to destroy her notes, in a meeting with no other American witnesses. Destruction of public records is of course a crime, yet another one that Trump is sure he can get away with.)
191
@dpaqcluck
Trump believes that in ordering the translator to destroy her notes, he can destroy her memory too. His miscalculations are obvious and petty. McConnell, Putin and Kim Jong-un give Trump exactly what he craves as sadistic experts of deception. The query is how long do the rest of us keep digging our own graves.
8
Mr Kristof, unusually for a journalist of his integrity, seems to have left the Norwegian Nobel Committee out of the equation.
It seems to me highly improbable that the Norwegian Nobel Committee, being Europeans, would be inclined to either presumed candidate, both of them being rather undemocratic sorts of individuals.
Just because the Japanese Prime Minister, who has a vested interest in remaining under the American nuclear umbrella and eliminating the DPRK nuclear cloud, may have nominated them, will make no difference to the Committee.
There are multitudes of worthy candidates and the unworthy do not belong in the Nobel Peace Peace Prize club.
148
@Svirchev
Note that Mr. Kristof says that it's an "illusory quest for a Nobel Peace Prize". He's just saying that if Trump and Kim think they might win a Nobel, they might be more apt to strike a better deal. Which is most likely not to happen given the circumstances; Kim will probably just outsmart Trump a second time.
In any event, the Nobel Committee would want to remain credible, so it's unthinkable from any angle that Trump would ever have a chance, given his human rights violations and his personal criminal activity.
74
@Svirchev The Nobel committee has awarded the prize prematurely on many occasions, and it has awarded it to manifestly unfit individuals in several.
If Trump and Kim struck a "deal", and then promptly forgot about it, they'd have done more than several prize winners have done. Nonetheless, there is no danger this time of an unearned prize, because Trump is such a boor that the committee wouldn't give him one if he somehow did deserve it.
1
@Svirchev there are plenty of unworthy Nobel prize winners. Obama is perhaps one of the least worthy in modern history. The stated reason that he won was: "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people". That's precious isn't it? Apparently the Nobel committee were enamored with his "apology tour".
2
Surprised that the new found peace between North and South Korea isn't mentioned in the article. Trump did initiate and court the growing peace between the two nations and from what I read this was the impitous for Nobel Peace prize discussions. As critical as many in the media are of Trump, it appears that after he leaves office NK and SK will continue to build intracountry trade and allow citizens to cross their shared border. The potential for sowing seedd of economic good for the citizens of NK should not be discounted.
14
Trump had nothing to do with any relationship between Kim and Moon Jae-In. Moon Jae-In did all of the heavy lifting, both for South Korea and for the U.S., because Trump was monumentally incompetent. Moon-Jae In laid the groundwork for Trump and Kim to meet and comported himself with dignity, intelligence and professionalism, none of which were exhibited by the buffoon in our Oval Office. If an agreement is reached, it will be in spite of Trump, not because of him. To give a Nobel Peace prize to someone who is not only incapable of forming coherent sentences but who also cannot form intelligent thoughts would be sacrilegious.
41
@Jason If by initiate and court you mean initiate an existential threat to South Korea and court the destruction of Seoul, than yes, Trump initiated and courted the new relationship between North and South Korea.
If any deserves a peace prize out of this mess, it's Moon Jae-in. He's trapped between two mad man. So far, President Moon has successful managed to prevent the two leaders from inadvertently destroying his country. That deserves some applause.
52
@Jason
I believe the impetus for growing peace between the North and South was/is the current president of South Korea’s—not President Trump. Trump was on the verge of attacking NK (“my nuclear button is bigger than yours”). Let’s not let the marketing of Trump cont w this fantasy.
14
A real negotiated agreement is unlikely to emerge from a Kim and Trump sit down, however eager the two are for the optics.
That's because the three biggest stakeholders are not at the table, China, South Korea and Japan.
China has everything to gain or lose in any agreement. They are the lifeline of North Korea, representing 95% of total trade with the half starved and shivering regime. And their nightmare scenario is millions of North Koreans streaming across the border into China, Venezuela style, destabilizing their own social system.
South Korea also either gains a peaceful if very odd neighbor or an increasingly unstable military cult distracting from its failures.
And both Japan and South Korea are not interested in raising tensions further with China in the Sea of Japan.
So at best expect a "freeze" without any real solution, while China provides just energy and food supplies to maintain control of the North Korea regime.
Hardly Nobel Prize material but perhaps Trump will be a candidate for the Neville Chamberlain "Peace in Our Time" Award for extreme political naivete.
156
@Look Ahead
So far, Trump looks like the leading contender for the Chamberlain Award. His work with North Korea, Russia, and Saudi Arabia is outstanding. There is some doubt about China, as yet.
32
@Look Ahead You deserve the award for extreme political naivete. Kim Jong Un is his own man, and uses China more than it uses him. How much has China helped? North Korea remains backward and can't even feed its own people. Kim is looking for something more than China will give him.
South Korea and Japan are both happy to let the United States do the negotiating. And China and Kim clearly keep in touch. So with this summit we have the two important players sitting down again. Trump has made his position clear. Now Kim needs to decide what he wants to do. And the world is watching to see his decision.
2
According to the Chamberlain Award Committee, a candidate must have his or her delusional bumbling proximate to a suitably devastating war, with preference for invasion, indiscriminate bombing, chemical and biological attack and general terror. There has been discussion about adding nuclear bombs to the rules, but the Committee tends to act slowly, since actors like Trump do not appear very often, and the Prize is not awarded for simple international misjudgement or stupidity.
4
Even from a position of strength, Trump cannot help but bluster and bluff. He proved this to Kim last year and in the intervening months his negotiating skills have gotten him exactly nowhere, be it with our increasingly skeptical allies or with the legislators of his own administration.
Kid yourself not. Kim is acutely attuned to Trump's activities and his record. It does not impress, and Kim and his underlings will be neither transparent nor pushovers.
As for the Novel Peace Prize, the last I heard, the decision was not made by the Senate of the United States.
248
@Glen
Well, yes, it would of necessity be a "Novel" peace prize were the current Senate to have any say-so in the choice of recipient.
11
@Glen
Trump is going to claim that he was told by " many people" that he actually won the Nobel Peace Prize but that Hillary and Pelosi or some unnamed Democrats used some unstated leverage to blackmail the committee to rescind it.
32
@Butterfly, As for either of these despots being peaceful, I maintain that one of Kim's attributes that attracted so much "Love!" is the younger man's ability to "fire" advisers who have lost favor by the spectacular means of an anti-aircraft cannon. The individual members of the committee selecting the Peace Prize recipient(s) might do well to keep this in mind, for their own welfare's sake.
8
I'm almost 76. When I'm 86 the news will be, North Korea to meet with the Secretary of State to discuss unilateral action for denuclearization of its stockpile. Though no breakthrough is expected, talks are always preferred to military action.
Now, if I manage to make it to 96, it will go something like Kim un Jong's son and future President of North Korea will meet with.....
127
@cherrylog754
And that will be good news. It means no nuclear war.
22
Ask yourself when, before Trump threatened fire and fury, you ever once feared that North Korea would go to war with us.
The Kim regime knows they wouldn't last a week and would end up losing everything.
Unlike Maduro, Kim is able to enjoy the fruits of his atrocities without worrying about repercussions.
He's not about to throw it all away.
7
@cherrylog754
At 77, I don't really expect to make it to 97. But if I do, I suspect your scenario will play out as written.
What no one here seems to recollect is that we've been here before. Think (or research) back to 1994 and the Clinton/Kim Jong Il "Agreed Framework".
7
Because pundits' past recommendations have worked so well? This is how Trump operates. Lots of salesmanship backed up by hard negotiations.
I'd much prefer to something difference a chance. After all, it's not as though the approaches approved by the cognoscenti have had such great results. People may have loved to listen to, say, Obama, but it doesn't mean he had any success.
Let's see.
2
Trump will declare the end of the Korean War and then race to Air Force 1 for a cheeseburger where he will moronically tweet while watching the Cohen hearing . He has no interest further in N Korea except for his updates on a Nobel Prize nomination. ( Pompeo and Conway will float Trump Tower Pyongyang as a possible incentive.)
Kim has no more interest either in opening his country to tourists or something as threatening as international nuclear inspectors. Without his nuclear weapons Kim’s fate is that of Qaddafi. It may be the only time Bolton was right about anything .
Kim however won the domestic and international acclaim he so desperately craved ( and needed) and China will prop up his economy to maintain his firm grip so refugees don’t flock to their border. China , Russia and other amoral plunderers will set up chemical factories and similar cancer traps which their own people would avoid even with the lure of steady work.
Trump was played once again . His cons fail the further away he is from the Fox News sets in DC and NYC.
8
optimism is great, planning is essential and a pragmatic approach sensible.
but, how much opportunity is lost when the u.s. effort is led by someone with the temperament of a rash, impetuous adolescent?
for everyone's sake, bonne chance.
9
An article on a president being awarded the Nobel without at least a reference to the meaningless of Nobel Peace Prizes after Pres. Obama was given one just for . . . ? Even he found it embarrassing. It is a political prize and will not be handed out to Pres. Trump b/c that would go against the prevailing narrative. I'm not saying he deserves one, just that he couldn't get it if flew to N. Korea and single-handedly dismantled the nuclear bombs. He'd be accused of racism and bullying. Kim is a possibility, of course. Kaiser Wilhelm II was nominated a few times. Arafat got one. Gandhi didn't. It's a joke.
I don't know if Trump will be successful. When I've heard him speak about it he has said . . . we'll see. Should he not try? Clinton, Bush, Obama all failed. Appeasement didn't work. At least Trump brandishes the sword along with an olive branch. No, it didn't lead to war despite the hand-wringing.
At the end, Mr. K makes it clear that even if there is some advancement, we should ignore it, because who knows what will happen. True, we don't. But, it didn't stop them from giving it to Obama.
I'm not a Trump supporter. But, most of the media and others in the "resistance" make him more sympathetic and look good in comparison. It's not easy making Trump look good. But, they helped get him elected and might again.
While I'm at it . . . Bob Dylan? I'm always open to being convinced otherwise, but, really.
13
"Clinton, Bush, Obama all failed."
Failed at what?
It has only been under Trump that NK has actually acquired nuclear weapons and the ICBMs to deliver them.
I have never feared nuclear war with NK until Trump, because I have always trusted -- until now -- that our government is smart enough not to attack another nuclear power.
I trust Kim more than I trust Trump because Kim is content with being a god-ruler and won't throw that away by getting bombed out of existence.
Trump, on the other hand, appears willing to enter a war to satisfy his tough-guy ego act.
1
I've been watching this nuclear weapons thing since the day the U.S. first bombed Japan. We celebrated like crazy. Then others got the bomb. It became obvious that using it was suicidal, which is why it has't been used since. There was never a danger of nuclear war between nations. No matter who threatens what, the U.S. and North Korea won't have a nuclear war.
2
As a resident of the Far East the North Korean threat is a hyperbole. North Korea could do harms on neighboring countries (which has been true all these years) but not without repercussions. The real threat is now from China after rising as an economic power, which is capable to almost peacefully occupy some foreign territories if they wish, as they are doing in the South China Sea. What prevents Xi from embarking on such an adventure is the international norms steadily strengthened after the Korean war, which Mr. Trump is trying to destroy. If Mr. Abe wrote a beautiful letter to nominate Mr. Trump for a Nobel peace prize his blind obedience to the USA will be punished by Mr. Xi sooner or later.
14
I would think Trump's treatment of refugees and immigrants by tearing children away from their parents, incarcerating asylum seekers and declaring an emergency justifying troops on the border would disqualify him from any type of peace prize. Perhaps South Korea might qualify in the Korean arena. They have done more than any others to try to open borders and come to peaceful agreements with North Korea.
36
Peace has good friends in free and open countries, epitomized by Japan and Switzerland. Peace usually has enemies in militarized, autocratic, closed places like North Korea. Kim lived formative years in Switzerland, knows of all the world, is scientifically literate, and seem to like much in modern culture, and might truly want to move his domain toward peace, prosperity, and even human progress. If so, the usual enemies of peace will try to kill him. Traveling by train shows his insecurity. Viet Nam would be a likely place for Kim's enemies to strike. There they could credibly frame a Viet Nam patsy bitter at America, or ascribe motive to President Trump's actual opponents or to mythical western actors. This is the time peace must be committed to by these leaders. Now. It is therefore a high risk moment. Our President must not become collateral damage. On guard. Give peace a chance.
1
The questions that go unanswered are: What did Trump offer Abe to write the letter? In Trump's world there is always a quid pro quo. Secondly, lets not forget the beautiful , wonderful, huge resorts along the North Korean shore that Trump said would follow denuclearization. Resorts with large hotels. Hotels with the name of a certain American president on them. So, by all means, give Trump the prize. For assuring his business interests are met there. Priority #1. You give me what I want. I'll let you give me what more of what I want in exchange.
13
Delusion is both their realities.
If the Nobel committee even considers one or both, then they will be discredited by all other societies.
Do you really think that these two children playing being adults are any match for the biologists and physicists who truly make a difference to people's lives and this planet.
53
The North Korean nuclear strategy has paid more dividend than he Kims could ever dream of.
And they can thank Trump for it.
The first summit gave Kim unprecedented prestige, enough fodder for years of propaganda and also concessions without giving anything in return
Sanctions have been undermined.
Why expect any other outcome from this summit?
Trump can celebrate another delusional victory only he and his cult consider real.
And Kim can’t believe his luck.
48
I would dare say not a whit of prestige arises from anything connected to trump. Likely the opposite. This is no “Nixon in China moment . For trump will never rise above his pay station, and that doesn’t even come close to the sad low bar of paranoid Richard Nixon.
1
As a private citizen, Trump opined that all of the ills of society and all geopolitical messes would be easy to fix. In his new position as leader of the free world (no more), reality is asserting itself. Reality being that Kim will not give up his nukes, because his family's continued dynasty is the ultimate goal. But Trump is a salesman, and he is satisfied with giving us the illusion of progress, not progress itself. In the Art of the Deal, I doubt Trump ever encountered anyone like Kim.
17
@Steve, ...”I doubt Trump ever encountered anyone like Kim”.
Well guess what? Obama didn’t either—because he lacked the vision and courage to try. At least Trump has stopped Kim from nuclear testing, firing missiles and threatening his neighbors. Isn’t that more than Obama’s hand wringing? Is there no credit for that?
1
With all respect to Barack Obama, his Noble Peace Prize (as far as I can tell) was awarded for NOT being GW Bush. It was an honor that I feel President Obama should have declined, perhaps with a speech to the effect of 'I hope some day to be worthy of this recognition, but until then...'.
The Nobel Committee is capricious and singularly political. Those things said, I'd say DJ Trump has nearly no chance at a Peace Prize- Not because he doesn't deserve it (he certainly doesn't) but because his brand of politics and spectacularly harmful shredding of American diplomatic currency have set back the international channels and institutions historically lauded by the Nobel Committee.
42
@Henry O
With all respect, you can't "tell" much, because the Nobel Committee awarded Obama the prize in recognition of his efforts in international diplomacy, something that can't be said about the current president.
3
I agree with Kristof, Clinton's handling of Libya is making it impossible for N. Korea to trust America enough to completely disarm. If Obama got this far, Democrats would be chiseling his image on Mt. Rushmore. If Trump does get a meaningful agreement, it must be a magical breakthrough.
8
@Jay Obama tried but was pilloried bythe right for even suggesting talking with N Korea. He could not politically do it under those circumstances. I woupd also suggest that Obama would have not made such grandiose declarations as Trump did based on nothing substantive.
2
Just a correction; it was George W Bush in 2001 that threatened Qaddafi about his Nuclear program not Clinton. It resulted in regime change by a European coalition assisted by US intelligence.
The biggest element that was hinted at in the article, but not stated explicitly, is that Kim no longer has a *reason* to attack the United States. With a friendly personal relationship with Trump, there is less fear for the topling of the Kim dynesty. This is, in some ways, the true lesson of Libya—nuclear weapons are a means for preservation of a regime when none other exist.
Where there is assurance of existence by other means, the need for nuclear deterence is removed. As evil as the Kim regime is, the goal of denuclearization cannot occur if they had a realistic fear of being deposed.
8
@Transposition Kim knows as well as anyone trump will not be in office but a few more years. Do you really think he is going to give up his nuclear program when he and the next president may not "fall in love"?
31
@Transposition
So what you are saying is we will turn a blind eye to one of the most repressive and unaccountable Nations in modern times - ignore the obscene inequity, lack of freedom, and misery most NK's endure - ignore the overwhelming conditioning of a People to be accepting and applauding of their own degradation?
And ignore the potential of nuclear war or other catastrophic happenings because of a maniacal regime devoid of any principle save its own enhancement and persistence?
We are to act fat dumb and happy because we find things less sensational for a period?
We are to rely on our Nation - leader of the free World - to continue to step lightly on eggs so as to let dictators and our FOREVER adversary do its thing.
NK will always work against us. Cyber-warfare; arming dangerous people and/or Nations; being a mm from being rogue.
Should we work with them and be rational and fair. YES. But they wil NEVER be our friend nor TRULY act under the covers as our friend. NEVER.
Nor will they EVER take their thumb off their People's jugular.
Transposition I get your point and the grains of reason in it.
But "management by personality" can only go so far and exist so long. Good businesses and good Companies operate on structure, procedures, principles, values that transcend personalities. Be wary of "relying on friendships and charm" re: enduring.
1
This meeting next week will be all smoke and mirrors. We can't trust either of them!
75
@BSR
Fortunately, the "trust" of Trump's critics doesn't influence his actions. The rest of us are actually optimistic that he's gotten this far, which is further than those "trusted" by his critics, I might add.
2
I predict if Trump does get this award. A vast majority of the other winners will not attend.
43
@MG Nor the Norwegian royal family who preside at the ceremony.
1
@MG Surely the committee is smart enough to NOT award the Peace Prize to anyone who calms things down after they were the one to rile everyone one up.
Trump badly needs a political boost, Kim not so much. We know that regardless of what really happens at this summit, Trump will claim the biggest victory ever. The truth will be slightly harder to discern, but given Trump's need for something big in the short-term I am fearful of a "sub-optimal" outcome.
30
While Nicholas Kristoff is hopeful about a "plausible deal", when we consider the ethically correct standard, Kristoff's "plausible deal" does not meet it. Since nuclear weapons cannot be used without harming innocent people and their possession by governments that can't be trusted not to harm innocent people, these weapons are morally wrong.
Kristoff pays lip service to a possible future denuclearization of No. Korea. We should note Obama's goal of a nuclear-free world, yet that is nowhere on the horizon.
The fearsome reality of governments' nuclear arsenals menacing humanity violates basic justice standards.
14
The first part of this article describes the delusional Trump we all know and shake our heads at in disbelief. The second part describes what a somewhat rational Trump could manage to achieve in negotiations with Kim. I haven't yet seen that second Trump, and have no realistic expectation for his appearance now even if a Nobel prize were in the balance.
97
Barack Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize nine months after he took office for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." At that point in his presidency it was a little difficult to see that Obama had done anything, and even he himself was a little embarrassed by it all. Most Americans polled by Gallup thought it was a joke. Obama wasn't George Bush, so that was apparently good enough in Oslo.
So by those standards, Trump should get the prize by acclamation.
22
@Chuck French I supported Obama, but I've always felt that he should have respectfully declined.
27
@skinnyD. I shook my head at the whole thing, too, but declining would have been insulting to the Nobel Foundation. Why insult somebody if he didn't have to? He's not Trump, after all.
3
@skinnyD And if he had, the Republicans and Obama-haters would have had a literal cow about it. They would have crucified him; they would have gone completely nuts and declared him to be the worst president of all times, how dare he turn up his nose at a Nobel, blah, blah, blah...he was darned if he did and darned if he didn't. These are folks who pitched a fit because he wore a TAN suit. President Obama (how I love to write that phrase) did the only polite, respectful thing he could: he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of America and then never referred to his winning it again. Can you just imagine what would happen if Trump were to win it? OMG, we'd hear about it every single day for years and years and years...and, of course, because he is hugely amazing, his prize was the biggest and shiniest one EVER given to anyone!
1
Can there be any good to come from the meeting of two very irrational and unstable world leaders? The fact there is no reporting or transcript of the first meeting is alarming. That it will happen a second time is terrifying.
Yikes.
205
"Here’s what a plausible deal might look like."
That outline is absurd. It is totally one sided.
The US can't expect to end the nuclear program in return for slight reduction in sanctions and everything else threatening the same.
Make peace or don't. If we don't, they'll have nuclear weapons so the US can't attack them.
10
"It is, of course, delusion to think that either Trump or Kim will win the Nobel Peace Prize"
I hope it is. The political reaction in the US would be infantile on all sides, from the war mongers who don't want peace to the NeverTrumpers who don't want Trump no matter what he does.
It would be wall to wall wailing and tears, a real temper tantrum 2-year old style.
It would be embarrassing for the country. So I hope we are spared like I'd hope a 2-year old doesn't get any reason for a tantrum. It just isn't worth that.
17
Given that an arch war criminal, Henry Kissinger, became a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, I suppose anything is possible.
Still, if there was anything like justice in this world, Kim Jong-un would be in the dock facing charges for crimes against humanity.
As for Donald J. Trump, we anxiously await the full accounting of his high crimes and misdemeanors.
121
@Tom Sullivan
"As for Donald J. Trump, we anxiously await the full accounting of his high crimes and misdemeanors."
There isn't just a book in that "accounting".
There is an entire Liebrary.
4
President Trump said that him and Kim "fell in love". It is sad that there is no Cupidon Price. Kim-Trump would deserve it.
18
Hmmm, trump is more likely to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize if he decides to adhere to the US Constitution, abandon his authoritarian initiatives, respect the rule of law and the judiciary, abstain from fomenting divisive racial and religious discord, champion a vigorous free press and no longer hold rallies in nonurban outposts where apparently the only news consumed is Fox and Limbaugh.
57
"...in general it’s not a good thing for leaders to go into a summit delusional."
Understatement of the day, year or even the century. Here we are hoping Kim and Trump somehow stumble into a not so bad agreement. I know, the bar can't be lower. But this is where we are.
70
Thank you as always Mr Kristof for your insights.
I have found that the best negotiators, whether they be in business, politics or even the grade school play yard, will have an excellent command of the facts, a keen empathy of the other’s positions and needs, and a strategic mindset. We should not underestimate the North Korean leadership in this regard. The US president, who by the way likely suffers from malignant narcissistic personality disorder, enjoys none of the criteria needed for successful negotiation outcomes – but we have known that for decades.
What can we expect from the Hanoi summit? Maybe an embarrassing lovefest, lies, bluster and many photo worthy humiliating scenes. Certainly at least one cultural blunder. But a denuclearization deal? A formal end to the Korean War hostilities? I expect not.
57
An "end" to Korean War hostilities could be an outcome. Both TRUMpp and Kim would get a boost out of that.
However, what does that really mean? Although the US and NK are still "officially" at war there have been no major battles fought in decades. To declare an official "end" would most likely change nothing in the actual military status quo. But what a GREAT photo op!
14
You are a true optimist Mr. Kristof; unfortunately, the most adult figure in the room seems to be Dennis Rodman.
35
Last year Mr. Kristoff harshly chastised those who criticized Trump’s summit with Kim. Now he admits, “Last year, Trump was bamboozled at his first meeting with Kim. There were minimal preparations, and Trump made major concessions such as suspending military exercises in exchange for nothing as significant.” Now he is cautiously optimistic. Why not ? But I hope he will not again condemn critics ifTrump once more turns in a hollow performance.
14
One thing that I will almost miss when the Trump is no longer President is some of these amazing pronouncements. Anything that he likes or wishes to occur quickly becomes the topic of favorable comments by anonymous observers.
My favorite was all the people who thought that the Democrats who failed to applaud his first State of the Union speech were likely guilty of treason. They have yet to present this definition of treason publicly. Similarly the investigators whom Trump sent to Hawaii to determine Obama’s birthplace and “can’t believe what they are finding”. They have yet to tell us and I can’t believe it either. So I am not optimistic about hearing from the “many other people” who think that he has a Nobel coming.
These are the thought processes and strategies of a small child. It is almost funny, until one considers what is at stake.
375
It seems to me that the Nobel Committee would have to award the prize to Kim, Trump, and the president of S. Korea, Moon Jae-in. The latter has played a role in interacting with both Trump & Kim at times - and in his attempts at re-approaching N. Korea. Of course, all of these things have been tried before by S. Korea, by the US. Perhaps N. Korea and the current Kim are in a different place now, but time (not short term post love-fest bromance announcements) will tell.
6
@Anne-Marie Hislop
If they are decent people they would award it only to Moon.
26
I understood that the state of war provides the justification for having 37000 US troops on the Korean border. Does Kim want a peace treaty just so he can press hard to get the troops out, with the US having little justification to keep them there? If so, I vote for maintaining the state of war, a while longer.
21
@PaulSFO I agree, at least until someone less self-grandiose is in charge of NK.
Donald Trump still dreams he will get the total applause Kim gets as he struts across the stage. Fortunately, we have freedoms and are not threatened with death if we do not comply.
87
@bnc
So far, bnc. So far.
The future is not here, yet.
4
Not yet, anyway.
Years ago I read an op-ed either in the NYTimes or WashPost that the only way for a country to keep the US from manipulating internal affairs was to have "the bomb". We have meddled in so many country's internal affairs in small and larger ways, forgive me if I skip a list, that we may have brought this on ourselves as we view ourselves as so exceptional that only we should have the keys to mass destruction. Why do we have an armed services larger than the rest of the World's combined? In more ways than I can count this has cost us dearly as have the hairbrained wars.
Excuse me if I skip a list.
62
"Improve their work on a nuclear deal"?
Are you kidding? Neither even knows how to make an actual deal, since they know nothing about international norms and what is required to sign a meaningful treaty. Besides, if Trump can tell thousands of lies in public in two years, what are the chances that he would bother to honor a treaty? Most countries won't even bother to sit down and negotiate with him on any subject, with the notable exceptions of Russia and Saudi Arabia.
Not to mention that Trump and Kim are two of the most psychopathic and mentally ill creatures in government anywhere.
The only accurate way for a journalist to report on either of them is with ridicule.
496
@Mike Roddy
You underestimate one party. Kim may have no conscience, but he is smart.
63
@Thomas Zaslavsky Correct. The only thing that will come out of this "summit" is that Kim will bamboozle Trump again. He'll tell Trump something about how huge his hands are, and then get yet another major concession from him without giving up anything.
45
@Mike Roddy -- "international norms" and the supposed experts are the ones that got to where we were in 2017 with North Korea. It required a break from the status quo in order to make progress in the direction of peace and denuclearization. "International norms" were not capable of this.
"If he and Kim pursue a painstaking peace process instead, in some illusory quest for a Nobel Peace Prize, we can live with that."
Here is what Trump supporters (currently 43% of us) see: North Korea stopped launching missiles, we have no new wars, nothing to bring down Trump has yet come from Mueller, the stock market has hit record highs, and unemployment is at record lows. Recall that Trump won in 2016 with 46% of the popular vote.
Democrats had better come up with some amazing arguments for why things really are not what they seem.
What do Democrats have? Climate change? Trump supporters just don't see it as a threat. Education? It's been a mess for years. Health care? Most of us have decent insurance through our employers and are reluctant to give it up for a government plan. What should Democrats run on? Free college for all, minimum basic income, and Medicare for All? Such a candidate would probably be decimated in the general election. Democrats really have an uphill battle.
What if Trump wins again next year? Do you think we can "live with that"? Many of us do not. We're not out of the woods yet, not by a long shot.
37
@Blue Moon
Why wring hands over Trump supporters? They do not and will not vote Democratic even if Jesus was at the head of the ticket. They - pay close attention - loathe Democrats. They all but believe that Democrats eat newborns for lunch. You won't be able to pierce their armor of denial, so let it go.
Let's worry instead about the people we might be able to reach, like the young, working class, squeezed nearly flat middle class, minorities, and women. They are in the Democratic party and they are also represented in the majority Independent non-party.
They are economically insecure. They have seen their tax returns disappear this year thanks to the GOP. They couldn't care less about the stock market because they don't benefit from it. They did not like the 35-day government shutdown, and many of them either experienced it directly or indirectly through the suffering of friends and relatives. Oh, yeah, and where are the "great, well-paying jobs" they were promised? Where is the infrastructure? Farmers had to plow under their soybeans. Will China come back to buy their crops again? Health care? How about rising cost and falling employer contributions? Many people are under-insured, meaning they have a policy but they cannot afford the deductible and the co-pays. They also have educational loans that will hang around their necks until they are underground.
The economy may be great for some, but it far from great for the majority, so don't cede that issue just yet.
288
@BM
Here is what Progressives see (currently 52% of us) North Korea has stopped ''testing'' missiles, but have not stop building them. We still have illegal republican generated wars ongoing. The Mueller investigation has gotten 34 indictments or guilty pleas of people ALL AROUND the President, so far. (and the inquiry is far from finished)
The Stock Market has carried on from the Obama Presidency which had the greatest string of private sector job growth in the history of the United States. Unemployment numbers have not moved that much from the end of the Obama Presidency. I recall that Hillary Clinton got over 48% of the popular vote translating to about 3,000,000 more votes overall.
Progressives have a lot going (especially since they won an historic 40 seat change in the mid terms) Every single Progressive policy issue polls extremely high . (even among republicans)
All of this posturing with North Korea is window dressing and nothing is going to come from it. (although if an actual and enforceable peace plan and nuclear arms reduction initiative did occur, then I would give credit)
The only question is whether republicans will accept a massive Democratic victory next year and peacefully turn over power? (especially the President)
We shall see.
139
@FunkyIrishman
You raise many good points. Still, 43% of us support Trump (I am not one of them). That's a big chunk of change. And that's a big, big problem.
The House was expected to flip; that outcome is within historical norms. HRC lost the EC, so she lost (Obama knew how to win it). The illegal Republican-generated wars were also going on while Obama was president. Trump has not yet been indicted. Obama did a great job with the economy, but now it is just making Trump look good. I'm afraid I just don't buy into the fear mongering about Trump not leaving office if he loses. That will not be allowed to happen. He will leave. The real problem is that Democrats will allow him to stay because they will put up a poor candidate. FunkyIrishman: You have good arguments, but they are not enough. What are the valid arguments Trump makes? Where are they? Yet he is president. Trump has been persuasive, and Democrats need to study his tactics. We cannot dismiss them. And please ... you can call me Blue Moon.
23
I've never been sure of how Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize after just one year as president. It was supposed to be because of his efforts to foster better international relations. But when you look at the eight years, he was president there were problems. Our relation with Russia deteriorated to the point that Russian military leaders were talking about their "nuclear option." He actively tried to influence the Israelis to reject Netanyahu. He turned his back on Egypt when they threw out Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. When our Secretary of State went there to talk with their president, he was subject to a thorough search including body xrays before he was even let into the room. ISIS rampaged through Syria and Iraq and Kim was testing long range missiles and nuclear bombs on a regular basis. We backed the overthrow of Qaddafi and now Libya is a terrorist training ground. Since Trump became president, our relations with Israel and Egypt have improved. Even the NYT gave him credit for the defeat of the Islamic State. Kim is no longer talking about blowing us up and instead is talking about denuclearizing and an end to the war. We are working on a peace plan in Afghanistan. I doubt, that with all the drama, he will get the prize. But he has accomplished a lot to reject out of hand.
7
@Ron
I am not sure how to respond to this comment, because there is just so much to unpack, but let's have a go.
If you have an extreme and ideological regime, then you are going to ''get along'' with similar like minded regimes around the world. (especially if you give them a blank check or an actual check worth billions) The proof of said ''getting along'' is the first time you say: '' NO '' to them. (which has not occurred)
Secondly, if you are supposedly ''negotiating'' with a regime, then the expectation is that you are actually going to get something in return. (other than a photo op and sound bite) So far, that has not been the case too.
Lastly. ''talking about'' something is not the same as doing. To achieve peace requires more than just lip service. The Previous President tried to take ALL sides into consideration when trying to form a reasonable and equitable policy of said peace for all. (not just for one side)
This President has done nothing so far, and I do reject him out of hand, because along the way, he has divided so many more than bring anyone together.
Regards.
155
@Ron Trump has also alienated our long-term allies and cozies up to Putin, the Saudis, Duterte, and Erdogan. That *should* give even Republicans pause, and I think that over the next couple of years, when it's no longer possible to ignore the consequences, it will.
43
@Ron...Give Obama his due. He talked a great speech. His tour of Europe put U-2 to shame in terms of marketing and mass appeal. The speech at the Brandenburg Gate was inspired. But, foreign policy is a far cry from oratory. It is messy, unpredictable and unforgiving. It is not just you, your speech consultants and the teleprompter. No one in history has come out of the Middle East without deep scars. Why the Nobel? Well, the Nobel is a bit of a popularity contest with all of the attendant political jockeying behind the throne. Maybe he will deserve the next one.
4
"Abe, apparently mortified that his effort to stroke Trump had become public, refused to confirm this. And two leading Japanese newspapers, The Asahi Shimbun and The Yomiuri Shimbun, reported that Abe’s letter was written at the White House’s request."
Nothing like the humility of asking someone to nominate you for a Nobel Prize.
What Americans should fear is how much Donald Trump wears his emotions in public. Kim is far more circumspect, and isn't it true what they say about negotiations? The more you want something, the more you give away the store.
I think Kim can play Trump like a fiddle, because we already saw it once. Of course, if the Cohen hearings infuriate Trump next week, he may become incapable of negotiating anything and Kim will see that too.
I think Nicholas Kristof's conclusion is absolutely right: even if the goals of these two men are illusory, it's worth seeing what they can do.
At least the world should be safe for another week, no matter how aggravated Trump becomes.
108
@ChristineMcM Trump knows he's not going to win a Nobel Prize, but he can blame the fake witch hunt media and the deep state insiders for their involvement in denying it to him. Always the victim, never the instigator of everything that goes wrong.
5
Don't forget, Tom Lehrer, composer of such immortal songs as "Poisoning Pigeons in the Park", retired when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, complaining that political satire had just become obsolete. If there is ever a Trump-Kim Peace Prize, he might observe that political satire had just become weaponized.
59
Great points, Nick. I have to laugh; the Kims are just like the trumps:
"The Kims are generally overachievers: Kim is said to have started driving at age 3, and his father had five holes-in-one in his first game of golf, not to mention a perfect score of 300 the first time he bowled."
Trump's notion of his Nobel Prize is just like his telling Forbes Magazine that he is worth ten billion dollars.
Everything about trump is psychology; there's no substance to his statements. He states:
“Many other people feel that way, too,” Trump told reporters..."
Trump will emit phrases like that to manipulate people. His followers don't understand that and get angry at the rest of us who understand that trump is merely show.
It would also help if we had a State Department. So in determining the next (Democrat) president, we need to understand that he or she has the additional burden of returning our government to rationality. While it is typical for normal presidents to explain things to people rationally, the next president will have to talk to people as if they had been deprived of a capable, reasoned executive branch for some time, because they have.
379
All great points. So many Americans seem to accept and prefer ‘his’ psychobabble. It’s going to be difficult for an opponent to cut through it.
His supporters love trump-speak and it’s apparent simplicity .
https://editist.com/trump-adverbs-exclamations/
7
@Charles
“Many other people feel that way, too,” Trump told reporters..."
Like many uneducated primitives, Trump counts, "1, 2, 3, many." Using that metric, "many" could be as few as four -- and probably not much more than that.
13
The problem is not with North Korea - it never has been. The problem is with China which props up North Korea by virtue of supplying 95% of what they require to just exist. (such as food, fuel and so on)
If China decided tomorrow that they wanted ''peace'' or to denuclearize or even demilitarize the region, then the nanosecond they did decide that, then North Korea would be forced to follow. Full stop.
Everything else and in between is indeed kabuki theater and photo ops and sound bites for both sides to look tough. Self promoting is but a sideshow and byproduct to all of that.
You have the power to pressure China, by economic means, by essentially buying local as much as you can, instead of propping up the big box store which is supplied generally by imported products from China. The byproduct of that would mean saving your own jobs and communities.
A win - win.
91
@FunkyIrishman
And then there are McCabe's revelations to consider... If Trump truly believes Putin over his own intel community, then the basis for negotiations are entirely different than those understood by most Americans.
160
@FunkyIrishman
Are you seriously suggesting that if Xi spoke out, the North Koreans would "demilitarize" - disband millions of soldiers, dismantle 50 years of equipment, and the South Koreans would follow suit?
That would indeed be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.
North Korea has proved to be capable of enduring a million or more of its people starving to death without flinching from its course. What makes you think something said in Beijing would provide more pressure? And if the Chinese have such control, why don't they push the North Koreans towards the economic reforms that has transformed the Chinese economy?
10
@FunkyIrishman You are essentially correct, however, China won't take that road to pressure the North to give up its nukes, because if it did, and North Korea refused to blink and the Kim regime fell as a result, China wouldn't see the instability on the Korean Penninsula as beneficial.
Not only would a flood of immigrants create problems on the border with China, but China worries such instability would improve the hand of the U.S. and South Korea on the Korean Penninsula.
For China North Korea is the devil it knows, and so it will put up with Pyongyong's nuclear ambitions.
4
Trump loves adulation and recognition for good deeds he imagines he did. Trump doesn't see any shame in asking the Japanese Prime Minister to nominate him.
The Japanese and Chinese have studied Trump's quirks and neuroses and they have a fix on his meshuggas to the point where they can play him quite well, given his animosities.
All the psychobabble and psychoanalysis in the world will do nothing to convince the Swedes they need to award Trump their prize. They're still the Obama kind of awarders.
As for improving on the nuclear deal... There's an actual deal that isn't the pomp, circumstance, and publicity these meetings afford both leaders?
This is no different from everything else Trump has touched: a dusting of gold simile on the outside, and chaos and dysfunction on the inside. Trump wants to win without putting in the work or giving any value in return. In particular cases, his biases prevent him from even considering a deal because he sees no value in the other side. A perfect example is Haiti and his $...hole comment.
Trump is as irredeemable as the ideals he fancies are toxic to the rest of us.
Nobel? No way.
===
Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking [2019] https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-3h2
405
@Rima Regas
Norwegian Nobel Committee.
I'm afraid you're right about all the rest. Our intelligence organizations may be as competent as those of Japan and China, but it stops there, beneath Trump, as it did beneath Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld.
29
@Thomas Zaslavsky
Thanks, Thomas. The Nobel awards originate from Sweden. See
https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/
8
@Rima Regas
Yes, Norway was once part of Sweden. This sounds like a turf battle to me. As it is currently, voting takes place in Norway, where Alfred Nobel was born.
15