Good column by Tom Friedman, thank you. I think Friedman is making more of the North Korean nuclear threat than he needs to. But he is absolutely right that even a small nuclear threat should be contained. Friedman rarely if ever compliments President Obama, but it is clear he admires Obama's success in Iran.
I just sat through a day long conference about the South China Sea with with Jackson Center of International Relations at Yale, with academics from Yale, King's College, the Center of Strategic and International Studies, and the Naval War College. One speaker, Lyle Goldstein, from the Naval War College, mentioned that he thought the problems with North Korea were more pressing than those of China's taking over the South China Sea. He and I both think that the dragon in the room is China. China has the power to control North Korea. I approve of the news in today's NYT that Rex Tillerson will pressure the Chinese to do more.
I just sat through a day long conference about the South China Sea with with Jackson Center of International Relations at Yale, with academics from Yale, King's College, the Center of Strategic and International Studies, and the Naval War College. One speaker, Lyle Goldstein, from the Naval War College, mentioned that he thought the problems with North Korea were more pressing than those of China's taking over the South China Sea. He and I both think that the dragon in the room is China. China has the power to control North Korea. I approve of the news in today's NYT that Rex Tillerson will pressure the Chinese to do more.
4
Kim Jong-un is not ready.
2
The kumbaya nogtiation Friedman would want is not a worthwhile proposition... at least not in the age of American proactive regime change (Lybia/Iraq). You want to know what Kim cares the most about? Economic advancement for his people? Recognition on a world stage? Having a hamburger with Donald Trump? No. He cares most about not having a guided munition dropped from a stealth bomber blow him to kingdom come. After that, he cares most about people in his own regime not slitting his throat. The two things he cares most about are most likely to come from his ability to produce and maintain an arsenal of Armageddon and a credible means to deliver it.
Nuclear weapons, and specifically the uncertainty that comes to US war planners trying to confront the North's emergent ability to strike the mainland United States is probably the only thing that helps him get a little sleep at night. Why on earth would he trade that away? Rather, what, realistically, could you possibly offer him to trade that away? Until anyone can answer that question, negotiation is futile. It isn't our "honest" guarantee not to do regime change. He already has that by virtue of a nuclear veto. It isn't money. You can't spend it if you're dead.
North Korea isn't Iran. North Korea doesn't have millions of people petitioning a quasi representative government for a better economic life. If you want to negotiate with North korea, than you have to wait for a change in the strategic dynamic.
Nuclear weapons, and specifically the uncertainty that comes to US war planners trying to confront the North's emergent ability to strike the mainland United States is probably the only thing that helps him get a little sleep at night. Why on earth would he trade that away? Rather, what, realistically, could you possibly offer him to trade that away? Until anyone can answer that question, negotiation is futile. It isn't our "honest" guarantee not to do regime change. He already has that by virtue of a nuclear veto. It isn't money. You can't spend it if you're dead.
North Korea isn't Iran. North Korea doesn't have millions of people petitioning a quasi representative government for a better economic life. If you want to negotiate with North korea, than you have to wait for a change in the strategic dynamic.
19
A situation such as this is exactly why Donald Trump should never have been elected. The world is a dangerous place and we can't have an extreme narcissist making life-and-death decisions. He has no background and has no desire to learn. Apparently, he is only interested in inviting world leaders to golf and dine at Mara-Lago. Lord help us all.
11
North Korea says, "Sign a peace treaty ending the Korean War. Till then we are enemies and we have to right to defend ourselves from Nuclear Armed America."
What do we say?
What do we say?
2
Mr. Friedman wrongly assumes Donald Trump has brains to understand the complexities of the issue. We have a President who has thick brains.
7
Trump is about to learn the limits of masculine posturing and sabre-rattling.
6
Another day and another NY liberal thinks....oops sorry.....FEELS that his opinion matters.
Let me let you in on something that you don't seem to understand. America elected Trump because we were tired of the same old failure. We rejected your failed idea because you have failed time and time again.
Einstein said it best.....The definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over and expecting a different result.
Let me let you in on something that you don't seem to understand. America elected Trump because we were tired of the same old failure. We rejected your failed idea because you have failed time and time again.
Einstein said it best.....The definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over and expecting a different result.
3
I think the elemental difference between the Iran deal and what could possibly happen with PDRK is that Kim is crazy enough to not care about unleashing a nuclear holocaust on his own people. I could see a deal brokered where he feigned compliance to buy time only to emerge with the exact capabilities that are sought to be avoided. He's simply too much of a wild card. He has demonstrated his willingness to go to the farthest extremes of brutality - starving his own people and killing his own relatives - to solidify his grasp on power. I absolutely believe he would sell this as a great war to defend the motherland and that people would take it at face value and hurl themselves into the battle. Oddly enough, I view DT as having the same sort of fanatical followers - people who have the loosest grasp on reality and who are eager to eschew facts which don't reinforce their world view. Of course, in the PDRK they don't have access to unfiltered news whereas here people just choose not to believe it. But in the end, the result is the same. A bilateral game of chicken between two machismo men with near megalomaniacal needs to be right about everything each of whom has his finger on the button of a nuclear arsenal. I can't construct a realistic scenario where this doesn't end badly for everyone. Very badly.
2
The US should attempt surgical removal of all their nuclear and heavy conventional capability immediately, if not sooner, with or without the regional players' permission. There is always inherent risk in surgery but sometimes it is necessary.
1
Meanwhile, Tillerson is in Asia with just one reporter covering him. Do we even have a fully-functioning Secretary of State, or is he just another sycophant-puppet in Trump's cabinet?
8
The biggest obstacle to peace is North Korea's standing army of 2 million soldiers, all of them cold, undernourished, and inadequately clothed in an area that is cold more than it's not. And most of these soldiers are within a few miles of Seoul, South Korea, which would suffer a very bad weekend if conflict started. My suggestion is to have a huge barbecue---chicken, would be good---just south of the DMZ. Lots of chicken on grills and spits with hopefully a strong northward wind that would have the starving NK soldiers laying down their rifles and marching toward freedom and a decent picnic. I know, an odd little notion, but probably cheaper than all-out war.
29
The trick is some people believe TV really is reality. With that cretinous world view, there are always "pure wins" to boast about. Think "Mission Accomplished" from the last Republican presidency. This is a president who obsesses in tweets about his failing reality TV show. Yes, Mr Friedman, I'm plenty scared...
1
It seems like a good idea, doesn't it, negotiating with the DPRK.
Especially when the other options are all out war (North Korea isn't really susceptible to surgical strikes, as Mr. Friedman points out) or sitting by and watching the Kim's acquire an ever larger arsenal of nukes and the means to delver them across the Pacific.
Only, I find it hard to believe that the North-Koreans can be trusted. Even if a settlement were possible -and you can be pretty sure they would demand a staggering payback for freezing their nuclear program- any deal would be exceedingly hard to monitor. The temptation to keep at it would be irresistible. Unless the People's Republic of China were inclined to guarantee compliance, obviously. They are the only ones with real influence. But getting them to agree wouldn't be a walk in the park, either.
I can well imagine China demanding recognition of its preeminence in the South China Sea in return, with all that entails towards Vietnam, the Philippines and the ROC, indeed towards Japan.
A challenge worthy of a Deal-maker-in-Chief if ever there was one.
Especially when the other options are all out war (North Korea isn't really susceptible to surgical strikes, as Mr. Friedman points out) or sitting by and watching the Kim's acquire an ever larger arsenal of nukes and the means to delver them across the Pacific.
Only, I find it hard to believe that the North-Koreans can be trusted. Even if a settlement were possible -and you can be pretty sure they would demand a staggering payback for freezing their nuclear program- any deal would be exceedingly hard to monitor. The temptation to keep at it would be irresistible. Unless the People's Republic of China were inclined to guarantee compliance, obviously. They are the only ones with real influence. But getting them to agree wouldn't be a walk in the park, either.
I can well imagine China demanding recognition of its preeminence in the South China Sea in return, with all that entails towards Vietnam, the Philippines and the ROC, indeed towards Japan.
A challenge worthy of a Deal-maker-in-Chief if ever there was one.
10
China can rein in North Korea and will do so. The spark of war should the North decide to do so will be struck in South Korea not the USA. The North Koreans developing a ICBM is actually not the immediate short or mid term issue here. A bigger issue demonstrated here is the fact that an entity with the economy of Dayton Ohio can develop nukes and missiles whether intercontinental or not. That potential takes in most all of the worlds nation states ( and wanabe state organisations such as ISIS) and not all of them care much about what China , the USA or Russia thinks.
2
This game is way more complex than Trump or his incompetents can handle.
While Trump volleys childish threats with North Korea's Kim, and waits for missiles launched at the US, Japan, or South Korea, Kim is most likely trying to get one or a few "dirty bombs" across the North-South line into Seoul.
At that point, the game will be over, and Trump won't have a "trump card" to play. At that point, Kim will blackmail the apprentice president.
And China will sit by, watching. They will not support us, in weakening their "long lost brothers" (the North and South Koreans). China also has been using the situation to expand their own "territories" into the "South China Sea". Trump's renunciation of the TPP helped China greatly in the region.
Trump doesn't know the rules of the game being played. Just as Nixon didn't understand how new rules of "Guerrilla Warfare" changed the game, until it was too late for VietNam... so Trump will be exposed as a neophyte. This doesn't even include the volatility from the hidden political gamesmanship occurring within Trump's cabinet.
Trump is playing a game he can't win. Too much history for him to learn.
A man who does not read, knows not much.
While Trump volleys childish threats with North Korea's Kim, and waits for missiles launched at the US, Japan, or South Korea, Kim is most likely trying to get one or a few "dirty bombs" across the North-South line into Seoul.
At that point, the game will be over, and Trump won't have a "trump card" to play. At that point, Kim will blackmail the apprentice president.
And China will sit by, watching. They will not support us, in weakening their "long lost brothers" (the North and South Koreans). China also has been using the situation to expand their own "territories" into the "South China Sea". Trump's renunciation of the TPP helped China greatly in the region.
Trump doesn't know the rules of the game being played. Just as Nixon didn't understand how new rules of "Guerrilla Warfare" changed the game, until it was too late for VietNam... so Trump will be exposed as a neophyte. This doesn't even include the volatility from the hidden political gamesmanship occurring within Trump's cabinet.
Trump is playing a game he can't win. Too much history for him to learn.
A man who does not read, knows not much.
4
The only option is to pay the terrorist? Probably the worst of all the proposed solutions. It emboldens and empowers the regime. It’s time to move towards regime change and reunification. This does mean diplomacy, but it certainly does not mean helping the terrorist state. It hinges on getting China on board with the goal, they are the only reason the hermit kingdom is still afloat. Short term solutions to long term problems is not the answer. You can’t band aide a gangrenous limb.
Let's just pretend this isn't real, and go back to focusing on Trump's tweets.
13
People don't get it. This is no joke. N. Korea is hell bent on getting their nuke arsenal operational, long range, to be a player on the field, with an equal seat at the table. What do they offer in return? Nothing really with the exception of not using their weapons. What do they want? South Korea to be reunited with the North.
Who do we have dealing with these issues? The equivalent of Foghorn Leghorn ( Rex The Mute Tillerson) and Caligula Trump.
This is where the big boys are needed. Trump has burned all of his political capital with his stupid tweets, lies, conflations, credit taking, and braggadocio to ever be taken seriously by the N. Koreans. Trump is clueless. Where the N. Koreans might have thought he was a trigger happy monster...they now know he is just an unmade bed and "easy pickens".
The N. Koreans may be a backward starving people, with a mythic like belief in the Fearless Leader, but they are on top of geo-political issues, and have a depth of experience hunkering down and doing what they please.
They have been "slow playing" this issue for quite a while (Slow playing (sandbagging or trapping) is deceptive play in poker that is roughly the opposite of bluffing) which may lead less experienced hands to believe they are open to negotiations over their preconceived but hardly secret goals. They aren't. They might take ship loads full of food stuffs for a while, medical supplies, and such...but at the end of the day the goal remains the same.
Who do we have dealing with these issues? The equivalent of Foghorn Leghorn ( Rex The Mute Tillerson) and Caligula Trump.
This is where the big boys are needed. Trump has burned all of his political capital with his stupid tweets, lies, conflations, credit taking, and braggadocio to ever be taken seriously by the N. Koreans. Trump is clueless. Where the N. Koreans might have thought he was a trigger happy monster...they now know he is just an unmade bed and "easy pickens".
The N. Koreans may be a backward starving people, with a mythic like belief in the Fearless Leader, but they are on top of geo-political issues, and have a depth of experience hunkering down and doing what they please.
They have been "slow playing" this issue for quite a while (Slow playing (sandbagging or trapping) is deceptive play in poker that is roughly the opposite of bluffing) which may lead less experienced hands to believe they are open to negotiations over their preconceived but hardly secret goals. They aren't. They might take ship loads full of food stuffs for a while, medical supplies, and such...but at the end of the day the goal remains the same.
31
Last time I checked Obama was president for the last 8 years. I will bet you supported him. Tell us.....What did he do about this?
5
B-b-but, where's the hyperbole? Where's the "Best Ever" gold star? Where's that celebrated moment when DT lands on an aircraft carrier and spews a bombastic speech in front of his very own "Mission Accomplished" banner?
Actually, I'm intrigued with the notion of DT and his administration actually having to sit down and slog through month after month of painful, boring negotiations while being forced to play nice with China, Japan, India, Australia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Korea, and all the other countries who may have any skin whatsoever in this game. It would be delightful seeing actual progress being made - as President Obama said: I want DT to be successful, because when he's successful, America will be successful.
Unfortunately, I can't imagine this president behaving in such a presidential manner. I hope I'm wrong, but I've seen very little so far that gives me hope.
So, like Mr. Friedman, I'm terrified.
Actually, I'm intrigued with the notion of DT and his administration actually having to sit down and slog through month after month of painful, boring negotiations while being forced to play nice with China, Japan, India, Australia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Korea, and all the other countries who may have any skin whatsoever in this game. It would be delightful seeing actual progress being made - as President Obama said: I want DT to be successful, because when he's successful, America will be successful.
Unfortunately, I can't imagine this president behaving in such a presidential manner. I hope I'm wrong, but I've seen very little so far that gives me hope.
So, like Mr. Friedman, I'm terrified.
93
The comparison between North Korea and Iran really is ridiculous. Iran wants to, and is a trading & cultural exchange partner with much of the world. You can negotiate with Iran. It is a sane and functioning stable country. While we should engage North Korea and always be talking, they are going to do what they want, no matter what they agree to. They want to have a nuclear arsenal. And yes China is needed to try and impede that goal. The Trump regime doesn't have a clue to all the facets this problem.
Orange, NJ
Orange, NJ
26
Calling on Americans to see a slow rolling Cuban style crisis would have more impact if Americans had been made fully aware of the real tale in October 62. Recently, going over once upon a time research notes, I was surprised to find that the US put nuke rockets- Jupiters, Atlases- in Italy and Turkey in '61 and '62. Which would have meant Moscow's Mr K was playing hard ball to make a trade to get ours close to him gone...
as if that were all.
We need to stop allowing the N. Korea matter put in anything less than symbiotic terms with more than one "bad actor".
N. Korea feels threatened. For rational cause. Much as Iran felt when there were a quarter million US troops in position on its Iraq and Afghan borders. That threat led to an accelerated nuke program. Self defense.
It s necessary to ratchet the threat we make back. A more secure leadership in Pyongyang then might make the change, with a nod from Beijing, that would seal the deal. So to speak.
(I am sure Mr. Friedman gets how they would like to lose their anti-aircraft gun nightmares.)
In '62 Moscow faced the coming deployment of Minutemen in silos. Solid fuel ICBMs that did not require four hours to LOX up in the open, easily detected by passing satellites (and ground watchers). Of course their Mr K (the real driver, not The Beard) was making a bold move for the freedom of Ladinos . But the paly gave the USSR a satellite down load for instantaneous warning of a first strike launch "geo stat"
as if that were all.
We need to stop allowing the N. Korea matter put in anything less than symbiotic terms with more than one "bad actor".
N. Korea feels threatened. For rational cause. Much as Iran felt when there were a quarter million US troops in position on its Iraq and Afghan borders. That threat led to an accelerated nuke program. Self defense.
It s necessary to ratchet the threat we make back. A more secure leadership in Pyongyang then might make the change, with a nod from Beijing, that would seal the deal. So to speak.
(I am sure Mr. Friedman gets how they would like to lose their anti-aircraft gun nightmares.)
In '62 Moscow faced the coming deployment of Minutemen in silos. Solid fuel ICBMs that did not require four hours to LOX up in the open, easily detected by passing satellites (and ground watchers). Of course their Mr K (the real driver, not The Beard) was making a bold move for the freedom of Ladinos . But the paly gave the USSR a satellite down load for instantaneous warning of a first strike launch "geo stat"
2
It is ironic that Mr Freedman after opining unfavorably about kicking the can down the road suggests as his wise solution that the Trump administration must kick the can down the road. He places his hopes on the North Koreans suddenly rising up and throttling or deposing Dear Leader and the army that supports him, China actually controlling their client state, or Dear Leader suddenly becoming a benign, progressive, democracy-loving statesman.
Sorry,Mr. Freidman, yo are selling solution that have managed to place our world in far more danger than acting meaningfully to remove the threats.
Sorry,Mr. Freidman, yo are selling solution that have managed to place our world in far more danger than acting meaningfully to remove the threats.
5
NONONNONO.
Donald must be allowed, yes, encouraged to boast.
He has to get something twitterable out of the deal.
Trump kimchi anyone?
Donald must be allowed, yes, encouraged to boast.
He has to get something twitterable out of the deal.
Trump kimchi anyone?
2
Negotiation with N Korea, while well well-intentioned, has been tried and failed with multiple US administrations. N Korea is not Iran. N Korea is too close to grabbing the brass ring, acceptance in the nuclear club, to back down now. US and China need to jointly deal with N Korea militarily for their own respective interests. US would grant China the right to install a new pro-Chinese government in N Korea. US would pull THAAD anit-missile system from S Korea.....Just as JFK pulled missiles from Turkey to settle the Cuban missile crisis.
3
China is the only country that can really influence North Korea. All those wonderful things Trump was going to do and say to China are on the table. But China needs North Korea to be just on the edge enough to keep the whole region in balance.
The scarier guy in all this is Bannon - he wants to and forsees a future war with China. I am not saying the US should back off, but with Bannon - who in reality is in the number one power seat in the world (why else does he want to be in the security counsel) - the question is how and what will he do to continue to ensure we tip the scales toward his presumed future.
The scarier guy in all this is Bannon - he wants to and forsees a future war with China. I am not saying the US should back off, but with Bannon - who in reality is in the number one power seat in the world (why else does he want to be in the security counsel) - the question is how and what will he do to continue to ensure we tip the scales toward his presumed future.
1
The assumption in making "a transactional deal" is that one is skillful in making such deals. Obama clearly had such skills - NO MATTER how his detractors try to portray him. Obama displayed such skills in many other occasions - in addition to the Iran deal.
He was ALSO tough when he needed to be, in most cases.
When it comes to this orange coiffured man, there is NO SUCH skill - writing The Art of the Deal notwithstanding!! Besides The Art of the Deal is a stinking piece of garbage that ALSO exemplify what happened with so-called Trump University, an EVEN BIGGER piece of stinking garbage.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for a man, who has declared bankruptcy SIX times, to have ANY kind of skill for transactional deals - not even while dreaming in color!!
In the absence of such skills of this man, perhaps there are others in the diplomatic bureaucracy who have. Even if they do, will this infinitely braggadocious man - who has also been described as a conman and a liar - listen to their advice???
He was ALSO tough when he needed to be, in most cases.
When it comes to this orange coiffured man, there is NO SUCH skill - writing The Art of the Deal notwithstanding!! Besides The Art of the Deal is a stinking piece of garbage that ALSO exemplify what happened with so-called Trump University, an EVEN BIGGER piece of stinking garbage.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for a man, who has declared bankruptcy SIX times, to have ANY kind of skill for transactional deals - not even while dreaming in color!!
In the absence of such skills of this man, perhaps there are others in the diplomatic bureaucracy who have. Even if they do, will this infinitely braggadocious man - who has also been described as a conman and a liar - listen to their advice???
9
Yes, President Obama was tough. When he drew a line in the sand, by god, you better cover your six.
2
Litwak is a fantasist and Friedman just repeats what he is saying. NK believes that only nuclear weapons will stop the US from attacking. Look at what happened to Iraq and Libya when they decided to forego going nuclear.
Once NK has those weapons, the US will ease sanctions because there will no longer be any reason to impose them. Kim is crazy like a fox, and the success of his dad and grandpa in facing down a succession of US presidents is ample evidence to expect that even The Donald will do nothing and pass the problem to his successor as well.
Only China can stop NK's nuclear program. What is their incentive when that program diverts US attention from other strategic issues?
Once NK has those weapons, the US will ease sanctions because there will no longer be any reason to impose them. Kim is crazy like a fox, and the success of his dad and grandpa in facing down a succession of US presidents is ample evidence to expect that even The Donald will do nothing and pass the problem to his successor as well.
Only China can stop NK's nuclear program. What is their incentive when that program diverts US attention from other strategic issues?
1
Being an ordinary citizen without any knowledge of back channel diplomacy with N. K., here's what I don't understand. Isn't Kim fully aware that if he were to launch nuclear strikes against our Asian allies or even our homeland - even if those strikes were unsuccessful - that his country, his regime and he would be incinerated?
If he were an irrational ideologue willing to die in order to kill as many of his enemies, then there's no dealing with him. If he only wants to stay in power and have sanctions removed (which is most probably the case), then he surly would not launch a first strike. It's M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) that prevents Russia and China from launching their own strikes against the U.S., and it should apply to N.K., as well. It's all macho posturing from Kim on an international scale.
So why do i always read/hear about our leaders wringing their hands over N.K. Shouldn't we be acting stronger (optics) in voicing our opposition?
If he were an irrational ideologue willing to die in order to kill as many of his enemies, then there's no dealing with him. If he only wants to stay in power and have sanctions removed (which is most probably the case), then he surly would not launch a first strike. It's M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) that prevents Russia and China from launching their own strikes against the U.S., and it should apply to N.K., as well. It's all macho posturing from Kim on an international scale.
So why do i always read/hear about our leaders wringing their hands over N.K. Shouldn't we be acting stronger (optics) in voicing our opposition?
2
Sorry, Mr. Friedman, your transactional deal with North Korea is a non-starter. First of, comparing Iran with North Korea is like comparing Obama with Trump. Iran is a rational nation compared to North Korea – hence, a transactional deal was possible with Iran. Also, as you indicated, both Clinton and George W. Bush tried to give North Korea significant incentives, including getting it off the list of state-sponsored terrorism, but to no avail. More importantly, two irrational heads-of-state cannot possibly negotiate a win-win deal.
So it’s time to try the route that got Iran to the negotiating table – U.N. sponsored heightened sanctions that will cripple the Kim Jong-un government. The grotesque assassination of his half brother, Kim Jong-nam, should provide sufficient grounds for the U.N. to move quickly against North Korea with China’s full support.
So it’s time to try the route that got Iran to the negotiating table – U.N. sponsored heightened sanctions that will cripple the Kim Jong-un government. The grotesque assassination of his half brother, Kim Jong-nam, should provide sufficient grounds for the U.N. to move quickly against North Korea with China’s full support.
1
Obviously we should send Dennis Rodman to negotiate the deal.
But seriously, Kim-Jung Un is not starving as a result of the economic sanctions, so there isn't much leverage there.
As other commenters have noted, we cannot impose a deal on North Korea, and must include many other countries if any progress is to be made.
I am not optimistic.
But seriously, Kim-Jung Un is not starving as a result of the economic sanctions, so there isn't much leverage there.
As other commenters have noted, we cannot impose a deal on North Korea, and must include many other countries if any progress is to be made.
I am not optimistic.
1
Having gone through the Cuban Missle Crisis as a young man shortly after leaving the USAF, my biggest concern was that it would lead to WW3. With two Nuclear superpowers playing "Chicken", one misstep, our world could come to an inglorious end. What is happening right now could be just as dangerous if not more. Why? Because the two men running the show now are NOT rational experienced military geniuses. Far from it! Like Tom mentioned, there are choices, but none of them are great. Hopefully Rex will turn out to be the person that can keep Trump in check and make suggestions that could at least resolve the tensions and keep BOTH Trump and Kim talking instead of threatening each other with their Nuclear stockpiles. If not? Well, we all lose!
1
Mr. Friedman seems to "keep hope alive", fervently believing that any day now, China will see the wisdom of "becoming American".
This is foolish.
Chinese society/government/culture crystalized almost 3000 years ago, and like all rigid crystaline structures....it has remained unchanged ever since. China can construct a complex facade in order to accomodate and placate the outside world,,,,but inwardly, China never changes.
In SE Asia, there are 500 year old Chinese Colonies......that remain "Chinese"..not Vietnamese or Cambodian, or Indonesian or even Philipino....but "Chinese"........
Dropping the Globalist Pretense, it is easy to observe how North Korea and Pakistan are to a large extent, simply Chinese puppets. Each of these failed states perfoms a valuable function. Pakistan's nuclear scientists develop the weapons, while North Korea tests the delivery systems. All while China sanctimoniously stands with the USA in the UN, and condems such rogue states.
A 21st Century stalemate and stability is achieved when USA and China make the Faustian Bargain......
We Surrender Afghanistan and Pakistan to China....and China allows USA and South Korea to invade and annex the Eastern Half of Korea(the coast facing Japan and Russia)......
This cuts China off from the north facing regions of Japan Sea....and potential oil fields in Siberia......but it guarantees Chinese oil pipelines thru Pakistan and Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, etc(they're already under construction).
This is foolish.
Chinese society/government/culture crystalized almost 3000 years ago, and like all rigid crystaline structures....it has remained unchanged ever since. China can construct a complex facade in order to accomodate and placate the outside world,,,,but inwardly, China never changes.
In SE Asia, there are 500 year old Chinese Colonies......that remain "Chinese"..not Vietnamese or Cambodian, or Indonesian or even Philipino....but "Chinese"........
Dropping the Globalist Pretense, it is easy to observe how North Korea and Pakistan are to a large extent, simply Chinese puppets. Each of these failed states perfoms a valuable function. Pakistan's nuclear scientists develop the weapons, while North Korea tests the delivery systems. All while China sanctimoniously stands with the USA in the UN, and condems such rogue states.
A 21st Century stalemate and stability is achieved when USA and China make the Faustian Bargain......
We Surrender Afghanistan and Pakistan to China....and China allows USA and South Korea to invade and annex the Eastern Half of Korea(the coast facing Japan and Russia)......
This cuts China off from the north facing regions of Japan Sea....and potential oil fields in Siberia......but it guarantees Chinese oil pipelines thru Pakistan and Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, etc(they're already under construction).
The US has negotiated deals with N. Korea in the past and the N. Koreans have violated those treaties. There is no reason for thinking things would be any different this time. Therefore, Mr. Friedman's suggestion that we negotiate an end to the North Korean nuclear threat is a fool's errand.
What is needed is to build up S. Korea's defenses against missile and artillery attacks (e.g. Iron Dome) so that the US and S. Korea can attack the North's military assets or, at least, make it clear to Kim that we are prepared to do so if he does not unilaterally end his attempts at developing nuclear weapons. Succumbing to blackmail, as Mr. Friedman suggests, is pure folly - though, after all, it worked so well with Hitler for Chamberlain.
Bill Clinton is reputed to have said of North Korea that, if they threatened the US or its allies with nuclear attack, they would cease to exist. It is now time to put in place the assets to end the North Korean threat so that Clinton's policy can become reality. Only then will Kim and his patrons in China take the US seriously. If they don't, they will suffer a singularly unpleasant endgame.
What is needed is to build up S. Korea's defenses against missile and artillery attacks (e.g. Iron Dome) so that the US and S. Korea can attack the North's military assets or, at least, make it clear to Kim that we are prepared to do so if he does not unilaterally end his attempts at developing nuclear weapons. Succumbing to blackmail, as Mr. Friedman suggests, is pure folly - though, after all, it worked so well with Hitler for Chamberlain.
Bill Clinton is reputed to have said of North Korea that, if they threatened the US or its allies with nuclear attack, they would cease to exist. It is now time to put in place the assets to end the North Korean threat so that Clinton's policy can become reality. Only then will Kim and his patrons in China take the US seriously. If they don't, they will suffer a singularly unpleasant endgame.
2
Who knew the world was such a complex place.
A country with an economy the size of Dayton Ohio is now an existential threat!
This could play into Bannon's desire for an apocalypse.
Beware the man-child in the White House and his minions.
A country with an economy the size of Dayton Ohio is now an existential threat!
This could play into Bannon's desire for an apocalypse.
Beware the man-child in the White House and his minions.
And just last week Nikki Haley, "just hours" after the Foreign Minister of China suggested opening negotiations with North Korea on the basis of exchanging a nuclear freeze for a cessation of joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises, presumed to reject any negotiations with North Korea. Whether she had bothered to consult with the White House, or with the Secretary, or with the Pentagon, is doubtful. Who's in charge of American foreign policy? Anyone?
3
I won't address Tom's N Korea argument. I just want to criticize what he said about Obamacare: more transactional than transformational. Not so Tom! Tell that to the millions who have been insured under the ACA. Tell that to those with pre-existing conditions. Obama succeeded where the Clintons failed back in the '90s. The Bush administration just punted during its 8 year stint. So no, Tom. The ACA, though imperfect, was revolutionary. It survived scores of Congressional repeal votes and an existential challenge in the Supreme Court. And even with a Republican president and Republican Congress, its resilience is still proving to be remarkable.
3
Negotiate? North Korea and the United States are both led by macho incompetents who should be selling used cars for a living. Add to that the fact that Trump has allowed the State Department to deteriorate into an irrelevant backwater outfit. Not much of an option.
2
According to Friedman, the least bad choice is negotiation.
Great, two deranged, narcissistic nuclear armed maniacs negotiating. What could possibly go wrong?
Great, two deranged, narcissistic nuclear armed maniacs negotiating. What could possibly go wrong?
7
Mr. Trump and Steve Bannon are not paying attention to North Korea. Their main priority is to weaken Europe by supporting Brexit, Marine Le Pen in France and all other extreme right wing politicians together with Russia. Not only "make America great again" but A New World Order. This is far more dangerous than the stupid North Korean leader. They want to invoke a new Nationalism which was tried by Germany during the 30-ies and into WWII. These 2 guys together with Putin are far more dangerous than the North Korean leader.
2
TRUMP'S DA BOMB? If that's what you believe, then how about this one. What's Trump going to do about potential nuclear breakaways in places such as Iran and North Korea? If the 2016 presidential election proved nothing else, it produced excruciatingly clear evidence that institutions and time-honored customs such as elections, are vulnerable to cyber hacking. While it has proven to be very difficult to hit all flying objects in a conflict, it would be far easier to track them with cyberhacking that would destroy their electronic systems so they would be inoperative. In any event, I don't expect the Twit Twat Tweet-in-Chief to give up his nightly ploppings of 140 character Tweets from his perch on his golden throne passing for major policy accomplishments. In addition, it seems that Trump's memory, language and executive brain functions are severely impaired. What we've got on our hands is a Mindless Trumpenstein Monster with whom cannot reason beyond his severely impaired antisocial behavior, has other short circuits, so it would seem, in the kingdom of the neuron. Trump is medically incapable of fulfilling his official duties. The 25th Amendment must be invoked.
1
This is rather more complex than a bilateral deal for some dirt.
Uh-oh.
The ONLY thing that will freeze North Korea's nuclear arms program is the exact same process that ended Nazi Germany's nuclear arms program.
Liberal Democrats have taught Iran, North Korea, and the other tyrannies that all Dems want is a picture to make people feel good for 5 minutes.
But they rolled ANYone as thoroughly and completely as they rolled Prince Barack the Unprepared.
Liberal Democrats have taught Iran, North Korea, and the other tyrannies that all Dems want is a picture to make people feel good for 5 minutes.
But they rolled ANYone as thoroughly and completely as they rolled Prince Barack the Unprepared.
Agree that negotiation makes the most sense. But to get there, the juvenile delinquent will need to be honored with respect and feted appropriately, which is probably beneath Trump. China can provide the best restraint. But the Dennis Rodman idea is brilliant. Establish diplomatic relations and make him our Ambassador. We could have NBA teams play exhibitions. If Dennis and Kim are tight, he probably will not nuke the U.S.
Mr. Friedman, you seemed to have missed the memo. It is the volatile, unreasonable brat,Trump we have elected. Can you expect anything reasonable from a raging, ranting lunatic? Trump was, is and will remain a dangerous brat. So stop fooling yourself expecting a sensible approach to any problem facing our Country. Kim Jong-un and Trump - two clowns with horns! No good can come out of this meeting except death and destruction for their country's citizens
3
It won't be Donald Trump who shapes our interactions with North Korea and Kim Jung-un.
It will be Steve Bannon.
What do we really know about Bannon? Very little ... except that he's a deft, snaking, nationalist macho thug.
Jets versus Sharks. "When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way from your first cigarette to your last dying day."
We have two future options, really, since the Trump administration revels in destruction, combat, and in displays of gorilla (not guerrilla) dominance. . 1) Kim Jung-Un will realize that his country is about the size of Delaware, and the US is, um, bigger. He will adjust. Will continue to send up missiles but will not nuke Los Angeles. 2) Hillary Clinton challenges Bannon to a duel, with pistols, and she proves to be a cool enemy and a good shot.
It will be Steve Bannon.
What do we really know about Bannon? Very little ... except that he's a deft, snaking, nationalist macho thug.
Jets versus Sharks. "When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way from your first cigarette to your last dying day."
We have two future options, really, since the Trump administration revels in destruction, combat, and in displays of gorilla (not guerrilla) dominance. . 1) Kim Jung-Un will realize that his country is about the size of Delaware, and the US is, um, bigger. He will adjust. Will continue to send up missiles but will not nuke Los Angeles. 2) Hillary Clinton challenges Bannon to a duel, with pistols, and she proves to be a cool enemy and a good shot.
Harry Truman once said he wanted his aides to get him a one-handed economist. When they looked confused, he went on "They keep saying, on the one hand we could increase spending but that might spur inflation, but on the other hand...".
Mr. Trump is finding out that diplomacy, like health care (and the economy), is actually difficult. We have a JV quarterback ready to call the plays in the NFL. What could possibly go wrong?
Mr. Trump is finding out that diplomacy, like health care (and the economy), is actually difficult. We have a JV quarterback ready to call the plays in the NFL. What could possibly go wrong?
1
Donald Trump has not shown that he has the ability to think through what you have just said, Mr. Friedman. He's not a rational, pragmatic man, nor has he surrounded himself with thinkers.
Yes, the situation does tend to keep one awake at night -
Yes, the situation does tend to keep one awake at night -
1
I suggest the great Leaders negotiate a proxy war by holding a globally televised game - it could be Twister, they're both obese and have limited range of motion so it's fair - it could be Passout with Bannon as the substitute drinker for the abstinent Trump - or even Risk! So much healthier for us all. Winner takes all nukes. Loser get a bid Loser tattoo on his forehead and loses his title as Leader, goes to prison, and his name is never to be published or spoken again.
I'm just an ignorant citizen, but I wonder what it is that N. Korea wants to do with its nuclear weapons? Or, what does it want everybody else to NOT do if it has the atom bomb? Or DO? What do they produce that anybody wants? Who
wants anything from N. Korea? N. Koreans might want something from their country so does Kim (whatever his name is) want the bomb for?
wants anything from N. Korea? N. Koreans might want something from their country so does Kim (whatever his name is) want the bomb for?
Just wait until the Republican version of the movie "The Producers", is finally revealed, where the Republicans needed a person with intelligence, money and nationally known to win back the WH after a second defeat in 2012.
NO REPUBLICAN could have beat Hillary in ‘16...the party needed a wealthy outspoken celebrity that was nationally known, who’s used to saying things off the cuff, and doesn’t care what anybody says…(unless critical of him) and not beholding to any lobbyists/special interest groups…politically neutral, and plan for him to go along with what the party desires, and eventually & deliberately flop by irritating people/ saying /doing ridiculous things, then either get assassinated (SAD, please God NO), impeached /resigns and the Republicans planned on a president Pence all along (as their replacement parachute) and who's one of the "normal" Republicans to carry the party banner. Mostly likeable&good street cred. And for his troubles, Trump received as president, the right to use his brand name in all of China worth hundreds of millions in the future of the Trump Organization & family and then ultimately pardoned by Pence. The Chinese real estate developer from SouFun Holdings Ltd, who bought his alma mater is a key component to this story with his influence within the Chinese government. The Republicans planned for a flop to finally get their white hands on the tiller of US power and money. America will ALWAYS be great!!!
J. DeLise
NYC 3/15/17
NO REPUBLICAN could have beat Hillary in ‘16...the party needed a wealthy outspoken celebrity that was nationally known, who’s used to saying things off the cuff, and doesn’t care what anybody says…(unless critical of him) and not beholding to any lobbyists/special interest groups…politically neutral, and plan for him to go along with what the party desires, and eventually & deliberately flop by irritating people/ saying /doing ridiculous things, then either get assassinated (SAD, please God NO), impeached /resigns and the Republicans planned on a president Pence all along (as their replacement parachute) and who's one of the "normal" Republicans to carry the party banner. Mostly likeable&good street cred. And for his troubles, Trump received as president, the right to use his brand name in all of China worth hundreds of millions in the future of the Trump Organization & family and then ultimately pardoned by Pence. The Chinese real estate developer from SouFun Holdings Ltd, who bought his alma mater is a key component to this story with his influence within the Chinese government. The Republicans planned for a flop to finally get their white hands on the tiller of US power and money. America will ALWAYS be great!!!
J. DeLise
NYC 3/15/17
5
Thank God that we have such an intellectual giant like Mr. Friedman. We are supposed to bow at his feet that we are so lucky that he graces us with such genius on the pages of the NYT. I can hardly contain myself.
Times, please give this guy a severance package. There are plenty of other places on the internet that he can grace us with his brilliant insights into the world that we live in.
Times, please give this guy a severance package. There are plenty of other places on the internet that he can grace us with his brilliant insights into the world that we live in.
Just to be fair, President Clinton was well on his way to negotiating an end to North Korea's development of nuclear capability, exchanging financial aid for a verifiable commitment to stop the process. President Bush chose to suspend the negotiations.
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/7/10729960/north-korea-nuclear-program-history
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/7/10729960/north-korea-nuclear-program-history
1
Trump's tweeting stirred up the pot with North Korea. He wasn't even inaugurated yet.
He played his hand too radically and too early, saying he wanted China to exert more control over Pyongyang to get it to abandon its nuclear program.
Trump also absurdly taunted Korea by tweeting it won't be able to develop a missile capable of reaching the U.S.
He says too much, too often, too cavalierly.
This penchant Trump has for degrading journalists is also hurting us, as this article details well:
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/02/trumps-dangerous-message-troops/...
He played his hand too radically and too early, saying he wanted China to exert more control over Pyongyang to get it to abandon its nuclear program.
Trump also absurdly taunted Korea by tweeting it won't be able to develop a missile capable of reaching the U.S.
He says too much, too often, too cavalierly.
This penchant Trump has for degrading journalists is also hurting us, as this article details well:
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/02/trumps-dangerous-message-troops/...
Trouble with this excellent proposal is that -to my recall - it’s already been tried and failed. We did negotiate a nuclear shut-down deal with NK a decade or so ago, they agreed and then broke their agreement. The question is not how to negotiate but how to make sure that negotiated agreements are kept. (Just remember Neville Chamberlin’s “peace in our time” agreement with Hitler!)
I hate being only negatively able rather than being able to offer something positive -but I do what I can do and hope somebody else can come up with useful positive solutions.
I hate being only negatively able rather than being able to offer something positive -but I do what I can do and hope somebody else can come up with useful positive solutions.
1
Two crazies, tRump and Kim Jung_un, comparing the size of their "missiles"...this doesn't end well...
I don't think Friedman has considered the possibility of some other unpleasant but nonetheless realistic options. Options that our insane clown president might actually pull off -- such as using force to make the price so high, they'll be forced to back down. That's a negotiating tactic he has used -- in this case telling North Korea, do what you want, but before you have nuclear weapons we are going to make your government buildings disappear - one at a time. Then we'll move on to some other violent options (making Kim's palaces disappear), but still short of nuclear war . . . .
Thomas, if only Trump could listen to any reason he could achieve a lot in his first 54 days in office.
But since he won only through his bombast beside the help of Putin and Mr. Comey, he doesn't have a clue what and how diplomacy works.
He's just chugging along with his never ending lies like his Trumpcare, by saying his bill will be 300% better than Obamcare.
But when the crunch time comes of how to tackle North Korea's KIm Jong-un, most probably our only talk,talk,talk president Trump, who puts no substance behind his bombast, will lower his tail and run from the responsibility for which a president is elected.
His silence on the subject of bombing North Korea since he sat down in the White House, is so deafening that even a 10 year old arm wrestler would've pulled a mad dog leader from Pyongyang by his tail.
But not Trump,who's so busy hearing about the billions of dollars worth of businesses that his two adult sons are procuring from all over the world that the existentialist threat that North Korea imposes on us by directing the Nuclear missiles towards our California shores, is not much of a deal saying we got huge amounts of nuclear arsenals in our own nuclear silos.
But what he's failing to realize is that one nuclear strike by North Korea on our mainland will be strong enough to destabilize our whole country and also the whole world.
That's why three options that you mentioned here should be what the leader of the free world should pursue.
Nothing else.
But since he won only through his bombast beside the help of Putin and Mr. Comey, he doesn't have a clue what and how diplomacy works.
He's just chugging along with his never ending lies like his Trumpcare, by saying his bill will be 300% better than Obamcare.
But when the crunch time comes of how to tackle North Korea's KIm Jong-un, most probably our only talk,talk,talk president Trump, who puts no substance behind his bombast, will lower his tail and run from the responsibility for which a president is elected.
His silence on the subject of bombing North Korea since he sat down in the White House, is so deafening that even a 10 year old arm wrestler would've pulled a mad dog leader from Pyongyang by his tail.
But not Trump,who's so busy hearing about the billions of dollars worth of businesses that his two adult sons are procuring from all over the world that the existentialist threat that North Korea imposes on us by directing the Nuclear missiles towards our California shores, is not much of a deal saying we got huge amounts of nuclear arsenals in our own nuclear silos.
But what he's failing to realize is that one nuclear strike by North Korea on our mainland will be strong enough to destabilize our whole country and also the whole world.
That's why three options that you mentioned here should be what the leader of the free world should pursue.
Nothing else.
"Bomb, acquiesce or negotiate"? Certainly, Bannon & his puppet, Drumpf, could easily be persuaded to bomb North Korea, It's seriously doubtful the career officers & generals in the Pentagon or the Cabinet would have any appetite for another military adventure that could cause the Chinese to react.
Acquiescence would be a worse option, since it would only reward Kim for intolerable acts, & reinforce his bad behavior. He would be further cemented into place, & would only lead to the bombing option down the road.
Negotiating would seem to be the most likely option, but it would require participation & assistance by China, Japan, South Korea, &, more than likely Russia. These would be problematic, since no one is certain of Putin's likely moves on the geopolitical chess board; he plays a different game with dissimilar goals than leaders in Europe or President Drumpf. Complicating matters further is that negotiations presume Kim would negotiate (or act) in rational ways. Judging from his behavior in the past, Kim does not act in rational ways to benefit his people or nation. We can only be certain he will act to prop up his "Government" & reinforce his hold on power. It's uncertain how well we can negotiate with an irrational Leader & his nation.
Negotiations may still lead to the first option, but as with Iran, negotiations would forestall any military action with hopes that Kim might die, be removed from office by the military or forced to seek shelter in China.
Acquiescence would be a worse option, since it would only reward Kim for intolerable acts, & reinforce his bad behavior. He would be further cemented into place, & would only lead to the bombing option down the road.
Negotiating would seem to be the most likely option, but it would require participation & assistance by China, Japan, South Korea, &, more than likely Russia. These would be problematic, since no one is certain of Putin's likely moves on the geopolitical chess board; he plays a different game with dissimilar goals than leaders in Europe or President Drumpf. Complicating matters further is that negotiations presume Kim would negotiate (or act) in rational ways. Judging from his behavior in the past, Kim does not act in rational ways to benefit his people or nation. We can only be certain he will act to prop up his "Government" & reinforce his hold on power. It's uncertain how well we can negotiate with an irrational Leader & his nation.
Negotiations may still lead to the first option, but as with Iran, negotiations would forestall any military action with hopes that Kim might die, be removed from office by the military or forced to seek shelter in China.
Why should North Korea surrender it's nukes when rogue nations like Israel, India and Pakistan will not surrender their nuclear weapons?
Why should North Korea make a nuke deal when the Korean War has merely paused?
Why should North Korea make a deal on it's nukes when America along with the P5+1 made a deal with Iran which was a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and had no nukes?
Why should North Korea make a deal when Japan has more enriched weapons grade nuclear material than any nation that does not have nuclear weapons and has had colonial designs on Korea?
Why should North Korea surrender it's nukes when Russia and America have 90% of Earthly nukes?
Why should North Korea make a nuke deal when the Korean War has merely paused?
Why should North Korea make a deal on it's nukes when America along with the P5+1 made a deal with Iran which was a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and had no nukes?
Why should North Korea make a deal when Japan has more enriched weapons grade nuclear material than any nation that does not have nuclear weapons and has had colonial designs on Korea?
Why should North Korea surrender it's nukes when Russia and America have 90% of Earthly nukes?
2
Just a note on Iran Deal Mr. Friedman, Iran has a global commodity worth discussing - the world's fourth largest oil reserve of 150 billion barrels. That's 10% of the world's proven reserves.
North Korea has nothing of interest to anyone, 75% of their trade is with China, and China has no real need for a North Korean marketplace. Conflating North Korean's strategic global value with Iran is not well thought out, there is no leverage and therefore nothing to negotiate. bump.
North Korea has nothing of interest to anyone, 75% of their trade is with China, and China has no real need for a North Korean marketplace. Conflating North Korean's strategic global value with Iran is not well thought out, there is no leverage and therefore nothing to negotiate. bump.
2
Bomb, acquiesce or negotiate doesn't seem like all the choices or even the best choices. Where is the knock down choice? Anything that gets up in the air gets knocked down as quickly as possible. We have the capability to do that though its not at a 100% rate. This is the most obvious solution and I almost never see it mentioned. Well its the best solution until they find a way to Fed Ex a nuclear bomb. Then we're toast.
1
How about a little lateral thinking?
Why not propose a nuclear free Korean Pennisula. Both the US and NK would dismantal or remove all nuclear weapons from the Penninsula and promise not to reintroduce them.
What's good for the goose ...
Why not propose a nuclear free Korean Pennisula. Both the US and NK would dismantal or remove all nuclear weapons from the Penninsula and promise not to reintroduce them.
What's good for the goose ...
1
This issue is much scarier than a rogue North Korea.
Several countries currently have nuclear missile capabilities, the most troubling being Russia and China. There is a scenario that's truly deadly, that can occur tomorrow -- and our apprentice president can do nothing about it.
Imagine this scenario:
1) Russia notifies the U.S. Chain of Command that their nuclear capable launch system was compromised by unknown hackers, and their missiles have entered automatic launch mode. In six minutes, eleven nuclear warheads will launch at United States metropolitan areas, and they cannot stop the launches.
2) The U.S. will be in a no-win situation... we cannot retaliate with our own missiles since as far as we know, Russia is not "intentionally" attacking the U.S. (or so they say).
3) The U.S. has no way to shoot-down those nuclear warheads once they are launched. And we cannot deploy bombers to shoot the missiles before launch. We cannot intercept missiles, which travel faster than our best fighters.
4) America will have to "absorb" eleven nuclear strikes by Russia.... because we're powerless, and because so-called "hackers did it" (at least that's what Russia says).
5) Trump's quandary: does he believe Russia and not retaliate? How will he prevent our being bombed?
This can occur any day. And if this scenario were to occur with China or North Korea (or both working together), we will definitely lose.
This is very serious.
Several countries currently have nuclear missile capabilities, the most troubling being Russia and China. There is a scenario that's truly deadly, that can occur tomorrow -- and our apprentice president can do nothing about it.
Imagine this scenario:
1) Russia notifies the U.S. Chain of Command that their nuclear capable launch system was compromised by unknown hackers, and their missiles have entered automatic launch mode. In six minutes, eleven nuclear warheads will launch at United States metropolitan areas, and they cannot stop the launches.
2) The U.S. will be in a no-win situation... we cannot retaliate with our own missiles since as far as we know, Russia is not "intentionally" attacking the U.S. (or so they say).
3) The U.S. has no way to shoot-down those nuclear warheads once they are launched. And we cannot deploy bombers to shoot the missiles before launch. We cannot intercept missiles, which travel faster than our best fighters.
4) America will have to "absorb" eleven nuclear strikes by Russia.... because we're powerless, and because so-called "hackers did it" (at least that's what Russia says).
5) Trump's quandary: does he believe Russia and not retaliate? How will he prevent our being bombed?
This can occur any day. And if this scenario were to occur with China or North Korea (or both working together), we will definitely lose.
This is very serious.
1
Thank you NYT's and Friedman for trying to cover the important issues. This is a doozy. The great thing is that there indeed a plausible path made possible by the Iran deal. Even Trump has refused to tear it up. Containment and hope - for something transactional - it could happen. Trump could send his close personal friend, Dennis Rodman, to chill with his buddy "Kim" and float the "deal". Nothing is funny here, of course. This may be Tellersonls first real tes, respected mogul of "oil" and international deal making at Exxon. China, Russia, Europe on board? I like this option. There is a tragic kind of irony with the Trump presidency. Opportunities abound for him to be a true hero, domestically and abroad: Health Care at home and Korea abroad, as examples. He could hit a balance with Obamacare and Trumpcare that would inch us towards healthcare for all. Hiis base and historians would praise him. He could negotiate a deal with Kim Jong-un, Iran-like, but better, an artful "Trumpian" deal - to the praises of Europe, China, and yes, Russia. Will these ironies truly be tragic - or not? I applaud Friedman and the Times for trying. Trump has entered the big leagues, he's been called to "the show". In reality, he is about to have his shot - the opportunity to get his big league start. USA vs. North Korea. Play ball!
This one is on China. With the second largest economy in the world, creating a nuclear wasteland next door is not good for business . John Huntsman should be ambassador to China not Russia. The farther away a incompetent know-nothing like Trump is from this the better off we all are.n
What about option 4? You know - it just "Ain't gonna happen"?
The only American interested in North Korea and Kim Jong-un, the third and youngest North Korean tyrant of the Kim Dynasty, is not our President, Donald Trump, or his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. Surpise! It's Dennis Rodman, "The Worm", who with his great height and piercing of ears, lips, nostrils with either platinum or nickel hoops has entranced and fascinated the North Korean leader. There's still plenty of time for President Trump and his pretty-much ignored Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, to get involved with Kim's possible development of bigger and better nuclear ICBM warheads for his missiles aimed at the US. Meanwhile, can someone explain why there were no pool reporters on the plane accompanying the SOS to his Asian destination - China, South Korea and Japan? No "Lamestream reporters" on his plane, Just one pretty conservative journalist named Erin McPike representing the right-wing rag "Independent Journalism Review". Do you think, Dr. Tom, that Trump will deal with North Korea when he has so many other elephants on his plate? How will trump eat the elephants? Bite by bite.
Why is North Korea’s small nuclear arsenal a special problem for Trump, the US, or the world? Are not the immense nuclear arsenals of Russia, China, and the US a greater concern for rational people?
By developing nuclear weapons North Korea becomes a participant in the terrifying international game of “Mutually-Assured Destruction” (MAD). The game has prevented nuclear wars for a half-century now. It ensures that a nuclear-armed nation is invulnerable to deliberate attack by a foreign power. But the expansion and proliferation of nuclear arsenals increases the probability of accidental nuclear war.
North Korea has borders with both China and Russia. It is situated only a few hundred miles from China’s major population centers, and Russia’s Pacific bases.
Let’s let China and Russia handle the problem on their doorsteps. Blustering and blundering by Trump and the US can only aggravate the situation.
By developing nuclear weapons North Korea becomes a participant in the terrifying international game of “Mutually-Assured Destruction” (MAD). The game has prevented nuclear wars for a half-century now. It ensures that a nuclear-armed nation is invulnerable to deliberate attack by a foreign power. But the expansion and proliferation of nuclear arsenals increases the probability of accidental nuclear war.
North Korea has borders with both China and Russia. It is situated only a few hundred miles from China’s major population centers, and Russia’s Pacific bases.
Let’s let China and Russia handle the problem on their doorsteps. Blustering and blundering by Trump and the US can only aggravate the situation.
Has North Korea ever adhered to a nuclear deal?
1
has Trump done anything right yet? He's an amateur playing a pro game.
1
Unfortunately, we have our own bizarre despot.
2
Who is selling North Korea the fuel to propel these missiles???
If you think Trump can unilaterally unleash nuclear missiles you probably should join those seeking New Zealand citizenship. This country may be violent in nature but it is not stupid.
And what would North Korea get in exchange? A lifting of all sanctions? Good, but not good enough. North Korea, quite reasonably, believes that the US wants to destroy its government. So do we give guarantees of non interference and non aggression? Would NK believe or accept this? There are only two other examples. Quadaffi's Libya gave up Nukes and was overthrown with our help. Iran gave up nukes and is still being threatened with destruction by Israel and the US hard right.
Taking the negotiation option could soon become politically easier. In the South Korean presidential election that has been forced by the ouster of President Park, the more liberal opposition party -- which has always shunned saber-rattling and leaned toward engagement with the North on bilateral issues -- is given a strong chance of winning. With them in power, the United States would not be undercutting a hard-line ally by negotiating.
from the day this clown took up residence in the WH,I have not had a decent nights sleep.If this had been a democrat,he/she would already have been impeached.The only person in DC that seems to have a spine and a brain[a rarity for republicans]is lindsey graham and I'm putting all my hopes for this country on him.rex tillerson???the silent giant and climate change denier,will for sure strike some deal with kim that benefits him and djt and too bad for the USA
That's too much for Trump to comprehend... Now, if that could be broken down into dollars ....
First, we should make it clear to the Chinese that we will not allow North Korea to have a working ICBM that can reach the US. That, to me, is just common sense. Other than that, we should flood the zone with good will: Push for and fully support re-unification of North and South Korea. Offer food aid to the North (air drop food, when and where feasible). Push for easing of travel restrictions to and from North Korea. Present their fearless leader with a deluxe edition of Layla and Other Assorted Love songs, autographed by Eric Clapton (whom he reportedly loves). Whatever it takes.
The Korean War was a long time ago. North Korea has never hurt the United States. Let's be tough on their military ambitions, but offer them a bunch of carrots on the side.
The Korean War was a long time ago. North Korea has never hurt the United States. Let's be tough on their military ambitions, but offer them a bunch of carrots on the side.
Ironically, Kim and Trump share a couple things in common. One, they both grew up in extremely privileged circumstances where humility, integrity, truth and honor were not particularly important. Two, they both favor the same negotiating strategy, to boast and threaten until their opponent is willing to accede to their terms. Most relevant to forging some kind of truce, both Kim and Trump are overt sybarites and heathens. My guess is that a few days of softening up at Mar-a-Lago surrounded by some attractive young women, good food and wine, and Kim would be ready to negotiate on Trump's terms.
Negotiating with an irrational dictator does not seem like an effective approach. How much credibility would the US stand to lose when, after months - possibly years - of protracted negotiations, North Korea takes the highly plausible steps of simply ignoring its treaty commitments and continuing business as usual. As hard as it may be for us to stomach, acquiescence may be the best option since it would at least provide an equilibrium in the form of not-so mutually assured destruction. That is, North Korea would be wiped off the planet in a counter-strike while the possibility of its nukes causing commensurate (or any) destruction of the US or most if its allies would be quite remote. Maybe the best option is to acquiesce, double-down on regional missile defense systems and have subs in range to guarantee a terminal counter-strike?
2
North Korean should be seen as a Chinese problem in its entirety that must be dealt with by Chinese's up and coming Society notwithstanding the difficult fact that any North Korean known to have liaison with them has been eradicated as a threat to the Dictator's longevity. There is also the problem of the Iran-North Korean Nuclear/Missile partnership that continues to confront another Region. A joint Chinese-American effort to solve the problem would be mutually beneficial to both parties.
This article while right on in its logical appraisal of the situation with north korea is way beyond Trump's mental ability to understand much less to implement. It requires that Trump sees policies beyond simple black and whites and requires that he think and work peacefully with others, traits that Trump has shown himself incapable of fathoming as he listens to people like Bannon whose only answer is to withdraw into our isolationist borders. ICBMs respect no borders and Trump's words alone can never protect us.
It seems obvious that N Korea is a buffer/surrogate and that China allows/encourages that apparent craziness in order to keep its own perceived enemies at bay. A peaceful and unified democratic Korea would be viewed as a threat by China. China will never let N Korea shoot missiles toward the US, but also will never let there be unity between N and S Korea.
Friedman's analysis misses one key aspect of Trump's (and Bannon's) calculations: wag the dog. If there's one way to deflect the US public's attention from what may well be growing investigations into Trump's hidden Russian ties and obligations, it's a foreign policy crisis. Rally round the flag, and all that. And what vastly complicates the equation is that Trump really is dealing with a nut on the other side of this confrontation.
I'm not so paranoid to think that this will definitely happen. But I'm not so naive to think that, with this president, it couldn't.
I'm not so paranoid to think that this will definitely happen. But I'm not so naive to think that, with this president, it couldn't.
The problem is past presidents have been trying to negotiate with this child for years, in exactly the way Friedman describes. What's different now? I'm not saying there are better alternatives, but Fat Boy has broken every promise he has made, to Clinton, Bush, Obama, etc. This is an enormous pickle, and the current president seems to me like the worst possible person to guide us though this thicket.
Trump is simply not up to this or any actual challenge of world leadership. His knowledge base appears to be extremely limited and his immediate staff are even more challenged, and even more knowledge limited than he is.
Our best hope is that nothing of any significant occurs prior to him resigning or being impeached, I cannot imagine him lasting the full 4 years
Our best hope is that nothing of any significant occurs prior to him resigning or being impeached, I cannot imagine him lasting the full 4 years
1
America, lacking both global knowledge and leadership, will likely fail this test.
Doesn't everybody realize that Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and President Obama have achieved “Peace In Our Time” with their Iran Nuclear Peace Treaty.
Really, but only for the next ten years and then they have agreed that Iran can build (and sell) as many nuclear weapons as it wants in accordance with this agreement.
Maybe North Korea would accept an agreement similar to the Iran Nuclear (Peace) Treaty.
Really, but only for the next ten years and then they have agreed that Iran can build (and sell) as many nuclear weapons as it wants in accordance with this agreement.
Maybe North Korea would accept an agreement similar to the Iran Nuclear (Peace) Treaty.
1
An interesting aspect to this equation is China's recent decision to stop buying coal from the North Koreans. This is a difficult blow to the north as it has little to export to obtain foreign exchange currency. The North Korean government will be stolid, but the short and long term consequences are undefined. I would expect feigning by the north to get some type of negotiations started followed by the usual backtracking and the always present shocker to be determined at a future date.
Kim would claim that any negotiations show how powerful his regime is, how he humiliated the U.S., and then ignore any agreement he may sign. Unless we are willing to see Seoul destroyed I can;t see any way to way to "contain" him.
One thing left out here is that the transactional deal with Iran involved them taking physical steps back from their current nuclear capability. While they can't surrender knowledge already gained, they surrendered the vast majority of their enriched uranium, disabled, dismantled, and stopped construction on much of their enrichment infrastructure and submitted to inspections.
Now what Iran did not agree to was ceasing their missile program. Essentially what Friedman proposes is that DPRK cease its missile program, halt weapons construction, but keep the bombs with the disposition of unused enriched material to be negotiated.
Even if DPRK agreed, this doesn't remove the threat to South Korea or Japan and would certainly require China or Russia to agree to accept the loose material for storage or conversion.
Now what Iran did not agree to was ceasing their missile program. Essentially what Friedman proposes is that DPRK cease its missile program, halt weapons construction, but keep the bombs with the disposition of unused enriched material to be negotiated.
Even if DPRK agreed, this doesn't remove the threat to South Korea or Japan and would certainly require China or Russia to agree to accept the loose material for storage or conversion.
1
Re: " ...but all the other options are worse ..."
Obama optimized, to the extent he could, most of the policies under his purview during his presidency. The policies are the way they are because they are often the least-bad option. The Republicans have never understood this because they never tried to offer other alternatives, just slogans and political gimcrackery. So now the Republicans are trying to offer new and better answers, presenting their new reign as a new dawn. But they almost literally have not one positive policy prescription to present relative to the many difficult challenges the country faces.
North Korea is many steps past a simple solution.
Obama optimized, to the extent he could, most of the policies under his purview during his presidency. The policies are the way they are because they are often the least-bad option. The Republicans have never understood this because they never tried to offer other alternatives, just slogans and political gimcrackery. So now the Republicans are trying to offer new and better answers, presenting their new reign as a new dawn. But they almost literally have not one positive policy prescription to present relative to the many difficult challenges the country faces.
North Korea is many steps past a simple solution.
Sometimes the 'kick the can down the road' argument is the most viable.
All very rational, reasonable, probably a great assessment and recommendation for strategy. But the president lacks an experienced State Department, has sidelined his secretary (who, I guess, is there for oil drilling purposes) and takes advice from crazies on TV. Somebody in the global military might figure out how to snipe a tiny target in the Korean dictator's bedroom from an extremely far range, or we're probably in for a very painful shock.
The outline of a deal have long been known. It involves Chine, NOT N.Korea, as the principal negotiation partner.
The US withdraws its troops from South Korea, in return, China forces N. Korea, with crippling sanctions to stop developing more nukes. South Korea neutral State is guaranteed by both, as was Austria after WW II, after the Russians withdrew their troops from Austria
History shows that the deal was not to the detriment of Austria.
The US withdraws its troops from South Korea, in return, China forces N. Korea, with crippling sanctions to stop developing more nukes. South Korea neutral State is guaranteed by both, as was Austria after WW II, after the Russians withdrew their troops from Austria
History shows that the deal was not to the detriment of Austria.
2
Old Russian folktale:
A peasant was condemned by the Tsar to beheaded. As he was being dragged out from the imperial presence, he shouted, "Spare me, oh Tsar, and I will teach your horse to talk!"
The Tsar was intrigued. "Can you do this thing? How long would it take?"
"A year, the peasant declared. Give me a year and your horse will talk!"
"Very well," said the Tsar.
Later, in the imperial stables, a friend of the peasant accosted him: "What were you doing? You can't teach a horse to talk!"
"I know," said the peasant. "But who knows what will happen in a year? The Tsar might die. The horse might die. At least I am alive, and I have a whole year."
A Russian colleague of my father, faced with a thorny problem, would sometimes shrug and say "Maybe the horse will die." When my dad asked him what he meant, he related the above story.
A peasant was condemned by the Tsar to beheaded. As he was being dragged out from the imperial presence, he shouted, "Spare me, oh Tsar, and I will teach your horse to talk!"
The Tsar was intrigued. "Can you do this thing? How long would it take?"
"A year, the peasant declared. Give me a year and your horse will talk!"
"Very well," said the Tsar.
Later, in the imperial stables, a friend of the peasant accosted him: "What were you doing? You can't teach a horse to talk!"
"I know," said the peasant. "But who knows what will happen in a year? The Tsar might die. The horse might die. At least I am alive, and I have a whole year."
A Russian colleague of my father, faced with a thorny problem, would sometimes shrug and say "Maybe the horse will die." When my dad asked him what he meant, he related the above story.
117
Why does anyone talk about sanity in relation to Trump or North Korean leaders.
Neither are sane. Neither have a moral compass. Both are naive and narcissistic.
Why would one expect any decent outcome? Lets hope we can have this discussion in 4 years when (by definition!) a saner POTUS will exist.
Neither are sane. Neither have a moral compass. Both are naive and narcissistic.
Why would one expect any decent outcome? Lets hope we can have this discussion in 4 years when (by definition!) a saner POTUS will exist.
50
No wonder you are so afraid. Clinton was sending them money for "aid" to feed the hungry populace - and we know that didn't end up where it was suppossed to go. Negotiation hasn't worked with North Korea, neither has paying him off.
The strategy shall be win-win-win for all parties concerned.
Resort hotels, perhaps owned in shares by every Korean, Northern and Southern.
With the benign cooperation and the guaranteed patronage of the world.
Impossible fantasy?
Well, then consider the much more possible madness alternative.
Resort hotels, perhaps owned in shares by every Korean, Northern and Southern.
With the benign cooperation and the guaranteed patronage of the world.
Impossible fantasy?
Well, then consider the much more possible madness alternative.
4
NK would be wiped off the face of the earth with a barrage of nuclear flames upon minutes of the launch of the first missile.
They know it and we know it.
Launch as many as you want into the ocean but aim it at us and your time is up.
They know it and we know it.
Launch as many as you want into the ocean but aim it at us and your time is up.
13
That's assuming sanity--on Fat Boy's and Trump's part. A specious assumption, IMO.
The challenge, of course, is that South Korea would also be wiped off the face of the earth. And South Korea is a key US ally in Asia.
The choices are indeed difficult; anyone who says otherwise is a fool or a liar. To paraphrase Mr. Trump, no one could have imagined that governing would be so complex. That's the Republican problem in a nutshell.
The choices are indeed difficult; anyone who says otherwise is a fool or a liar. To paraphrase Mr. Trump, no one could have imagined that governing would be so complex. That's the Republican problem in a nutshell.
Can we be so certain that our missile defense system will hit the target? And if it doesn't . . .
Friedman is egging us on towards another war. Trump should just ignore North Korea, its own contradictions will end it, not outside intervention.
8
"Friedman is egging us on towards another war."
Obviously, you did NOT read his article in its entirety. If you did, you'd have noticed that he is suggesting " a transactional deal", much like the one with Iran!
He is precisely NOT "egging us on towards another war."
Obviously, you did NOT read his article in its entirety. If you did, you'd have noticed that he is suggesting " a transactional deal", much like the one with Iran!
He is precisely NOT "egging us on towards another war."
Trump could always deploy Dennis Rodman as a birthday present to Mr. Kim to warm things up. Or send in the Swiss Army, with chocolate...
12
China will never agree to any change in North Korea. If they do so, soon they have a US-friendly state on it's southern border. Need to be immensely stupid, in order to agree to such deal.
3
Why are things always presented in black and white terms? Why say it has to be either Kim Jong-un OR an US-friendly state? There is a huge range of possibilities between those two extremes. A stable, predictable government in N Korea is beneficial to both sides.
Tom can't be serious. One ICBM from NK toward the US would draw a retaliatory nuclear barrage aimed at Pyongyang. Which is exactly 500 miles from Beijing so folks there will actually be able to see the top of the mushroom cloud and then have 12 hrs. to prepare for the radiation-bearing winds headed their way.
So, if there's a single line that Xi Jinping has memorized in Korean to tell Kim Jong Un over the phone it's "Don't even think of it!". This is one 3am call that the President can answer with, Leave it to the Chinese, and roll over and get back to sleep.
So, if there's a single line that Xi Jinping has memorized in Korean to tell Kim Jong Un over the phone it's "Don't even think of it!". This is one 3am call that the President can answer with, Leave it to the Chinese, and roll over and get back to sleep.
6
You cannot expect a logical action by an mentally deficient individual.
I guess all of the US and EU lectures about "proportional response" only apply to Israel, then. In any event, what happens in your scenario when the 3am call includes a Chinese warning that any retaliatory attack on North Korea will be considered an attack on China?
Assign the assassination of Kim to the SEALs and let them get it over with. We can help them rebuild from that point on.
2
The N Korean military isn't a bunch of terrorists holed up in a Yemeni walled compound. And the repercussions of an assassination attempt on Fatty3 would be immediate war on the Korean peninsula. Real solutions to real problems are not that simple. Which is what scares me about Trump - he's liable to think what you have suggested is a realistic solution.
Negotiation seems the correct choice but the thought of negotiations involving an unhinged lunatic leaves me dyspeptic. And Kim Jong-nam isn't much better.
36
Kim Jong-nam is dead ... I guess he couldn't negotiate a natural death with his crazy half-brother Kim Jong-un.
If the idea of a Trump / Jong-un negotiation doesn't scare you nothing will.
In "survivor" these two dudes would be the first two voted off the island.
If only the world's population could vote political leaders off the planet. In a Trump / Jong-un vote I think Jong-un would be first voted off, but my hunch is that the tally would be pretty close.
In "survivor" these two dudes would be the first two voted off the island.
If only the world's population could vote political leaders off the planet. In a Trump / Jong-un vote I think Jong-un would be first voted off, but my hunch is that the tally would be pretty close.
6
Trump will be the first to discover ... again ... Knowbody knew how hard this was!
7
Obama's deal with Iran was a thoughtfully measured undertaking. Thoughtful and measured are not in Trump's vocabulary. My fear is that this hellish administration will come under such intense investigation and criticism that Trump (enabled by the apocalyptic Bannon) will launch a strike to divert attention (it will do that!) and improve his poll numbers. My opinion: Impeach this amoral and unstable lunatic before its too late!
33
the doctor,
Ten years from now Iran will be manufacturing nuclear WMDs and selling them to the various Islamic terror groups that can afford to pay for them in accord with President Obama's Nuclear Treaty with Iran.
Iran, ISIS and the other Islamic groups do not have intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems, but they can afford to rent a U-Haul van for a WMD suicide bomber to drive a Nuclear Device to Times Square in NYC instead.
This Obama treaty is a great disaster for the USA.
Ten years from now Iran will be manufacturing nuclear WMDs and selling them to the various Islamic terror groups that can afford to pay for them in accord with President Obama's Nuclear Treaty with Iran.
Iran, ISIS and the other Islamic groups do not have intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems, but they can afford to rent a U-Haul van for a WMD suicide bomber to drive a Nuclear Device to Times Square in NYC instead.
This Obama treaty is a great disaster for the USA.
1
Obama's deal with Iran? Thoughtful and measured?
No. A strategic sell-out that left Iran a virtual member of the nuclear club while they prepare the means for delivering them to create the work caliphate that they Invision.
A rank betrayal of sanity and our way of life.
No. A strategic sell-out that left Iran a virtual member of the nuclear club while they prepare the means for delivering them to create the work caliphate that they Invision.
A rank betrayal of sanity and our way of life.
1
There was nothing "thoughtfully measured" about the Iran deal. It was a
gift of nuclear weapons, along with the return of more than $100 billion to speed their development, to a group of hard-line mullahs who run an Islamic state.
gift of nuclear weapons, along with the return of more than $100 billion to speed their development, to a group of hard-line mullahs who run an Islamic state.
One additional problem - Trump is mentally ill, can't think straight, out of control. Come to think of it, not entirely unlike Kim Jong-un. What a delightful scenario. See: Canticle for Liebowitz, author Walter M. Miller. "Have a nice day."
9
Whatever our ideals and our sense of good and evil - leaders must know and understand the world as it is. The North Korean regime is too dangerous, too unpredictable to have the weapons that will hold South Korea, Japan, the United States and yes, China hostage.
All players must know and understand each other... . They do not have to like each other, or the world views they do not share.
China must be respected with its perceived national security interests. China must feel secure.
Intelligent negotiations must take place...as they did with Iran. And the North Korean regime must understand that all players know they cannot live with the growing threat of that unpredictable regime. That regime, a scourge to its own people, we must and can tolerate. Yes, we have to. The weapons, no. And then we must all move to decrease such weapons from the earth because no nation is so virtuous as to be trusted with them. We are all in this together. WE must do this for all our children. -Rudolph
All players must know and understand each other... . They do not have to like each other, or the world views they do not share.
China must be respected with its perceived national security interests. China must feel secure.
Intelligent negotiations must take place...as they did with Iran. And the North Korean regime must understand that all players know they cannot live with the growing threat of that unpredictable regime. That regime, a scourge to its own people, we must and can tolerate. Yes, we have to. The weapons, no. And then we must all move to decrease such weapons from the earth because no nation is so virtuous as to be trusted with them. We are all in this together. WE must do this for all our children. -Rudolph
6
What comes to mind is the response we would have if Iran were run by a crazy fratricidal dictator who has many nuclear weapons and is building ICBMs. How would Bibi act?
Trump says he's a great negotiator. He has an opportunity to prove it. North Korea exists as a bargaining chip for China. Maybe Trump can make a really great deal with China over North Korea, or maybe he's just an ignorant big mouthed rich boy.
Trump says he's a great negotiator. He has an opportunity to prove it. North Korea exists as a bargaining chip for China. Maybe Trump can make a really great deal with China over North Korea, or maybe he's just an ignorant big mouthed rich boy.
11
We have only ourselves to blame. In the days when Republicans still had a lick of sense, Nuclear disarmament was on the table.
Now we're back to talking about hiding under the table. Duck and Cover!
The principal Nations against disarmament were the US and Israel, for obvious reasons, none of which involve national security. Einstein called this one long ago.
I think Trump’s deepest thought on the subject of North Korea is how he can get Americans to call him Dear Leader.
Now we're back to talking about hiding under the table. Duck and Cover!
The principal Nations against disarmament were the US and Israel, for obvious reasons, none of which involve national security. Einstein called this one long ago.
I think Trump’s deepest thought on the subject of North Korea is how he can get Americans to call him Dear Leader.
5
George W. Bush recognized the danger of North Korea, but the neo-cons decided to attack Iraq instead. We all know what happened after that.
Kim Jong Un should be given the same "out" that the Iranians were given. If he doesn't agree to that, then he should be eliminated. The way to deal with a venomous snake is decapitation.
Kim Jong Un should be given the same "out" that the Iranians were given. If he doesn't agree to that, then he should be eliminated. The way to deal with a venomous snake is decapitation.
6
I understand the Chinese are coming to D.C soon. Let's hope, seriously hope, the Trump family in addition to talking investment deals can discuss how America and China will deal with a rogue nuke armed state. Perhaps beside including Bannon in these necessary discussions, Rex T might be invited. The administration is denying global warming. Let's hope they are not denying how serious the launching of any nuclear device will be upon our planet.
4
All despots have the same character flaws as our dear leader, DJT. But as crazy as they are, their sense of survival outways their desire to be dead heroes. I also know that this logic isn't taken into consideration when pondering this issue. The "cold war" lasted fifty years because neither side wanted to alter the map of our planet. Whoever fires the first shot will not be victorious and despite TLF's op-ed, even the crazies know this. Fear mongering is a great political tool, but if I had to guess, I'm of the belief, as an avid golfer myself, that DJT wants to remain on the top side of the fairway.
3
The way I see this going down is Trump visiting Kim Jong-un in North Korea in the next few weeks; and finding out that he really likes the guy; and learning that -- unlike Americans -- North Koreans truly believe in and fear their leaders; and are in dire need of gambling casinos, golf courses, hotels, overpriced restaurants and branches of Trump University; all of which would be generously supported by North Korea's hard-working taxpayers; and deciding to stay and live there.
Together, G-d willing, with Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon, Ivanka and Jared.
Together, G-d willing, with Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon, Ivanka and Jared.
7
Thanks for telling us what the unhinged left is thinking
Trump reminds me of Kim Jung Un. He's a loose cannon, unpredictable, unhinged and self-centered.
5
I love how this situation mirrors Obamacare...we've handed you a complete mess Mr. Trump, now what are you going to do to fix it? And if your attempts fail, see it's all your fault. I keep reading this childish reasoning day after day, and yet am amazed how many people in this Country have absolutely no common sense whatsoever...but it does make for great partisan politics and unbelievably bad "journalism".
3
The two leaders are too much alike. We have two dangerous countries with two dangerous dictators in control of nuclear weapons.
Yes, Tom, we should lie awake in terror at night.
Yes, Tom, we should lie awake in terror at night.
6
Not sure why Trump and the US must assume responsibility for defusing Kim Jong-lunatic. It seems to me that while the leadership of that sad country stands resolutely facing we here in the west, perhaps China could launch a precision rapid strike at Mr. Kim personally. Cut off the head of this dragon and it will surely die. Also, China scores major bonus points for actually making the world a safer place.
2
China needs North Korea. It's like keeping a bad dog around to scare the neighborhood. After the dog goes on a terror rampage, it gets penned for a day or so. "Bad dog!" Meanwhile, China gets to play good dog owner/bad dog owner and everyone in the neighborhood frets.
North Korea is not a "failed state". A failed state is one that does not control its territory (like Somalia), in which insurgencies run wild. North Korea is exactly the opposite---the government controls every inch, and every person, completely.
If we make a deal with North Korea, it will lie and cheat continually. The deal will constrain only us. The same might be said about Iran, but Iran is a semi-open society in which information flows. We'll know when Iran cheats, and that fact constrains (but does not prevent) its cheating. We won't know when North Korea cheats. There won't be any Oslo Letter.
If we make a deal with North Korea, it will lie and cheat continually. The deal will constrain only us. The same might be said about Iran, but Iran is a semi-open society in which information flows. We'll know when Iran cheats, and that fact constrains (but does not prevent) its cheating. We won't know when North Korea cheats. There won't be any Oslo Letter.
1
Tom, you are amazingly positive, thinking Trump knows what he is doing and he cares about doing something besides use our military. We can only hope the
people around him can convince him to do the right thing. Maybe he can build a Trump hotel in North Korea.
people around him can convince him to do the right thing. Maybe he can build a Trump hotel in North Korea.
2
Trump and Kim Jong-un are both sneaky and liars. They should get along just fine.
2
Let's see, bomb, acquiesce, negotiate. Geez, I didn’t know this could all be so complicated!
2
No... It's acquiecse and RENEGOTIATE.
Repeat every eight years or so.
Repeat every eight years or so.
We have seen this movie before. Deals negotiated with North Korea are NEVER honored by them. The same story as Chamberlain negotiating a treaty with Hitler, who later characterized it as a "scrap of paper". A "deal" is just fooling ourselves and sealing our fate.
5
As I recall, President Clinton resolve the North Korean problem, didn't he?
Was he such a rube?
And what did Obama do for eight years while Dear Leader thumbed his nose at the world?
Was he such a rube?
And what did Obama do for eight years while Dear Leader thumbed his nose at the world?
"GOTCHA'"!
That might be what President Xi of China might be saying to your column as the "diversion" of North Korea is working quite nicely.
While we're all looking at the Koreans, Mr. Xi is busy building bases in the South China Sea, building a "blue water" navy and running an aircraft carrier near Taiwan. This strategy, advocated by Sun-Tzu's book the "Art of War", is deceptive and confounding; confuse the enemy rather than confront, strike where he is weakest and keep him off balance and incapable of cogent re-action. Mr. Trump just makes the job easier.
And, by the way, do you really think the leader of our country, Mr. Putin, would allow a nuclear war?
That might be what President Xi of China might be saying to your column as the "diversion" of North Korea is working quite nicely.
While we're all looking at the Koreans, Mr. Xi is busy building bases in the South China Sea, building a "blue water" navy and running an aircraft carrier near Taiwan. This strategy, advocated by Sun-Tzu's book the "Art of War", is deceptive and confounding; confuse the enemy rather than confront, strike where he is weakest and keep him off balance and incapable of cogent re-action. Mr. Trump just makes the job easier.
And, by the way, do you really think the leader of our country, Mr. Putin, would allow a nuclear war?
3
If the only logical option is to negotiate, we are in for a frightening ride. Our macho donald can only bluster and threaten like the bully he is. Doesn't work too well when two bullies square off.
4
"Won't happen" says Trump. Most probably will happen. What else does North Korea, the Jim Jones global equivalent, have to lose? They have already proven that survival at a most basic level is sustainable. If they are willing to drink the cool-aid of nuclear annielation then they have everything and we have nothing in negotiations. They will have a weapon that can reach the US.
And we will live with that terrible prospect. We can't even blame it on Trump. We unleashed this dark genie years ago when we bombed Japan in 1945. How's that for Karma?
And we will live with that terrible prospect. We can't even blame it on Trump. We unleashed this dark genie years ago when we bombed Japan in 1945. How's that for Karma?
1
American diplomacy has two huge problems. First one is a total inability to understand any culture paradigm which is different from this of West. Second one is lack of any professionalism in State department. All major positions actually are rewards for President aids and allies during campaign. Not professionals.
Until this changes, loses will come one after another. Like Egypt or Russia.
Until this changes, loses will come one after another. Like Egypt or Russia.
Having cool heads advising a President who famously lacks one will be crucial for this crisis, as well as other, unforeseen ones that are sure to come. One of the few things to celebrate in the administration is the replacement of Flynn by McMaster. Now is there some way of ousting Bannon, too?
So the best advice that Mr. Friedman has for President Trump is that China is holding us hostage? Consequently, we should continue to allow our factories and jobs to be shipped overseas and we should just ignore their currency manipulations?
Not a chance.
I suspect that China has far more to lose from an all out war on the Korean peninsular or a "trade war" than does the United States.
Let the people who live in Asia sort out their problems.
Not a chance.
I suspect that China has far more to lose from an all out war on the Korean peninsular or a "trade war" than does the United States.
Let the people who live in Asia sort out their problems.
3
Oh, boy, DJT will have to metaphorically sit down at the bargaining table with a malignantly narcissistic sociopath who has nuclear weapons and who wants to use them. Tact, restraint, and diplomacy will definitely be required.
What could possibly go wrong?
Maybe Jared can do this after he fixes the Middle East.
What could possibly go wrong?
Maybe Jared can do this after he fixes the Middle East.
7
With a president as twisted as Trump, we need to do what Robert Riech has said time and again- "follow the money". Trump (in his mind at least) is the head of the War Machine. He can use North Korea as a tool to help build up and inflate our arsenals and yet continue to do nothing leaving the impending danger to the next president.
While Friedman is correct in his analysis of Obama's strategy, he consistently underwhelms with his gloved approach to the tyrant in the White House. Trump must only be critiqued. There is no there there.
Following the money is all Trump is about. Diplomacy is about as far away as rationality is to the Korean leadership.
While Friedman is correct in his analysis of Obama's strategy, he consistently underwhelms with his gloved approach to the tyrant in the White House. Trump must only be critiqued. There is no there there.
Following the money is all Trump is about. Diplomacy is about as far away as rationality is to the Korean leadership.
3
While all of this is going on, Trump is too busy tweeting, pushing for investigations into Obama "tapping" and surveilling his campaign, tweeting about Arnold's ratings for Celebrity Apprentice and the like. Too busy to be President and deal with the hard stuff.
Is this what is meant by Nero fiddled while Rome burned?
Is this what is meant by Nero fiddled while Rome burned?
Future Trump Quote
"Nobody knew being President could be so complicated"
"Nobody knew being President could be so complicated"
10
..... and there is tape of obama saying almost exactly that..... not long after he was inaugurated. it seems all presidents show up with an agenda and then hit the wall.
I just know DJT will make "The greatest deal ever" and save us. I know this because he always makes the greatest deals and everyone else's deals are "disasters". What TF did not say is that all Americans need to hope that Tillerson has the wisdom to deal with the issue and the strength to keep DJT's ego out of the process. As TF said, "Hey, what could go wrong.". Well Trump could always get us into a nuclear confrontation and blame it on the democrats in congress. Or, worse yet, cry out that smoldering ruins left by his ignorance were "Fake News".
2
Negotiate is not only the fall-back option. It is also the most viable in view of the inevitability of regime change in both the USA and North Korea. I am struck by the similarities between Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump. If there is any rationality left in world affairs, they will go soon enough. Yes, that's a big if.
2
First, even if you assume for the sake of argument that the deal Obama made with Iran was a good deal, the only leverage Obama used on Iran was the sanctions. Sanctions are even less viable as leverage against North Korea. Kim simply does not care if all his people starve. If force is off the table, as you imply it should be, then the best you can get is a Kim ruse whereby he temporarily delays some of his capabilities, but continues to increase the threat to us and our allies.
Second, North Korea has never honored any deal it has made. All three of the last three Administrations have been taken in by Kim family promises. (By the way, it is rich that you so cavalierly lay at the feet of Trump a problem that Obama did nothing to solve in eight years, without a word of criticism for Obama).
Third, the idea that something transformational will happen in North Korea in the next 15 years is sheer madness.
Yes, all the options are bad, but the least worst is to bomb North Korea's capabilities. We can easily eliminate the threat from North Korea with a first strike. If they want to respond violently, we just keep bombing. If the Chinese don't like it, they should have stopped Kim a long time ago. Technically, we are still at war with North Korea under the auspices of a UN authorization. North Korea developing a nuclear weapons and ICBMs is sufficient justification to renew hostilities that ended with a cease-fire, but not a final peace treaty.
Second, North Korea has never honored any deal it has made. All three of the last three Administrations have been taken in by Kim family promises. (By the way, it is rich that you so cavalierly lay at the feet of Trump a problem that Obama did nothing to solve in eight years, without a word of criticism for Obama).
Third, the idea that something transformational will happen in North Korea in the next 15 years is sheer madness.
Yes, all the options are bad, but the least worst is to bomb North Korea's capabilities. We can easily eliminate the threat from North Korea with a first strike. If they want to respond violently, we just keep bombing. If the Chinese don't like it, they should have stopped Kim a long time ago. Technically, we are still at war with North Korea under the auspices of a UN authorization. North Korea developing a nuclear weapons and ICBMs is sufficient justification to renew hostilities that ended with a cease-fire, but not a final peace treaty.
2
A very worrisome situation for the American people, but this is pointless as advice to Trump. Can you think of an example, whether during the campaign or in the first 50 days of his presidency, where he has dealt with an issue rationally? Where he had identified an actual problem, analyzed it, and proposed a genuine solution? Can anyone think of a single instance? I can't.
3
I agree with Tom Friedman. El Presidente is just realizing that, gee, governing is really, really hard.
We have a dictator in North Korea who is a narcissist, who is irrational and child-like, who values loyalty above all else, and who cracks down hard on anyone who disagrees with him. Sound like anyone we know?
The only viable way out of this growing escalation between North Korea and the United States is to convince China to intervene, something it has been reluctant to do. Let's see what kind of a deal maker Rex Tillerson really is to achieve that end. We should wish him godspeed.
We have a dictator in North Korea who is a narcissist, who is irrational and child-like, who values loyalty above all else, and who cracks down hard on anyone who disagrees with him. Sound like anyone we know?
The only viable way out of this growing escalation between North Korea and the United States is to convince China to intervene, something it has been reluctant to do. Let's see what kind of a deal maker Rex Tillerson really is to achieve that end. We should wish him godspeed.
5
In order to negotiate you need two parties that are willing to lose something at the table. Trump and Jong-un do not want to lose or give anything away. They both believes they has the upper hand. With Iran, President Obama and to a certain point Iran wanted to work something out, which they did. Neither side got everything it wanted but a deal was struck. North Korea’s goal is unification of Korea with the north as the leader and Un as the helmsmen. No, negotiations are a nonstarter with these two and the alternative is frightening and will lead to a loss of life on a grand scale.
3
What incentive does Lil Kim have to stop his nuclear and now missile program? Help his people get out of poverty? A majority of people must think he cares about that issue. News flash, he doesn't. He is doing just fine, he lives in a palace and I suspect eats pretty good. The Ukraine gave up their nuclear arsenal. How is that working for them? China will not let us bomb him, just like the USSR would not let us bomb Cuba and we will not let China bomb Taiwan. I would be surprised if the drug cartels of Mexico and Columbia don't start building their own nuclear weapons. Mutually assured destruction is a pretty good deterrent. Lil Kim knows this.
2
On the other hand Donald Trump may possess just the right kind of temperament to work with the dear leader. He loved Dennis Rodman.
4
Why would China want to restrain North Korea? Allowing North Korea to be belligerent increases China's leverage. And Trump doesn't help any by bad mouthing China. I say more power to the Chinese!
1
How on earth is any agreement with North Korea to be monitored? Does anybody really think UN (or whatever) inspectors are going to be given free run of the country?
More attention needs to be paid to countries facilitating North Korea. I knew of China, but never imagined Malaysia as an economic conduit prior to the murder in the KL airport. Who else is keeping NK's military program going?
More attention needs to be paid to countries facilitating North Korea. I knew of China, but never imagined Malaysia as an economic conduit prior to the murder in the KL airport. Who else is keeping NK's military program going?
2
Takes two to tango, Thomas. Between them, Kim and Trump have four left feet, and heavy metal does not lend itself to close contact, particularly to a pair of supreme narcissists.
The likeliest option is the first.
The likeliest option is the first.
Threading the eye of this nuclear crisis needle calls for the steadiest of hands. A foreign policy illiterate like Trump, and an ideologue like Bannon, are way, way, over their heads. Mattis and McMaster and those they choose to consult with, must be the dominant voices. The genius of Kennedy's handling of the Cuban missile crisis was his rejection of the general's exhortations to bomb and invade, ( unknown at the time, was the fact that Russia had tactical nukes in Cuba, any invasion would have precipitated their use and meant WW III ), and his prescient understanding that the first step in a confrontation should be the least intrusive ( the quarantine ). Complicating the North Korean crisis, is the fact that Seoul, the economic hub of South Korea and home to 20 million people, is within artillery range of North Korea and a million combat ready troops.
North Korea never registered as a worry for me. But with two spoiled brats that think they are alpha males with their fingers on nuclear buttons it is indeed very worrisome.
In any case Mr. Friedman there are alternative wins, when someone just says we won.
In any case Mr. Friedman there are alternative wins, when someone just says we won.
2
Negotiate, yes, but with the knowledge that North Korea never sticks to its end of the deal. It always reneges and does what it wants. We need China to strong arm them. Without China on board to contain Kim the US has little leverage.
1
I have not slept well for months. This has been more unnerving than the assignation of JFK. The situation with N. Korea is dangerous at best and at worst the scenario of the lives of the N, Korean people now. Those poor souls. The citizens of our country are under informed and ill prepared for the hard choices of what we will support and what we will not back. I recommend preparing for that and I thank Mr. Friedman for encouraging us to get started now. Adam Johnson's The Orphan Master's Son, is a novel which may help getting into the shoes of these inhumanely treated people.
1
Tom the big problem is Russiagate! Don't lose sight of it. As a columnist that is read by many, you need to keep the focus on Russiagate, and ignore the Benedict Donald red-herrings.
2
The "say anything/drunk uncle" schtick of the campaign doesn't play as well, or at all, in a presidency where real and irrevocable decisions about mass destruction are an immediate consequence.
2
The most confounding aspect to the North Korea problem is the immense artillery concentration the North Koreans have that threatens Seoul, South Korea. It is estimated that as many as 500,000 shells could hit Seoul in just the first hour of a conventional conflict. This very real threat neutralizes many of our options, including 'taking out' the North Korean nuclear facilities.
1
Has anyone explained how an isolated place like North Korea with severely limited resources managed to develop such a program?
1
And a 4th option. As long as ther are two Koreas, desire for reunification will create tension and instability, fueling a need for need for military buildup. If we were back to one Korea, we could close our military facilities there and the newly reunited Korea would be hard pressed to find external threats requiring an expensive nuclear arsenal.
1
We negotiated deals with North Korea in the past, and what happened? They appeared to be destroying their nuclear capabilities in order to get relief from sanctions plus US aid. Once they got what they wanted, they resurrected their nukes and have more destructive power at their bidding than ever. A better strategy would be to target the latest Kim as a global terrorist and take him out as we did with Bin Laden.
3
The problem with the transactional option is North Korea is not Iran. Say what you want about Iran, but, there is a degree of rationality that made President Obama's deal work---that rationality does not exist in North Korea---in fact, quite the opposite---this young man is a Freudian nightmare with access to nuclear weapons--
2
Sometimes buying time and waiting for a transformation event (or a time when options may be better) is the best approach. However, that would require understanding and reasoning that Trump and his cadre at the White House have yet to demonstrate they possess.
1
There are so many things that keep me up at night now with this Administration- the possibility of losing our health insurance, the environmental regulations about to be rolled back, the degradation of the office of the Presidency by this vicious madman.
"Trump will soon discover that in foreign policy, everything is like Obamacare — easy to criticize, more transactional than transformational, but all the other options are worse."
I don't see our so-called president gripping anything that is nuanced.
I don't see our so-called president gripping anything that is nuanced.
4
I hope Litwak isn't the only commentator Tom (or the NSC) is listening to,b/c there are a greater range of options available to policymakers. Hope the rumored SecState Tillerson has some success in Beijing this week, among several other options.
2
It seems to me that Bush, Clinton, and Obama were all face with the same problem. What we learned from that is that negotiation doesn't really work with North Korea. Clinton struck an agreement with them, and they simply violated it at their leisure.
I don't have any miraculous solutions, but let's not pretend that negotiation is the genius move that nobody tried.
I don't have any miraculous solutions, but let's not pretend that negotiation is the genius move that nobody tried.
1
I seriously doubt that trump is up to the task, better start building that 1950s style bomb shelter in the backyard.
1
It might help if there were a functioning Secretary of State in the house. The State Department doesn't seem able even to do routine press briefings. Rex Tillerson has little to say, although I was alarmed that in his confirmation hearings, he was obsessing about China's 30-acre artificial islands that are a routine Law of the Sea issue. The current administration also seems unable to fill hundreds of key deputy positions, having apparently run out of friends, family and cronies. Nothing is going to get better until Trump has his Twitter account taken away, and Bannon is removed from the security council and some professionals are brought in.
2
Friedman assumes that Trump understands world affairs. With Tillerson running a non existent State Department and no one in the Trump white house understanding how world affairs works beyond the corporate level we're in trouble. If Trump was smart (he's not so this will never happen) he would call Bill Richardson and craft an Iran like deal with China, N Korea and America all at the table.
1
The mouse that roared meets the mouse king!
3
(A) As a resident of Dayton, OH, I feel somehow insulted.
(B) Please, just this once, let Mr. Trump listen to the career professionals.
(B) Please, just this once, let Mr. Trump listen to the career professionals.
2
This all kind of makes sense, if only there was actually someone in the White House and/or the State Department who was paying attention. Our President has no idea, our VP is in over his head, our Sec. of State is absent, and there is no staff to back them up. All staff has to take a retroactive pledge to never have bad thoughts about The Donald, which disqualifies pretty much everyone with any skills.
The Russians have seen this and are doing flybys of our ships, and one of their ships is off the coast of New England. The Iranians are testing us and have found that Trump is all hot air. They were warned that they are 'on notice', but then nothing happened. The North Koreans know that nothing will happen because Trump doesn't know what to do besides Tweet, and everyone around him is just as clueless or scared to say anything because Trump's chief strategist will get them fired.
The Russians have seen this and are doing flybys of our ships, and one of their ships is off the coast of New England. The Iranians are testing us and have found that Trump is all hot air. They were warned that they are 'on notice', but then nothing happened. The North Koreans know that nothing will happen because Trump doesn't know what to do besides Tweet, and everyone around him is just as clueless or scared to say anything because Trump's chief strategist will get them fired.
1
Donald Trump is the Ron Popeil of Presidents, he invents stories and them sells them to the public in tweetfomercials. He doesn't care about foreign policy, healthcare, or anything to do with the greater good of mankind or the American people. He is only concerned with perception. reality does not exist, unless it is his reality. Stop thinking he wants to be a great statesman, he is a showman and a salesman, if you don't applaud him or buy his brand, you don't exist.
2
This, and the similar recommendations made in another editorial today by Anthony Blinken ("Will Rex Tillerson Pass North Korea's Nuclear Test?"), are generally the same deal that President Clinton made with Kim Jong Il in 1994 (the so-called "Agreed Framework"). That agreement has often been criticized as a failure; but the failure was actually on the part of the U.S., which dragged its feet implementing it. And it was ultimately undermined and eventually canned by the Bush 43 administration.
The best recommendations I have seen over the years are in Selig Harrison's 2002 book, Korean End Game. It contains an analysis and recommendations for comprehensive solutions to the region's military problems. Although some of it is out-dated--it is based, in part, on an understanding of the regime's wishes as expressed by the late Kim Jong Il's military and foreign policy circles--much of it is still relevant.
But to work, it has to be negotiated in good faith, and adhered to by the current occupant of the White House and his successors. I don't see that happening.
The best recommendations I have seen over the years are in Selig Harrison's 2002 book, Korean End Game. It contains an analysis and recommendations for comprehensive solutions to the region's military problems. Although some of it is out-dated--it is based, in part, on an understanding of the regime's wishes as expressed by the late Kim Jong Il's military and foreign policy circles--much of it is still relevant.
But to work, it has to be negotiated in good faith, and adhered to by the current occupant of the White House and his successors. I don't see that happening.
It is beyond my ability to imagine Donald Trump being able to handle anything threatening coming out of North Korea. We are in a the unenviable position of having a president who is unqualified and not willing to be educated to the duties and behavior of the president of the United States. His white house staff doesn't seem to have anyone on it who can talk truth to power. I can't imagine what other world leaders think about us and wonder if they'll have any confidence in what Trump says.
As an American citizen I am embarrassed for us all. They can hear all the things Trump says because it's all out there for anyone to hear and/or read.
Currently he is going to have a rally. I'm convinced he's trying to ingratiate himself with his base so they'll vote for him so he can stay in for another term. This position has given him unbelievable opportunities which he couldn't have imagined. He is the new robber baron of our times. Who could imagine how easy it is when you're president. Why use the White House when you have a place in Florida where you can impress everyone who sees you.
What does it matter that you're using tax payers' money to fly and to maintain Trump Tower in NYC.
The White House isn't good enough for the Trumps.
As an American citizen I am embarrassed for us all. They can hear all the things Trump says because it's all out there for anyone to hear and/or read.
Currently he is going to have a rally. I'm convinced he's trying to ingratiate himself with his base so they'll vote for him so he can stay in for another term. This position has given him unbelievable opportunities which he couldn't have imagined. He is the new robber baron of our times. Who could imagine how easy it is when you're president. Why use the White House when you have a place in Florida where you can impress everyone who sees you.
What does it matter that you're using tax payers' money to fly and to maintain Trump Tower in NYC.
The White House isn't good enough for the Trumps.
1
During the Clinton administration the United States was a party to a regional agreement with the acronym KEDO (Friedman should look it up through Google) and it was created to encourage North Korea to disassemble its nuclear reactors. The carrot was billions of dollars, technology and shipments of fuel oil to North Korea, all of which found its way to the military and the beloved leader. A few years later under the Bush administration it was discovered the North Koreans simply continued their nuclear program unchecked.
Perhaps in a few years we will discover the Iranians were using the same template that worked well for the North Koreans. There are few good options, but the last option should be to put faith or trust in a regime that has a long history of dishonest behavior.
Perhaps in a few years we will discover the Iranians were using the same template that worked well for the North Koreans. There are few good options, but the last option should be to put faith or trust in a regime that has a long history of dishonest behavior.
2
Mr Friedman is clearly gifted with insights regarding the middle east, but I believe he is missing an essential element of the North Korean issue. I remember when I studied in China in the early 80's that Koreans, both north and south, were considered "lost brothers and sisters". That is, that the Chines and Koreans share a common heritage and, like Taiwan, the Koreans will someday return to be part of the motherland. Perhaps the threat of Korean nuks is fueled by the Russians and it will be settled by the Chinese, who share a border and are most directly affected by this threat.
But wait a minute. In January, didn't President elect Trump reassure the world that a North Korean intercontinental missile "wasn't going to happen"? Surely we could take that to the bank.
One could fairly speculate that Mad Dog will advise Dumb Dog against belling the Kim Jong Cat with a pre-emptive attack and that, for the time being, the negotiation option will not receive the priority that federal "reforms" will enjoy.
One could fairly speculate that Mad Dog will advise Dumb Dog against belling the Kim Jong Cat with a pre-emptive attack and that, for the time being, the negotiation option will not receive the priority that federal "reforms" will enjoy.
1
I fear that Trump is all too much like Chance Gardener, the fictional character from Jerzy Kosinski's "Being There." Like Gardener, Trump seems only to know what he sees on his wide screen television. I certainly hope he's watching the news about North Korea, although I'm also concerned that none of his agenda-laden White House sycophants will have the guts to tell him that it's not an inconsequential video game.
Maybe Rex Tillerson has the experience and knowledge to act against North Korea. I'm afraid that the president won't be listening to him nor to other experts who have studied the region for years.
Would it be too audacious to think that Steve Bannon, with his desire to "deconstruct" the federal government, might think a little war with Korea would be a good thing? Is it likely that the president could be enticed into thinking that he, the great negotiator, doesn't need a lots of complicated facts and that the power of the US is so great it can't be effectively challenged?
Would it be too audacious to think that Steve Bannon, with his desire to "deconstruct" the federal government, might think a little war with Korea would be a good thing? Is it likely that the president could be enticed into thinking that he, the great negotiator, doesn't need a lots of complicated facts and that the power of the US is so great it can't be effectively challenged?
1
My only thought is to add that this mess first was passed on, not by Clinton, but by Harry Truman. We've been forced to put up with this travesty because of his inaction. We haven't had a "win the war" approach since then.
Nothing will ever work other than a removal of North Korea's leadership which can only occur if China wills it, which China will never do. Invasion is the first ingredient for WWW III. And there is no way to stop development of more and smaller nuclear devices and delivery systems. There are more than missles in development. N. Korea will ultimately disseminate these weapons. And then the cancer will have finally metastasized beyond control. So the first thing we have to do is prevent our President from doing anything because what is clear is he doesn't have a clue.
1
Our "Art of the Deal" President shouldn't find the negotiation option difficult, bar one thing--he only knows how to deal for himself not his country.
I suspect that Trump & Kim Jong-un share similar negotiating skills--unless one or the other appears the winner and on top, there is no deal.
Neither one of these two men appear to have the moral compasses needed to negotiate peace. Business, yes, is a deal. Peace, however, requires generosity and heart.
I suspect that Trump & Kim Jong-un share similar negotiating skills--unless one or the other appears the winner and on top, there is no deal.
Neither one of these two men appear to have the moral compasses needed to negotiate peace. Business, yes, is a deal. Peace, however, requires generosity and heart.
The thought that DJT and Bannon will have to solve this issue scares the living daylights out of me. They do not appear to have the intelligence, constraint or wisdom to make the deal Friedman suggests.
Under DJT, who's busy watching TV and tweeting, I see the US making another historic blunder here reminiscent of invading Iraq; but for very different reasons, alienating allies and enemies alike.
Under DJT, who's busy watching TV and tweeting, I see the US making another historic blunder here reminiscent of invading Iraq; but for very different reasons, alienating allies and enemies alike.
1
Amazing! A thoughtful article, about a topic which should be on anyone's informed mind, which should have stimulated thousands of comments. So far there are only 82. Compare that with 2K on Ivanka's clothing line. My God, what have we become?
To say that this president has an early foreign policy test implies that he knows there is an exam.
He doesn't.
Welcome to the Donald's world.
He doesn't.
Welcome to the Donald's world.
1
Well, negotiation with Kim Jong-un as Plan A is pretty weak when dealing with a nut case (not Trump, the other guy). Kim Jong-un might respond if the Chinese really applies the screws, but the USA hasn't much leverage. The Chinese might help, but what is Plan B?
Possible US military action will worry the Chinese, but maybe that possibility will bring about negotiation needed with them. As Thomas says, we need negotiations with the Chinese not with Kim Jong-un.
Joint action with the Chinese might make Kim Jong-un begin to appear as a liability to others in N Korea. That might make Kim Jong-un irrelevant - would his absence bring sanity within reach?
Possible US military action will worry the Chinese, but maybe that possibility will bring about negotiation needed with them. As Thomas says, we need negotiations with the Chinese not with Kim Jong-un.
Joint action with the Chinese might make Kim Jong-un begin to appear as a liability to others in N Korea. That might make Kim Jong-un irrelevant - would his absence bring sanity within reach?
1
Whisper to China that we may no choice but to put nukes in S Korea. China can solve our problem.
I do not think Pres. Trump has anything good to offer this country at this point but it remains to be seen. Instead of dealing with North Korea and other important issues, he is fixated on Mr. Obama and busy “leaking” two pages of his tax return he and his allies believe is most favorable to him. Why the media is not seriously questioning the source of Pres. Trump's tax is mind boggling? I lean on the side that Mr. Trump & his inner circle released it and playing the media for a sucker. When is the media going to realize that they are being used? If someone wants to damage Mr. Trump, why will he/she release only 2 pages that show no income source and the one most favorable to him? Something is not right here and the media should stop playing along. Stay on the Russia and wiretap story. Until Mr. Trump's "complete" & many years of tax return is release, do not play his game. We do not have a normal President here.
One cannot equate Iran with North Korea. ( but the press\right try and try )
The Iran deal was a sound one that could, and possibly will lead to peace on a whole host of fronts. I congratulate the Obama administration for brokering the deal, and feel much more safe because of it. ( as many do )
North Korea is a completely different scenario as it always has been and always will be. They are puppet state of China. The deal is to be made with China ( as it always will be )
What would they want for reigning them in ? I haven't a clue, but if there is a deal to be had, I am not convinced this administration has the gravitas or wherewithal to even figure it out.
We might end up with North Korea loaded up with nukes to the gills for a better deal on Trump ties being made in China.
This is what you voted for people. ( at least a clear minority of you )
The Iran deal was a sound one that could, and possibly will lead to peace on a whole host of fronts. I congratulate the Obama administration for brokering the deal, and feel much more safe because of it. ( as many do )
North Korea is a completely different scenario as it always has been and always will be. They are puppet state of China. The deal is to be made with China ( as it always will be )
What would they want for reigning them in ? I haven't a clue, but if there is a deal to be had, I am not convinced this administration has the gravitas or wherewithal to even figure it out.
We might end up with North Korea loaded up with nukes to the gills for a better deal on Trump ties being made in China.
This is what you voted for people. ( at least a clear minority of you )
1
Negotiate with N. Korea? You do realize that it took weeks of negotiation at Panmunjom to determine the height and arrangements of flags on the negotiating table, right? Not to mention the negotiations on the size and shape of the table itself.
You're assuming Trump has an interest in fixing this, he doesn't. Bannon is preoccupied with Islam and racial, nativist issues. Republicans are only interested in their pro rich, anti social progress agenda, plus gaming the system to win elections. Why deal with a hard problem with no political benefit for them?
2
Trump had better stop sucking up to Putin and start sucking up to Xi. He needs China far more than Russia to secure a nuke freeze in North Korea, and trade with China is far more valuable than trade with Russia. Trump may not know where North Korea is but some people in the State Department could point it out, if Bannon would stop firing them and gutting our most vital tool of worldwide diplomacy.
1
One problem. You would need someone who is marginally intelligent to negotiate such a deal. You'd also need Chinas help. Trump is far more concerned with his new trademark deal with China than to the North Korean situation. Bannons an ideological wack job. Tillerson is a figurehead. Jared is busy selling property to China oh and solving relations with Mexico and Israel/Palestine (ha!). All the State departments institutional knowledge is gone... with no replacements insight. And Trump is probably waiting on Putins instruction anyway.
1
How on earth does Trump effectively negotiate with anyone when on a near-daily basis he shows himself to be spectacularly dishonest and anything but a man of his word. Would YOU negotiate in good faith with that man and believe that the deal will hold? If you do, I have a lovely bridge I'd like to sell you.
If this issue presents a genuine challenge for grown-ups,and it does, Trump is in way over his elaborately coiffed head dealing with this. This is not a New York negotiation with a high rise landlord. This is a negotiation with a guy who holds the lives of many millions of people in his hands. Play tough guy here and lots of people may be killed, if for no other reason than to show you that Koreans can be tough too. And they are. So unless he wants to see South Korea obliterated, Trump had better be a better negotiator than any of us think he actually is.
This idiot is in way over his head. He's the only one who can't see that.
If this issue presents a genuine challenge for grown-ups,and it does, Trump is in way over his elaborately coiffed head dealing with this. This is not a New York negotiation with a high rise landlord. This is a negotiation with a guy who holds the lives of many millions of people in his hands. Play tough guy here and lots of people may be killed, if for no other reason than to show you that Koreans can be tough too. And they are. So unless he wants to see South Korea obliterated, Trump had better be a better negotiator than any of us think he actually is.
This idiot is in way over his head. He's the only one who can't see that.
I am an independent candidate for president. I wrote down my solution years ago and posted same in the old Daily Beast forums.
We produce a playbook showing our nuclear sub fleet—how many subs, pictures of missiles on board; our ground forces in South Korea, Guam and San Diego; destroyers and aircraft carriers, all our airplane fleets and what they carry including our state of art satellite radar.
We pass our playbook to South Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Chinese and Russians. We seek negotiations immediately—or else, at 2:00 a.m. in the bitter dead of freezing winter we drop ten 500 pound mega bombs on the famous marching square in the middle of downtown Pyongyang.
2:00 a.m. twenty below zero nobody dies but every window for blocks around is blown out, the N. Korean government computers inoperable. Then we precision bomb every airport and nuclear facility.
N. Korea buildup at 38th parallel is a paper tiger as the trucks and tanks won't start as all the batteries are dead. They don’t have the fuel to start the engines every day.
We bomb the buildings that have heat as those are the buildings with military commanders. We leaflets the 38th parallel telling the troops their government is gone, march south with white flags have free lunch in McDonalds and jobs tomorrow in the Hyundai and Kia plants.
I have designed and plan to publish a super cost-effective counter measure to eliminate ICBM’s as war instruments!!!!! Include that, too.
http://thegovernmentinexile.com
We produce a playbook showing our nuclear sub fleet—how many subs, pictures of missiles on board; our ground forces in South Korea, Guam and San Diego; destroyers and aircraft carriers, all our airplane fleets and what they carry including our state of art satellite radar.
We pass our playbook to South Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Chinese and Russians. We seek negotiations immediately—or else, at 2:00 a.m. in the bitter dead of freezing winter we drop ten 500 pound mega bombs on the famous marching square in the middle of downtown Pyongyang.
2:00 a.m. twenty below zero nobody dies but every window for blocks around is blown out, the N. Korean government computers inoperable. Then we precision bomb every airport and nuclear facility.
N. Korea buildup at 38th parallel is a paper tiger as the trucks and tanks won't start as all the batteries are dead. They don’t have the fuel to start the engines every day.
We bomb the buildings that have heat as those are the buildings with military commanders. We leaflets the 38th parallel telling the troops their government is gone, march south with white flags have free lunch in McDonalds and jobs tomorrow in the Hyundai and Kia plants.
I have designed and plan to publish a super cost-effective counter measure to eliminate ICBM’s as war instruments!!!!! Include that, too.
http://thegovernmentinexile.com
1
Friedman is of the Remnick School of Obama hagiography. They specialize in parroting Obama's false-choices narrative, like "Obama had the same three choices on Iran: bomb, acquiesce or negotiate."
Obama actually did two of the three, acquiescing when he led the world in abolishing sanctions against Iran -- and more poignantly -- refusing to stand with those brave Iranian young people who thronged the streets. "Something will happen in these 15 years that will be 'transformational'" was happening, but Obama did not have the rhetorical nerve, or the un-PC inclination, to subdue his preposterous aim of normalizing Iran and instead encourage the (democratic-minded) uprising against the mullahs.
Meanwhile, how much terror and carnage and incinerated and crucified children have resulted from Obama's special brand of realpolitik?
I'm no Trump fan (nor was I a W. fan) but at least we finally have someone in the WH who has a better understanding of deterrence than wishing things were so. I only hope Trump's impulsiveness is not worse than Obama's utter fecklessness.
Obama actually did two of the three, acquiescing when he led the world in abolishing sanctions against Iran -- and more poignantly -- refusing to stand with those brave Iranian young people who thronged the streets. "Something will happen in these 15 years that will be 'transformational'" was happening, but Obama did not have the rhetorical nerve, or the un-PC inclination, to subdue his preposterous aim of normalizing Iran and instead encourage the (democratic-minded) uprising against the mullahs.
Meanwhile, how much terror and carnage and incinerated and crucified children have resulted from Obama's special brand of realpolitik?
I'm no Trump fan (nor was I a W. fan) but at least we finally have someone in the WH who has a better understanding of deterrence than wishing things were so. I only hope Trump's impulsiveness is not worse than Obama's utter fecklessness.
1
I too disagree with the approach espoused by Thomas Friedman - I think it is unrealistic and would be ineffective. But your supposition that Obama should have somehow fanned the uprising in Iran ignores our history in that country. The US once orchestrated and carried out a coup in the 1950s that resulted in the removal of Iran's only democratically-elected leader, Mohammed Mosadegh. That is an approach best left in the past and one that not only shot us in the foot for years to come when Mosadegh was deposed, but also one that was not likely to even be popular with young Iranians and, taken to its extreme, likely would have resulted in another Syrian-type conflict. Realism is the best approach in this situation, as it has been for most of the nuclear age. We need to step up missile defense, have nuclear carriers in range to launch a terminal counterstrike, and maintain credibility by not negotiating with an irrational dictator of a tiny country that could not survive a counter-strike.
Problem is you expect donny to be sensible. He is a narcissistic cretin on his best day. Let us pray that would be more effective than letting the lucky spermer negotiate with another lucky spermer.
How the Cuban missile crisis, a confrontation with a superpower can be compared with the N. Korean missile problem is beyond me. North Korea has what? Two dozen nuclear weapons capable of getting half way to Japan... The Soviet Union and the US could have destroyed a quarter of the planet in a 3 days exchange and start an WWIII.... What is the "resemblance"?? Hello?
No wonder the middle classes in rich Western Europe and North America are spooked by the global trends occurred in the last few decades.
The so-called third world nations are clear winners of the American-led economic integration of last century. Economic prosperity brings with it geopolitical power in global governance.
North Korea is a good example of the new status quo in the military arena. Obviously, diplomatic negotiations are the only way out of this dangerous/lethal situation in the Korea peninsula.
Will Trump -- the art of the deal president-- pursue the negotiation venue with his untested/leading from behind Secretary of State Rex Tillerson?
The so-called third world nations are clear winners of the American-led economic integration of last century. Economic prosperity brings with it geopolitical power in global governance.
North Korea is a good example of the new status quo in the military arena. Obviously, diplomatic negotiations are the only way out of this dangerous/lethal situation in the Korea peninsula.
Will Trump -- the art of the deal president-- pursue the negotiation venue with his untested/leading from behind Secretary of State Rex Tillerson?
4
Mr. Friedman suggests that America should attempt to negotiate a nuclear "deal" with North Korea that emulates the nuclear agreement with Iran. Unfortunately, there is one very major difference between Iran and North Korea which will make this almost impossible: Iran has a mixed theocratic-democratic political system in which the people have a limited say, but the North Korean government is a dictatorship in which the people have no influence whatsoever; and thus easing of sanctions and some economic aid are not particularly appealing to Kim Jung Un. Moreover, the North Korean government strongly believes, justifiably so, that a viable nuclear arsenal coupled with a credible ICBM capability assure its survival. I believe that America will have to adjust to a nuclear North Korea just as it has adjusted to a nuclear China.
39
How will you adjust to Kim saying "lift all sanctions or I launch a nuclear strike on Los Angeles."?
2
There is NO adjusting to nuclear North Korea with ICBM's. He will have to be disarmed one way or the other.
1
The Chinese ballistic missiles would not fly on course before President Clinton granted export license to Communist China for the US military TOP SECRET classified Hughes Aircraft Rocket Guidance Technology as a part of Clinton’s “Chinagate” bribery deal with Johnny Chung as the bagman.
Google up “Chinagate.”
This Military Secret Rocket Guidance technology allows Communist China the ability for intercontinental ballistic missile targeting anywhere in the USA (and anywhere else around the world), according to Richard Poe, Tuesday, May 27, 2003?
Google up “Chinagate.”
This Military Secret Rocket Guidance technology allows Communist China the ability for intercontinental ballistic missile targeting anywhere in the USA (and anywhere else around the world), according to Richard Poe, Tuesday, May 27, 2003?
1
Trump, Bannon and the rest of the "inner circle" almost certainly would prefer military action (in any of its forms) if there is to be direct engagement with North Korea. It's been remarked by many that Trump and Kim seem eerily alike. Both are desperate for respect. Perhaps that works to our advantage. China will certainly play a role. McMaster and Mattis should also be at the table. Indeed, to the extent they remain professionally and reasonably objective and focused on our nation's well-being, McMaster and Mattis may be the sole voices of reason within this administration. They're reputed to be able to speak truth to power... but they have to have access and power has to listen.
4
More and more articles and comments shows a very dangerous mindset that is overly rational and far too thoughtful. The United States and increasingly China are realizing that N. Korea is not rational or gives a damn about anything except acting out some delusional plan. The historic tragedy here is a failure to recall the past, Japan and Germany's irrational and self destructive path in the 1930's. The US should enter a quiet but serious program to develop a new weapon that neutralizes atomic devices. Eventually this will be an imperative as more states have atomic weapons. N. Korea sees the US as the devil and is more than willing to face destruction rather than cut a deal that might have material gain but a loss of glory and historic action. To batter the US, to inflict huge damage, to kill millions is a serious narcotic to desperate minds. To be remembered as the guy who devastated the US is a genuine thrill worth seeking. We have to realizes there are people who do want to kill us. China can only go so far, and we should do everything to have China with us. But the terrible truth is that one morning N. Korea will ignore all reason and come for us, just as Japan did in December 1941. We must not get lost in wishful thinking but be able to minimize the nightmare. N.Korea does not see itself as a suicide but on a great and glorious historic mission.
6
Regrettably, I think you may be right.
The US has thought about developing a system to shoot down missiles for many years. The technical part is not easy and it is really expensive. Once built it is to be used only if facing a suicidal lunatic.
The US has thought about developing a system to shoot down missiles for many years. The technical part is not easy and it is really expensive. Once built it is to be used only if facing a suicidal lunatic.
The Iran deal was (and is) a great deal. Republicans don't like it because it was achieved by a Democrat, and because they want maximally war-like conditions to prevail in respect to Iran (if they let Iran get nuclear weapons, then they can bomb them). What made the Iran deal so good was the breadth of its international support. We need the same breadth of support regarding N. Korea.
Obviously, it must include S. Korea and Japan. Obviously, it must include China. It should also include, unequivocally, Russia. Also, all of the SE Asian countries and every country in Europe. It should offer improvements in the living conditions in NK in return for elimination of weapons programs. This is for 2 reasons: Leverage for the deal, and (more importantly) inducements over time to a population that either slowly or quickly will change the nature of their governance. They cannot effect such changes from such a weak and impoverished position. Upgrading their economic situation is how the danger will be eliminated in the long-run. And we need to address this with a deal like the one in Iran, in order to HAVE a "long-run."
Obviously, it must include S. Korea and Japan. Obviously, it must include China. It should also include, unequivocally, Russia. Also, all of the SE Asian countries and every country in Europe. It should offer improvements in the living conditions in NK in return for elimination of weapons programs. This is for 2 reasons: Leverage for the deal, and (more importantly) inducements over time to a population that either slowly or quickly will change the nature of their governance. They cannot effect such changes from such a weak and impoverished position. Upgrading their economic situation is how the danger will be eliminated in the long-run. And we need to address this with a deal like the one in Iran, in order to HAVE a "long-run."
70
Rice cakes for rice cakes: That was the deal that Kim Yong-sun, a senior North Korean negotiator with the U.S. thought possible before the arrival of George Bush in the White House. Bush, as we might recall, put his boots firmly down on the late South Korean President Kim Dae Jung's gradual detente with the North. Things have been sliding rapidly downward since. Still, diplomatic negotiations centered on the rice-cakes imagery remain the only hope for progress toward normalcy and peace on the Korean peninsula.
Despite descriptions of the dictatorial regime of North Korea as buffoons and loonies, all their moves are motivated by self-preservation. If South Korea and the U.S. perceive them as threats , they see the same threat in the Washington-Seoul military ties.
What if the annual joint U.S.-ROK military exercises close to North Korean waters( underway right now) were to be suspended and the prospects of a peace treaty, diplomatic recognition, and a mutual non-aggression pact were to be held out to Pyongyang in return for a properly monitored halt and dismantling of the North Korean nuclear program?
North Korea genuinely fears that America , joined by South Korea, aims at a violent offensive leading to regime change in Pyongyang. If that fear can be allayed by concrete action, we could be reading about actual rice-cake baskets being exchanged across the DMZ someday.
Despite descriptions of the dictatorial regime of North Korea as buffoons and loonies, all their moves are motivated by self-preservation. If South Korea and the U.S. perceive them as threats , they see the same threat in the Washington-Seoul military ties.
What if the annual joint U.S.-ROK military exercises close to North Korean waters( underway right now) were to be suspended and the prospects of a peace treaty, diplomatic recognition, and a mutual non-aggression pact were to be held out to Pyongyang in return for a properly monitored halt and dismantling of the North Korean nuclear program?
North Korea genuinely fears that America , joined by South Korea, aims at a violent offensive leading to regime change in Pyongyang. If that fear can be allayed by concrete action, we could be reading about actual rice-cake baskets being exchanged across the DMZ someday.
4
I have to agree that negotiation is the only viable solution; but negotiating a deal with countries that have the historical baggage of North Korea, South Korea, Japan, and China -- not to mention the United States and whatever allies we have left -- will require subtlety, flexibility, improved good will, and a lot of trust. Those are qualities that President Obama brought to the Iran deal and that a President Hillary Clinton could have brought to a North Korea deal; but each and every one of them is far outside the limits of the skill and temperament that I see any reason to expect from so-called President Trump. Secretary Tillerson has been a pleasant surprise to me. He perhaps of all the Trump appointees may have what it would take to make a deal with North Korea, South Korea, China, and Japan; but that is probably why he was so quickly marginalized in this failed administration.
104
Not surprisingly, Friedman presents a disturbingly high level of naivete given his world travels.
The North Korean despot and his family will never honor any agreement with any nation other than China, and that only because the Chinese could overthrow and kill them but - to date - have chosen not to.
This calls into question China's motivation for keeping such a highly charged situation so close to their homeland, and is at odds with their childish protests about the THAAD defense system - something they too should be considering for their own defense.
This particular Kim family are vicious animals.They are murders, extortionists, and pathological liars. So far, every time they have moved toward armed conflict, it has turned out to be a shakedown in the end. One doesn't cut deals with vicious animals. They need to be eradicated.
This time, it should be left to China to decide whether it is actually willing to risk nuclear conflict on its front door, or, take definitive action to eradicate the Kim regime and all of its collaborators, and return stability to the peninsula.
There is nothing to be gained by propagating a situation that has got further and further out of control, with no likelihood of ever being resolved.
The North Korean despot and his family will never honor any agreement with any nation other than China, and that only because the Chinese could overthrow and kill them but - to date - have chosen not to.
This calls into question China's motivation for keeping such a highly charged situation so close to their homeland, and is at odds with their childish protests about the THAAD defense system - something they too should be considering for their own defense.
This particular Kim family are vicious animals.They are murders, extortionists, and pathological liars. So far, every time they have moved toward armed conflict, it has turned out to be a shakedown in the end. One doesn't cut deals with vicious animals. They need to be eradicated.
This time, it should be left to China to decide whether it is actually willing to risk nuclear conflict on its front door, or, take definitive action to eradicate the Kim regime and all of its collaborators, and return stability to the peninsula.
There is nothing to be gained by propagating a situation that has got further and further out of control, with no likelihood of ever being resolved.
6
Negotiation might work. Consider a theory that the incumbent president ideal model of an effective leader maybe isn't Russian, but North Korean. Consider the similarities, his inner circle is all guys in military uniform or syncophants. When Conway starts following him around with a small open flip notebook you will see. He prizes loyalty over competence. Quashing dissent by declaring so and so or such is an enemy of the state and preserving secrecy above all are goals shared both by administrations, although to be sure the North Korean modus operandi is more threatening. Both love adoring fawning large scale theatrical and unhinged stadium events of Praise and Thanksgiving, although I have heard few republicans in the last month call ours the Dear Leader, although I suspect a few are sending letters that start out like that. Last consider both dear leaders are hell bent on bankrupting the lower and middle class in order to fuel a massive military and the elites well pillowed in comfort. With so much in common, surely they can make a deal.
3
Trump will soon be meeting with China's premier.
Will that result in some agreement regarding N. Korea or simply another real estate deal for Trump's son-in-law?
Will that result in some agreement regarding N. Korea or simply another real estate deal for Trump's son-in-law?
5
I don't believe that our mentally unstable president is up to the task of negotiating some kind of deal with North Korea that halts their nuclear and ballistic missile program. He is more comfortable dealing from a position of strength and imposing his deals on others. And then stiffing them at the end.
However, I hope and pray that he has the intelligence to stand aside and let more mature and careful players, such as, career diplomats in the state department and military planners, deal with North Korea. This is perhaps the best option available to us. Hopefully, they can reach an agreement similar to the one President Obama reached with Iran. Because, despite what our president said, that deal avoided war and bought us some time.
However, I hope and pray that he has the intelligence to stand aside and let more mature and careful players, such as, career diplomats in the state department and military planners, deal with North Korea. This is perhaps the best option available to us. Hopefully, they can reach an agreement similar to the one President Obama reached with Iran. Because, despite what our president said, that deal avoided war and bought us some time.
3
There are a few issues with this article that lead me to question Mr. Friedman's understanding of the issue. First of all, the bombing option would be absolutely ludicrous considering the immense concern of retaliation from both the DPRK and China. Through conventional means the North has the potential to wipe out nearly half of the South's population that live in and around Seoul. It's also imperative to consider that China is still technically an ally of the North and we shouldn't forget that last time there was a military conflict, 3 million Chinese soldiers made things anything but easy for the United States.
Secondly, all indicators lead anyone paying attention to believe the Nuclear program is no longer a bargaining chip. Furthermore, if multiple administrations with vastly more foreign policy experience could not successfully deal with a more sane Kim jong-il, what makes you think the novice Trump administration can accomplish anything of significance?
This leaves me considering two options. The first is the acquiescence that Friedman references. It's maybe not ideal, but it seams preferable to potentially 25 million dead South Koreans and a war with China. The second option is to strike a deal, but with China instead. China has the ability to truly isolate the North in a way the United States doesn't and they can pressure them to either change or collapse on their own terms.
Secondly, all indicators lead anyone paying attention to believe the Nuclear program is no longer a bargaining chip. Furthermore, if multiple administrations with vastly more foreign policy experience could not successfully deal with a more sane Kim jong-il, what makes you think the novice Trump administration can accomplish anything of significance?
This leaves me considering two options. The first is the acquiescence that Friedman references. It's maybe not ideal, but it seams preferable to potentially 25 million dead South Koreans and a war with China. The second option is to strike a deal, but with China instead. China has the ability to truly isolate the North in a way the United States doesn't and they can pressure them to either change or collapse on their own terms.
31
Mr. Freidman:
The Soviet Leadership during the Cold War, from Khrushchev thru Gorbachev, was at times histrionic, but very rational. Yeltsin was drunk but also rational. Putin is as cold, ruthless, calculating--and rational--as Machiavelli. Fidel Castro was theatrical, but always rational. Iran's Supreme Leader and Revolutionary Guard are ideologically intractable and aggressive, but always cold, calculating and rational. In all these cases there was/is a formal or informal government bureaucracy that would squelch irrational behavior.
Kim Jong-un is a young, inexperienced, and insecure autocratic dictator with no internal bureaucratic checks on him. The chances of him miscalculating are very high with potentially catastrophic results. For that reason, a nuclear first strike unfortunately has to be kept in the armamentarium along with a willingness to use it if indicated. If he is convinced that we are willing to destroy him and his regime if he miscalculates, his rational impulses *might* supersede his irrational impulses. But anything less than the demonstrated willingness to carry through on a lethal threat is a provocation for that man.
The Soviet Leadership during the Cold War, from Khrushchev thru Gorbachev, was at times histrionic, but very rational. Yeltsin was drunk but also rational. Putin is as cold, ruthless, calculating--and rational--as Machiavelli. Fidel Castro was theatrical, but always rational. Iran's Supreme Leader and Revolutionary Guard are ideologically intractable and aggressive, but always cold, calculating and rational. In all these cases there was/is a formal or informal government bureaucracy that would squelch irrational behavior.
Kim Jong-un is a young, inexperienced, and insecure autocratic dictator with no internal bureaucratic checks on him. The chances of him miscalculating are very high with potentially catastrophic results. For that reason, a nuclear first strike unfortunately has to be kept in the armamentarium along with a willingness to use it if indicated. If he is convinced that we are willing to destroy him and his regime if he miscalculates, his rational impulses *might* supersede his irrational impulses. But anything less than the demonstrated willingness to carry through on a lethal threat is a provocation for that man.
2
Transformational. Nice big word conveying big hopes and dreams, though it's a synonym for Alice in Wonderland. The rabbit hole is anyone whose been paying attention is that North Korea has been playing the same saber rattling game to receive aid since inception. So the advise is for Trump to do exactly what others have done in the past to achiever exactly what North Korea wants?
First, lumping the previous Bush & Clinton administrations together with Obama is convenient since the problem of North Korea was no different a couple months ago. The only difference is that shackles of ripping the President for inaction on an threat to America are off with the name change. Obama sat on the fence hoping things work out. His actual quote on foreign policy? "These things always work themselves out." I recall an awful lot of awful history that I wouldn't characterize as "working out."
Second, the aid deal may be the best thing to do now, however. What's the plan when it's obvious it won't? Picture Kim Jun Ugh III with 300 ballistic missiles in hardened silos demanding much more than just a belly full of rice. What's the plan. If it's ever to take out the nukes, it's a lot easier to take out 10 than 100.
Hoping for things to work themselves out makes doing nothing seem like a plan. But tough problems were usually worked out by tough men making tough choices that aren't always popular. I don't see millions who are bred to hate the West doing good things with nukes after Kim.
First, lumping the previous Bush & Clinton administrations together with Obama is convenient since the problem of North Korea was no different a couple months ago. The only difference is that shackles of ripping the President for inaction on an threat to America are off with the name change. Obama sat on the fence hoping things work out. His actual quote on foreign policy? "These things always work themselves out." I recall an awful lot of awful history that I wouldn't characterize as "working out."
Second, the aid deal may be the best thing to do now, however. What's the plan when it's obvious it won't? Picture Kim Jun Ugh III with 300 ballistic missiles in hardened silos demanding much more than just a belly full of rice. What's the plan. If it's ever to take out the nukes, it's a lot easier to take out 10 than 100.
Hoping for things to work themselves out makes doing nothing seem like a plan. But tough problems were usually worked out by tough men making tough choices that aren't always popular. I don't see millions who are bred to hate the West doing good things with nukes after Kim.
1
Developers negotiate around binary options. They choose one site vs. another. They choose to build or not to build. They bring in partners or not. Which lenders’ terms will they accept? Yes, they’ll negotiate specifics around any of the options, but if a deal is not made, who loses? The developer won’t do the project and no one is really harmed. The developer will do something else, somewhere else. He’ll succeed or fail with whatever it is. There are few constituents for whom and to whom the developer is responsible, especially constituents who’ll be affected if he does nothing. If he was going to fill a need, someone else will do it.
Contrast this to the negotiations needed to reduce the risk of rogue states with nuclear and long-range delivery capabilities. These require the intellect, calculus, patience and tact to play a multi-national three-dimensional chess game. The globe is the constituent of such negotiations. The consequences are existential.
Although we know little of the man controlling North Korea, we know enough to doubt his negotiating skills. His tactic is brutality. We’re getting to know more of our nation’s leader each day, and sadly I suspect he lacks the intellect, calculus, patience and tact to manage the negotiations Mr. Friedman suggest as necessary. I worry that those advising him can’t fill the gap either. He’s right, it is the best option in a conflict that needs to be stabilized before it’s too late. Do we have the leadership to accomplish it?
Contrast this to the negotiations needed to reduce the risk of rogue states with nuclear and long-range delivery capabilities. These require the intellect, calculus, patience and tact to play a multi-national three-dimensional chess game. The globe is the constituent of such negotiations. The consequences are existential.
Although we know little of the man controlling North Korea, we know enough to doubt his negotiating skills. His tactic is brutality. We’re getting to know more of our nation’s leader each day, and sadly I suspect he lacks the intellect, calculus, patience and tact to manage the negotiations Mr. Friedman suggest as necessary. I worry that those advising him can’t fill the gap either. He’s right, it is the best option in a conflict that needs to be stabilized before it’s too late. Do we have the leadership to accomplish it?
2
"Trump should follow that path, argues Litwak: Get North Korea to freeze its nuclear warheads at present levels — around 15 — freeze all production of weapons-usable fissile material and freeze all ballistic missile testing — so it cannot hit the U.S. — in return for an easing of economic sanctions and some economic aid."
Trump's solution: bomb the hell out of them, and welcome to WWIII.
Trump's solution: bomb the hell out of them, and welcome to WWIII.
10
Find the National Academy Of Science study relating to a "small nuclear exchange" between Pakistan and India. I believe it was 10 missiles. It came out a few years ago. The effects on the northern hemisphere would take care of global warming. Maybe the deniers would like to see this occur.
I've been on edge about North Korea for weeks, given the bizarre assassination of Kim Jong-un's brother and the missile testing they are doing. In making Muslims public enemy number 1, even prior to Trump, we have allowed far more dangerous threats to develop. Consider how many women have been killed by domestic violence, how many people in general by gun violence since 9/11, compared to victims of terrorism perpetrated by Muslims and the numbers are staggering. But we will keep throwing billions down the drain to fight the never ending war on terror, but can't spare a few farthings to deal with the causes that are actually killing thousands of American citizens.
Trump is stuck here. His tough talk on foreign policy and position that everything Bush and Obama did was wrong played well to his base, but real world issues can't be solved with sound bites, Twitter threats, and Trump rallies. And where exactly is our Sec of State, Mr. Tillerson on this? He's on a tour of Asia, including Japan, China, and South Korea. It would be nice to know what his position is on North Korea's nuclear capability.
Trump is stuck here. His tough talk on foreign policy and position that everything Bush and Obama did was wrong played well to his base, but real world issues can't be solved with sound bites, Twitter threats, and Trump rallies. And where exactly is our Sec of State, Mr. Tillerson on this? He's on a tour of Asia, including Japan, China, and South Korea. It would be nice to know what his position is on North Korea's nuclear capability.
76
Tillerson may be as clueless as his boss.
"Trump will soon discover that in foreign policy, everything is like Obamacare — easy to criticize, more transactional than transformational, but all the other options are worse."
Stark, but compelling column. Of all the issues facing Trump, this is the one President Obama warned him about, the one costing nervous Americans sleep.
I'm not sure Trump or Bannon can even comprehend the magnitude of what you wrote here, Mr. Friedman. It's outside their Islamic lexicon of banning Muslims in an attempt to purify America for the growing clash of civilizations between Islam and white Christianity.
American foreign policy is adrift right now, and if negotiation is the only sane way to avoid nuclear Armageddon at the hands of a lunatic, we're coming up short with an inexperienced Secretary of State overseeing a ghost department. So who's in charge now? Somehow I can't picture Jim Jong-un visiting Mar a Lago, nor can I see the Trump plane landing in North Korea.
Like many Americans, I want to bury my head in the sand now, or go back to screaming about Russia and the death of the ACA. But this little state could end up being "The Mouse That Roared," and if it does, it's unfathomable what destruction they could cause.
We're dealing with two highly childish, erratic leaders here, and I'm not sure two wrongs can make a right unless a true adult steps up to the plate.
On either side.
Stark, but compelling column. Of all the issues facing Trump, this is the one President Obama warned him about, the one costing nervous Americans sleep.
I'm not sure Trump or Bannon can even comprehend the magnitude of what you wrote here, Mr. Friedman. It's outside their Islamic lexicon of banning Muslims in an attempt to purify America for the growing clash of civilizations between Islam and white Christianity.
American foreign policy is adrift right now, and if negotiation is the only sane way to avoid nuclear Armageddon at the hands of a lunatic, we're coming up short with an inexperienced Secretary of State overseeing a ghost department. So who's in charge now? Somehow I can't picture Jim Jong-un visiting Mar a Lago, nor can I see the Trump plane landing in North Korea.
Like many Americans, I want to bury my head in the sand now, or go back to screaming about Russia and the death of the ACA. But this little state could end up being "The Mouse That Roared," and if it does, it's unfathomable what destruction they could cause.
We're dealing with two highly childish, erratic leaders here, and I'm not sure two wrongs can make a right unless a true adult steps up to the plate.
On either side.
154
I agree that adults need to be brought into the picture. Negotiations should be headed by China with Tillerson doing the US talking. Other adults in the room - Japan and South Korea. Russia? If we had a fully functioning State Department, Tillerson could get some quality support. As it stands now, lunch with Kissinger is as good as it gets.
Here is the problem as I see it, and it is very much our problem, that is, a problem of the American people. Trump and Kim Jong-in are very similar characters. Both are completely unhinged, and therefore untrustworthy. Litwak's premise is, if I take it correctly, that Kim is rational - in the sense that his primary objective is to remain in power. Negotiation would thus be directed at an agreement that recognizes and respects that goal. But, for Kim to accept such a deal he would have to trust Trump at his word. Yet we have installed a narcissistic madman in the White House, who has proven himself utterly erratic and therefore utterly untrustworthy. Trump sees the world as zero sum, and his ego will not allow non-zero negotiation. Therefore, given Kim's possession of nuclear weapons, his only realistic path to remaining in power, from his perspective, is to continue to do what he has been doing for over a decade. Unless he is completely insane, a distinct possibility, he will not shoot first, as that would be suicidal. And he cannot back down, because his weapons are his only means to his status quo. The risk, our and the world's risk, is that an accident will happen, as it surely will, either in Asia or, more likely, the Middle East. What a mess. When we most need a cool head and steady hand, we have a hotheaded idiot, handled by raving lunatics.
117
Nonsense - this is pure 'Mouse that Roared' territory. Any use of a nuclear weapon by North Korea would be instant national suicide. No more May-Day parades, no more Nuremberg rallies, no more bad kimchee. Even NK's distracted and cartoonish leadership knows this.
No, it is one more convenient bogeyman for the administration to keep shoveling tragic amount of precious treasure down the DOD welfare-state rathole.
No, it is one more convenient bogeyman for the administration to keep shoveling tragic amount of precious treasure down the DOD welfare-state rathole.
22
Generally, you are correct. But if there are internal political issues in North Korea, Kim could opt for national suicide rather than face the end of the Kim dynasty.
This editorial flies in the face of decades of conventional wisdom. Everybody writing on this subject has emphasized that the Chinese and the North Koreans have a special relationship and that the only way to deter the North Koreans is by convincing the Chinese to come down hard upon them. The notion that we should engage in bilateral negotiations with Kim has no support at all.. This is a bizarre recommendation from out of nowhere. You'd think Mr. Friedman would acknowledge that he's the only person in the universe who favors direct negotiations.
4
"...he only way to deter the North Koreans is by convincing the Chinese to come down hard upon them."
For a reasoned look at that approach, from people who know what they're talking about, read this article from Foreign Policy magazine:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/07/china-is-doing-what-it-has-to-in-nor...
For a reasoned look at that approach, from people who know what they're talking about, read this article from Foreign Policy magazine:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/07/china-is-doing-what-it-has-to-in-nor...
The image of the Dear Leader & our ignorant narcissistic president tying to make a 'Deal' seems awful surreal. One has to wonder if Il Trumpolini is together enough to now realize that poking a stick at the PRC over the One China/Two Systems policy of generations was not a good idea. And of course, what happens to the Koreans matter not at all to him. The "worse solutions" seem to be growing.
9
The idea of Trump having to handle anything more than deciding which side of the plate the fork goes on scares me. The notion of him dealing with North Korea over nuclear issues? (Insert swear words here.)
105
Winter is almost and summer may already be here. It's going to get hotter!
1
Does anyone believe that the president-for-now could point to North Korea on a map of the world? Or that he knows what's in the Iran deal? Or that he has the slightest idea of the content of Trumpcare...or as some have called it, Wealth Care?
360
Readers may wish to recall the "Sunshine Policy" initiated in 1998 and designed to explore the possibility of reuniting the two Koreas. Considerable progress seemed to be under way, beginning with the reuniting of family members who had not seen one another at that point for half a century. Kim Dae Jung was even awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts at the time. Tragically, all of this came crashing down when President Bush cited North Korea as part of the "Axis of Evil" (along with Iran and Iraq) in a State of the Union Address delivered in January of 2002.
41
The South Korean government is likely to lose the next election to a left leaning party that will be more inclined to negotiate with the North Korean regime and foster better relations with Kim. I would suggest leading from behind by allowing South Korea to fashion a solution to the problems raised by this column
"Tragically, all of this came crashing down when President Bush cited North Korea as part of the "Axis of Evil" (along with Iran and Iraq) in a State of the Union Address delivered in January of 2002."
Coincidently, that's when the Iranians, who had moderated their positions and were cooperating with us on "The War on Terror", suddenly turned hard right and accelerated their nuclear program.
Coincidently, that's when the Iranians, who had moderated their positions and were cooperating with us on "The War on Terror", suddenly turned hard right and accelerated their nuclear program.
The problem is that we're talking about Trump, who grasps subtlety and nuance as well as a rabid ferret. I am not at all optimistic that this administration will handle this well.
North Korea presents the ultimate problem: nuclear weapons in the hands of a possibly irrational state. This has vexed several administrations which have all failed to produce a working solution. If it stumped them, chances are good that the incompetent Trump administration will fail at it as well. This is the cost of electing a fool as President.
If you want to sleep poorly tomorrow night, think of the cheers that will come from certain quarters if Trump were to order a nuclear attack on North Korea. JFK used patience and wisdom to resolve Cuba in 1962, going against a lot of military advice. I just don't see Trump following that lead.
North Korea presents the ultimate problem: nuclear weapons in the hands of a possibly irrational state. This has vexed several administrations which have all failed to produce a working solution. If it stumped them, chances are good that the incompetent Trump administration will fail at it as well. This is the cost of electing a fool as President.
If you want to sleep poorly tomorrow night, think of the cheers that will come from certain quarters if Trump were to order a nuclear attack on North Korea. JFK used patience and wisdom to resolve Cuba in 1962, going against a lot of military advice. I just don't see Trump following that lead.
162
You say "nuclear weapons in the hands of a possibly irrational state." It's worse: with Trump as Commander-in-Chief, it could mean nuclear weapons in the hands of possibly 2 irrational states.
That ratchets up the 'scare' scale enormously.
That ratchets up the 'scare' scale enormously.
1
The US also has nuclear weapons in the hands of an irrational leader. Help!!!!!!!!
Friedman is correct in asserting that negotiations are the only solution, but his analysis is incomplete. There needs to be a strategic carrot and stick set of items at the ready. Recall that JFK pledged that the USA would never again invade Cuba, as it did at the Bay of Pigs. Here, carrots would include a similar pledge and the obvious set of incentives for trade, etc., as Friedman mentions in his article. However, it is the stick that is missing. We must make clear that if Kim does not stand down, we will do everything humanly imaginable to destabilize what is left of his economy, encourage covert attempts to destabilize his regime (not every North Korean general can be happy with the status quo), and other measures left to experts who understand North Korea and foreign policy far better than me. Negotiating from weakness is doomed to failure, and expecting someting to happen in 15 years is a roll of the dice I am unwilling to take with a family leadership in its third generation, with each new leader evincing a sociopathological behavior worse than before.
14
I suggest we not hold our collective breath waiting for Trump to grow into his role. Recall please that this is the same ignorant, compulsive, short-tempered, narcissistic, name calling, man-child who has advocated that other countries, such as Japan, develop their own nuclear weapons and that the US engage in another "arms race." As you said Tom, what could possibly go wrong!
83
Just another of America's bogeymen needed to satisfy America's religious sensibilities of always looking for, creating and finding the bogeyman to continue America's perpetual war machine and war psychology.
7
Trump has already issued his policy position: allow all the stakeholders in the region, Japan, South Korea, etc., to acquire their own nuclear arsenals. It's the dandy 4th option you forgot, Tom.
30
I am concewrned about a more likely path.
As the Twitter King recognizes the political mire he is plodding into, and perhaps after a brief showcase of "negotiation" he will also see a seductive illusion on the horizon - mushroom clouds in Korea and possibly Japan, creating (in his deluded eyes) a great opportunity for US exports and military heroics. All this neatly timed to occur as the 2020 election looms. Rally round the flag- support the troops - we can't fire the Commander in Chief during a war!
W had a similar delusion, and insofar as the 2004 election was concerned, it worked.
Please convince me I'm wrong.
As the Twitter King recognizes the political mire he is plodding into, and perhaps after a brief showcase of "negotiation" he will also see a seductive illusion on the horizon - mushroom clouds in Korea and possibly Japan, creating (in his deluded eyes) a great opportunity for US exports and military heroics. All this neatly timed to occur as the 2020 election looms. Rally round the flag- support the troops - we can't fire the Commander in Chief during a war!
W had a similar delusion, and insofar as the 2004 election was concerned, it worked.
Please convince me I'm wrong.
17
Kim seeks stardom on the world stage. Who, other than our own Star-in-Chief, can help him get there? Mr Negotiator should have no problem appealing to Kim's narcissism since it's a trait they both can relate to. Now, if we only let Trump be Trump this problem will be solved.
Had to say all that. In all seriousness, this problem, and problem child, is here to stay unless our government--State, Treasury, Defense--works in consort to formulate and negotiate a path towards de-escalation. Agree with Ed Litwack and think an Iran like path may work. The big IF, though, is the degree to which Kim (and party/military leaders) decide to be rational. Any nuclear exchange will obliterate South Korea and fallout will affect China. So, this isn't a bilateral undertaking either. Very worrisome.
Had to say all that. In all seriousness, this problem, and problem child, is here to stay unless our government--State, Treasury, Defense--works in consort to formulate and negotiate a path towards de-escalation. Agree with Ed Litwack and think an Iran like path may work. The big IF, though, is the degree to which Kim (and party/military leaders) decide to be rational. Any nuclear exchange will obliterate South Korea and fallout will affect China. So, this isn't a bilateral undertaking either. Very worrisome.
5
Actually, given the prevailing winds of the region, the fallout of a nuclear exchange would affect us more than the Chinese.
North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, is a ridiculous leader, but he is also a desperate, ambitious and cruel leader. Someone needs to get effective nuclear weapons out of Kim’s hands before a long-range delivery system is developed.
For various reasons, the “someone” who needs to act is the United States, and our leader, unfortunately, is President Donald Trump. That means that we have two, raw rookies – Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – couched with the responsibility of solving the North Korea problem.
Not only is Donald Trump inexperienced, he is permanently immature. The kind of deal Mr. Trump must make is a deal similar to the careful strategy outlined by Thomas Friedman today. Mr. Trump, however, may want to be a hero – he may not be able to resist trying to hit a home run.
The business history of Donald Trump is filled with efforts to hit a home run. Sometimes he succeeded, but sometimes he failed and needed to be bailed out by his father or the bankruptcy courts.
There can be no failure with North Korea.
There also cannot be any hiding behind the throw-back isolationism Mr. Trump espoused in his recent speech to Congress.
For various reasons, the “someone” who needs to act is the United States, and our leader, unfortunately, is President Donald Trump. That means that we have two, raw rookies – Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – couched with the responsibility of solving the North Korea problem.
Not only is Donald Trump inexperienced, he is permanently immature. The kind of deal Mr. Trump must make is a deal similar to the careful strategy outlined by Thomas Friedman today. Mr. Trump, however, may want to be a hero – he may not be able to resist trying to hit a home run.
The business history of Donald Trump is filled with efforts to hit a home run. Sometimes he succeeded, but sometimes he failed and needed to be bailed out by his father or the bankruptcy courts.
There can be no failure with North Korea.
There also cannot be any hiding behind the throw-back isolationism Mr. Trump espoused in his recent speech to Congress.
3
Hasn't North Korea already set the table for negotiation by demanding that the U.S. cease war-games with South Korea? We could get a lot in the way of inspection etc. by agreeing to something like that perhaps, then recommence war games, but as partners with the Chinese. Bet Kim wouldn't like that, but what a fun civilized way to spy on, test, and evaluate each other's military capabilities, while sharing status as co-guarantors of stable, relatively status quo secure Asia. Sort of like Yellow Sea Military Olympics.
We would probably have to first clean up the Chinese financial ties to Trump Inc. though; or simply eliminate the problem through the Emoluments Clause and the 25th Amendment. I wonder if Pence could resurrect the State Dept.?
We would probably have to first clean up the Chinese financial ties to Trump Inc. though; or simply eliminate the problem through the Emoluments Clause and the 25th Amendment. I wonder if Pence could resurrect the State Dept.?
1
Mr. Friedman makes it sound like a deal could be made but in reality the North Koreans are unreliable partners. Witness the 1994 deal to stop nuclear proliferation made with President Clinton with they ignored. Trump is often portrayed as someone who doesn't live up to his word. But he is an amateur compared to the North Koreans.
18
Of course, with our rhetoric declining lower and lower day by day, I'm sure Mr. Trump is seriously considering sending Dennis Rodman to be his initial emissary to the offices of basketball-loving Kim Jong-un.
We are all tempted to sink lower in our discourse, but don't forget, there is always Hope: Love Trumps Hate.
We are all tempted to sink lower in our discourse, but don't forget, there is always Hope: Love Trumps Hate.
3
I think we had wide options for negotiation in the Clinton and Bush regimes. From Obama to Trump, those options are narrower. The Chinese have to be made to believe that we are ready to go to war with North Korea for them to exert the kind of pressure necessary to make a change in North Korean behavior. In order for the Chinese to believe that, we have to believe it. I am no warmonger, but we cannot abide a North Korea capable of hitting the US with nuclear weapons. Our discussions with China only only include half of a Jeremiad today: "Get Korea to acquiesce and we will delay THAAD, or otherwise reduce our presence on the peninsula." The necessary and sufficient clause would include: "or we will attack North Korea, igniting at best a terrible refugee crisis on your border, bloodbath in South Korea, and a resurgent militarized Japan. At worst a war, as they do, that will somehow spill over your border dragging all parties into a wider conflict that is not, as some believe, already predestined."
North Korea is not Iraq, nor Afghanistan. We don't need to hold it to be succesful militarily, only to destroy it. Any negotiating position that doesn't include annhilation as an alternative is a waste of time.
North Korea is not Iraq, nor Afghanistan. We don't need to hold it to be succesful militarily, only to destroy it. Any negotiating position that doesn't include annhilation as an alternative is a waste of time.
3
Talk to Jared!
2
You left out a fourth option:
convincing China to solve this problem. They have other options not available to us.
convincing China to solve this problem. They have other options not available to us.
1
Does anyone actually believe that Trump has the capacity and/or ability to be reasonable? Not in this lifetime. This “man” doesn’t have the temperament of a well-schooled high school student.
3
There is an elephant in the room here. How is a country with the economic size of Dayton, Ohio able to develop advanced nuclear capabilities and missile systems? They are getting outside help. So, who is backing them? I suspect the Russians. Someone is directly supplying them with the tools and talent. Putin's strategy is to insert Russian influence against the any US influence around the world. This is the new cold war.
3
But, of course!
Looking forward to this all out war with RUSSIA and CHINA that Trump is setting us to have down the line.
Trump does not understand anything beyond what FOX NEWS tell him. We need to send a reporter from FOX to N Korea to investigate so Trump can see just how badly the people live there under their dictator. Kim would starve his people to get his nukes program to grow.
We need to be thinking 10 and 20 years down the road not just the next four miserable years.
Looking forward to this all out war with RUSSIA and CHINA that Trump is setting us to have down the line.
Trump does not understand anything beyond what FOX NEWS tell him. We need to send a reporter from FOX to N Korea to investigate so Trump can see just how badly the people live there under their dictator. Kim would starve his people to get his nukes program to grow.
We need to be thinking 10 and 20 years down the road not just the next four miserable years.
Tom, I don't believe this administration is capable of anything hard. And this would be hard and require concessions. How do we get there? It will be up to China. Imagine that, China will have to be our security partner, how novel.
6
North Korea won't negotiate, doesn't appear to be affected by sanctions, and keeps producing nuclear weapons. If we show our concern by putting missile defense in South Korea, China rails at us for provocation.
What's a country to do?
China is in the best if not the only position to deal and/or negotiate with North Korea but they apparently would rather sit back and watching our novice leader tweet about personal insults and childish faux angers.
A nuclear solution in North Korea would destroy the whole region and cost millions of lives. China must understand that yet they are letting it go on. Then there is also the problem that Trump has no seasoned negotiators to send to North Korea or China to get tension reduction started.
What's a country to do?
China is in the best if not the only position to deal and/or negotiate with North Korea but they apparently would rather sit back and watching our novice leader tweet about personal insults and childish faux angers.
A nuclear solution in North Korea would destroy the whole region and cost millions of lives. China must understand that yet they are letting it go on. Then there is also the problem that Trump has no seasoned negotiators to send to North Korea or China to get tension reduction started.
China can put a stop to North Korea's nuclear ambitions and that is where the full attention of our State Department should be right now.
But under "President Bannon's" desire to 'deconstruct' the administrative state our State Department isn't able to practice diplomacy.
What a time for our diplomats to have their hands tied by a man trying to undermine his own government.
But under "President Bannon's" desire to 'deconstruct' the administrative state our State Department isn't able to practice diplomacy.
What a time for our diplomats to have their hands tied by a man trying to undermine his own government.
4
Perhaps by now the Secretary of Energy has done his homework and knows why his department can't be shut down. As with climate change, nuclear fallout has global repercussions. Rick Perry should have a talk with his boss and let him know in no uncertain terms that bombing their bombs is not an option.
3
It's a frightening scenario, a face off of two mad men.
2
GWB was told about OBL being a threat in his briefing. He sat on that and we had a major event. Likewise DJT has been briefed about the threat posed by North Korea. And all we have are a few tweets from the egomaniac about the size of crowds at his inauguration and an ill conceived executive order blocking immigrants and green card holders. I don't think he understands the gravity of the situation. This is what we get when an ill informed citizenry sends an ill informed guy to the White House. Sad, very sad.
3
To think that trump and his team could ever negotiate a deal with North Korea is just fantasy. Trump does not have the self control to work through the process without tweeting about it to the whole world and he and Kim Jong-un have the same personality, talk about butting heads! This is just like health care, the GOP spent 8 years criticizing President Obama however when their turn came were speechless!!
2
North Korea is everyone's problem but it is China's to solve. China would quite literally have to deal with the fallout. The US should accept Chinese Monroe-like assertions regarding the Spratlys in return for firm action that restrains North Korea.
In other words, buying them off, right? Gee, that is a great position for the leader of the free world to be in. Plus, we could try this with all of our adversaries; we can afford it, can't we? As you say, "What could go wrong?"
But first we have to deal with Arnold Schwarzenegger's ratings...
I have never understood the hair-on-fire about all this. We lived for 50 years with Soviet and US missiles aimed at each other and on-the-ready. MAD worked then, why not now? Especially since the "destruction" part of that acronym would only fall on North Korea. Surely a 'smuggled' nuke (whose perpetrators would possibly be unknown) is a far, far more worrisome problem than Kim Jong-un sending a lonely nuke over the sea to land who knows where. Even he is not likely that suicidal.
Barely rational (here) meets entirely irrational (there). What could possibly go wrong?
These kinds of "no way out" situations were not on the minds, not for one nano second, when people were meeting and screaming in mass rallies for Trump. Whatever damage Trump/Ryan/McConnell can do domestically, it pales into relative insignificance compared to nukes over LA or SF. This, in a nutshell, is why the presidency is a deadly difficult game: a president has a set of choices, all bad, and has to choose the least bad with the best possible outcome and roll the dice with humanity in the balance. Ugh.
These kinds of "no way out" situations were not on the minds, not for one nano second, when people were meeting and screaming in mass rallies for Trump. Whatever damage Trump/Ryan/McConnell can do domestically, it pales into relative insignificance compared to nukes over LA or SF. This, in a nutshell, is why the presidency is a deadly difficult game: a president has a set of choices, all bad, and has to choose the least bad with the best possible outcome and roll the dice with humanity in the balance. Ugh.
1
Reagan's goal wasn't to negotiate an agreement with the USSR. It was to have the USSR collapse. And he succeeded. The US goal today for North Korea should be to do everything possible to cause it to internally collapse and have a plan in place to swoop in and secure the nuclear stockpile as soon as that happens.
1
The idea that Reagan caused the collapse of the Soviet Union is one of the most repeated, unsupported assertions in American political history.
There were many reasons they essentially gave up, threw in the towel. One was the decision reached early in the communist years not to have their currency traded on world currency exchange markets. This blocked access to trade that might have allowed them to purchase goods and services needed by people inside the Soviet states. This, in my view, was the most important factor. Another was lies: because the communist party lied over and over again about what was happening in their economy, no one had the correct, true story and, as a direct result, decisions could not be reached to change and move in a new direction. They drowned in their own lies.
Reagan correctly recognized that pressure should be kept up on the Soviets. They greatly feared America's nuclear armaments and the plan for star wars, something they knew they could not match, ever. This probably played a role but the dominant reason is their economy was collapsing and they had no idea how to fix it.
There were many reasons they essentially gave up, threw in the towel. One was the decision reached early in the communist years not to have their currency traded on world currency exchange markets. This blocked access to trade that might have allowed them to purchase goods and services needed by people inside the Soviet states. This, in my view, was the most important factor. Another was lies: because the communist party lied over and over again about what was happening in their economy, no one had the correct, true story and, as a direct result, decisions could not be reached to change and move in a new direction. They drowned in their own lies.
Reagan correctly recognized that pressure should be kept up on the Soviets. They greatly feared America's nuclear armaments and the plan for star wars, something they knew they could not match, ever. This probably played a role but the dominant reason is their economy was collapsing and they had no idea how to fix it.
1
The US has been trying to make NK collapse for decades. As with most of its foreign policy, the US has failed. Reagan didn't cause the USSR to collapse, he and Bush happened to be there when it occurred, they had no plan at all for the aftermath, and they - particularly Reagan - saddled the US with crippling debt by needlessly expanding the military and cutting taxes for the rich. So the USSR collapsed and has been replaced with a relatively more powerful and dynamic Russia. That and the rise of violent Islamic fundamentalism is what Reagan facilitated. How about we try a strategy with NK that actually works? Think long term success, not just about quick "victory".
A very lucid and intelligent discussion of the options. The Iranian deal at least had a rational and thoughtful participant in Obama and the Iranians saw the benefits of detente. With North Korea we have two participants both of whom are far from rational and patient.
1
Qualities needed in a negotiator in a potential crisis such as this include a steady hand and a willingness to learn and take advice. Instead, we have an egotistical narcissist.
Egotistical narcissists don't back down, they seek to 'win', they never 'settle', they never compromise.
My deep concern is not that our president lacks the qualities to succeed in this particular crisis, it is that his actions are likely to be incendiary.
Egotistical narcissists don't back down, they seek to 'win', they never 'settle', they never compromise.
My deep concern is not that our president lacks the qualities to succeed in this particular crisis, it is that his actions are likely to be incendiary.
"Nobody knew how complicated foreign relations could be." I can hear him saying it, just before NK launches a nuclear missle in the direction of our west coast. Or maybe he'll frame it as payback for California's intransigence. In any case, if we're expecting Trump and his Keystone Kops to save the world, we are in deep trouble.
2
Comparing Iran and North Korea is nonsense. Iran had no interest in developing a nuclear weapon, they decided that nuclear weapons are immoral – as the much-derided US intelligence Agencies have reported. The so-called Iran deal was a farce to prevent Israel from initiating a nuclear war in the middle east with unknowable consequences.
6
Who believes that Trump can orchestrate a successful negotiated 15 year deal with North Korea that will last?
Which member of his team has the insight and skill to pull it off outside of Mattis?
How will his Alt right supporters react to making the same Iranian deal with North Korea?
I agree that we are at a critical juncture.
Which member of his team has the insight and skill to pull it off outside of Mattis?
How will his Alt right supporters react to making the same Iranian deal with North Korea?
I agree that we are at a critical juncture.
It may be that Mattis has the insight ad skills, but with increasing side lining of the secretary of state these advantages will likely bemused in a void.
I think we are going a downward path, and that little can be done, because Trump is not interested in anything except looting our country to line his and his cronies pockets. If California is hit, he will be glad, because there lives a great many of his non-voters. We are in deep trouble right now on a lot of fronts. if we survive Trump, it will be a miracle.
4
Who knew that preventing nuclear war could be so complicated?
18
Such an exemplar of modesty and truthfulness, the negotiations between Trump and Kim could lead to nothing less than world peace - it could be the new answer for the contestants in one of Trumps beauty pageants.
It would be more accurate to say that decades of sanctions and diplomacy have not prevented North Korea from developing weapons capable of threatening US targets. Our hope that China would be a broker that could "rein in" North Korean behavior was wishful thinking.
Deterrence and sanctions may be the only palatable options, but let's not pretend that our North Korean policies have been anything other than a failure under ALL of the past four US presidents.
Deterrence and sanctions may be the only palatable options, but let's not pretend that our North Korean policies have been anything other than a failure under ALL of the past four US presidents.
Deftly done, Tom, as usual. Thank God this will be up to Tillerson and McMaster, whom you were careful not to mention so that Trump can play the hero. I wonder whether Kim would like an invitation to Mar-al-Lago.
2
As with with healthcare, Donald Trump may soon be telling us that "Nobody knew North Korea could be so complicated," at least I sincerely hope so. If he ever says it's simple I'll be scared out of my wits!
2
Pretty good analysis, IMO. I'm not sure the Trump team is up to this job, but it is possible the Chinese will conclude the same thing and help Trump do a deal to avoid their having to live with the aftermath of an Armageddon move by Kim. This may be an instance where Trump's abject incapacity to be President might work in the world's favor.
To trust the North Koreans to honor a nuclear deal is like expecting the Republican party to give us Universal Health Care - a fairy tale.
2
So why isn't Dayton, Ohio a nuclear power? Whose really funding that program?
1
Tom, don't even try; it's a fool's errand.
Thanks for ruining my morning!
What is left out of this scenario is the role of South Korea. A plan to unite the Korean people is something that should've been done years ago, but it's never too late to try. Remember the 2 Germanys?
A start of talks between the 2 Korea's without the presence of the U.S and the other 5 countries usually involved would be a start. It should start with low level people. And should begin with trade, as an economic reliance on each other is the basis of any agreement.
Again learn from the Germany's.
What is left out of this scenario is the role of South Korea. A plan to unite the Korean people is something that should've been done years ago, but it's never too late to try. Remember the 2 Germanys?
A start of talks between the 2 Korea's without the presence of the U.S and the other 5 countries usually involved would be a start. It should start with low level people. And should begin with trade, as an economic reliance on each other is the basis of any agreement.
Again learn from the Germany's.
33
This would be much more difficult than reaching an agreement to freeze North Korea's nuclear buildup.
Likely Trump has yet to learn, as he apparently did only recently about healthcare, that foreign relations are "complicated." One problem in negotiating with North Korea, which is different from Iran, is that the NK population is thoroughly cowed and virtually cut off from the rest of the world.
Iran has an educated population with strong knowledge of and ties to the west creating some pressure from below to move Iran's leaders to change things. That is not to say that NK lacks dissidents, for certainly there are some. Still, the population at large has shown itself remarkably willing to suffer terribly if "the dear leader" tells them that they must.
That said, it is clear that negotiations are the only viable option. One real question is whether two men of outsized egos and remarkably thin skin can actually negotiate. Trump's belief seems to lean towards the zero-sum-game where there are clear winners and losers, but international negotiations are about nuance and compromise. We shall see.
Iran has an educated population with strong knowledge of and ties to the west creating some pressure from below to move Iran's leaders to change things. That is not to say that NK lacks dissidents, for certainly there are some. Still, the population at large has shown itself remarkably willing to suffer terribly if "the dear leader" tells them that they must.
That said, it is clear that negotiations are the only viable option. One real question is whether two men of outsized egos and remarkably thin skin can actually negotiate. Trump's belief seems to lean towards the zero-sum-game where there are clear winners and losers, but international negotiations are about nuance and compromise. We shall see.
181
Negotiate with whom? "Lil Kim or his Chinese overlords? Negotiate directly with China. Tell them to halt their puppet regime or we will consider N. Korea to be in a state of war with the United States. We could nuke them. That might be what is necessary. The Chinese let this go on way too long.
North Korea is more of the same as it was under Obama. That is not an "early test." It isn't sudden or new or in any way a surprise. This could have been written years ago.
Trump faces the same options as Obama, and as W before him, and as Bill Clinton before that. Attack, or deal, or sit back and complain that China does not make it go away as per our orders to do so.
Given the reality, a deal with China is needed, not a deal with NK. What does China want, to inspire it to act on NK?
I suggest working with South Korea on an offer to demilitarize the peninsula. South Korea does not want to be part of the American Empire, it just does not want to be attacked by the North.
Also, have South Korea agree to bear the burden of rebuilding the North that China fears could be dumped on it. The South sees the people of the North as their near relatives, in many cases they literally are cousins. Many WANT to be the ones to help.
We might also offer some Washington Treaty ideas from the 1920's, for a stand still on fortification and military changes in some regions off China's coast. If they are paranoid about that, we can reduce the things that inspire paranoia, in return for things we want, NK not least.
None of this is a sudden new test. It has been exactly what it is for decades now.
Trump faces the same options as Obama, and as W before him, and as Bill Clinton before that. Attack, or deal, or sit back and complain that China does not make it go away as per our orders to do so.
Given the reality, a deal with China is needed, not a deal with NK. What does China want, to inspire it to act on NK?
I suggest working with South Korea on an offer to demilitarize the peninsula. South Korea does not want to be part of the American Empire, it just does not want to be attacked by the North.
Also, have South Korea agree to bear the burden of rebuilding the North that China fears could be dumped on it. The South sees the people of the North as their near relatives, in many cases they literally are cousins. Many WANT to be the ones to help.
We might also offer some Washington Treaty ideas from the 1920's, for a stand still on fortification and military changes in some regions off China's coast. If they are paranoid about that, we can reduce the things that inspire paranoia, in return for things we want, NK not least.
None of this is a sudden new test. It has been exactly what it is for decades now.
216
Nevertheless, it IS a new test for the new President and his inexperienced understaffed staff.
2
Mr. Thomason your insight and suggestions are highly inspired, but
do you really think the Trump Administration capable of such Real Politik?
do you really think the Trump Administration capable of such Real Politik?
1
Good post, except I don't understand why South Korea needs to bear the entire burden. The U.S., China, and Japan should all chip in.
1
During the ”Missiles of October”, at stake was the incineration of about two-thirds of the U.S. population. During this North Korean Kabuki, at most we’re talking about one U.S. city, and the odds of “hitting a bullet with another bullet” is immensely greater than hitting hundreds. Then, it’s unlikely that it will happen, since Kim Jung-un knows that in response every imaginable place where he might hide would become an immense crater walled by volcanic glass.
But I agree that Trump needs to do something before 2020 and the proliferation of that threat. Volcanic glass is looking more inviting by the day, if not by us then by the Chinese, who certainly are within this nut-pod’s threat-radius and who might be concerned about the fallout (ahem) arising from cancelling coal orders.
But I wouldn’t target the “hot” nuclear facilities. I’d blow up the palaces and barracks, and set off multiple EMP devices above the nuclear facilities, so that missiles couldn’t be launched. The cleanup operations could be given to the South Koreans, who likely would be welcomed joyously by the 99% of their unaffected ethnic brothers as liberators. If we do it in conjunction with the Chinese, it could open up a new era in Sino-American relations undreamt of by Henry Kissinger.
And I simply disagree that Trump’s options are limited to “negotiate” – Kim Jong-un is a very young man, and that kind of blackmail could last for many decades, with a nuclear accident only a buried pot of kimchi away.
But I agree that Trump needs to do something before 2020 and the proliferation of that threat. Volcanic glass is looking more inviting by the day, if not by us then by the Chinese, who certainly are within this nut-pod’s threat-radius and who might be concerned about the fallout (ahem) arising from cancelling coal orders.
But I wouldn’t target the “hot” nuclear facilities. I’d blow up the palaces and barracks, and set off multiple EMP devices above the nuclear facilities, so that missiles couldn’t be launched. The cleanup operations could be given to the South Koreans, who likely would be welcomed joyously by the 99% of their unaffected ethnic brothers as liberators. If we do it in conjunction with the Chinese, it could open up a new era in Sino-American relations undreamt of by Henry Kissinger.
And I simply disagree that Trump’s options are limited to “negotiate” – Kim Jong-un is a very young man, and that kind of blackmail could last for many decades, with a nuclear accident only a buried pot of kimchi away.
18
See: George C. Scott as General Jack D. Ripper in the film "Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb".
89
Great plan, what could go wrong?
16
Well if you are willing to go that far, it makes negotiating much easier. Just make them an offer they can't refuse.
2
Donald, a transactional deal?
A logical cortex reveal?
You ask for too much, Sir,
We're really in dutch, sir,
Logic for Donald won't appeal.
Flattery, tickling his ego,
Is the only route that you can go,
Addlepated, nonthinking,
At real facts unblinking
Make it a Reality Show!
A logical cortex reveal?
You ask for too much, Sir,
We're really in dutch, sir,
Logic for Donald won't appeal.
Flattery, tickling his ego,
Is the only route that you can go,
Addlepated, nonthinking,
At real facts unblinking
Make it a Reality Show!
256
Larry Eisenberg I've missed you!
Of late your poetic lines are few;
Ah, but your weighing in on this
Returns to me some bliss!
(With deepest apologies!)
Of late your poetic lines are few;
Ah, but your weighing in on this
Returns to me some bliss!
(With deepest apologies!)
1
Mr. Friedman was bullish on democracy in Iraq, and the Arab Spring was a no brainer, what with all those young Arabs thirsty for western lifestyles.
The arc of history does not seem to bend in the direction that Mr. Friedman predicts.