It's a good time for a different voice from South Korea to reach out and try to determine what is really on the mind of the North Korean leader. As we saw under Kim Dae-Jung, the sunshine policy has its limitations as soon as it threatens the preeminence of the Kim dynasty in the north, but I don't think we can truly divine the intentions of Kim Jong-un until someone makes personal contact. Ironically, this was also candidate Trump's idea, so let's have no pretense that this is a ideological concept unique to Mr. Moon. Also, is Park Geun-hye really "disgraced"? She was only forced from office by the Constitutional Court after the impeachment, has denied all the charges against her and still awaits trial. The use of that term is a little premature.
At least failing North Korea isn't overdeveloped.
Sad day in korea. :(
This guy looks like a true patriot of his country.
The US has nearly 30,000 troops in stationed on the Korean Peninsula which is the site of the most troublesome sounding US / Trump saber rattling thus far. The views of Moon Jae-in are more or less consistent with virtually every one of the handful of Koreans whom I have spoken to in the US for the past 15 years whenever I’ve brought up the subject of North Korea. This is serious stuff. I therefore have the following questions for the NY Times and its readers. (a) Why has there been so little reporting on the position of the average South Korean…as opposed to US, Chinese or Japanese official positions. (b) Why did THIS election receive so much less attention than the French? Could it be that WE…along with China, Russia and Japan…just can’t seem to shake the centuries old habit of treating Korea as merely a geopolitical pawn?
I am pleased to see that we are now hearing from Korea! North or South...it is still ONE country.
I am pleased to see that we are now hearing from Korea! North or South...it is still ONE country.
2
It doesn't matter who occupies the Blue House now, unless he or she is a North Korean puppet or agent.
The situation is easily explained. We approach a fork in the road, if we aren't past it already. No South Korean administration can surrender to North Korea despite its blandishments and threats. And no American administration can allow the unpredictable, unstable Kim regime to develop a strategic nuclear strike capability that can hit Japan, forget the continental United States. The Kim Regime's existence depends on being able to do both, and it has said as much.
If preventing those developments requires repeated tactical nuclear strikes on numerous North Korean targets it will be done; have no doubt about it. The North must know it, too, why it's been miniaturizing small-yield tactical nuclear weapons to infiltrate into South Korea, Japan and the United States for many years. Their missile parades are actually a ruse to divert attention from the real program, one just within their means -- like Operation Fortitude confused and distracted German military intelligence to cloak Operation Overlord.
Their progress miniaturizing their nuclear weapons determines the launch time of an American attack that will be sudden and without warning, targets based on satellite intelligence and estimates.
It should be called a nuclear straight-jacket because that's what it is. No way out. And it's inevitable, unless the Kim Regime is overthrown.
Anything else is wishful thinking.
The situation is easily explained. We approach a fork in the road, if we aren't past it already. No South Korean administration can surrender to North Korea despite its blandishments and threats. And no American administration can allow the unpredictable, unstable Kim regime to develop a strategic nuclear strike capability that can hit Japan, forget the continental United States. The Kim Regime's existence depends on being able to do both, and it has said as much.
If preventing those developments requires repeated tactical nuclear strikes on numerous North Korean targets it will be done; have no doubt about it. The North must know it, too, why it's been miniaturizing small-yield tactical nuclear weapons to infiltrate into South Korea, Japan and the United States for many years. Their missile parades are actually a ruse to divert attention from the real program, one just within their means -- like Operation Fortitude confused and distracted German military intelligence to cloak Operation Overlord.
Their progress miniaturizing their nuclear weapons determines the launch time of an American attack that will be sudden and without warning, targets based on satellite intelligence and estimates.
It should be called a nuclear straight-jacket because that's what it is. No way out. And it's inevitable, unless the Kim Regime is overthrown.
Anything else is wishful thinking.
1
This may be the right time for Asians to try to solve this Korean Peninsula hostility problem-festering since mid-20th century. South Korea is a fully developed sovereign country with significant industrial capability and force of extremely well educated citizens.
It would help their cause for opening another attempt at dialogue for them to tone down the current US military rhetoric. Neither side is going to open active hostilities anytime soon. The US must back off and let SK do what they are best suited to do-engage as it seems fit. After all, there is a common language and ancient cultural heritage.
Many Americans seem to think that SK is merely a vassal state of America. That concept must change so that SK can assume their rightful position in the future.
It would help their cause for opening another attempt at dialogue for them to tone down the current US military rhetoric. Neither side is going to open active hostilities anytime soon. The US must back off and let SK do what they are best suited to do-engage as it seems fit. After all, there is a common language and ancient cultural heritage.
Many Americans seem to think that SK is merely a vassal state of America. That concept must change so that SK can assume their rightful position in the future.
1
Thank goodness for this electoral win! Now the madness of Trump will hopefully be banished from the Korean Peninsular and its proximity to Japan and China. It's beyond time that the dangerous United States military antagonisation of the entire region be sent packing. And one hopes that in the not too distant future we may do likewise with the unwarranted and unwanted US military presence in Australia - spy bases and troop rotations and military exercises - all gone! Trump promised such a vision - but as is typical with him - what he lies about one day is reversed the very next! Bravo brave SKorea!
1
These pesky international elections aren't going so well for Trump ... and Putin.
3
Why is this so bad for the US?
As always, it must be asked: why is the US so special over the concerns of other Western nations? What makes us so prickly, makes Americans the most likely to go to war with the DPRK? The Korean War was an international issue. Why did we end up holding the Peace? Why are we the ones that suddenly are looming as Western War Monger In Chief against the North?
Who died and made the next DPRK our issue alone?
The North and South need stability. Any major War is going to mean a destructive artillery barrage of South Korea and Seoul: a nuclear exchange would largely destroy both nations. Of course the South wants to negotiate! I too would want to preserve my industries and major cities! This is just rational common sense!
It sounds like the South just took their own destiny in hand... Good for them! They have the most to lose! Why anyone sees this as a "loss" for the US is beyond me. Any war we can walk away from - especially a possible nuclear exchange, is a good day!
Let's wish the Koreans well, and see what talking can do.
As always, it must be asked: why is the US so special over the concerns of other Western nations? What makes us so prickly, makes Americans the most likely to go to war with the DPRK? The Korean War was an international issue. Why did we end up holding the Peace? Why are we the ones that suddenly are looming as Western War Monger In Chief against the North?
Who died and made the next DPRK our issue alone?
The North and South need stability. Any major War is going to mean a destructive artillery barrage of South Korea and Seoul: a nuclear exchange would largely destroy both nations. Of course the South wants to negotiate! I too would want to preserve my industries and major cities! This is just rational common sense!
It sounds like the South just took their own destiny in hand... Good for them! They have the most to lose! Why anyone sees this as a "loss" for the US is beyond me. Any war we can walk away from - especially a possible nuclear exchange, is a good day!
Let's wish the Koreans well, and see what talking can do.
2
How will Moon Jae-in address the most pressing problem of East Asia... desertification.
Confucian values are deeply entrenched in the South Korean society. Moon Jae-in's ambition to run for president was very much motivated by his desire to fight rampant corruption and nepotism, as well as to reject the hawkish policy that the conservative administrations before him had conducted. He is equally determined to fulfil the dying wish of Kim Dae-jung, Nobel Peace Prize laureate and architect of the sunshine policy with North Korea.
Although he is teem with idealism, he seems retain a healthy portion of pragmatism. Challenging times lie ahead of him, walking a tightrope between Beijing and Washington, without losing sight of the forest for the trees - stability in the Korean Peninsula.
He, himself welcomes a unification of the two Koreas, but many South Koreans aren't keen on it, given the enormous costs involved.
Although he is teem with idealism, he seems retain a healthy portion of pragmatism. Challenging times lie ahead of him, walking a tightrope between Beijing and Washington, without losing sight of the forest for the trees - stability in the Korean Peninsula.
He, himself welcomes a unification of the two Koreas, but many South Koreans aren't keen on it, given the enormous costs involved.
5
I think I the term "liberal" should be replaced with "social spending Santa Clause". That's all they are. And I'm sure their spouse manages their household budgets. Because they don't understand it.
2
I think it's worth reminding oneself every now and then what the origin of the word "liberal" in political discourse is. What it means, more or less, is someone who values the freedom of the individual - to live their life freely as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others, to be free to enter into economic exchanges, to express one's views, etc. Liberal means less state, not more. It also means "not socially conservative". So to say that liberals spend lots of public money is to apply an American understanding of the term, where it seems to nowadays be considered the same as "the left".
Folk's like Nancy Pelosi don't have their spouses manage the household budgets... they have financial managers for that.
Funny, then, how liberal Bill Clinton is the only recent president who managed to balance the federal budget.
It is pretty naive to play nice with Kim Jong-un while he brutalizes his own people and builds out his nuclear arsenal. And it looks like this trend is going to continue.
So what's the alternative? Playing hard-ball with North Korea doesn't deter them either, as they've been building their nuke arsenal even with U.S. and South Korea's hard-line. Maybe it is time for some deténte.
2
You've been reading too much one-eyed US media/political propaganda. Trump and police (re Black Lives Matter) are NOT brutalising their own people??? How do you imagine others see the US. It is not simple -but the aping of the US here in Australia is brutalising our ordinary folk! Not nice. One has to remove the blindness in one's own eyes in order to see the truth.
1
The South Koreans will dump the USA in a heartbeat. Much the same as Africa does by continuously slating the west but enjoying the fruits of the aid they receive. Both parasites. Bring all your resources home and leave China and the Koreas to fend for themselves. Bring the jobs home too!
3
What a relief to the people of SKorea that will be! No longer having to pay for the parasitical presence of the US military and their Weapons of Mass Destruction deployed on SKorean soil!
1
He is not a liberal President. I think NY times has to check if it's correct labeling.
He said on the public debate stage that "I am homosexual denialist" and doubling it down saying "I think homosexuals in the army debilitate strength of our country".
He said on the public debate stage that "I am homosexual denialist" and doubling it down saying "I think homosexuals in the army debilitate strength of our country".
Good. They need a little more detente. People don't realize how close Seoul is to the N Korean border... it's about the distance of White Plains from Manhattan. There's no good outcome to a war that kills over a million allied, modern people living in the northern suburbs -- and this is without the threat of nuclear weapons. Kim Jong Un is not his father. At least try negotiation once. The DPRK is reprehensible but it's not worth dying over.
10
If or when the new South Korean president offers to open up trade or other bilateral financial relations with the north, what will happen to Trump's demand that all countries sever all ties? How can there be any pressure on China to cease its financial relations with North Korea?
Looks like Trump will have to go back to the drawing board. Whatever he does, let's start calling Trump, "weak" "pathetic" "unstable" "fearful" and all the other fake charges that he projected onto the Obama administration.
Looks like Trump will have to go back to the drawing board. Whatever he does, let's start calling Trump, "weak" "pathetic" "unstable" "fearful" and all the other fake charges that he projected onto the Obama administration.
3
Correct! All political bullies like TRUMP think that bombing and attacking and threatening show strength - but the opposite is true. But when ignorant thugs gain control - some suggest Trump is without any fellow-feeling - they throw their weight around and see the fearful and nervous giggles/smiles as adulation - of course surrounding themselves only with Yes-men&women!
1
All of this Doom and Gloom. Come on people. Where is your sense of humor?
Korea North and South did well with Mr Moon’s election. It should be possible to move back toward resolving the mania of Pyongyang and slowly bringing the parties involved toward conditions that will suppress the threat of nuclear conflict and give the North the security it demands; if the two big power brokers allow. Big If.
4
This is all we need. A liberal that wants to dialog some more. How foolish can he be?
1
I hope the Blue House does not re-indoctrinate the sunshine policy which for all intents and purpose provided no relief for the suffering people of NK. Rather, it seems evident, the hundreds of millions of dollars and food intended for humanitarian relief went toward weapons development, members of the Peoples Assembly and feeding the NK army.
2
get ready. a reunification of Korea gives the north more of everything they need. SK will be absorbed and drained of everything, strengthening the new korea, china's little helper. No bases or staging areas for usa any longer. China will continue to absorb territory until the far East looks like the old soviet union. and what president allowed China to purchase Smithfield farms, the largest producer of pork products in the usa? wait until they decide all that production should get shipped out of usa to china. then we will start starving. chaos will ensue. unrest and civil war. they won't need to send troops. after we kill each other they will open their doors and move right into america. Doesn't anyone see this?
3
There is a reason they say China thinks long term unlike the US which is so short sighted it is going to get caught with its pants down. China would not be in the power today had it not been for Henry Kissinger under the direction of Richard Nixon going to China in 1972 to open the markets over there and China took America like a fool and ever since then the Chinese have been growing faster than ever.
Moon Jae-in, sounds a bit like Chamberlain, doesn't it...
That didn't work out well the last time, in 1938, it won't work out this time either.
History is about to repeat itself, this time with nuclear consequences.
That didn't work out well the last time, in 1938, it won't work out this time either.
History is about to repeat itself, this time with nuclear consequences.
5
Good job, South Korea. Much luck to Mr. Moon Jae-in & toward a peaceful co-existence with North Korea.
As for our role around the oceans of the world, we'd gain much more respect if we began steps to research control of lionfish predation in our territorial waters & shared it with the world.
As for our role around the oceans of the world, we'd gain much more respect if we began steps to research control of lionfish predation in our territorial waters & shared it with the world.
5
Shame on us. I'm a South Korean who leans toward the conservative side. It is true that the topic of DPRK has been something that swings the political debate. However, we oppose Mr Moon in many different respects. This election was a lucky time for Mr.Moon : While the right wing Ms. Park was impeached, the right wings didn't know where to go: Should we go to Mr.Ahn or Mr.Hong(who belongs to the same party Ms.Park was from)? Not surprisingly, 45 % of the votes were divided between them two.
When people actually watch the political debates on TV, we can easily see that Mr.Moon’s logic is absent. The fact that he lost presidential election 2 times in a row, employing propaganda using the death of his friend, ex-president, Mr.Noh, is very disturbing too. It is safe to even say that 40% of those who voted for Mr.Moon, did not vote for HIM but voted for ex President Noh.
When Mr.Moon was the Presidential Secretary to President Noh, the government sent billions of dollars to DPRK for "peace negotiations". What did we get in return? We got missiles and nuclear experiments. As soon as next president comes to seat, DPRK will use that money to act up their drama again. Not only that, Mr. Moon wants to create 810K jobs using government money, to help the job economy. Mr.Moon, in addition, wants to leave it up to China and DPRK to decide about the Nuclear Missiles etc. However…has it work previously?
South Korea is STILL in war. I hope my comment can give insights to some out there.
When people actually watch the political debates on TV, we can easily see that Mr.Moon’s logic is absent. The fact that he lost presidential election 2 times in a row, employing propaganda using the death of his friend, ex-president, Mr.Noh, is very disturbing too. It is safe to even say that 40% of those who voted for Mr.Moon, did not vote for HIM but voted for ex President Noh.
When Mr.Moon was the Presidential Secretary to President Noh, the government sent billions of dollars to DPRK for "peace negotiations". What did we get in return? We got missiles and nuclear experiments. As soon as next president comes to seat, DPRK will use that money to act up their drama again. Not only that, Mr. Moon wants to create 810K jobs using government money, to help the job economy. Mr.Moon, in addition, wants to leave it up to China and DPRK to decide about the Nuclear Missiles etc. However…has it work previously?
South Korea is STILL in war. I hope my comment can give insights to some out there.
7
What did we get in return from the conservative side since 2008? Four major river project? Impeachment? political scandal with Soon-Sil Choi? These things are all of legacy from the conservative side you support. How long should our people to endure these problems made by conservative side? This is the right time to change and accept different perspective for making a better country.
2
This is a bias view planted by the followers of the impeached former president Park Geun-hye (aka daughter of former military dictator Park Chung-hee). What you're saying is absolutely untrue. Get the fact for yourself and stop spreading fake news. This view is only shared and agreed by right wing non-sense extremists which make about 15 to 20% of the general population of the country. Recent poll indicated 75 to 80% of S.Koreans approved the impeachment while 15 to 20% disapproved. The hardliners of the former SK regimes always used NK for their political gains against those who opposed. Let Pres. Moon fix the corruptions and brought back justice to SK.
2
Why don't you two get your logic straight first. Do you consider all 60% of those who did NOT vote for Mr.Moon as right wing extremist? Certainly 60% of the votes were spread among different candidates, including liberal and conservatives (Ahn, hong, Shim, Yoo)
No where in my comment, I mentioned or hinted that impeachment was a wrong decision. NK is not the only factor why 60% of the voters disapprove Mr.Moon. Do you think majority of South Koreans have no brain? If someone disapproves Mr.Moon, is he or she supposed to deemed as a right wing extremist?
No where in my comment, I mentioned or hinted that impeachment was a wrong decision. NK is not the only factor why 60% of the voters disapprove Mr.Moon. Do you think majority of South Koreans have no brain? If someone disapproves Mr.Moon, is he or she supposed to deemed as a right wing extremist?
South Korea needed a change in policy about challenging the North for the benefits of U.S. politicians who identify themselves as hardliners at whatever the price. It's very easy to push buttons and reap the glories like Trump did in Syria. The MOAB in Afghanistan has so far produced nothing but dust, maybe a YUGE cloud of pure dust, beautiful for tabloids that's it.
4
Wow. You should be sent as a special envoy to North Korea.
I've spent much time in Korea and I'm an American married into a Korean family. From what I understand, the South Koreans view the Americans as an impediment to the South and North reuniting Koreans need to understand that the US military would gladly turn over the defense of the South if they accept. They have postponed the responsibility since 2005, because they are not ready, and desire the American military manage their defense. The previous sunshine policy under Kim Dae Jung, funded the Kim dynasty to build nuclear weapons. It is time, after 65 years to allow both Koreas to solve their differences on their own. It is past time to bring our troops home now.
4
I like your reasoning.
There were only two options. One was to remove Kim Jong-un and install a friendly government there in a peaceful way, for which we need a fine-tuned diplomacy involving China we cannot really expect the present US president to be capable of. (The Thaad deployment was not a choice if this were to be pursued.) Anyway this option was completely blew up by Trump by hinting a third option of destroying it. The other option was admit the status quo in the Far East and prod North Korea to follow an economic course such as taken by China, which will eventually weaken the grip of the Kim dynasty of his subjects and bring some peace in our regions. Since we come this far we certainly can live with that. I think South Korean people made a sensible decision.
3
Friends who know South Korea say we should remove our 38 thousand military force and missiles so Korea can begin to reunite with the North. America's interests are for Japan and America which could exclude South Korea. China wants us out an is helping the North in many ways knowing about the North's trade with Iran. Why are we disliked? The answer as we are part of what Korean's hate.
2
They will reunite in the sense that they will be slaves to the DPRK.
4
This is so much nonsense.
South Koreans do not dislike America, rather they have much more in common with America than they do the political leadership of North Korea. Most South Koreans do not trust North Korea either and are not so anxious to reunite with such. I guess your friends never told you about the majority point-of-view here in South Korea either.
South Koreans do not dislike America, rather they have much more in common with America than they do the political leadership of North Korea. Most South Koreans do not trust North Korea either and are not so anxious to reunite with such. I guess your friends never told you about the majority point-of-view here in South Korea either.
3
I completely agree. Give the South Koreans what they want. no shame in that. I mean, come on - we all need a good laugh right now. If nothing else it will be a good distraction.
I almost seems that Trump has started a dialog. I see the Korean leaders and Trump golfing in Florida soon.
3
Using the 'football' as their puck?
I hope Trump can just be quiet, about the Koreas. I couldn't believe it a few weeks ago, as he was antagonizing North Korea, he decided to chastise South Korea about paying more for our military! He was picking fights with both sides simultaneously. Someone needs to apply lots of sticky tape to his mouth and his tweeting fingers. in fact, just put him in a gilded box for the next four years, while grown ups sort out the world.
8
Now that SK joins Trump in a desire to speak with NK, can direct talks now happen? Unfortunately the USA and SK have different interests. The USA must keep NK from developing nuclear capable ICBM's. Since NK has long had SK (particularly Seoul) in their range (with missiles and nukes) they don't see a problem if NK places the USA under the same threat as SK.
Has Moon clarified how to reunify Korea? NK has always been willing to absorb SK, at any time. Does Moon support that view? If not, how does he intend to instill a regime change in NK?
Has Moon clarified how to reunify Korea? NK has always been willing to absorb SK, at any time. Does Moon support that view? If not, how does he intend to instill a regime change in NK?
2
@BB
Moon is not proposing unification he is proposing engagement, opening dialog once again with presumably a means to be found to promote disarmament; that means meeting Pyongyang idea of security: a Chinese-American security pact to disallow Régime Change and whatever might follow. The change from the past: NK has the nuke and both powers have to listen – or we all suffer the consequences. Cheer for Moon.
Moon is not proposing unification he is proposing engagement, opening dialog once again with presumably a means to be found to promote disarmament; that means meeting Pyongyang idea of security: a Chinese-American security pact to disallow Régime Change and whatever might follow. The change from the past: NK has the nuke and both powers have to listen – or we all suffer the consequences. Cheer for Moon.
I believe Donald Trump said he was willing to meet with the North Korean leader. So why is this a conflict with the new South Korean leader? The Times spins everything negative when it comes to Trump.
8
It's impossible to spin anything when it comes to Trump, he is spinning like a windmill.
Impossible to keep up!
Impossible to keep up!
Perfect! I'm sure the South Koreans will happily take on all responsibilities for their own protection from now forward. We can happily bring our people home and redirect the savings to more useful and gratifying endeavors.
5
Why stop there? Why not bring all deployments around the world back home? I think that's over 200K military personnel. What gratifying endeavors do you recommend once our soldiers return to the states? Also, do you want the troops in other parts of the word, for instance, in Europe, to also vacate? Or, are you just stating this with no particular reason and as it only relates to our troops stationed in SK?
yes. it is time for USA to go home and not creating trouble all over the planet.
I believe this is further evidence that we live in a world void of morals.
Does anyone give a thought to the plight of the North Korean people under severe oppression?
Do the South Koreans feel a shred of responsibility to the US, which has been spent trillions to protect them over the last 60 years?
Does it matter to the South Koreans that the North sells slave labor to Russia and China in order to raise capital that is used to build weapons that so clearly jeopardizes the very existence of the planet?
American exceptionalism is real. Those values are superior. Even if most Americans no longer subscribe to them.
Pre-election Donald Trump was 100% right. South Korea is taking advantage of America. If they are unwilling to stand up for what is right, why must we put ourselves in harms way and spend trillions in the process?
We live in a world of goofy idiots who can't see past their own immediate needs.
Does anyone give a thought to the plight of the North Korean people under severe oppression?
Do the South Koreans feel a shred of responsibility to the US, which has been spent trillions to protect them over the last 60 years?
Does it matter to the South Koreans that the North sells slave labor to Russia and China in order to raise capital that is used to build weapons that so clearly jeopardizes the very existence of the planet?
American exceptionalism is real. Those values are superior. Even if most Americans no longer subscribe to them.
Pre-election Donald Trump was 100% right. South Korea is taking advantage of America. If they are unwilling to stand up for what is right, why must we put ourselves in harms way and spend trillions in the process?
We live in a world of goofy idiots who can't see past their own immediate needs.
7
south korea so ungrateful. time for USA to go home. let south koreans deal with their brethrens north of their border.
Talking with Kim Jong-un is better than military stalemate and much better than war.
8
Let's hope that Presidents Trump and Moon Jae-in can bring about reunification of the Korean Peninsula. Mr Trump has signaled his willingness to meet with the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, which is a promising sign. It is high time that the Korean War be ended by a formal peace treaty between the two sides.
4
The issue is whether the North Korea can have nukes they refuse to give up? What Trump does matters not an election has no impact on Trumps decision.
Surely the election of someone who has the ideas as this new South Korean president has, undermines the U.S. foreign policy's interest toward Asia, specially for the Korean peninsula: the growing radicalization in order to justify the presence of the U.S. troops over there.
A deeply divided Asia by the U.S. politicization is clearly preferred by the Americans, regardless its political stance, rather than an pacified Asia though not following the U.S. ideological diktat.
Let's hope this newly elected South Korean president along with its Asian peers, regardless their ideological stance, can wipe this cancer (aka the political radicalization sponsored by the U.S.) out from Asia!
A deeply divided Asia by the U.S. politicization is clearly preferred by the Americans, regardless its political stance, rather than an pacified Asia though not following the U.S. ideological diktat.
Let's hope this newly elected South Korean president along with its Asian peers, regardless their ideological stance, can wipe this cancer (aka the political radicalization sponsored by the U.S.) out from Asia!
7
The Times thinks the election of Moon is some sort of repudiation of Trump, which is the furthest thing from the truth.
Meanwhile, their new hero is very anti-gay. But that can be overlooked because his election is bad for Trump, even though it is really not bad for Trump.
Meanwhile, their new hero is very anti-gay. But that can be overlooked because his election is bad for Trump, even though it is really not bad for Trump.
5
You all understand that this is China's work right?
Everything going on there in the Korea's and even further afield, is China doing its best to cause us problems and by that win control over the western Pacific. Don't forget how they got away with building island on reefs that belong to other nations. We still need to drive them off those islands and make them respect the nations they seek to overwhelm. They are not benign or benevolent overlords or even ambiguous friends like the US they are the nation that starved millions of its own citizens to death then encouraged their children to abuse and murder adults and then when they adopted "market based" policies they chose and still do use slave and forced prisoner labor to make things they sell us. Ai Weiwei described their insidiousness and the impunity witgh which they will act if they don't think their manipulations are working in his article about how censorship works. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/06/opinion/sunday/ai-weiwei-how-censorsh...
Everything going on there in the Korea's and even further afield, is China doing its best to cause us problems and by that win control over the western Pacific. Don't forget how they got away with building island on reefs that belong to other nations. We still need to drive them off those islands and make them respect the nations they seek to overwhelm. They are not benign or benevolent overlords or even ambiguous friends like the US they are the nation that starved millions of its own citizens to death then encouraged their children to abuse and murder adults and then when they adopted "market based" policies they chose and still do use slave and forced prisoner labor to make things they sell us. Ai Weiwei described their insidiousness and the impunity witgh which they will act if they don't think their manipulations are working in his article about how censorship works. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/06/opinion/sunday/ai-weiwei-how-censorsh...
6
In response to magicisnotreal earth.
This is a great post that reveals China's true strategy in the South China Sea and beyond.
This is a great post that reveals China's true strategy in the South China Sea and beyond.
3
Oh hopeful days. Mr. Moon, a most worthy heir to the noble president Kim -- may the sun shine on all your efforts.
1
Living on the West Coast in the city where North Korea wants to use as the destination for their missile, I am pleased to see someone who wants to talk first. President trump would gladly sacrifice us, as we are part of a blue state and a sanctuary city. I may just like Moon Jae-in and hope he succeeds.
6
The triumph of reason yet again.
Merkel.
Obama.
Trudeau. Macron.
And now Moon Jae-in.
Maybe we can keep the warmongers and the haters at bay a little longer ...
I have a little hope and optimism again
Merkel.
Obama.
Trudeau. Macron.
And now Moon Jae-in.
Maybe we can keep the warmongers and the haters at bay a little longer ...
I have a little hope and optimism again
10
Art, keep feeling that hope and optimism over in the UK when the United States invokes Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty and withdraws from NATO.
4
because we ain't bailing them out a 3rd time. beat them 2x and saved them 2 more times. with partners like that, who needs enemies?
1
Whatever policy we decide to follow, South Korea will have to be included. If North Korea can hit Japan with nukes, I suppose we will have to include them too. If the North can reach California, should we care? That is Liberal/Democrat Lala Land. Not my problem.
1
You should care because New Jersey can't feed itself without California or products from the West Coast. And because the trajectory of a circumpolar missle can also hit the East Coast. Thinking that you are safe from the results of nukes is just stink' thinkin'.
3
The resulting nuclear fallout WOULD become your problem...
Why are you calling him liberal?
"Moon Jae-in was criticized after a recent debate for saying he opposes homosexuality.
According to ABC News, Moon was asked in the debate whether he agrees with the idea that gay soldiers are weakening South Korea’s military. Moon indicated that he does agree."
Why don't you just say, "We are glad he won and we only like liberals. Ergo he must be a liberal."
"Moon Jae-in was criticized after a recent debate for saying he opposes homosexuality.
According to ABC News, Moon was asked in the debate whether he agrees with the idea that gay soldiers are weakening South Korea’s military. Moon indicated that he does agree."
Why don't you just say, "We are glad he won and we only like liberals. Ergo he must be a liberal."
3
That is South Korean politics. It is still a very much conservative society like most other Asian nations, and Moon Jae-in had to say it to appease conservative older generation.
1
Must every "liberal" on the planet hold all the same positions on all issues?
2
Yes
1
So Moon wants to try the sunshine policy again, despite its total failure only a decade ago.
Insanity: Doing the same thing and expect a different result.
Insanity: Doing the same thing and expect a different result.
9
What's wrong with Mr. Moon re-engaging with the North? Let South Korea have a chance to try diplomacy. It's their decision- not the U.S. to dictate. In the immediate term it may ratchet down tension in Asia. The U.S. doesn't want to lose its military base so close to China. If in the end diplomacy gains nothing for either N. or S. Korea, S. Korea can always resume its policy of U.S. backed military hardball. Or the C.I.A. can engineer a coup by working with S.Korea's military to have a government more to its liking.
15
What is wrong with this approach is that it assumes a perpetual role of the American people, and its military, in this quandary. So ceaseless that the protected have assumed an independent posture, counter to the protector. Apparently, completely oblivious to their position without the good will of the defender. Truly a "distilled statement" of American foreign policy over continual decades of the past.
3
What is wrong with this approach is that it has been already tried by Moon's party when they were in power for a decade during the 90's and all they did was enable NK to develop its nuclear program. It was the huge amount of cash given to them by the SK government that revived the regime that was on its last legs and start what has become the most serious problem for Korean Peninsula.
2
Mr. Cohen you are more than old enough to know better than to be so naive about North Korea, China's pitbull and proxy.
2
North Korea will be a basket case country when the Kim regime fails.
Their entire economy is based on the government.
All the players in the region - China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and the USA need to get come to an agreement on how to deal with that future humanitarian crisis.
It is too big for any one of them take it on alone.
Their entire economy is based on the government.
All the players in the region - China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and the USA need to get come to an agreement on how to deal with that future humanitarian crisis.
It is too big for any one of them take it on alone.
4
The article says: "Mr. Moon’s view of North Korea echoes the approach of the two liberal presidents who held power from 1998 to 2008 and pursued a so-called sunshine policy toward the North"
Resurrecting a failed policy will simply fail again. It takes TWO to tango, and Kim Jong Un will dance only if he can call the tune.
Conciliatory policies directed toward tyrannies have a perfect track record of failure. North Korea will NEVER compromise on anything.
Insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".
Resurrecting a failed policy will simply fail again. It takes TWO to tango, and Kim Jong Un will dance only if he can call the tune.
Conciliatory policies directed toward tyrannies have a perfect track record of failure. North Korea will NEVER compromise on anything.
Insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".
2
As a Korean-American, I know the fact, the sunshine policy would work the best with NK. There is no perfect approach when you deal with NK. The fact is that the past two right-wing regimes of SK totally destroyed the relationship with NK and led them to focus on the development of nuclear weapon. Yes, the sunshine policy will not solve the issue entirely but it would work as a leverage to bring piece to the Korean peninsula. I'm so happy to see Mr. Moon was elected! The impeached former president Park Geun-hye brought down the country to the total disaster.
6
It didn't seem to work as leverage in the past, why would it work now? Instead of being leverage, the Kaesong industrial park has been accused of indirectly funding the North's Nuclear program. Any effort to provide economic aid or engage in economic partnership should take that into account and make sure that does not happen.
"Peace"
Having Lived in the Peninsula ...very Near The Border ...tell you for a Fact that Talking giving AID to NK Really Works.
You cannot Bully Yourself into this Situation ...as Mr. Trump has Demonstrated. This is a Very Serious Matter ...'cause the Leaders in NK don't have much to loose. Their proximity to other countries in the Region and it's unstable Leadership creates a Dangerous Climate.
The People Of South Korea did the most Logical and Positive course of Action ...they could do and that's someone willing to Speak With Words Of Reason into this situation.
You cannot Bully Yourself into this Situation ...as Mr. Trump has Demonstrated. This is a Very Serious Matter ...'cause the Leaders in NK don't have much to loose. Their proximity to other countries in the Region and it's unstable Leadership creates a Dangerous Climate.
The People Of South Korea did the most Logical and Positive course of Action ...they could do and that's someone willing to Speak With Words Of Reason into this situation.
7
But there should be talks with the North, even Trump supports the idea. People have got to get over their Trump derangement syndrome. Unlike your traditional republican he does not appear to be much of a warmonger. Moon Jae-in may be a liberal, but there's much that he and Trump can probably agree on.
6
Donald Trump will find some way of ruining the good news here, as soon as somebody informs him of the difference between South Korea and North Korea.
Still, congratulations to our Korean friends on a peaceful and progressive election! All good things to Mr. Moon.
Still, congratulations to our Korean friends on a peaceful and progressive election! All good things to Mr. Moon.
12
South Korea becomes the second country in a few days to choose a leader wisely. If only Americans could be as astute and as involved in their own government. Sad!
17
well stated!
3
Of course we should talk with North Korea. They're not bombing anyone or invading other countries. Maybe they shouldn't talk to us.
3
So lobbing missiles repeatedly into common ocean while making threats to annihilate other countries is passive?
2
I wish him well. North Korea is literally starving and diplomacy has a better chance to bring peace without military action.
11
Let's hope for it.
4
The online article front page subhead - saying the SK election could cause a rift with the United States - is absolutely fatuous. Of course any informed, not-alt-right, uncoerced leadership choice that another country makes will cause a rift with Trump & Associates.
7
So from your point of view all of the UK, Japan, Australia and Canada are either coerced or alt-right? All of their leaders have had friendly talks with Trump.
I understand that you hate Trump. But you need to be aware that some others do not.
Do come back to the real world. There is less hatred where the rest of us live.
I understand that you hate Trump. But you need to be aware that some others do not.
Do come back to the real world. There is less hatred where the rest of us live.
3
It's about time someone asked South Korea what they think is the best solution to the "crisis" in the North.
10
Will he send the US Military home? Then, reunify?
6
I hope so. Plainly speaking, coming to concerned countries, the Korean reunification is not a reality due to China's objections caused by an eventual presence of the American troops in an unified Korea. So, following the rationale, if the Chinese can guarantee that the American troops will no longer stay into an unified Korea, maybe the Chinese could give a green light for the reunification.
1
Mr.Moon's election is a great news and if he is successful in curbing the power of big business, aka, Wall Street, then we may learn something from South Korea. It also benefits China at the expense of United States. China is winning without using weapons, just through talks and commerce, like promoting Ivanka brands and Kushner's real estate business. We are brain dead outside Pentagon. We should focus on Diplomacy and send the military back to garrison.
14
South Korea will be in the hands of a dynamic and progressive leader. A united Korea will usher in peace, prosperity and goodwill among the divided nation/people and will augur in true normalization of the region. A united Korea will be the bulwark against militarization of the entire region. More power to the newly elected President. May his Dream come true!
12
If this person thing that they can make any kind of deal with the North, they re liable to end up citizens of N. Korea.
3
Given the fact the United States has a long and tragic history of military interventions, was the first and only nation to use nuclear weapons (on another Asian nation) and that the American colossus has presented itself, since the end of the Korean War, as an existential national security threat to North Korea, it comes as no surprise that the North Koreans have responded with developing their military capability including the nuclear option. A nation of twenty two million people, reportedly poor and underdeveloped needs to be convinced that the United States will not launch a nuclear weapon and/or a preemptive strike, a military invasion, covert and black ops etc. The unending demonization of the North Korean Government and its leader is just not helpful and the historical American involvement in Asia has not been without its inflicting terrible suffering upon its peoples, something not lost on any of the Asian nations. Diplomacy is war by other means but it is also a vehicle for allowing history to evolve. Moon Jae-in is an experienced, seasoned politician. His election is as hopeful in Asia as Emmanuel Macron's was in Europe. He and his nation along with China, despite are rivalry and differences elsewhere, are worthy partners in securing stability on the Korean peninsula.
3
Right on, El.
Now is very likely an appropriate time to begin the "international dialogue" with South Korea on the withdrawal of the 28K+ American troops based in the country. This will allow South Korea the independent action it requests. And more to the point, give greater flexibility to American defense of the homeland from North Korean intrusion and threat. Similar American economic disengagement should also be discussed with South Korea.
4
Mr. Trump's tweets and comments- taking unilateral action against North Korea at the risk of turning the Korea peninsula into a radioactive zone, South Korea should pay for the deployment of THAAD, the US carrier was on her way to Korea while she was heading toward opposite direction, and etc. have swayed the voters toward liberal candidate and convinced the Koreans that the alliances between the 2 countries are managed by unsteady and incompetent hands, and the US is becoming an unreliable strategic partner.
1
One thing is for certain: there is no war the Right doesn't love to start (nor lose). Let the bombs fly away, in fact send the mother of all bombs. All the while while championing the rights of the unborn back home. What hypocrisy. I salute the South Korean president elect who has the courage to engage in peaceful dialog with a country propped up by a cult. Cut of the head to the cult and the next thing you know the entire country, including the military, will ask the South for a bail out. Maybe NK won't feel as threatened as it would under a right wing government so closely aligned with the US. The US doesn't seem to have a problem dealing with Vietnam nor China, both Communist countries, so why would it have a problem with a less dogmatic South Korea? Everywhere the US has intervened in the past 50 years, things turned to a pile of dung. Stop trying to coerce Trump into another disaster.
4
"But that era was punctuated by the North’s first nuclear test...." No it was punctuated by the incompetence of W's administration, his 6-party talks gimmick and his attempt at bullying that led to N. Korea's first nuclear test.
2
I believe most of the readers of NYT doesn't know President-elect Moon. He is not a professional politician who rose to power out of no where after impeachment of ex-President Park. Yes, he served one term as congressman and served as a leader of now-ruling party - in that sense he could be called as professional politician. However, he worked as a human rights lawyer most of his adult life and proved himself to be with the poor and the people in need. He served as public official in the last democratic (we call liberal administration as democratic) government as chief of staff and has in-depth knowledge about the state craft. He is not a anti US zealot and clearly stated that he would continue to work with US, one of our most important allies. It's too early to judge him and his foreign policies in general. Let's give him some time and personally I'm pretty sure US' evaluation of him would get better in time. As a Korean, however, I would like you to give us just a few days to celebrate our victory after almost 10 years of suffering without premature judgement of your own.
6
Are you guys kidding me? President Moon Jae-in is an amazingly qualified man. He is a Civil Rights Lawyer, he has been in public service for a long time, and he cares about the poor and the middle class. He believes in dialogue...not the bully pulpit, nor paranoia driven geopolitical policies, inside or outside the Korean peninsula. Why would you have anything negative to say about this man...on day one of his election victory? Is NYT moving to the dark place...where every leader is attacked? Your article on President Macron was also very negative. Are you guys a big supporter of Trump while pretending not to be?
6
Many people outside of Korea seems to misunderstand how was the so called Sunshine policy. It's not failed. Rather it was successful. For 10 years of presidents Kim and Rho (1998~2007), Korean peninsula was most peaceful ever. North Korea built an industrial complex at GaeSeong(the president Park shut it down recently), South Korean companies moved into there. Moreover, surprisingly north Korea pulled back their troops to the rear just because of the complex. Can you believe it? Then, president Lee and Park totally messed it up, they just need to deny and destroy all the liberals achievements to maintain their political powers. I like Mr Obama and I understand US governments stance, but he was failed in dealing with Korean peninsula. He should not have ignored North Korea. Since Kim Jung Il's time, North Korea always want to talk with US and want US to guarantee maintenance of their system. President Clinton understood President Kim's Sunshine policy and supported it. If US supported it patiently, we would have seen North Korean's denuclearization already. Unfortunately, the next president of US was aggressive Bush. One thing I have learned in my life is that guys who call themselves conservative always mess things up. Moreover, If a guy who calls him/herself a conservative is rich, then he/she is either an idiot or a psychopath. (Sorry for my bad English.)
5
Don't you realize it was this sunshine policy that enabled NK to start its nuclear program with the huge transfer of cash by Moon's party?
1
Have we been here before? Yes, many times. The US government actually believed that it knows better than the locals about what was best for the locals. Vietnam and Iraq are the two most costly examples. Not to mention supporting strongmen and dictators and engineering military coups. We all know the consequences.
Respect the outcomes of the democratic process. Election has consequences. Let the South Koreans determine how they want to deal with the North. It's their country.
Respect the outcomes of the democratic process. Election has consequences. Let the South Koreans determine how they want to deal with the North. It's their country.
7
And withdraw the American military contingent from South Korea. This will allow the South Koreans the full independence of negotiation the people of the nation purportedly desire.
5
It's easy to talk tough and bluster from the distant fantasyland that is Mar-a-Lago, but for South Koreans, where the largest city is just south of the DMZ, a more balanced approach to North Korea is a matter of survival.
5
America is little more than a bankrupt third world country with a large military it can no longer afford. Today, South Korea is more of a real world power than America.
3
If true they certainly don't need our help for their defenses. They can and should be willing to shoulder the burden on their own.
3
The US says it is the guarantor of security for both S Korea and Japan, but every serious student of international relations knows that it is there to counter China and sell weapons to those held captive (S Korea and Japan)
1
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, certainly no Liberal, backed talkes with the Fuhrer before the outbreak of WWII. How did that happy attitude work out for the world?
6
Sorry, but this is comparing oranges to apples. Nazi Germany was a serious military threat, and Chamberlain's negotiations were an act of desperation to avoid war. The rest of Europe and Russia knew war was coming.
NK is an economic basket case and, although they have a relatively large military, the US has overwhelming military superiority. The NK gov't isn't going to be invading anyone because US nuclear weapons could vaporize them within 30 minutes of the start of hostilities. Their missile tests, pursuit of atomic weapons, and massed artillery pointed at Seoul are a desperate attempt to prevent the US from invading them. (G.W. Bush put NK on the "Axis of Evil" list, along with Iraq, and he promptly invade Iraq.)
So, military solutions are off the table for dealing with NK (millions of South Koreans could die) - diplomacy is the only realistic option.
NK is an economic basket case and, although they have a relatively large military, the US has overwhelming military superiority. The NK gov't isn't going to be invading anyone because US nuclear weapons could vaporize them within 30 minutes of the start of hostilities. Their missile tests, pursuit of atomic weapons, and massed artillery pointed at Seoul are a desperate attempt to prevent the US from invading them. (G.W. Bush put NK on the "Axis of Evil" list, along with Iraq, and he promptly invade Iraq.)
So, military solutions are off the table for dealing with NK (millions of South Koreans could die) - diplomacy is the only realistic option.
1
Go ahead and start talks with the tyrant.
The US should withdraw our troops from South Korea and let them deal with Kim Jung Un. We should just not allow Kim to have the capability to reach the US with his nuclear weapons. As their launchers go up, we take them down via cyber action or drone. Good luck South Korea.
The US should withdraw our troops from South Korea and let them deal with Kim Jung Un. We should just not allow Kim to have the capability to reach the US with his nuclear weapons. As their launchers go up, we take them down via cyber action or drone. Good luck South Korea.
8
US withdrawing from S Korea? Not gonna happen. You seriously think the US will give up only bases on continental Asia that are so close to China? The US is there to benefit themselves, and the prospect of peace will strengthen the day they leave the peninsula.
2
Advocating military action against NK is a very bad idea. They would start shelling Seoul as soon as the US attacked, resulting in countless deaths in SK, and perhaps Japan as well. This is why the US has not attacked NK in the past 64 years, since hostilities stopped in the Korean war. Diplomacy is the only sane way out of the NK problem.
1
This matter of continually reporting world events under an anti-President Trump banner is annoying, thoroughly irresponsible journalism. President Trump, it was ballyhooed in this very news source just last week, has said he'd like to talk to North Korea. President Moon Jae-in wants to open a dialogue.
You'd have to think even the virulently reckless left in the United States would see this as a hopeful sign, rather than just another hateful, spiteful jab at the Trump administration.
Enough, already.
You'd have to think even the virulently reckless left in the United States would see this as a hopeful sign, rather than just another hateful, spiteful jab at the Trump administration.
Enough, already.
7
As a member of the virulently reckless left, I do see this election as a hopeful sign. I suspect many liberal Americans feel likewise. The US foreign policy establishment should rethink its Korea policy and do everything it can to promote dialogue between the two Koreas. Part of that effort would involve withdrawing the THAAD "defense" system, which is rightly perceived by the North as threatening, and another part should involve withdrawing American troops from the peninsula. Let Korea be neutral. If it ends up tilting toward China, that is only natural. Such an alignment hardly threatens US interests.
6
I believe that most informed people around the world save "virulently reckless" for Donald Trump.
4
Trump's policy is annoying. Let the Koreans, North and South, talk to each other. Trump's bullying is garbage.
1
Doesn't trump support talks with the north?
6
Actually, Trump and Moon Jae-in will do just fine - both have shown an interest in meeting with the North Korean leader.
8
Moon Jae-in is the democratically elected president of South Korea. His goal is to maintain peace on the Korean peninsula and to improve the lives of all Koreans. Moon has far more experience dealing with North Korea than either Trump or Tillerson. He deserves the respect and support of the United States. I hope Trump congratulates Moon on his election and pledges continued U.S. support for South Korea.
15
South Korea provides no tangible benefit to the American people. Placing our military at risk for a foreign nation, and its contrarian policy (assuming that develops to be the case), will not be tolerated by the American public.
5
Maintaining U.S. troops and weapons in South Korea provide the United States a way to offset the growing power of China and Russia in Northeast Asia. That is a tangible benefit. Like most countries, the United States acts in its own best interest.
3
Washington won't be pleased. Diplomacy is something you try only after all military options have failed.
4
It's the other way around. Military options are tried only after diplomacy fails.
3
Somebody ought to be talking to North Korea.
Their kin and compatriots in the South are best equipped linguistically, culturally and psychologically to do so. They also have the most to lose if a great war is triggered on the peninsula by a foreign power.
Washington's addiction to one-size-fits-all military solutions is going to end in unspeakable tragedy.
Their kin and compatriots in the South are best equipped linguistically, culturally and psychologically to do so. They also have the most to lose if a great war is triggered on the peninsula by a foreign power.
Washington's addiction to one-size-fits-all military solutions is going to end in unspeakable tragedy.
5
If South Koreans believe rapprochement is their best course of action with North Korea so be it. But its intentions and threats in regards to the U.S. and Japan must be considered independently in terms of future responses.
2
This is a great piece of luck, getting our dysfunctional government off the hook from having to rattle its sabers over something it can do nothing about, anyway. If the Koreas can make peace, then let them have at it!
3
Anyone or any action that complicates Trump's life is fine with me. It is only 1,352 days to the end of the Trump Debacle.
2
How do you know the American experiment in sheer stupidity will be over then?
Why should South Korea take it's marching orders from the USA? Why should they allow us to direct their policy apropos of their belligerent neighbor to the North? They have a great deal more at stake than we do.
If they want a dialogue with the North, fine. I suspect they'll find out all over again that Kim Jong Un is a lying thief, and totally untrustworthy. Trump, of course, is also a lying thief and totally untrustworthy, but he's slightly the better of the two. Slightly.
If they want a dialogue with the North, fine. I suspect they'll find out all over again that Kim Jong Un is a lying thief, and totally untrustworthy. Trump, of course, is also a lying thief and totally untrustworthy, but he's slightly the better of the two. Slightly.
4
Winston Churchill said it best of all , "It is better to jaw, jaw, jaw, than to war, war, war. Moon may not be able to totally resolve the situation but he is moving in the right direction. A war with North Korea would devastate both countries. At least China knows that and hopefully Trump's advisors also know that.
5
Well here we go again. Years of appeasement and groveling to the crazy vertically challenged despot to please, oh pretty please, stop developing nuclear weapons. We'll give you anything your tiny little heart desires, but please behave now. Right.
3
If the new ROK Govt has issues with our policy to the North, that is just fine.
We can withdraw the ROK entirely and just cancel the defense treaty.
Good luck to the ROK!
We can withdraw the ROK entirely and just cancel the defense treaty.
Good luck to the ROK!
3
Thanks for your sophisticated black-and-white mafia-type threat to solving the world's problems, Straight Furrow.
3
I feel somewhat the same way. We are being used by all three parties : The Koreas and China.
I love Korea as a country but we cant sit around like dopes paying through the nose for nothing.
Obviously Korea wants to exchange their security for the material goods they can garner from close relations with China. That makes total sense. The trade deal we have with Korea is supposedly one of the worst on our books anyway, in practice.
Korea can defend itself better than we can. The country needs reunification and we should get out of the way. Nuclear non proliferation is probably dead anyway after the hash we made of it.
Non proliferation was my only interest in the NoKorean issue. I don't see the foreign policy of Goldman Sachs doing anything about that. The rest is just money and China will buy more television sets than we will.
I love Korea as a country but we cant sit around like dopes paying through the nose for nothing.
Obviously Korea wants to exchange their security for the material goods they can garner from close relations with China. That makes total sense. The trade deal we have with Korea is supposedly one of the worst on our books anyway, in practice.
Korea can defend itself better than we can. The country needs reunification and we should get out of the way. Nuclear non proliferation is probably dead anyway after the hash we made of it.
Non proliferation was my only interest in the NoKorean issue. I don't see the foreign policy of Goldman Sachs doing anything about that. The rest is just money and China will buy more television sets than we will.
3
1) Come on, NYTimes! Pres. Moon isn't just a leader who wants to talk with NK. My God. What a sensationalist title! He's a liberal Democrat who is trying to work for the poors and the laborers. Yes, he probably has more common with the US Dem. candidates that you endorse in terms of many policies. And you decide to concentrate on his NK's policy alone as if now SK will become allies with NK. Why don't you follow BBC and other Western media's more neutral approach when it comes to title? Such as "Liberal claims win in South Korean poll" of BBC or "The Latest: Liberal claims victory as South Korea's leader." of AP.
This kind of sensationalist title sometimes really makes me want to unsubscribe from your newspaper.
2) And for people who keeps saying SK should defend its own turfs and US should retreat. Stop being naive. US troops are stationed in Korea and Japan not merely to protect these two countries from NK. It's a geopolitical decision to have influence in the Pacific against China and Russia. Korea and Japan aren't free loaders like you think. This is a give and take situation.
3) So what's the alternative? Do you really want the second place, ultra-right candidate, Hong, who proudly claimed women's proper position is in kitchen washing dishes and want to give amnesty to ex-Prez Park who is in jail just because he wants to go to war with NK? Get a grip.
This kind of sensationalist title sometimes really makes me want to unsubscribe from your newspaper.
2) And for people who keeps saying SK should defend its own turfs and US should retreat. Stop being naive. US troops are stationed in Korea and Japan not merely to protect these two countries from NK. It's a geopolitical decision to have influence in the Pacific against China and Russia. Korea and Japan aren't free loaders like you think. This is a give and take situation.
3) So what's the alternative? Do you really want the second place, ultra-right candidate, Hong, who proudly claimed women's proper position is in kitchen washing dishes and want to give amnesty to ex-Prez Park who is in jail just because he wants to go to war with NK? Get a grip.
4
Congratulations South Korea. Amazing how some countries can smell a rat and the US can't. Our turn next, I hope.
12
So many happy people in the world, so many unhappy NYT readers.
4
So many happy people in the world, so many Republicans itching for Trump to start a war. Lets face it, winning does not always have a happy ending. Some times the people who lost don't take it lying down, especially if they feel cheated. BTW, what is wrong with reading the worlds number one newspaper?
Hey Kim,
Let's face it, you won. You, your dad and your grandpa held us off for 65 years, and there's little reason to think things will change unless you attack someone. It seems like you respect the sovereignty of others as you expect them to respect yours, and that's the highest moralistic achievement throughout all humanity.
What say we promise to respect your sovereignty by signing an official treaty to end the Korean War and have the world recognize that through the United Nations. We will admit you won, we're willing to do that because we could not win and we have lost the desire to compel you against your wishes. We want to respect your family, your nation.
I know this may sound suspicious given our long, fraught history, but we need to have the courage of our convictions as a democratic republic and we feel this is the right thing to do. Given this, we would very like to open up trade with you and seek ways we can work together. Baby steps at first, and we would like to defer to your comfort level and your nation's interests. We've come to realize we can find serenity in trusting you and working with you so please accept our forgiveness and sincere desire to become your friend, compatriot and peace-loving ally.
Yours Truly,
South Korea, Japan and the United States of America
Let's face it, you won. You, your dad and your grandpa held us off for 65 years, and there's little reason to think things will change unless you attack someone. It seems like you respect the sovereignty of others as you expect them to respect yours, and that's the highest moralistic achievement throughout all humanity.
What say we promise to respect your sovereignty by signing an official treaty to end the Korean War and have the world recognize that through the United Nations. We will admit you won, we're willing to do that because we could not win and we have lost the desire to compel you against your wishes. We want to respect your family, your nation.
I know this may sound suspicious given our long, fraught history, but we need to have the courage of our convictions as a democratic republic and we feel this is the right thing to do. Given this, we would very like to open up trade with you and seek ways we can work together. Baby steps at first, and we would like to defer to your comfort level and your nation's interests. We've come to realize we can find serenity in trusting you and working with you so please accept our forgiveness and sincere desire to become your friend, compatriot and peace-loving ally.
Yours Truly,
South Korea, Japan and the United States of America
4
Please leave Japan out of this context.
2
Hey Japan we got this. If we need you to sign the card, we'll let you know.
Thanks,
SK & 'Murica
Thanks,
SK & 'Murica
Congratulations, Mr. Moon. Nothing but the best for a beautiful country and wonderful people. Hope for the unification of your country despite foreign interest that have caused so much injustice to your culture.
13
The newly elected leader of South Korea speaks of peace with North Korea? Wonderful! As the current administration embraces tyrants with one arm and threatens strong arm tactics with the other here in the US, I am thrilled that adult words and thoughts are going to be used to join not divide people. The US administration wishes to withdraw from the world to watch reality TV and bully, whine, throw temper tantrums and defend other bullies to aid their self-impotance. The US has no idea what it is like to have a wall dividing us as between North and South Korea just as we had no idea when Germany was separated. Granted, we did have the Civil War but then just ask our President how that could have been avoided but be sure to fact check his work - he did his homework assignment while watching Celebrity Apprentice episodes. I applaud those nations that see that the US IS regressing away from its ideals of freedom and democracy. I applaud those nations that see this path of self-destruction and greed has no place in a world that must work together so all survive. The US politicians continue to show how hatred can destroy a democratic society. May the new leader of South Korea and the new leader of France LEAD the way toward unity.
13
I am very sure, that we spent no small amount of tax payer dollars "meddling" in the Korean election.
Which is ironic, because It just took us three years, and at least 5 Billion dollars of campaign spending, to hold our own national election. And when the election was over, we did not even have a winner that Americans could embrace and get behind.
Nevertheless, we still continue to concentrate on international conquest - our beloved Democracy has now become "A Bigger Putin" than Putin.
Need proof? We now have the worlds finest oligarch in charge of our country. And he comes complete with family. Right in the White House. I dare you to find a better term than "A Bigger Putin" to describe our current set-up.
Which is ironic, because It just took us three years, and at least 5 Billion dollars of campaign spending, to hold our own national election. And when the election was over, we did not even have a winner that Americans could embrace and get behind.
Nevertheless, we still continue to concentrate on international conquest - our beloved Democracy has now become "A Bigger Putin" than Putin.
Need proof? We now have the worlds finest oligarch in charge of our country. And he comes complete with family. Right in the White House. I dare you to find a better term than "A Bigger Putin" to describe our current set-up.
10
Is the South going to signal capitulation not only to China but also to Kim? If Trump gets out of Korea, it will greatly simplify his presidency. The US's future global policy choice will also be simplified - for the worse.
Mango will have to start the war he wants so badly to divert attention from TrumpRussia and the crimes his family is committing elsewhere. Given that it was just announced he has decided to start arming Kurds we can al guess where....
2
Congrats on electing a person with morals this time. Now, LA is 6000 miles away from Pyonyang, NYC 7000. Plenty of time to shoot down a long range missile - if it can be detected early enough. Sorry, South Korea, you will let us put up that Missile Defense Shield. On the other hand, we will concede that it's not about your security (NK has you under artillery any time they want, anyway) but about ours and maybe with luck a bit for the Japanese. Without you as a hostage, we would have invaded there long ago. I know our Orangutan must look scary to you but this, too shall pass.
5
S. Korea makes positive change and
"...forced a South Korean president from office for the first time in almost 60 years, leaving the conservative establishment in disarray and its former leader in jail."
I await the day, when the above reads "American president".
"...forced a South Korean president from office for the first time in almost 60 years, leaving the conservative establishment in disarray and its former leader in jail."
I await the day, when the above reads "American president".
5
The US-South Korean partnership was formed to prevent war. But Trump does not seem to know that there are consequences beyond pleasing his base to all those thoughtless Tweets. What choice do the South Koreans have but to distance themselves from someone who it trying to start a war.
2
President Park was in office long before Trump entered into politics - the South Korean rejection of traditional parties and embrace of the maverick liberal Moon Jae-in amounts to a rejection of South Korea's longstanding foreign policy stance, and not some mere rejection of Trump. By doing this, South Korean voters are undermining military ties between the US and South Korea. The United States is not a vassal state, to be treated like a waiter by spoiled pampered capricious millennials who tilted the vote in South Korea. Let the South Koreans take ownership of their own security, instead of outsourcing it to the American vassal whose service and sacrifice they take for granted. Once these South Korean millennials have to take responsibility and make sacrifices for their own security, it'll provide them with a rude awakening on why they shouldn't take military ties for granted - or even the free trade agreement.
2
Why is the Republican American government so worked up about North Korea all the time when South Koreans yawn about the North's latest missile test and it isn't even covered by their media?
What do they know we don't? With the election of Mr. Moon I think we are about to find out. And wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall when he informs our elected leader that his former crony capitalism amiga is gone, probably going to jail and he, Mr. Moon, has dramatically different ideas about their relationship to both North Korea and the United States? That doesn't involve promoting Ivanka's product line.
Stay tuned!
What do they know we don't? With the election of Mr. Moon I think we are about to find out. And wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall when he informs our elected leader that his former crony capitalism amiga is gone, probably going to jail and he, Mr. Moon, has dramatically different ideas about their relationship to both North Korea and the United States? That doesn't involve promoting Ivanka's product line.
Stay tuned!
5
China has given N. Korea the means to make nuclear weapons and propped up its weapons delivery systems. N. Korea is its stalking dog in its bullying of adjacent countries for territorial concessions. Giving long reaching nuclear weapons to what the world sees as an unstable dictator is one more weapon in this arsenal; the U.S. will now also be bullied. Far from "reining in" N. Korea, China has sanctioned S. Korea, ostensibly over the THAAD anti-missile system. They have restricted tourism to S. Korea, banned products (such as very popular Korean TV, just as they have banned youtube) and promulgated a propaganda campaign to boycott S. Korean goods and treat S. Koreans as "others" inside China.
Noting that Trump has been easily compromised by the Russians through shady business deals, they are now trying the same thing through guanxi (bribes); immediate patents for his daughter's businesses and green lighting investments in Trump real estate in the U.S.
Allowing N.Korea to target the U.S. with nuclear ICBMs is serious business and must be stopped. Either the DE-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula is the policy of the U.S, China, and Russia; or it is not. Diplomacy here has been stonewalling by the Chinese and N. Koreans. It is a time for action to resolve this.
Noting that Trump has been easily compromised by the Russians through shady business deals, they are now trying the same thing through guanxi (bribes); immediate patents for his daughter's businesses and green lighting investments in Trump real estate in the U.S.
Allowing N.Korea to target the U.S. with nuclear ICBMs is serious business and must be stopped. Either the DE-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula is the policy of the U.S, China, and Russia; or it is not. Diplomacy here has been stonewalling by the Chinese and N. Koreans. It is a time for action to resolve this.
1
Looks like the Trump effect really has influenced the world. Nobody wants a similar moron leading their country.
4
This is beyond Trump's ability to manage - expect another havoc.
7
I am deeply concerned as I am a firm believer that no country in the world should consider another "human rights" approach towards N. Korea.
2
Stop believing, and start thinking, Joshua.
What exactly disturbs you about a 'human rights' approach ?
Would you prefer a nuclear weapons approach ?
What exactly disturbs you about a 'human rights' approach ?
Would you prefer a nuclear weapons approach ?
26
Last time I checked there are human beings living in North Korea. People who are struggling to get by in a oppressive regime. I cannot think of any scenario where human rights should not be the priority.
3
The lessons of WWII were that human rights NEVER are trumped by any other concern. Period. The Nuremberg trials were the basis for a great many treaties of international criminal law such as:
The Genocide Convention, 1948.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
The Nuremberg Principles, 1950.
The Convention on the Abolition of the Statute of Limitations on War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity, 1968.
The Geneva Convention on the Laws and Customs of War, 1949; its supplementary protocols, 1977.
It is these provisions that govern the rights of any human being in any country on this planet. THAT IS WHAT HUMAN RIGHTS MEANS.
Your comment is both ignorant and frightening.
The Genocide Convention, 1948.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
The Nuremberg Principles, 1950.
The Convention on the Abolition of the Statute of Limitations on War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity, 1968.
The Geneva Convention on the Laws and Customs of War, 1949; its supplementary protocols, 1977.
It is these provisions that govern the rights of any human being in any country on this planet. THAT IS WHAT HUMAN RIGHTS MEANS.
Your comment is both ignorant and frightening.
2
If South Korea wants to be responsible for its own defense and take its chances then Americans really should be grateful for that; with the full understanding we get our troops out promptly, our commits to them are at an end.
The reality for any American president has been that protecting S. Korea has been costly for the US, but it has kept the peace in part of southern Asia, allowed an ally to prosper, and avoided a minor-power nuclear arms race there.
With N. Korea racing to become a nuclear power the incentives for Japan, South Korea and possibly Taiwan and even the Philippines to develope nuclear weapons are next to irresistible.
The reality for any American president has been that protecting S. Korea has been costly for the US, but it has kept the peace in part of southern Asia, allowed an ally to prosper, and avoided a minor-power nuclear arms race there.
With N. Korea racing to become a nuclear power the incentives for Japan, South Korea and possibly Taiwan and even the Philippines to develope nuclear weapons are next to irresistible.
3
US troops are not stationed in Japan and Korea merely to protect them. It's a geopolitical decision to have US influence in the area against China and Russia. People need to understand. This is a proxy geopolitical arm wrestling between China, Russia, and US using NK as a tool.
So US Gov't and Pentagon would be the first to balk if SK and Japan actually ask them to leave.
So US Gov't and Pentagon would be the first to balk if SK and Japan actually ask them to leave.
3
Michael -- yes it has been large-power geopolitical. You appear to entirely miss my point, let me make it more bluntly:
* why are we guaranteeing South Korea's freedom from invasion (or just shelling and intimidation) by North Korea? Particularly so South Korea intends to undertake its own diplomacy and self-defense?
* North Korea routinely threatens the US. Why should we acquiesce to this brutal regime having nuclear weapons?
* If South Korea is independent of the US, then the US is free to follow its own most advantageous strategy wrt North Korea. We would no longer be on the hook for what happened to South Korea, and in principle there would be no reason for North Korea to attack their neighbors ... even if we were pounding their nuclear facilities to rubble.
* why are we guaranteeing South Korea's freedom from invasion (or just shelling and intimidation) by North Korea? Particularly so South Korea intends to undertake its own diplomacy and self-defense?
* North Korea routinely threatens the US. Why should we acquiesce to this brutal regime having nuclear weapons?
* If South Korea is independent of the US, then the US is free to follow its own most advantageous strategy wrt North Korea. We would no longer be on the hook for what happened to South Korea, and in principle there would be no reason for North Korea to attack their neighbors ... even if we were pounding their nuclear facilities to rubble.
2
The real story here would be if, in the 21st century, the USA would NOT interfere with a democratically elected president whose views conflict with our administration's policies. Hopefully, Moon will not be assassinated or brought down by some "Mission Impossible" plan to discredit him. In this case America's export of democracy seems to be holding up with resilience. Building bridges instead of walls is the best way to secure peace and do business. Don't expect Trump, et. al. to appreciate that. For Trump peace is bad for business. Now that we've officially abandoned moral leadership in the world, everyone else has carte blanche to set their own path. France did, the Netherlands did, and now South Korea. The battle against oligarchy is never ending. Maybe there is hope for us, too. How long till the midterms?
Frankly, the nukes issue is a red herring. China will not allow the North to initiate nuclear conflict in the South China Sea. No one has the stomach (or reason) for a protracted ground war. But the U.S. could influence a reunification of the peninsula by behaving in ways that are anathema to them both. These relationships and solutions will hinge on titration of the egos involved among the leaders. Neither Trump nor Kim Jong-un want to 'lose face.' Therein lies the rub. Maybe Moon could win the Nobel prize by emerging as the real adult in the room. We can only hope.
Frankly, the nukes issue is a red herring. China will not allow the North to initiate nuclear conflict in the South China Sea. No one has the stomach (or reason) for a protracted ground war. But the U.S. could influence a reunification of the peninsula by behaving in ways that are anathema to them both. These relationships and solutions will hinge on titration of the egos involved among the leaders. Neither Trump nor Kim Jong-un want to 'lose face.' Therein lies the rub. Maybe Moon could win the Nobel prize by emerging as the real adult in the room. We can only hope.
3
It's not clear what this reporter means when he suggests that Moon would strike a more conciliatory tone than Trump. But any moves toward dialogue make more sense than vaguely hinted military options.
What is also noteworthy is how certain elements in Washington keep pushing toward a military option. Would the US risk a first strike on North Korea knowing that doing so would certainly lead to the destruction of Soul and possibly the detonation of on our more nuclear weapons?
It seems for some that the answer to this question is 'yes'. It's also clear that the anti-misled batteries are intended as much for China as they are North Korea.
With a US president that knows little to nothing about history this is a very dangerous time. Elements within our government talk almost casually about the loss of innocent lives even in the millions. Our policy in the Middle East is testament to that. So Americans must make their voices heard that any nuclear exchange is unthinkable.
What is also noteworthy is how certain elements in Washington keep pushing toward a military option. Would the US risk a first strike on North Korea knowing that doing so would certainly lead to the destruction of Soul and possibly the detonation of on our more nuclear weapons?
It seems for some that the answer to this question is 'yes'. It's also clear that the anti-misled batteries are intended as much for China as they are North Korea.
With a US president that knows little to nothing about history this is a very dangerous time. Elements within our government talk almost casually about the loss of innocent lives even in the millions. Our policy in the Middle East is testament to that. So Americans must make their voices heard that any nuclear exchange is unthinkable.
18
trump has no idea what's going on in Kansas. His opinion regarding North/South Korea is meaningless. I'll heed his words the day he can find either country on a map, or Kentucky for that matter.
8
Good news, although I personally believe Ahn would've been a better choice.
Moon served as chief of staff under Roh Moo-hyun and he is expected to adopt the more conciliatory approach towards North Korea advocated by the Nobel peace prize-winner Kim Dae-jung and his former boss.
His stance on LGBTQ rights is regrettable, but then South Korea is also rather conservative in that regard and I still expect LGBT rights to expand under his administration.
Time for the US to stay out of Korea and let the Koreans figure out how to reconcile.
Moon served as chief of staff under Roh Moo-hyun and he is expected to adopt the more conciliatory approach towards North Korea advocated by the Nobel peace prize-winner Kim Dae-jung and his former boss.
His stance on LGBTQ rights is regrettable, but then South Korea is also rather conservative in that regard and I still expect LGBT rights to expand under his administration.
Time for the US to stay out of Korea and let the Koreans figure out how to reconcile.
14
South Korea tried rapprochement. It failed, giving North Korea eight years to develop its nuclear program.
South Korea then tried to punitive incrementalism. That, too, failed, giving North Korea eight more years.
The key is China. As long as China continues to support the North, the North will continue to develop its nuclear program. If the South wants a diplomatic solution, China must participate. But China has thus far refused.
The only thing that appears to have rattled China is the sudden ratcheting up of U.S. military presence. But the U.S. military presence has alienated South Koreans, and the U.S. can't lose South Korea as an ally.
However, North Korea is more capable than ever before. In addition to South Korea, it now poses a military threat to Japan. Soon it will pose a military threat to the U.S.
It's a conundrum. I understand South Korea's resentment of the larger power players, and South Koreans have the right to autonomy and self-determination. If they want to reduce the U.S. military presence, the U.S. must comply. That said, the U.S. has a responsibility to protect its people. Because it's in the cross hairs of North Korea, it can't sit idly by. At the same time, Mr. Trump is incompetent, volatile, and clearly unwell, and poses a real risk of igniting a powder keg.
I don't know what the solution is, but I do know that South Koreans are deluding themselves if they think it's a return to rapprochement.
South Korea then tried to punitive incrementalism. That, too, failed, giving North Korea eight more years.
The key is China. As long as China continues to support the North, the North will continue to develop its nuclear program. If the South wants a diplomatic solution, China must participate. But China has thus far refused.
The only thing that appears to have rattled China is the sudden ratcheting up of U.S. military presence. But the U.S. military presence has alienated South Koreans, and the U.S. can't lose South Korea as an ally.
However, North Korea is more capable than ever before. In addition to South Korea, it now poses a military threat to Japan. Soon it will pose a military threat to the U.S.
It's a conundrum. I understand South Korea's resentment of the larger power players, and South Koreans have the right to autonomy and self-determination. If they want to reduce the U.S. military presence, the U.S. must comply. That said, the U.S. has a responsibility to protect its people. Because it's in the cross hairs of North Korea, it can't sit idly by. At the same time, Mr. Trump is incompetent, volatile, and clearly unwell, and poses a real risk of igniting a powder keg.
I don't know what the solution is, but I do know that South Koreans are deluding themselves if they think it's a return to rapprochement.
22
You know the South Koreans are deluding themselves? How do you know this? It's their country, their people. Many families are split, north and south. They want to reunite. Perhaps it's time we left. That should be up to the Korean people. Korea is or should be more than a strategic place for us to have our military. And if we leave, and no longer stage military exercises there, why would North Korea want to attack us? We were needed there in 1950; we fought long and hard and, under very difficult conditions, ultimately well. Perhaps we have by now served our usefulness. Perhaps we are now a big part of the problem.
3
Any president of South Korea has a potential rift with the Trump Administration, because the Trump Administration has articulated at least two inconsistent approaches to North Korea and the new president is going to have to disagree with at least one of them.
Well, I take that back. The new South Korean President could be as inconsistent as the Trump Administration and agree with each inconsistent position Trump takes. I wouldn't advise that.
Well, I take that back. The new South Korean President could be as inconsistent as the Trump Administration and agree with each inconsistent position Trump takes. I wouldn't advise that.
The fact the US pressured the South Korean government to race to install the US THAAD system while a majority of the South Korean population opposed installing the system so that it could be presented as a fait accompli in case Moon did get elected says exactly what about the US approach to democracy abroad? The whole thing was an embarassment and played a major role in Moon's election. The sooner the system is pulled back up out of the golf course it was installed under packed up and sent back to the Pentagon the better.
5
Sure; why defend yourself when it is so much more... em, peaceful to just not defend yourself.
1
Gosh, a rift with the US. Really? Does that mean that we may be able to remove our forces from South Korea and take them off the list of freeloading "allies" that we have been pledged ( for some unfathomable reason) to protect from their northern neighbor, which has a military aged population much smaller than South Korea and that has an industrial plant that is miniature by comparison? Hallelujah!!!
May that Moon rise and shine brightly! Oh how good that would have felt when I was in my early 20s (back in 1950-1953) and draft bait. If he needs a few nuclear tipped rockets to strengthen his hand with the fat boy up north, we probably could spare a few -- for cash of course.
May that Moon rise and shine brightly! Oh how good that would have felt when I was in my early 20s (back in 1950-1953) and draft bait. If he needs a few nuclear tipped rockets to strengthen his hand with the fat boy up north, we probably could spare a few -- for cash of course.
3
When it comes to avoiding war and its catastrophic consequences - diplomacy and dialogue are the only essential way! So why is the United States not welcoming the results of the South Korean elections?
The people of the Korean peninsula are clearly hungering for the end of this long period of uncertainty following the suspension of the Korean war. A binding treaty (which has been favored by the North) has never been signed between the two regimes - a step that would be essential to the reduction of hostilities.
That could lay the groundwork for the eventual reunification of North and South - or at least a peaceful co-existence between the two. This is the only solution that makes any kind of sense - there is no other alternative!
The people of the Korean peninsula are clearly hungering for the end of this long period of uncertainty following the suspension of the Korean war. A binding treaty (which has been favored by the North) has never been signed between the two regimes - a step that would be essential to the reduction of hostilities.
That could lay the groundwork for the eventual reunification of North and South - or at least a peaceful co-existence between the two. This is the only solution that makes any kind of sense - there is no other alternative!
2
Er....follow the general Lincoln, FDR, Obama etc. doctrine.....ie....S Korea, Japan can protect themselves. North Korea is their problem not ours.
Only get involved if N. Korea can threaten us with a long range threat otherwise stay as far away from that place as possible.
It would be the same if Cuba threatens us again and Russia starts installing nuclear weapons in Cuba. Only get involved with Cuba in that/similar circumstance, otherwise stay the heck out of Cuba.
Learn from history or forever repeat its greatest mistakes.
Only get involved if N. Korea can threaten us with a long range threat otherwise stay as far away from that place as possible.
It would be the same if Cuba threatens us again and Russia starts installing nuclear weapons in Cuba. Only get involved with Cuba in that/similar circumstance, otherwise stay the heck out of Cuba.
Learn from history or forever repeat its greatest mistakes.
1
If the new President duly elected by the majority of his people (no archaic electoral college), decides to appease and make peace with his northern bellicose neighbor, good for him. In that case, the U.S. has no business in protecting South Korea. We should remove the anti ballistic system THADD and install the system in a place where will be appreciated and protects us.
Why should we insist on protecting other people when they don't want to be protected?
Why should we insist on protecting other people when they don't want to be protected?
1
As long as he pays for THAAD and all of the defense the US provides, I'm fine with it.
It is now up to Mr. Moon to reject American influence on the peninsula.
The Korean people need not worry about looking "obsequious" to China, as this has never been the case in recent history, and China does not desire a vassal relationship. What they should worry about is not being obsequious to the US, which they already are.
As he says, America's hysteria over North Korea is somehow not shared by South Koreans, who stand the most to lose from a war. Mr. Moon can slowly peel back the American influence on the peninsula by appealing to pan-Korean nationalism, as many of his followers already do. With China's help in pressuring Kim Jong-un, the two Koreas can begin a "return to Asia" and a move away from the declining west.
The Korean people need not worry about looking "obsequious" to China, as this has never been the case in recent history, and China does not desire a vassal relationship. What they should worry about is not being obsequious to the US, which they already are.
As he says, America's hysteria over North Korea is somehow not shared by South Koreans, who stand the most to lose from a war. Mr. Moon can slowly peel back the American influence on the peninsula by appealing to pan-Korean nationalism, as many of his followers already do. With China's help in pressuring Kim Jong-un, the two Koreas can begin a "return to Asia" and a move away from the declining west.
3
The vital cooperation of the relevant democratic societies, South Korea, U.S., and Japan is doomed. North Korea has consistently cheated other nations (in particular, the U.S.) -- it even dared to perform the first nuclear bomb test during the "celebrated" (actually badly oppressive) Sunshine Policy of Kim Dae Jung -- so that any meaningful dialog with North Korea has been impossible, Moon is known to have acted on behalf of N. Korea during the Roh government, and Moon is actively breaking ties with Japan now, e.g., by invoking the so-called comfort women (a total fiction which majority South Koreans have been educated to believe). I think the U.S. should let South Korea pursue its desire to become a part of the dectatorial nation of North Korea, withdraw all troops from the Peninsula, the troops unappreciated in South Korea anyway, and keep solid the ties with the only remaining democratic countries in the Far East, i.e., Japan and Taiwan.
1
What choice did the Koreans have? Follow Trumpolini and "Rex"? They can't even provide intelligent leadership for our own country.
2
I just realized that he is the son of North Korean refugees. Goes to show how their is still a lot of interconnection. Most people there don't want war. This is an issue between brothers. Oftentimes wen outsiders get involved - it makes the problem worse. Hopefully the brothers can work it out themselves.
1
Between our last election and the UK leaving the EU I was loosing hope. France and now SK have given me hope. Maybe Trump has shown the world how not to go.
1
As the old '60s song pleaded..l
"Give peace a chance.."
"Give peace a chance.."
3
I lived in South Korea years ago and if ever there were a people that have earned their democracy, it is the South Koreans. Americans could learn a lot about civic engagement from the Koreans. Stay strong! Resist Trump, you know what your country needs!
6
According to the PBS News Hour interview(Judy Woodruff) with a former State Department official recently, the U.S. placed tactical nuclear weapons in S. Korea pointing toward N. Korea decades ago. Another Korean expert being interviewed did not refute that claim. I thought I would throw in a little tidbit of news seldom heard. And how many times have we threatened them....as in "all options on the table". And we wonder how someone would react?
2
Excellent! Without an American puppet leading S. Korea, there's a chance for real change.
2
From now on no more stopover at Seoul Airport. Tokyo is saver for any US passport holder.
3
Perhaps this will provide a reason for the US to reconsider why its soldiers should be halfway across the world providing "security" for a country that doesn't think it needs it.
The US should remove bases and troops from South Korea and make it clear to that nation that the US is under no obligation to assist in case of attack. Stop spending $$$ on silly foreign entanglements. I'm sure Mr. Moon would appreciate the US backing away from a warmongering position, right?
The US should remove bases and troops from South Korea and make it clear to that nation that the US is under no obligation to assist in case of attack. Stop spending $$$ on silly foreign entanglements. I'm sure Mr. Moon would appreciate the US backing away from a warmongering position, right?
2
Lilo,
Gee whiz, I'm not sure what Moon wants to try warrants this kind of hard line response. Perhaps they should try engagement again. That's all Moon wants to try. And why abandoning our allies over policy differences or debates has suddenly gained currency under Trump is beyond rationality.
Gee whiz, I'm not sure what Moon wants to try warrants this kind of hard line response. Perhaps they should try engagement again. That's all Moon wants to try. And why abandoning our allies over policy differences or debates has suddenly gained currency under Trump is beyond rationality.
Unfortunately, there are not many South Koreans who think the US military presence in Korea is to protect S. Korea. Furthermore, many think US presence and their security measures make Korean Peninsula more dangerous. US military in there is more for checking China and Russia at bay. And now Mr. Trump is asking money to S. Korea for this. What a nonsense!!
Before we start cheering Moon Jae-in’s expressed desire to achieve some sort of rapprochement with North Korea, recognize the reality of Kim Jong-un’s madness, for it is that madness that allows him to believe North Korea should become some sort of regional if not world power, brandishing atomic weapons and outfitting huge crowds that march, cheer, and applaud in unison while literally hundreds of thousands are imprisoned for life, 40% of which die of malnutrition.
Indeed, 40% or more of the general population lives in “extreme poverty” as defined by the United Nations. According to the World Food Program, one-third of children are stunted due to malnutrition and the infant mortality rate is 33 percent. But Kim’s concern is with the perfection of his displays and the readiness of his huge army: More than 1.2 million active soldiers, and a further 7.7 million in reserve, out of a population of but 25 million.
This is not a man that can be reasoned with. Indeed, attempts to do so will be looked upon as signs of weakness and serve only strengthen his insane resolve.
Indeed, 40% or more of the general population lives in “extreme poverty” as defined by the United Nations. According to the World Food Program, one-third of children are stunted due to malnutrition and the infant mortality rate is 33 percent. But Kim’s concern is with the perfection of his displays and the readiness of his huge army: More than 1.2 million active soldiers, and a further 7.7 million in reserve, out of a population of but 25 million.
This is not a man that can be reasoned with. Indeed, attempts to do so will be looked upon as signs of weakness and serve only strengthen his insane resolve.
4
With the North Korean leadership called the Sun and South Korea's president called Moon, this makes for an interesting situation.
4
Recent history suggests dictators who give up nuclear pursuits don't end well. Think Qaddafi and Hussein. There has to be a different approach. Perhaps offer Mr Kim a life of luxury for the rest of his life if he would abdicate and move to Elba or St Helena.
1
South Korean stand to gain from a US military withdrawal, but so do their separated brethren of the north.
Korean people are perfectly capable of working out their own differences by themselves. The presence of the military of the declining superpower, complicates matters and delays the eventual reunification of the Korean peninsula. Kim Jong-il's recalcitrance and nuclear brinkmanship are largely in response to the threat he feels from the Americans.. If this threat were removed, North Korea may speed up reforms of the backward economy with the assistance from the South. The policy of non-interventionism would afford the people of both Korea's an opportunity to enhance cooperation and integration, leading to a speedier reunification of the painfully divided country.
Moon Jae-in, favors dialogue with North Korea is a highly positive development indeed.
Korean people are perfectly capable of working out their own differences by themselves. The presence of the military of the declining superpower, complicates matters and delays the eventual reunification of the Korean peninsula. Kim Jong-il's recalcitrance and nuclear brinkmanship are largely in response to the threat he feels from the Americans.. If this threat were removed, North Korea may speed up reforms of the backward economy with the assistance from the South. The policy of non-interventionism would afford the people of both Korea's an opportunity to enhance cooperation and integration, leading to a speedier reunification of the painfully divided country.
Moon Jae-in, favors dialogue with North Korea is a highly positive development indeed.
3
However, pigs may fly! Kim Jong-il was educated; I believe, in Switzerland, and I do not believe his education there contributed to his current behaviour. It is either that of a his late father's influence or a deformed mentality of grandeur.
1
Maybe just maybe the Koreans know what's best for Korea and the US should back off and respect their sovereignty. Let's give humanity a chance and try for peace instead of all the threats, bullying and war mongering. Our grand kids just might be thankful we did.
10
It would be nice if we had a President who understood the intricacies of South/North Korean/China politics so that I won't have to wake up every morning wondering whether I need to pack up my household and move inland. Gosh, who knew this was all to complex? Oh, wait...
I wish the Republican caucus would consider adopting the same tactic during their rallies.
1
Shocked bigly that Trump put the Thaad system on a Golf Course. He must be planning a rival resort in the area.
2
THAAD was an Initiative started under Obama. Trump has plenty of faults - but no need to blame him for things he didn't cause.
1
I'm sure the talking heads will be on here saying how the South Koreans are crazy. Well South Korea has one of the highest IQ averages among their population in the world. They are a thinking people. This election - in contrast to ours - had the highest voter turnout in 20 years. That's how democracy works. This is no "electoral college" controversy. This was an overwhelming vote for the direction they want their country to head. People were protesting against THAAD but the past government still allowed it. It's their heads that will be on the line if something breaks out... Many of them don't want to upset the Chinese either - who is their largest trading partner. If we claim we are for democracy - we should respect ther process. In the same way - I didn't vote for Trump - but he won. These outcomes are polar opposites - but they happened within their respective systems. The people of South Korea have spoken loudly - they don't want more tension with their neighbors.
60
"This was an overwhelming vote for the direction they want their country to head."
Pray tell, what's "overwhelming" about Moon winning with only 39.6% of the vote?
Pray tell, what's "overwhelming" about Moon winning with only 39.6% of the vote?
3
Mpound... "Overwhelming" in that voter turnout was high - unlike here! Also being that there are several viable candidates on a ballot - unlike here - 40 percent for one candidate says a lot.
Moon won 40% of the vote - not exactly overwhelming.
Good luck, Pres. Moon, you're going to need it with the Pentagon & Trump at your back and the dictator facing you across the border.
5
Meet the New boss...same as the Old boss.
4
I don't understand why US should worry about Moon Jae-in's win in S.Korea. If he wants better relations with N.Korea, that ought to be so much better.
N.Koreans ought to be almost as good as S.Koreans in their ingenuity & work ethic. Because of floods & droughts as well as mismanagement & focusing so much on Nuclear weapons, a horrific famine apparently killed some 2 million N.Koreans in 1990s. Food shortage is endemic there & malnutrition is still quite prevalent.
Most people are unaware that though S.Korea is now providing the bulk of food aid to North, they make it so hard. Back in early 2000s & late 1990s, they had even dissuaded international community from providing food aid to North saying that North was exaggerating the famine, as I read somewhere. In the mid & late 1990s US was the principal donor of food to N.Korea.
I often wondered then why S.Korea with so much new-found wealth at least did not make sure their cousins in the North didn't starve to death in such large numbers? How could they be so callous? If a similar famine occurred in Mexico wouldn't US make sure they don't die of starvation? As an Indian American, I remember US provided so much free food to India in 1960s when there was famine in Bihar & neighboring areas through what's called PL480. And India absorbed over 10 million refugees from E.Pakistan in 1971 - only some 5,000 died from a cholera outbreak then out of 10 million!
If Moon helps N.Koreans who're hostages of Kim dynasty it'd be great.
N.Koreans ought to be almost as good as S.Koreans in their ingenuity & work ethic. Because of floods & droughts as well as mismanagement & focusing so much on Nuclear weapons, a horrific famine apparently killed some 2 million N.Koreans in 1990s. Food shortage is endemic there & malnutrition is still quite prevalent.
Most people are unaware that though S.Korea is now providing the bulk of food aid to North, they make it so hard. Back in early 2000s & late 1990s, they had even dissuaded international community from providing food aid to North saying that North was exaggerating the famine, as I read somewhere. In the mid & late 1990s US was the principal donor of food to N.Korea.
I often wondered then why S.Korea with so much new-found wealth at least did not make sure their cousins in the North didn't starve to death in such large numbers? How could they be so callous? If a similar famine occurred in Mexico wouldn't US make sure they don't die of starvation? As an Indian American, I remember US provided so much free food to India in 1960s when there was famine in Bihar & neighboring areas through what's called PL480. And India absorbed over 10 million refugees from E.Pakistan in 1971 - only some 5,000 died from a cholera outbreak then out of 10 million!
If Moon helps N.Koreans who're hostages of Kim dynasty it'd be great.
I wonder if Spinmeister Trump will take credit?
1
Such a relief to see that South Korean people have chosen Mr. Moon. I was so impressed by how the people of South Korea united to impeach corrupt Park through peaceful demonstration week after week. Brexit and Trump taking office was a bit crushing, but this shows me there is still hope! Good job South Korea & France!
31
Trump on another collision course? He must think the Presidency is a dodge-em car at the county fair.
6
North Korea has been on a straight line course to developing both a nuclear arsenal and an intercontinental missile fleet since the early 1990's. When the US has tried dialogue and inducements, the North Koreans have pocketed those and kept right on course. The issue facing the US now not just a potential North Korean military threat to South Korea, but a real threat to the continental United States. Once NK mates a miniaturized nuclear warhead to an ICBM, it could invade South Korea and force Washington decision makers to choose between protecting the South or risk the North launching a nuke at San Francisco. No US president, Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, wants to be in that position. Judging by all past attempts at dialogue, there is exactly zero basis for believing the North will change its behavior absent real pressure. Even the Chinese have come to that conclusion. Which is why they just stepped up pressure on NK by suspending coal imports from it, a major source of NK revenue.
6
T Walters. - North Korea already has nukes and could use one on the South tomorrow (God forbid). Even without nukes - a conventional war would be utterly catostrophic for Seoul. The South Korean people have lived with up and down tension for over 50 years. They made their will clear (at least for this election cycle). Stop thinking we know better than them when you are thousands of miles away.
5
We have become a cautionary tale. Sad.
I'm still hopeful. Congratulations France and South Korea!
I'm still hopeful. Congratulations France and South Korea!
24
Excellent story, NY Times. I have to wish Mr. Moon well and trust that the Trump administration will appreciate the possibilities his election offers. Re-opening the Kaesong industrial park seems to be a step worthy of support.
2
The Times writes that, "Mr. Moon’s victory would scramble the geopolitics of the standoff over North Korea’s nuclear arsenal."
Nonsense. It is Donald Trump who has "scrambled the geopolitics" on the Korean peninsula, deploying a missile defense system that has outraged Beijing, and doing so without the approval of the Korean government, and even stating that a "major, major conflict" with North Korea is possible, dramatically raising the prospects of just such a war.
President-elect Moon is a thoughtful and responsible leader with a deep understanding of intra-Korean affairs and an unvarnished perspective on the horrors of war.
The Times should not be leading its coverage of the president-elect with such superficial and misleading reporting.
Nonsense. It is Donald Trump who has "scrambled the geopolitics" on the Korean peninsula, deploying a missile defense system that has outraged Beijing, and doing so without the approval of the Korean government, and even stating that a "major, major conflict" with North Korea is possible, dramatically raising the prospects of just such a war.
President-elect Moon is a thoughtful and responsible leader with a deep understanding of intra-Korean affairs and an unvarnished perspective on the horrors of war.
The Times should not be leading its coverage of the president-elect with such superficial and misleading reporting.
50
It is such a shame to see this incompetent buffoon and so-called president of the most powerful country in the world unnecessarily escalate a situation when he has no knowledge or desire to learn about the history of the conflict.
He doesn't even know kim jong un's name and refers to him in an interview as a gentleman!
He doesn't even know kim jong un's name and refers to him in an interview as a gentleman!
Wow, this is a heartening development, men Of Peace ascending to lead the people, Sunshine policies welcome.
28
imagine! a new leader who is responsible and wants to reduce tensions and represent all his people. Where in the world do we find such a person?
55
Not in Washington now, for sure.
NYT headline: " A liberal who favors talks with North Korea claimed victory in South Korea’s presidential race. His win risks a rift with the U.S."
Misleading headline. In fact, a liberal politician is an ideal candidate to be president at this point. Donald Trump has made a smart move by announcing a willingness to engage North Korea in direct talks along with China's support.
This sounds simple but it is extremely difficult to be carried out.
A country like South is under a stranglehold of special interest groups --i.e., the industrial/military/intelligence complex -- domestically, Tokio and Washington DC.
The special interest groups are powerful and will do whatever it takes to keep the status quo. Trump has no chance to defeat them and normalize relations with Pyongyang.
Misleading headline. In fact, a liberal politician is an ideal candidate to be president at this point. Donald Trump has made a smart move by announcing a willingness to engage North Korea in direct talks along with China's support.
This sounds simple but it is extremely difficult to be carried out.
A country like South is under a stranglehold of special interest groups --i.e., the industrial/military/intelligence complex -- domestically, Tokio and Washington DC.
The special interest groups are powerful and will do whatever it takes to keep the status quo. Trump has no chance to defeat them and normalize relations with Pyongyang.
2
Trump has no chance to "beat them" because he hasn't the faintest clue what he's doing. He only seems to like dictators.
1
I'm satisfied with South Korea declaring victory in its conflict with North Korea. But let's be realistic, and not giddy high school students who won prom king/queen.
South Korea can declare victory because of US nuclear weapons.
If it weren't for the US nuclear deterrent, North Korea would have invaded South Korea decades ago. That's the fact. US nukes helped South Korea.
Period.
South Korea can declare victory because of US nuclear weapons.
If it weren't for the US nuclear deterrent, North Korea would have invaded South Korea decades ago. That's the fact. US nukes helped South Korea.
Period.
10
US Nuclear deterrent is why the North is obsessed with having them. You missed that part.
1
Period. ? Is that the Sean Spicer School of Writing you attended? Nothing is "period" in this complicated world. And the biggest likely threat to South Korea is actually the implosion of North Korea and the millions of crazed, starving refugees flooding its border --going through land mines too--and the resulting instability Seoul would have to manage. Of course the refugees would also try to get into China, where there are already soldiers on hand to push them back. Very messy situation. Period (:
3
Looks like a backlash against Trumpism. There is hope yet.
20
This is a hopeful development. Constructive dialogue with opposition leaders seems preferable to bluster & brinkmanship & deliberate walling off of direct communication.
Even Donald Trump was right to say he was open to dialogue with Kim Jong-un (even though saying he would be "honored" to meet with him was exceedingly clumsy). Such an approach is not so different from Barack Obama's initiatives toward Iran in the early days of his presidency. (That approach bore fruit as a multinational agreement to prevent Iran from continuing down the road to building nuclear weapons eventually resulted from the combination of sanctions and diplomacy.)
Even the hard liners (in Seoul or in Washington D.C.) must understand that hardball is effective only if diplomacy has first been given every chance to succeed. While we are far from any reason to celebrate, we can at least have some hope that a fresh approach to an old problem may be at hand. Such a fresh approach may not work, but it is better than isolating & threatening a rogue nation on the cusp of having nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them as a first strategy. If constructive dialogue proves unsuccessful - and it might - then the civilized world is in a stronger position to put other options in play.
Even Donald Trump was right to say he was open to dialogue with Kim Jong-un (even though saying he would be "honored" to meet with him was exceedingly clumsy). Such an approach is not so different from Barack Obama's initiatives toward Iran in the early days of his presidency. (That approach bore fruit as a multinational agreement to prevent Iran from continuing down the road to building nuclear weapons eventually resulted from the combination of sanctions and diplomacy.)
Even the hard liners (in Seoul or in Washington D.C.) must understand that hardball is effective only if diplomacy has first been given every chance to succeed. While we are far from any reason to celebrate, we can at least have some hope that a fresh approach to an old problem may be at hand. Such a fresh approach may not work, but it is better than isolating & threatening a rogue nation on the cusp of having nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them as a first strategy. If constructive dialogue proves unsuccessful - and it might - then the civilized world is in a stronger position to put other options in play.
37
Your last paragraph is true. The worst thing to do with a wild animal is to try and back it into a corner. It's going to lash out.
1
Globally, America is as much the problem as the solution. For a while after WWII we did some things that made sense, the Marshall plan being the most outstanding example.
But then we went all nutzo anti-communist, and, beginning with the Korean war, began to muck things up. Our "defender of the free world" posture got mixed up with our corporate, imperialistic agendas and we caused no end of trouble in Vietnam, South America and the Middle East. Fast forwarding, there is Afghanistan, Iraq and our military presence in the rest of the Middle East and in Africa.
Now it's theoretically possible for things to settle down and some sort of deescalation to take place on the Korean peninsula.
What would help is for Trump to keep sending his Armadas in the wrong direction.
But then we went all nutzo anti-communist, and, beginning with the Korean war, began to muck things up. Our "defender of the free world" posture got mixed up with our corporate, imperialistic agendas and we caused no end of trouble in Vietnam, South America and the Middle East. Fast forwarding, there is Afghanistan, Iraq and our military presence in the rest of the Middle East and in Africa.
Now it's theoretically possible for things to settle down and some sort of deescalation to take place on the Korean peninsula.
What would help is for Trump to keep sending his Armadas in the wrong direction.
88
"But then we went all nutzo anti-communist, and, beginning with the Korean war, began to muck things up."
Stalin (a communist) killed 56 million of his own people.
Mao (another communist) killed 45-70 million of his own people.
Other communist governments killed millions more both of their own citizens
and people in other countries. Millions of other were jailed and abused.
Yes Philip, shame on the US for going "nutzo" over minor details like this. Like, who cares, right?
Stalin (a communist) killed 56 million of his own people.
Mao (another communist) killed 45-70 million of his own people.
Other communist governments killed millions more both of their own citizens
and people in other countries. Millions of other were jailed and abused.
Yes Philip, shame on the US for going "nutzo" over minor details like this. Like, who cares, right?
5
I really enjoyed Mr. Wenz comment. And good humor is a "good", a "gooder", an even "gooder" thing, in Tumps stile. The last sentence of Mr. Wenz is perfect. Maybe DT keep sending ships, planes and Thaads in the wrong direction.
1
This is silly. In 1950, NK almost overran SK. If they US (actually, the UN) had not intervened, Kim would be the nut-in-chief of all of Korea. And perhaps other territories. The only peaceful deescalation Kim can allow is to absorb SK into a unified Korea, under Kim. How is that a good thing?
Sounds like South Koreans made a great selection. Anything to lower the tensions on the peninsula and allow for sovereignty is a great move. The US needs to take it easy on the Korean Peninsula and stop acting like a bully with his feelings hurt because he was disrespected.
34
Let's hope that he will help South Korea move on from his predecessor's corruption, steer the nation through economic difficulties, and offer solid leadership in the face of North Korea's threats.
9
Yes. Maybe South Korea can steer us from the current corruption, steer us through economic disaster and wealth separation, and offer solid leadership for us in the face of our internal threats to our democracy.
Another stone fallen from the imagined Trump wall of growing popularism. Vive le progressivisme!
67
Mr. Moon would be considered right wing by western standards.
"Progressivism" is a construct of of the white western mind, and has nowhere to go but down.
"Progressivism" is a construct of of the white western mind, and has nowhere to go but down.
3
I think I just fell in love with Mr. Moon. The vote is still being counted, but this is terribly exciting for South Korea. Perhaps now, North Korea will come out of the dark.
Also, did anyone else hear a few echoes of "Lock him up!" about this, excerpted from the article? "The vote caps a remarkable national drama in which a corruption scandal, mass protests and impeachment forced a South Korean president from office for the first time in almost 60 years, leaving the conservative establishment in disarray and its former leader in jail."
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
Also, did anyone else hear a few echoes of "Lock him up!" about this, excerpted from the article? "The vote caps a remarkable national drama in which a corruption scandal, mass protests and impeachment forced a South Korean president from office for the first time in almost 60 years, leaving the conservative establishment in disarray and its former leader in jail."
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
20
Talking to North Korea is pointless. The all-consuming vision of the northern regime is a unified Korea under the leadership of Pyongyang. Their entire foreign and domestic policy supports that goal. So what do we get out of defending South Korea? Another Asian competitor in global trade. If South Korea wants to engage with their northern neighbors that is their concern and their problem to solve. The standoff in Korea is a cold war anachronism and we need to update our policy accordingly. The American tax payer is subsidizing South Korean defense for questionable returns. We should remove all military units from South Korea when the treaty expires 2018 and allow the Koreans to determine their own future.
8
You see this is the problem with having a misinformed populace. In case you didn't know - for years both countries had dialogue and joint ventures on how to re-unify the peninsula. Then the hard liners got in and that ceased. The South Koreans voted to start the "Sunshine Policy" anew. Duh - they had less tension then.
2
Military pressure and sanctions since 1954 haven't changed the
situation. It is time to try dialogue involving test ban by N. Korea
and security guarantee by USA, S. Korea and China. In the meantime
China should put pressure on N. Korea to stop any missile and N bomb
tests to create proper environment for dialogue.
situation. It is time to try dialogue involving test ban by N. Korea
and security guarantee by USA, S. Korea and China. In the meantime
China should put pressure on N. Korea to stop any missile and N bomb
tests to create proper environment for dialogue.
2
So, ROK sees Kim Jong-Un as a better bet than Trump. Can't say I'm surprised.
15
Trump is not the necessary bad guy in all this; his understanding of Korea and America’s intervention there is clumsy, but his deferring to Xi Jinping and offering to talk with Kim lifts him over a constipated foreign policy in Asia that could result in health developments. But he will surely muff it along the way if he stays in office any time. Nixon the arch-anti-communists when to China; history has its twist.
As a overseas south korean citizen, I voted for Mr. Moon few days ago during the overseas ballot period. So happy to see him becoming my next president. I want Americans to acknowledge that Mr. Moon is not pro-north korea. In previous statements, he made clear that the reopening Kaeseong Industrial Complex and further economic cooperation can take place only when there is a significant progress in the nuclear negotiation. To be honest, I don't really consider Mr. Moon as a liberal. He is more like a center-right candidate. But its unique SK political environment that makes him look like a liberal politician.
163
Thank you for this insight. It is important for Americans to remember that labels like liberal and conservative are artificial. Furthermore, Americans cannot push our politics on sovereign nations.
7
There is no way he can be a center-right candidate given his big promise to hire a massive number of civil servants. Mr. Moon is indeed more conservative than other leaders in his party about some issues such as same-sex marriage and stunningly biased toward Korean nationalism just like any other candidates in SK. But think of him center-right? Impossible. I would like to point out it would be very misleading to introduce American politics terms like liberal into Korean politics.
I hope you know that the Kaeseong Industrial resulted in North Korean slave labor working to fund Pyeongyang in building its nuclear weapons.
1
Different continent, different reasons, but, like France, a good result and a reality check for our raving president and his mobs, henchmen and fellow travelers in nepotism and kleptocracy.
21
Let us hope that Mr Moon and Mr Kim together can bring, if not peace, at least a reduction of tensions to that troubled peninsula, which since Hideyoshi's day some four centuries ago has been a playground for would-be conquerors of China....
The less outside influence there, the better for all concerned....
Henri
The less outside influence there, the better for all concerned....
Henri
4
Why do we really care about North Korea-South Korea relations except for NK's ability to deliver a nuclear weapon to the U.S.?
Maybe this election could be a first step to de-escalation and eventually to de-nuclearization by the North Koreans.
If NK got rid of its nuclear weapons, I'd support signing a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War and redeploying the troops in SK to Japan/Guam.
The elephant in the room is that this NK issue gives the U.S. an excuse to deploy a more aggressive military posture in the region and rally SK and Japan to support the U.S.'s China containment strategy.
Maybe this election could be a first step to de-escalation and eventually to de-nuclearization by the North Koreans.
If NK got rid of its nuclear weapons, I'd support signing a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War and redeploying the troops in SK to Japan/Guam.
The elephant in the room is that this NK issue gives the U.S. an excuse to deploy a more aggressive military posture in the region and rally SK and Japan to support the U.S.'s China containment strategy.
8
Korea elects a human rights lawyer, who is interested in lessening inequality in his country, and we elect an arrogant ignoramus, whose goal is to dismantle everything that is descent, defend indefensible, sell this country to the highest bidder (as per letting Flynn go eighteen days after being warned about his Russian connection by Sally Yates), and keep enriching his family.
I am happy for the Koreans, and deeply troubled, and increasingly depressed, about what has been happening to us under Trump and his enablers.
I am happy for the Koreans, and deeply troubled, and increasingly depressed, about what has been happening to us under Trump and his enablers.
30
Perhaps this is an unexpected positive outcome from the election of Trump. Maybe democracies worldwide are stunned by the horrible choice of the ignorant bigot, and intelligent people everywhere are determined to avoid similar catastrophes. With the defeat of the racist Le Pen, and the victory of a liberal, forward-thinking guy in South Korea, maybe democracies are intent on moving forward with society, rather than retreating to the 19th century or earlier.
If this also means that South Korea, and others, will be pulling away from America, that certainly seems to be the smart thing to do. In the age of Trump, America must be treated as a pugnacious, drunken liar, not a trusted ally.
If this also means that South Korea, and others, will be pulling away from America, that certainly seems to be the smart thing to do. In the age of Trump, America must be treated as a pugnacious, drunken liar, not a trusted ally.
23
I always enjoy your insights Stacky!
Congratulations - and with Macron, we now have two leaders who truly want to represent all of their people. Americans -- please pay attention.
37
Back to the drawing board for the two Koreas. They were on the verge of a major breakthrough or rapprochement in the early 2000s between Kim Dae Jung and Kim Jong Il. Maybe North Korea wasn't about to go the way of East Germany vis-a-vis West Germany and peacefully reunify with the democratic South, but there were clear signs at least that North Korea would be ready to embrace a more reformist style of rule, akin to China after Mao's death in 1976 or Vietnam with the Doi Moi reforms after 1986.
But alas, George W. Bush became U.S. president in 2001 and made it very clear that he simply didn't care for what Kim Dae Jung was trying to do. The possibility of any kind of thaw between the two Koreas was scuttled by U.S. disapproval. It was unforgivably disgusting how Bush treated Kim Dae Jung, a pro-democratic activist and dissident who was 1000 times the man the 43rd U.S. president will ever be.
Let us now hope that Donald & Co. don't do the same thing to Moon Jae-in. South Koreans know and understand the North Korean regime better than the Americans ever will. Fifty years ago, at the height of the Cultural Revolution in 1967, China was ruled by the craziest looking bunch of communist radicals the world had ever seen. But China changed. Believing that non-violent change can happen in North Korea is essential to bringing about a peaceful transformation of the government in Pyongyang.
Donald, stay out of stuff you don't know. And tell the neocons to take a hike, please.
But alas, George W. Bush became U.S. president in 2001 and made it very clear that he simply didn't care for what Kim Dae Jung was trying to do. The possibility of any kind of thaw between the two Koreas was scuttled by U.S. disapproval. It was unforgivably disgusting how Bush treated Kim Dae Jung, a pro-democratic activist and dissident who was 1000 times the man the 43rd U.S. president will ever be.
Let us now hope that Donald & Co. don't do the same thing to Moon Jae-in. South Koreans know and understand the North Korean regime better than the Americans ever will. Fifty years ago, at the height of the Cultural Revolution in 1967, China was ruled by the craziest looking bunch of communist radicals the world had ever seen. But China changed. Believing that non-violent change can happen in North Korea is essential to bringing about a peaceful transformation of the government in Pyongyang.
Donald, stay out of stuff you don't know. And tell the neocons to take a hike, please.
119
If Con Man Don stays out of stuff he doesn't know, he'll have to lock himself in a closet for the next 3-3/4 years.
7
One minor point: Dick Cheney became president in 2001.
If I could give you a plus 10 - I would. The best comment I've seen on the issue... Frankly your comment understands the issues better than most journalists and politicians we have here as well!!
1
It's absolutely heartening that a thoughtful and progressive Moon Jae-in will be replacing the corrupt, conservative leadership that was just impeached from office.
Moon Jae-in is a student of Kim Dae-jung, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, one of Korea's modern heroes.
Moon Jae-in is the son of North Korean refugees, the perfect knowledgeable counterbalance to the towering Trump ignorance and xenophobic stupidity occupying America's Oval Office.
Well done , South Korea - well done, France !
It's amazing what good decisions voters can make when there's no Fake News channel on.
America will catch up to you next election cycle.
Moon Jae-in is a student of Kim Dae-jung, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, one of Korea's modern heroes.
Moon Jae-in is the son of North Korean refugees, the perfect knowledgeable counterbalance to the towering Trump ignorance and xenophobic stupidity occupying America's Oval Office.
Well done , South Korea - well done, France !
It's amazing what good decisions voters can make when there's no Fake News channel on.
America will catch up to you next election cycle.
246
Oh trust me, there are plenty of "Fake News" channels in Korea as well. Conservatives are deeply rooted in the Korean society, and their claws are all over politics, which is why such a ridiculous person was made president in the last election. This is one step closer to the path towards democracy!
6
I don't think it will make much difference in Korea. The North Koreans will probably try to use South Korea, China, and the USA against one another and Trump will only be interested in his ego. With any luck there won't be a war, and the North will continue in its drift toward disintegration. I have heard talk that the North's objective continues to be to take over the South, but this would be as much of a disaster for the north as it would be for the south. Whether they know it or not, the North's interest is to continue as a parasite living off the prosperity of the south, without admitting this. If there is a war it would probably be a result of a blunder by North Korea or America, and of course this is possible considering the leadership in both places.
Well, what you said is mostly correct, except that Korea was also in no shortage of fake news during this campaign. It's just that the past conservative government was so bad that the country hit the rock bottom, such that people got absolutely fed up. I didn't want to see the US go down the same path, but apparently that's the only (hopeful) option there is...
3
Interesting that the South Koreans are not real "up" for having our amazingly, fantastic, best in the world deal maker Commander and Thief act out his passive aggressive, narcissism driven Rapture visions in their neighborhood. Are they chicken or what?
107
commander of thieves
Of course we should all be talking to North Korea! Makes no sense to keep escalating without ever trying to directly communicate beyond threats.
67
Another good news following France! Cheers to Koreans!
163
YES! A new day in the land of the morning calm!
21
“The rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible.” -President George Washington (1796)
Our diplomats tell us that every problem is too complex for the rest of us to understand. True — when you have no basic principles.
So, South Korea has a new President soft on North Korea. His supporters aren’t keen on having American missiles there; nevertheless, we’ll borrow a billion dollars from the Chinese to install them, so South Korea remains safe to continue raping us economically.
Hey, the Cold War is over! Is it in the national interest of these United States of America to involve ourselves in a potential nuclear catastrophe to protect our economic adversary? Well, maybe not in our interest but in the interest of our “military-industrial complex”.
“The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.” -Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)
Recall the warning from President Eisenhower? Right, forget about it! Who cares about history anyway, let alone principles? Excuse me, somebody who “friended” me is sending me a meaningless “text”.
See “What Me Worry?” & “Defend South Korea” under ...
http://nationonfire.com/category/government/page/10/ .