Please, New York Times, enough with this gibberish.
Nine steps? How about we formulate nine steps to get rid of the Trump/Pence regime before going off half-cocked with delusions of grandeur over the Korea's.
We needed to lose half our Pacific Fleet before getting into WWII. Since then, the US has engaged in one catastrophic debacle after another.
First on deck: Korea. But a few short years after WWII, the US got involved in military experts worse-case scenario: engage in a land war in Asia. And that ended in a stalemate. Lesson learned?
Next stop: Vietnam. There the US outdid itself. Having assumed the role of World's policeman, the US began its long, slow slog into a quagmire of devastating proportions. Yet, here I sit, reading yet another piece of pablum about nine steps. How foolish do you take people like me for?
It's time Americans finally realize we've been on the road to perdition for quite some time. Listening to allegedly the best and brightest did US no good. From Korea and Vietnam we've gone from one stupid war to another. People love using the quote: "Insanity is doing the same thing again and again expecting different results. With Trump, the US has doubled down on its arrogance. American is announcing to the World not only will we do whatever we want, we will do it with a mentally deranged psychotic.
Many Americans today will take comfort with the news coming out of Singapore. I shudder at the sheer arrogance of those Americans.
DD
Manhattan
This ain’t gonna happen. Trump’s deal-making prowess is a ‘legend in his own mind’ while his reputation for stiffing the other guy is documented by the plethora of law suits brought against him.
1
What seems to be omitted from the list is the thousands of artillery pieces emplacement that are the biggest non-nuclear killer threats to South Korea! If these are not dismantled, the most major threat to its security will remain!
Do you really think that Trump or anyone involved in this effort needs advice from the New York Times? Please, keep in mind your journalists, not tacticians. Trump and his advisors have this well in hand thank you. I believe you would rather commit hari- kari then to give Trump and his team any credit.
1
Did some one tweet this article to @realdonaldtrump?
He clearly needs to read this.
Let's not forget that there are quite a few countries in the world that have given up their nuclear program voluntarily. Nuclear arms are expensive and polluting and the threshold for using them is so high that many countries decide in the end that it isn't worth the trouble.
The JPCOA with Iran is complicated. But one has to wonder how much of it was written to counter arguments from the Israel lobby - that didn't want a treaty anyway - rather than to make sure that Iran really didn't get nuclear arms.
The core of any agreement should be to offer North Korea an alternative path of development and an end to the permanent threat of a US invasion. Once the country enters that path it no longer will need nuclear arms.
The article's claim that these 9 steps would be necessary to achieve Pompeo's "complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization’’ is correct. Which is precisely why they're not going to happen.
Having gone to the enormous effort and expense to provide itself with the nukes and rockets to deliver them (well-illustrated by these satellite photos), which it believes necessary to deter a U.S.first strike , North Korea is not likely to agree to leave itself totally defenseless. We wouldn't were we in their position. Why would we expect them to?
If that's all Trump has to offer, he might as well have stayed home. That also applies to the G7 meeting.
Yeah, last month, the North blew up test-tunnel portals at Mount Mantap as a conciliatory gesture. But the North neglected to say that Mt. Matap had become unusable for any further nuclear weapons testing because any such testing would release huge amounts of nuclear fallout endangering the lives of millions of North Koreans living in the are. Kim Jong Un went on to say that the North had drilled even wider tunnels in other mountains.
Unless China persuades North Korea to give up its nukes I see absolutely no chance that it will voluntarily do so
The realpolitik of the situation is that Kim has no real reason to give up his nuclear capability and it would be against his personal interests to do so. North Korea is not Iran. It makes sense for Iran to trade its military advantages conferred by nuclear weaponry for entry into the world community; Iran wishes to be engaged with the rest of us. Kim (who is North Korea as we know it) has no interest in opening up his country to an inflow of goods and ideas that would make a lie of North Korea's socio-political structure and lead to his own and his dynasty's destruction as it inevitably would. Trump is playing for headlines and his puerile need for attention, but Kim is playing for his life and he dearly loves the life he leads now. To put it in terms Trump might grasp one might say that Kim really has no interest in selling, he's just trying to raise his property's perceived market value in the eyes of his bankers, the Chinese. Let the games begin.
Not going to happen, ever.
If Trump gets all this, I will lobby my Senators to nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. However I know Trump won't. So doe Trump. More importantly, so does Kim!
I add that unless Kim reveals all the paperwork for illegal acquisitions of components (for example, those for superior big missiles from Russian occupied Ukraine) this will all be in vain. He will just use the same networks again. And of course, if he reveals paperwork for materials he has not revealed, that will help.
1
"The best approach ... is for Western inspectors to monitor North Korean disarmament. The time estimates range from a few years to a decade and a half — long after Mr. Trump leaves office."
That's IF he leaves office!
While this layman’s overview of the steps that would be involved in winding down North Korea’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program is useful, the analysis left out the most complex yet vital step: completely dismantling and/or destroying the infrastructure used to produce the weapons. To end the nuclear (and other WMD) threat posed by North Korea, every piece of equipment used in its program needs to be systematically located and destroyed. That includes not only equipment currently in use but also older or even currently non-functional equipment that could nonetheless help a rogue state or terrorist organization advance a WMD program. Similarly, decades of accumulated “wastes,” including materials and components, need to be located and removed or rendered permanently unusable in place. That last step is vital because not only has North Korea engaged in a long-term effort to develop its own WMD program, it has also engaged in an equally long-term black-market trade with other nations and groups that were working on their own programs.
Completely eliminating the infrastructure that underpins North Korea’s WMD programs is necessary to ensure the final end, rather than a temporary cessation, of North Korea's WMD programs as well as to ensure that North Korea does not remain a source for WMD technology and know-how for rogue states as well as terrorists.
If Ukraine can get rid of its nukes, so can NK.
If Iran can submit to UN inspections, so can NK.
"The play's the thing."
Hamlet, act 2, scene 2.
The nine-steps analysis is a noble and useful intellectual exercise but should not be confused with the spectacle now unfolding in Singapore. This show is simply a media event designed to take advantage of the early summer scheduling void when the sitcoms are on vacation, the NBA finals are over, and the baseball races have yet to become critically competitive.
Both main players will eagerly bask in the worldwide attention, with minor further benefits anticipated. For Kim it buys time at a minimum and may even generate a relaxation of sanctions. And, who knows, maybe the idiot savant Trump will just impulsively give away the store; no one would be truly surprised at that. For Trump the concept of a peacemaking spectacle has already produced a bounce in his popularity ratings and, if the aura can be extended through November, gives the Republicans a shot at retaining control of Congress. If the Republicans can hold on to Congress, they will then kill the Mueller investigation once and for all and Trump will be home free.
Just one minor criticism of the spectacle staging: it should have been held at the truly fabulous Singapore Zoo. There the wild animals are not caged but allowed to roam freely with natural-appearing barriers unobtrusively keeping them at bay. The same illusion of reality could have been effectively used for this spectacle: Trump and Kim only a few feet apart but safely separated by a yawning abyss.
1
CVID is a pipe dream. The toothpaste of know-how cannot be squeezed back into the tube of nescience.
US goal here should not be getting the DPRK to surrender its nuclear weapons capabilities—which it will not do—but achieving credible detente, ending the Korean War, raising DPRK’s living standards and bringing it into the international community of nations. [18.0611:1723]
50 yrs ago on July 1st, 1968, we, the USSR and well over 50 nations signed the NPT (The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty). As a prominent advocate it is a profound date that diserves recalling as we enter talks. We have reneged on our commitment.
The vast majority of humanity applaud the talks of the two Koreas. Two highly significant anniversaries, one 50 yrs old and the other with it’s first, on July 7th, The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was adopted specifically to help nuclear states return to their obligations. Our NPT declares our “intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race…”, that the nuclear states will "facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles …” It underscores this again in Article 6. “To pursue negotiations in good faith.. on a treaty on general and complete disarmament…” The USA promoted this with non nuclear states so they would not develop the weapons. Last month Congress passed yet another vast military increase adding yet another $ 22 billion toward new nuclear weapon facilities and new nuclear weapons. If this summit will be any success, it would be that we become aware of the basic facts of our own nuclear weapons, our vast proliferation, and then to return to a democratic process that allows us involvement with our money, taken in our name for an out of control, highly dangerous, lawless nuclear weapon industry.
1
Odd. I read NO articles like this when Obama made his one-man-rule agreement with Iran. Apparently whatever he decided on was good enough; even though Israel has iron-clad proof Iran is still developing the bomb. Even though Iranian leadership brags it could start it up their bomb program in hours and days. Even though NO inspection is allowed in Iran for several of the most sensitive Nuclear sites. And of course this came with pallets of cash being shipped to Iran as an incentive.
But when Trump has done NO such thing, by his actions he has stuck it to N. Korea harder than any President ever and forced them to the table, then the media/pundit standard is so high for an acceptable deal that the table is set for failure even if a Peace Treaty between the two Korea's is the result and a path for denuclearization is clearly established. No standard at all for Obama; just whatever he.....alone....decided.
And you wonder why Trump was elected, the "Blue Wave" isn't happening, Trump's popularity is rising, and he has no worse than a 50/50 chance of being re-elected at this point.
Do countries with thousands of nuclear weapons have the right to tell North Korea it can't have 20? Does a country that has twice used nuclear weapons against civilians have the right to tell North Korea to give it its nukes?
Why not exchange diplomatic relations and an end to sanctions for an absolute and verifiable pledge by Pyongyang not to give or sell nuclear weapons to non-state actors or other states?
2
Dear President Donald Trump,
I know you enjoy reading the NTY comments, so here it goes.
Good luck on your summit with North Korea. The NYT has put up some really helpful and informative infographics on their webpage - you should check them out! I know you're super busy, but I think they're pretty cool.
I know you're not too keen on Canada right now, and we've had a lot of misunderstandings. I'm happy to report that we're a very united country right now, and it's all thanks to you! You really can bring people together. Good job uniting both the Liberals and the Conservatives up here in the North!
Now, I know you feel like North Korea is all about those amazing ratings. You'll get those, but I think that you, the President, can do what no one else has ever done before, and go one step further than just the photo-ops that Obama had in Asia. You can do better than Obama, right?
So those infographics? They're great. Kim Jong-Un won't know what hit him when you actually hold his feet to the fire and negotiate for more than just photos and a few warheads.
Sticking it to the G7 by negotiating the most effective disarmament treaty of all time is a smooth move, I'll give you that. Obama never got North Korea to agree to the same one the rest of us did.
Canada is taking care of its own, so don't worry about us.
Go out there and make the most effective deal ever!
Sincerely,
C the Canadian
P.S. You don't want to ship us milk, anyway. We mostly drink soy now.
1
This is quite an extensive and very thorough approach, but seemingly unrealistic and unattainable. Is that the point of aiming for it - so the talks will fail by these standards? Was this protocol used with Libya or Iran? Each case may be different, and each leader is certainly their own unpredictable personality, but each case is a potential global disaster. Instead of asking for so much, maybe we should begin with smaller demands.
1
Well it's a good think the meeting is a one on one with only Trump and a translator in the room. I'm sure he will cover all nines steps in that meeting.
Trump will lie and Kim will lie and bingo. There's the agreement.
I am a Navy Vietnam veteran '65-'69. I was a Fire control Technician Gunnery 3rd class. I am a retired federal prosecuting attorney.
It's much more than a safe bet that North Korea will never accede to any of these "steps" let alone all of them for several reasons. Most importantly, Mr. Kim knows, as do our former G-7 allies and any reasonable person (excluding by definition, every Trump supporter) that every utterance from Trump's mouth is a lie.
Mr. Kim may be dumb, but the evidence demonstrates that he is not as stupid as Trump, Pence, Pompeo, Bolton, et al. Moreover, it's also more than a safe bet that Kim has no desire to be the next graphic example of the "Libyayn model" as Chickenhawk Draft Ddodger Bolton put it so succinctly just a few weeks ago..
These talks are a dog and pony show, laughable when China can rearm the North Koreans by sending anything it wishes across their shared border in a day. Without the Chinese at the table, agreements with Mr. Kim are about as reliable as Trump's word.
Pompeo's catch phrase "irreversible denuclearization" is ludicrous, short of mass execution of scientists, technicians, and military bureaucrats. North Korea's achieved status as a nation capable of nuclear warfare cannot be permanently undone. It is not a matter of things but of scientific and technological knowledge, as well as an understanding the requisite organizational structure and discipline. The best that can be accomplished by way of the disarmament of things is to increase the time frame between a decision to reacquire nuclear ICBM capability and its ready-to-go reality. Only a genuine, willed change of policy can turn back a nation over the threshold or close. That's the reason it was simply foolish to tear up the Iran agreement on the grounds that all its stipulations were not permanent. It achieved the necessary delay, breathing space for any possible policy change of heart. Kim can offer Trump the entire world of things for sanctions relief. But so long as there is no genuine change of long-term direction, sanctions relief only strengthens North Korea's population and scientific and technical infrastructure, upon which military nuclear capability ultimately depends. In sum, the situation is far trickier than the capabilities of an ignorant, narcissistic President desperate for the photo-op of a lifetime of charlatanism. That they have already minted the commemorative coins says all one needs to know about what's coming.
The person who should read this article is President Trump.
Little chance this will happen because:
1. Trump does not care to learn anything new.
2. Trump does not read anything informative.
Any use of a nuclear weapon by Kim would mean immediate destruction of his capitol and large portions of his country, soon followed by his own execution. There is no scenario where North Korea would emerge intact and victorious after a nuclear war. Kim is educated must know this.
"A key question is whether arms negotiators will also try to redirect the North’s large corps of rocket designers and engineers into peaceful activities, such as making and lofting civilian satellites."
==============================================
Meanwhile, hypocritically the United States has the world's largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, and is continually upgrading them.
This "Pax Americana" article suffers from the same nationalistic American exceptionalism as the Trump administration.
It mentions the possibility of North Korean missiles being able to reach the United States. But the US already has missiles in range of North Korea. And many North Koreans have not forgotten the war-criminal carpet bombing of their country by the US in the Korean War.
Why doesn't the US give up its nuclear arsenal and have its rocket designers and engineers redirect their energies to peaceful uses?
Answer that question, and you'll have answered why North Korea won't give up theirs.
2
...elect a different president
1
I suspect this whole Trump-Kim thing is a precursor to an attack on NK. The prospects for an agreement to Trump's satisfaction (as outlined in this article) are extremely unlikely. That will give Trump and his hawks the justification to attack. I believe that this is what Trump is counting on.
1
There is only one step: for South Korea to acknowledge the aegis of China.
"John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s hawkish national security adviser"
Gosh, is Bolton really going to come face to face with Kim Jong Un? Bolton with his mustache looks like a crazed, annihilationist 19th century cavalryman hellbent on wiping out the last recalcitrant Native American tribe in the American West. Understand that this is how Bolton views the North Korean leaders--as being like a bunch of uncooperative Native American chiefs who need to be exterminated.
And yes, I know that comparing Bolton to a cavalryman is ridiculous since Bolton was a chickenhawk during the Vietnam War.
4
..and to really disarm the United States?
If only these little infographics could have been printed on Big Mac wrappers and KFC bucket lids the last few months. Maybe there would have been a chance ---slim, but a chance --- our toddler-in-chief could have accidentally absorbed a few of them in preparation for his meeting. But alas...
5
Is the author smoking? Why not add “put all the Nuclear Scientists to a firing squad”.
Nobody is giving up Nuclear Energy for electricity. So enrichment and shutting down reactors is a big no no. He is even asking to shut down all research on Nuclear Science!
The author did not, for once, mention NPT or Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. There is a global inspections regime, which is working, that helps countries research on Nuclear Science while preventing them from building Nuclear Weapons. Japan, Brazil, Iran and Germany also have all the knowledge to build Nuclear Weapons but they cannot.
We will end up adding North Korea in that list.
It isn't going to happen. Why waste the time.
1
Wonderful visuals for denuclearization of North Korea. Where was your graphics department when we were dealing with Iran?
Nice. But these folks can't feed themselves. Do they really represent a threat to us? Relative to China, which seems poised to eat our economy whole? Or Russia, which appears to be pulling the strings in Washington these days?
Have you noticed that Kim wants to dismantle and remove nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula and Trump wants to dismantle and remove nuclear weapons from North Korea? Will the US be willing to remove their nuclear arsenal from South Korea, UNLIKELY.
1
North Korea reminds me of the Soviet Union before the fall of the Berlin wall. A savvy propaganda machine portrayed the Soviet Union as having a strong army with enormous capabilities. Once the veil was lifted, we discovered a very different picture: a poorly organized army with rotten equipment and low morale. It is time to call North Korea's bluff. Easier said than done, however, given the consequences of being wrong.
Offer big bucks to Korean scientists, including the Ukrainian physicists and engineers who are helping NK, to do something else. Let them work on solar tech and wind turbines. Take the car keys from the kid and let him ride a bike til he proves himself capable of being responsible.
1
Let us hope that USA will not renege on the agreement. Last there was an agreement USA did not follow up on its commitments. USA did not build the light-water reactors that we promised them. Heavy fuel shipments that we were supposed to send were often delayed. North Korea was not removed from the state department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism until 2008, though it had long met the criteria for removal. A limited number of US sanctions were eased, but not until 2000 – six years later than pledged in the agreed framework. Why is American broken promise never ever mentioned in main stream media that always harps on how unreliable North Korea is.
North Korea Withdrew from the previous agreement only because USA was not keeping up with its side of the agreement. and was constantly moving the Goal post.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/north-korea-missile-test-us-1994-ag...
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/north-korea-and-americas-long-history-of-...
3
Please explain to me how it is morally reasonable to demand that North Korea gives up nuclear weapons when we refuse to do the same.
5
Do you think Trump is interested? No, he doesn't like "boring" lectures about details. He doesn't care about the truth, only the cameras.
Like our modern Republican party, he will declare victory and go home. End of story.
Vote, people, vote. This nation cannot stand much more of this.
2
I don't see any reason short of a continual stream of largess in the realm of billions per year that would incentivize Kim to disarm. The DPRK has found workarounds for sanctions before, and to think that relaxing them would be sufficient to motivate disarmament seems highly suspect. The North is more technologically developed than at any time in its history, and with technological change comes societal instability. Why would Kim want to relinquish one of the foundational element of his family’s dynastic rule?
Diplomacy is the only avenue that doesn’t result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. Yet if history is any guide, we should not be surprised to learn that this entire summit is a farce and that no meaningful change will come of it… except that it will have gained North Korean scientists a little more time to perfect the weapons that will ensure a Kim rules the DPRK indefinitely.
2
In order to be truly convincing, the U.S. must also pledge to reduce its nuclear weapon arsenal too. I can't see 45 and his fellow war profiteers doing that, unfortunately.
The president's lack of preparation and lack of desire to do so is even more worrying here than usual. After the debacle at the G7 conference, I have little confidence in the encounter in Singapore.
1
How many steps to denuclearize the US. Putin has voiced a desire to return to the negotiating table on mutual arms reduction. We cannot honestly expect others to disarm while we build and renew our arsenal and continue threatening the rest of the world.
3
Jong Un will offer to close his test sites, which already happened two months ago when his test site collapsed causing seismic reactions and possible nuclear contamination. Anything else he "gives up" will be more lies to get what he wants.
tRump hasn't read the news yet, and will declare victory, even though N. Korea has already signed, and broken, seven treaties. President Obama was too smart to be conned into another "give-and-take" with N. Korea, that's why Jong Un didn't bother with enhancing his nuclear capability then. He's finally found a global dupe who will take his bait.
3
This is highly idealistic. These nine stps apply to all the nuclear powers: USA, Russia, China, France, GB and so on. Although rational this is impossible. So it seems to me a sterile exercise to formulate the nine steps in this unilateral way to any country. As monstrous as the North Korean regime is, it is now a nuclear power.
Thanks, NYTimes, for taking the time and effort to lay out a scenario that will never happen. NK will never give up its weapons; it's the nation's "trump" card for survival.
But the larger point is this: no matter what happens in Singapore -- even if nothing happens -- Trump will claim total "victory" and proclaim to the world that he is the savior of all mankind. The global news media will broadcast this fake news account, and Trump's favorable ratings will skyrocket.
This is all about Trump's outsized and undeserved ego. It has nothing whatever to do with world peace or creative diplomacy. It's all and only about Trump.
1
"After arguing that the Obama administration made a “terrible deal” by allowing modest enrichment to continue in Iran, it is hard to imagine how Mr. Trump could insist on less than a total shutdown in North Korea."
Seriously, you find it hard to imagine Trump being hypocritical?
"If I win I may never see my property -- I may never see these places again," Trump said at an August 2016 campaign event. "But because I'm going to be working for you, I'm not going to have time to go golfing, believe me. Believe me. Believe me, folks."
2
Maybe the US could turn its attention to a few other nuclear armed states in troublesome parts of the world, when it has done with this one.
1
Surely Trump plans to apply these 9 steps also in the US?
3
If it's good enough for Iran, it should be good enough for North Korea. Stop shifting the goalposts.
1
I think Trump cancelled the Iran deal because he felt it was NOT good enough.
iran committed a cardinal sin against the u.s. : trade oil in euro. if other oil producers follow suit. where does that leave good old uncle sam and his almighty petrodollar?
Iran dropped the petrodollar in oil trade. Venezuela also dropped the usd in oil trade. that's why Venezuela is in turmoil.
We used to refer to denuclearizing the Korean peninsula. Now it's just N. Korea. What about the US nuclear warheads in transit through S. Korean airspace? How about the warheads on US ships docking in S. Korean waters?
Why is half the equation missing now?
2
it's never about North Korea.
it's always about China and Russia since the ceased fire more than 60 years ago. North Korea provides us with the so call threat to u.s. vassal states of Japan and South Korea to have multiple bases to encircle China.
the mic won't go for this. however, Trump will put on his dog and pony show just the same.
Trump is only good at destroying things, not fixing them.
Can you email this article to Trump please? Perhaps his attention span will last to read the general "bullet points" - maybe insert the word "Trump" with each bullet point, so he will be encouraged to read it (probably all that he can absorb). Maybe this will provide him more than just his narcissist "attitude" going into the negotiations!
Our problem isn't just that our lying blowhard of a President won't so much as read this list, let alone its accompanying explanations, and that he wouldn't understand it if he did.
Our prob is that President Trump doesn't care about any of that, and is currently running a country that has a lot of Trumpists who don't care either, as well as a fair number of pseudo-leftists who really, really believe that if we just hand Kim what he wants--us out of Korea, and the DPRK allowed to trade freely--everything'll be just nifty and peachey.
My advice is, take a good hard look at Kim grinning while several hundred thousand over-dressed sturmtruppen goosestep down the avenue.
The big Stalin-era general hats and the festoons of medals are also not a good sign.
There are no “bomb-useable waste products” that come out of a nuclear power reactor. What comes out is a soup of every element in the periodic table, incapable of exploding anything. Using an expensive, 600-step purifying process, it would be theoretically possible to separate a tiny amount of manufactured plutonium-239 after 5%-enriched power reactor fuel is considered spent. Then, do it again several thousand times to yield enough plutonium to make a weapon.
By halting centrifuge production of highly-enriched uranium, and shutting down any reactors specifically designed to manufacture plutonium (useless for generating power), we would eliminate the potential for both uranium and plutonium bombs at once. The supposed link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons is a product of the fertile imaginations of Greenpeace activists.
I was struck by the 60 Minutes piece Sunday night about North Korea's weapons and the US', the response times to ICBMs and warhead counts. Let's not lose sight of the fact that 'ONLY' 100 nuclear explosions are needed to end life on planet Earth from a Nuclear Winter caused by the material expelled into the atmosphere by the explosions.Carl Sagan et al worked this out decades ago. Wikipedia has a longer, more detailed description.
I think you need a third color in the block chart to indicate a capability that was prevented in the first place. The existing format is like the old vaudeville question "When did you stop beating your wife?" For example the blank space under Iran for "Dismantle nuclear arms" mistakenly suggests that they had nukes they did not dismantle rather than pointing out that the deal (now defunct due to Trump) would have prevented them from developing any nukes.
Sounds kinda like Iran
I predict one of two outcomes on this. 1. Our president will accomplish nothing, but he or his minions will vigorously demand he be given the Noble Prize for what he accomplished- namely nothing (as usual). 2. He will give away the store and in doing so sell out our nation, our friends and allies. In the end he will still accomplish nothing except further alienating our friends and our allies (you might call that an accomplishment). Of course he'll still demand the Noble Prize as he blames Obama, Trudeau, the Affordable Care Act, our free press and the hated American liberals for his failures. I hope I'm wrong with my prediction and he somehow succeeds despite his all so evident shortcomings. I'd like to believe our president is good at something beside telling lies.
1
So this is where the rubber meets the road. This is where Trump must out perform Obama. People like Piers Morgan believe we should be more supportive of Trump. But there are two different issues at hand. Yes !Americans like everyone else in the world ,want the removal of a nuclear holocaust. But the man trying to deliver results has a way of lying & using situations for his personal benefit & no one else's. Everyone else is a liar & fake. So how can such a man altruistically work on a treaty? Is the trip to Singapore grandstanding? Donald Trump so far has proven to be an undeclared agent of Putin & also Xi. What is he planning to give away to our enemies?
Does verified denuclearization even matter? Plenty of evidence US would dismiss findings of fact by knowlegeable inspectors and wave the WMD card if (and we usually do) wanted to invade and wage war.
2
Too funny
Obama’s Iran deal didn’t get even one of these steps
2
If I were Trump, I would aim to exchange ambassadors right away. That is an easy, clear, and probably necessary first step toward denuclearization.
1
I appreciate the simplified survey of the scientific technologies and steps. It's obvious this is a process view, not a political estimate.
Especially useful is the estimate that "denuclearization" could be completed in 15 years, an extremely optimistic number based upon lessons of Hanford, Chernobyl or Fukushima. This number provides some perspective for the commitment that will be necessary and the need for international cooperation.
It's highly likely that Kim will have a grasp on each and every one of this issues.
Tragically, there is zero evidence any of these scientific facts will be relevant to our news-cycle ratings obsessed president.
I can't imagine why Kim, knowing the survival of his family's dynasty depends upon deterrence of an invasion, would honestly negotiate away that deterrence. Kim has proven he will feign compliance and he has every incentive to do so. As Xi Jinping has demonstrated, Kim can easily inflate Trump's ego to the point he'll ignore any lack of compliance. What will happen with the next president would be an important question for Kim.
If 'denuclearization' is going to take longer time as this article suggests, President can only claim victory in starting the process. How this will be any different from the past efforts? He would realize(but not admit) how better the joint Iran deal was.
I am sure Pompeo & team would have prepared similar illustrations for our president to grasp the enormity of the issue.
1
I take it your kidding about 'Pompeo & team' trying to teach our fake president anything. First of all you would have to believe that 'Pompeo & team' know anything to teach. And if they did, it's highly unlikely they would dare attempt teach our fake president anything if keeping their jobs depends on not trying to teach him anything. Pompeo & team are there as window dressing, the president really doesn't care about any advice they might give him.
These are some interesting and complicated steps to reach nuclear salvation, but sorry, yawn. The threat of nuclear elimination is beginning to feel as real to me as is the promise of heaven. All my life both is all I’ve heard about, but nothing else. Politics to me is a lot like Catechism, their job is to keep you in fear so you don’t dare ask any questions and they don’t have to show you anything, and for sure you have to act grateful for it in return for nothing.
4
And what are the 9 steps it would take to remove the United States' nuclear capabilities??
14
It's funny, because of the three previous administrations, two of them actually tried to prevent NK from gaining a nuclear bomb, and the third actually did nothing about it, resulting in NK gaining a nuclear bomb. Clearly, diplomacy doesn't work with a delusional psychopath in command of a nation of hate. It's not clear that Trump is doing anything useful, but it's absolutely clear Obama did nothing about it at all.
1
The circumstances are very different now because there’s been a change of government in South Korea and unlike like its predecessor, the new government supports a rapprochement with the north. Indeed, they may well have forced Trump’s hand: the impact of the north’s participation in the Olympics can’t be under-estimated, not to mention that photo op of the 2 leaders meeting and embracing.
"Diplomacy doesn't work with a delusional psychopath in command of a nation of hate."
That made me chuckle a bit because that's how much of the world views us now, not North Korea...
1
Cassandra: Nothing has changed the underlying fact that NK is, was, and always will be a nation of willing-to-die-for-Glorious-Leader people, and their Glorious Deranged Teenage Leader. As long as Communism is the guiding principle in that nation, they are doomed to failure (hence the continuous need for food, fuel, cash and other forms of sustenance from the West). Until that wretched beast gestated by Marx is killed, NK will always be a threat.
1
The question no one seems to ask is: why shouldn't North Korea have nuclear weapons? They have lived surrounded by US nuclear arms for nearly 70 years. We seem to be perfectly willing to countenance Israel's nuclear capability. Why not North Korea's? As a sovereign nation, they have as much legal right to them as does the United States.
17
if we had signed the peace treaty instead of the armistice. where would that put us? why would japan need multiple bases on its soil? why would south korea?
north korea is not an irrational actor when confronts with military drills across the borders.
north korea gives us the excuse to station troops on japan and south korea. however, the main target is china and Russia, not north korea.
3
Thank you! The Elephant NO ONE wants to bring up. NK should just tell the world, " We choose the "Israel Model", which is develop 100 or so nukes, claim nuclear ambiguity and the right as a sovereign nation to be able to protect itself from any and all enemies. There, done. This position is and has been accepted by all the other nuclear nations so if it's OK for Israel it must be OK for NK.
1
So true, especially considering the enormous damage and death toll inflicted on the North Koreans by the US in the 1950's. The same can be said for Iran who have also fared badly from our meddling in their leadership, we had no qualms about shooting down their civilian airliner either, with hundreds of deaths being the result. Personally, I am sick of our aggressive, bullying and sanctioning of other less favored nations - whilst arming ourselves (and favored friends) to the teeth. It all stinks of ugly hypocrisy.
1
Yes, of course we would all like to see nuclear disarmament by North Korea.
The question is, will the US be willing to go along?
I mean, if North Korea is will to give up uranium enrichment, nuclear reactors, nuclear bomb tests, hydrogen bombs, and biological and chemical warfare agents, why not the US as well?
After all, isn't the goal of our delegated representatives to achieve complete nuclear, biological, and chemical disarmament, in line with the wishes of a broad majority of the populace?
Or am I missing something?
4
This is Trump's photo op. He will try to take credit regardless of the results. He may say a failure is a success or he may say a failure is the fault of Kim and his own aides for letting him down. Trump will garner headlines, either favorable or unfavorable, and in his mind that's about all that counts.
12
I know that this article is about denuclearization and delivery systems. But the scope of North Korea's development of weapons and means of social control are vast and sometimes it seems that North Korea's development of nuclear weapons and saying they would make a deal to eliminate them is only a ploy to keep its power intact. Trump said as much about Iran and it is doubly so for North Korea which would need to change its whole society, its persecution of its people and neighbors, which will not change necessarily with the perhaps token dismantling of some nukes. As this article that issue is big enough, but north Korea can not be allowed to continue the intimidation of its neighbors. Trump may declare a 'victory', but where is the bigger agreement that Trump demanded so ostentatiously of Iran.
My question is: are all of N Korea's nuclear capabilities and infrastructure verifiable or is this article conjecture? Previously it's been reported that their aircraft and rail systems are terribly antiquated. The trains were reported to have a maximum speed of under 30MPH! What gives?
1
Mr Trump's personal and political aims do not now appear to allow for failure. He has already ignored the North's decision to refuse to give up it's weapons. If Trump is so desperate for an accomplishment, (for which he will demand to receive a Nobel Peace prize), than he has no interest in ensuring the DPRK sticks to it's bargains-appearances are eough. Mr Trump may think he is making a deal with himself, and he is sure not to betray that person. Whatever the DPRK does in the future can simply be ignored-attributed to the evil wishes and conspiring of his enemies in the "Fake Media" or, ultimately, bad laws passed by the Democrats.
If Trump wants a big parade he will get it and the rest of the planet will just have to deal with it.
I suspect this is the reasoning behind much of the media's "give the President a chance" opinionating. They are backed into a corner and must await the eventual failure or success of Mr "T", who is cutting himself off from all the West and all America's trustworthy and dependable allies. We are basically allowing the ship of state to be steered by one elderly maniac sufferring delusions, as his party's members cheer him on-or grit their teeth-having let themselves become totally dependent on his good will and their voters immediate wishes.
Not to mention lobotomizing all its nuclear scientists, technicians, educators, and anyone who might one day be able to read up on the processing procedures.
Well unfortunately, we don't even know what Trump's idea is about "denuclearization"; he has a total lack of introspection and disregard of the potential consequences of his actions. To the christian right; this is a bad tree that is incapable of bearing good fruit.
1
Kim Jong Un or Kim Kardashian, with Trump it's all about the ratings, and this will be the "biggest and best," of his soon to be shortened term.
1
Reading these comments leaves me with no doubt as to why previous administrations - from Truman to Obama - were content to kick the North Korean can down the road. Kudos to President Trump for having the nerve to try.
If only he would actually try.
1
"Since 1992, [North Korea] has repeatedly vowed never to test, manufacture, produce, store or deploy nuclear arms. It has broken all those promises and built a sprawling nuclear complex." This sums it up. We cannot trust Kim Jong-un to denuclearize at all. Of course, with Donald Trump at our helm, North Korea cannot trust us either. Trump is making enemies of our allies; he certainly won't be honest with an adversary.
1
This is pretty helpful. Does anyone have a link to the one that must surely have been done for Iran?
1
Stop confusing everyone with facts and details. Its really simple:
The Trump team just demands: 'Destroy all your nuclear arsenal, right now or we will destroy you.
Kim walks out of the meeting. Trump lies and claims he walked out first.
1
Fools rush in. Let's see now how the Great Deal Maker plies the Art of the Deal. Too much is at stake here for Trump to become petulant and walk out. What will he do when the conference really heats up?
Just way too much information for Trump to process. He thinks he can just wave his Golden Finger and "poof!" its gone.
Love the graphics on the splash page. Maybe Trump's sidekicks can use them as cue cards?
1
"Nuclear experts like David A. Kay, who led the largely futile American hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, argue that the North Korean arms complex is too large for outsiders to dismantle. The best approach, he contends, is for Western inspectors to monitor North Korean disarmament."
Oh, we're calling the complete intelligence disaster that WMD's were a "largely futile hunt" now? And quoting the so-called "experts" that entangled us in a long term war because of garbage information and outright propaganda? Yeah, let's hear this guy out, he was so on the money last time.
Be better, NYT.
You forgot the first and most important step:
Change the attitudes that cause them to seek nuclear weapons in the first place.
Until and unless they come to view nuclear weapons as no longer necessary to their national survival, any denulcearization program is doomed to failure.
That should be the goal of the summit, make them feel safe so they don't need nuclear weapons. If that doesn't happen, then you will be involved on a long game of "Wack-A-Mole."
Great analysis, ... but one doesn't have to look hard to see that this article is "prep work" for trashing whatever comes out of this meeting as faring poorly - NUMERICALLY.
You can almost read what will appear in an NYT editorial in 3-10 days RIGHT HERE: "ZERO attempt to even address 4 of the 9 plus 'very small steps' re 2 or 3 others, ... HENCE total flim-flam when DJT self-nominates for Nobel Peace Prize."
Yes, one CAN expect smaller steps than most of us would like ... AND enormous over-statement from the White House as to what will have been accomplished, ... but this is one of those cases where what looks like NEWS REPORTING is really "stacking the deck," and that gives the Trump administration more help than it needs or deserves. (Bring back BALANCE and the "Public Editor!")
YES, it IS very tricky to "size up" the agreement with Iran of a few years back - and tougher still to say whether it was "the most" Iran would have agreed to or not.
But compiling a long wish list and using words like "REQUIRED" clearly crosses the line into op-ed territory.
Again, one has to wonder that just as Trump has been widely accused - nowhere more so than in the NYT - as being opposed to ANYthing Obama favored ...
maybe, the NYT has all but officially declared that ANYthing Trump says or favors must be bogus.
They say you can't put the genie back in the lamp - and they are RIGHT. So maybe, you "settle" for trying to put the lamp 20,000 leagues under the sea but with a camera on it!
The purpose of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty aka NPT is to retard and stop the spread of nuclear weapons on the way to their reduction and elimination.
When, where and how were these steps used against the NPT nuclear weapons rogue nations Israel, India and Pakistan?
America and Russia have 95 % of the world's nuclear weapons. America invented and has used nuclear weapons.
2
The 9 steps Trump must do. The 15 things he must look out for. The 59 things that may go wrong, what 5 things he must not promise, etc, etc....Recommendations from the "Harvard Elite" that for the past 40 years have brought us to this dangerous moment. Perhaps we should try Monty Python's "And now for something completely different." Let Trump be Trump.
No way that North Korea is actually going to denuclearize. What they might do is to offer to keeps talks open and see what they can get out of it as long as they can.
Even without our current president in office, I am just as concerned about dismantling our own nuclear arsenal. The John Boltons of the world will be here after Trump goes away.
1
I refrain any judgment. Deeply in my heart I believe this is just a political stunt from both of these clowns we call leaders or presidents.
But perhaps something comes out of it.
What I am certain is that both clowns need to have a narrative of victory. It is fair to ask how this is possible? If both sides present the same facts as alternative facts and convince the public that the alternative is the truth they can become both victors.
As for my self I have no expectation that I will hear the truth ever in this age of alternative facts.
1
It's saddening how political expenditure works. The GOP was all for trade until trump; and the dems were all for a nuclear free world. Now the roles are reversed.
To me they're both great goals, regardless is the loser in office (I didn't like Obama either).
Like most any other rational person who has both eyes open, I have a low regard for Trump as president, and zero expectations of his success, in Korea or anywhere else. But if he can actually pull off the denuclearization of Korea, and do it peacefully, he will have succeeded where eleven presidents before him have failed. And it will then be time -- for all of us -- to re-evaluate Trump the man, and Trump the president. In any event, if he does succeed in solving the intractable problem of Korea (and if the US economy stays fairly healthy), I think his second term will be assured.
Of course, that's a lot of "ifs". We've yet to see what, if anything, will come of this meeting with Kim. Frankly, I had my doubts it would even get this far, but since it has I'm hoping for the best (but still expecting the worst).
2
The details in this article highlight how complex "denuclearization" would be if the US and NK can even come to a shared definition of it.
How good has this administration bee at handling complex issues? Any issues? Anyway, it doesn't really matter how the talks with Kim go because trump will declare victory regardless. They payoff for any negotiated agreements are way down the road and there will be many trump crisis to distract us before the real outcome is known. It's all just a photo-op for donny.
16
Who cares, just as long as the both sign the same piece of paper. It doesn’t have to say anything on it, so long as the headline reads “signed”. For all the stir made yesterday for not signing something, think of the banner-sized print if they do sign
>>> ". . .removal of the nuclear arms, the dismantlement of the atomic complex and the elimination of the North’s other weapons of mass destruction."
There is no prospect of all this being achievable, no indication that all of it is under serious consideration, and no reason to believe that it reasonably could be -- all in the foreseeable future.
Perhaps, rather than focusing on how difficult it would be to accomplish fanciful goals, it would be more useful to discuss the requirements for reaching goals that are within the realm of practicability.
10
First answer the question: What the hell are we doing paying to defend S. Korea in the first place?
The answer is corporate and banking interests have us there, by using the press to scare Americans into their compliance position, which is when we don't question huge wasteful military adventures. Nuthin' for nuttin' as they say; we are in S. Korea because the threat we produce from there forces the N. Koreans to challenge us.
How about to re-frame the discussion by having Americans be billed monthly per family the full cost of maintaining our pointless threat force we keep in the South? Camp Humphreys in South Korea is one of the largest construction projects in the history of the U.S. military, what is the point of all that waste? That money is education and infrastructure stolen from future generations. I'm getting sick of this banking and commerce driven war prep merry-go-round.
26
Who paid for Camp Humphreys construction? Plus, the price of land is very expensive in South Korea.
Wow! CK - talk about rewriting history. The US engaged in Korea after North Korea invaded the South in 1950. That was sort of beginning of the Cold War and America's fear of communism overwhelming democracies. The fear of Communism is the reason we are in Korea, were in Vietnam, built the Nuclear arsenal and son on.
In terms of reframing the discussion: You will need to look at the entire military-economic complex. The cost of our presence in SKorea is much less than 1% of the military budget. And if you remove the troops you still have to pay and feed them. So the cost is really negligible.
It is a reasonable debate on what value military efforts have and you can stake out different positions. The fact that we spend the highest amount of GDP on military is undeniable and is a choice we made because we think it is necessary for our "freedom".
4
What are we doing paying to defend Japan or Europe? Why are you just worried about the troops in SK and not all the others spread around the world? The reality is SK is actually one of the few places it makes sense for us to have troops since we are still technically at war with NK and have guaranteed the SK's security.
2
Nuclear weapons can keep the peace in the Korean peninsula just like they do in Europe. We should allow this to happen, by just backing out of there and pocketing the $billions in savings. We could then perhaps put US Marines in a place they belong, where people are being murdered every day by a sociopathic military - the border between Israel & Gaza.
13
Kim will never give up his nuclear weapons or capability. To do so would reduce him to just another minor figure in world diplomacy, just when Trump has promoted him to a major figure. And with Seoul just minutes from the border with North Korea, even disabling the missiles in Kim possession would amount to very little (they could fire a nuclear warhead through a cannon and take out the South Korean capital).
Moreover, the process of dismantling the nuclear capability of the North would take years, all this with a President who has the attention span and patience of a two-year-old at best.
This is all theater: a performance designed to aggrandize Trump and cozy up to Putin and Xi, while Trump alienates our allied democracies in a show meant to gain political advantage with his base while ruining trade.
I view the Singapore meeting as another Trump circus. And I will value any "agreement" proceeding from it as worth most of Trump's other "deals": discounted at 5 cents on the dollar.
28
still 5 cents more than Obama, Clinton and Kerry.
It's true. His test site collapsed weeks ago, so I'm sure he's prepared to "offer" closing his test site, and nothing more . . . nothing verifiable, anyway.
Spot on. Kim Jung Un knows that Trump's word is worthless.
Yes, a complex, lengthy road lies ahead to achieve significant progress toward elimination of nuclear weapons in North Korea.
There is much talk of absolutes, getting any and all weapons, materials, and facilities shutdown and destroyed.
It's important to remember to assess this notion of perfect denuclearization carefully for what it is -- a political position.
It is assuredly not a military position. North Korea, for all its efforts and the power that simple possession of nuclear weapons gives it, remains a tiny nation of limited resources. It has given priority to leveraging its military capacity via nuclear arms, but remains seriously out-gunned and incapable of a first strike able to cripple US forces.
In effect, even if not so limited in Kim's intent, these weapons provide the only marginal security that they plausibly supply -- deterrence against the US using its own weapons against the North.
A few bombs missed? Given the vast resources of US intelligence focused on this problem, it remains possible if unlikely. Even if so, would such hidden weapons provide a military advantage? Quite unlikely unless the US commits to greater reductions than might come about so far in meeting its own commitments to international treaties such as the NPT, CTBT, and others.
The goal of "perfect" in this matter should remind us to not let what might be the political embarrassment lack of it could cause be an enemy of the good, a pact that would greatly reduce the chance of war.
4
North Korea has suffered greatly over many decades to build their nuclear arsenal. Because of their weapons, they are a small nation with oversized power. I cannot believe they will easily give that up. Additionally, the US at present has not shown itself to be an honest broker. The US simply walked away from the Iranian deal, a far less complex treaty to verify. What this US - North Korea meeting will accomplish is to open the conversation to further dialog. In itself, this is not a bad outcome but far from nuclear disarmament. My fear is that this gives China a bigger role on the world stage. As America's role is shrinking, in part because of Trump's ineptitude, the vacuum will be filled by another nation. It would be in no one's interest if that nation were China or Russia.
13
And how many steps are needed to disarm the US? Shouldn't we apply the same standard to the self selected members of the "atomic club"?
So hypocritical to pretend we are a "peace loving nation" when we alone have the atomic arsenal to destroy Earth seven times over.
North Korea should not trust the messenger of Western "values" and don't buy any of the wares Trump is peddling. They should remember we are the only country that has used atomic weapons on human beings.
If North Korea is banking on the American promise of economic development, they should just see how quickly Americans walk away from economic treaties and agreements.
21
George, you are an embarrassment. Our nukes are deterrents.
War is not a game, with both sides allowed equal strength and some scoreboard announcing the winner. If one prepares for battle -- or wishes to deter battle -- one builds overwhelming strength to achieve, it is hoped, the latter by convincing the opposition that the alternative is their annihilation during the former.
1
I share the deep desire to end the scourge of nuclear weapons everywhere on earth, but the extreme "all or nothing" approach suggested in George Hawkeye's comment transforms is a recipe for disaster.
Comparing the so-called "P5" (the USA, Russia, China, France and the UK) with North Korea is deeply misleading. The P5 have not, at least for the past 50 years, been sharing WMD technology with other states or terrorists. North Korea has been selling to anyone willing to buy. None of the P5 have launched ballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads over the landmass of another country without warning and consultation, as North Korea has. All of the P5 belong to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and other international conventions to limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. North Korea belongs to none of those and has shown no inclination to abide by the rules membership would entail.
So while I agree that the world should pursue the total elimination of nuclear weapons, I cannot agree that until/unless that happens that we should take no steps to reduce the threat from unchecked nuclear proliferation. Denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula would be a great step forward toward total denuclearization.
Thank you, my thoughts exactly!
I finally got around to reading the Iran agreement, just before Trump withdrew from it. The detail and complexity was staggering and I was particularly struck by the carefully timed program which set out, step by step, how the concessions made by all parties would be implemented.
I find it hard to believe that Trump would have read it, and even harder to believe that he’ll have the patience to do the detailed (and arguably more difficult) work for an agreement with North Korea. I just hope that the media and politicians subjects the plan (and there will be something, I’m sure of that) to the sort of close scrutiny it will need.
Not that it will make any difference. Trump will proclaim it a victory and the spivs and sycophants will parrot their praise.
33
I admire you for doing this reality check.
I wish a single Republican had actually looked at the deal before they joined the mob knitting like Madame DeFarge at the execution.
2
"Not that it will make any difference. Trump will proclaim it a victory and the spivs and sycophants will parrot their praise."
Just like the Obama/Kerry proclamation ?
To be fair, I'd find it hard to believe "covfefe" reads ANYTHING. News stories on rare occasion say he's read X document but more of them talk about how he'd...much rather not. Poor intel briefers.
No, he treats this as a fake-wrestling match, complete with himself as Hulk Hogan the over-tanned flag-waving spandex-tearing "hero", Kim as Little Rocket Man the suspiciously stereotypical heel character, Iran's leaders as said heel's manager, and We'll-See-What-Happens promos of their pay-per-view extravaganza.
They think it's SummerSlam. We'll be lucky if it's Survivor Series.
1
The "Nine Steps Required to Really Disarm North Korea" did not include professional controls on North Korean scientists, engineers and technicians. That is to say, that the North Koreans have apparently educated, trained and enabled a large group of people. After disarmament these people would be left penniless with nothing else to do. Given the dearth of technology industries in North Korea, many would most likely seek work abroad.
In the United States and elsewhere, after the military is finished with people who work on Navy propulsion systems and nuclear weapons, they are 'encouraged' to work in controlled professional areas. This can mean cradle-to-grave job security in the nuclear power industry, the defense industry and elsewhere.
This also means that the scientific and engineering professions here in the United States will probably have to accept North Korean engineers, as they did with the nuclear refugees from the former soviet union.
9
The only rational answer is for both South Korea and Japan to being planning to provide wholly for their own deterrent forces and defense. They have the means in military aged population, industrial strength and technical know-how. What they lack is the willingness to face up to the inevitable US phased withdrawal from its outdated and no longer affordable or necessary role as world policeman. Western Europe would wisely come to the same conclusion and for the same reasons. The policies formed 70 years ago in 1948, no longer are practical; no longer apply. Wake up time!
7
I’m afraid that your suggested plan sounds rather similar to the NRA’s stated belief that the cure for our national reality of demonic gun violence is for every sane person to be packing. To me that sounds not only impractical but opens the door to continual mass murder in our streets, homes and businesses. All sane gun owners are law abiding until they aren’t. In the same way a gun continually says to their possessor, ‘hey, your problem can be easily solved by pulling my trigger’, arming more and more small developed countries with large standing armies and nukes is a recipe for disaster. In the end, all wars have been started to ‘solve a problem’ for the nations involved in them. The next war will solve the problem of the human race- namely by ending our existence.
1