Nobody has to convince Kim to make any kind of a deal. Kim got to do everything his little heart ever wanted to do, but could not even dream of doing until self-proclaimed genius Donald Trump stumbled into the White House ... with a lot of help from his Russian friends.
Kim (un-opposed) tested his nuclear delivery systems, and possibly even the destructive power of one of his nuclear bombs, while kid wonder Trump sat on his hands waiting for Kim's big brother in China to come to our aid.
The only thing left for Kim now is to figure out how to avoid leaving a tip for the free meal Trump served him.
3
To the best of my knowledge, there is no U.S. strategy, other than to rant for NK to give up their nukes.
3
Kim Jong-un is smarter than we give him credit. In retrospect we can see a story arc of the Korean political game. Kim's NK nuke develop was pretext to build political currency at a time when NK's allies would abandon his leadership: China will not play the fool for a small-time dictator that refused, ostensibly, to step in line and avoid Chinese-American diplomatic and trade fall-out. The second outstanding 'elephant in the room' is (flip-flop) Donald Trump. The impetuous nature of the most inexperienced president elected since the recording of presidential history is a global issue. Few world leaders would agree that Trump is a force for stability on the world political stage, other than a few extremist politicians that favour estranged policies that are reminisent of Germany under the Nazi regime. So what's the end-game played by Kim Jong-un? He started talking tough and showing his prowess by testing nukes that NK claimed could reach the USA. Now he is more cooperative and willing to meet SK and USA to resolve outstanding challenges. What gives? It's probably a temporary act that repeats NK's past reneging of 'agreements'. Kim will play the nuke card to trade-off sanctions and rejoin, more so than anytime in past, a convenient armistice treaty to end the Korean War and get back into bed with the South that offers mutually beneficial economic opportunities and a repeal of global sanctions. After the North Korean dictatorship gets its way, smoke and mirrors returns.
IMO, the times are ripe for a deal because China wants a deal and it willing to help "persuade" Kim to make a deal. China thinks the time may be ripe because Trump is president and can most likely be manipulated because of his and his team's need for some legitimacy in foreign affairs among the US people. Trump has no personal capacity to deal with the issue except for hope that China can cut a deal the US can accept and that the nuke-em Boltonites won't queer the deal. This would be a big win for Trump and the US despite Trump being an idiot president. We should all hope for a deal even if it makes Trump look like the brightest star in the sky because it will be good for humanity. This is an example of a situation in which the US gets a lemon and ends up with tasty lemonade instead of a sour taste in it mouth. Cheer for Trump on this one.
1
Look, I'm a Democrat, but I'm rooting for Bolton to have his way on this one. No more NK ICBM developments!
Unlike Cuba, the other weird dynastic authoritarian nation, NK has know-how. They can build things and are technologically advanced. They have so much to gain by being more a part of the world.
1
“Mr. Kim has taken steps to appear willing to cut a deal, offering what sound like concessions to the United States, but can also be seen as clever negotiating tactics.”
If only the US media would report on proposed military action with such pessimism - after all, it’s not like Washington’s military adventurism has done anything but create a multitude of unforeseen negative consequences over the last several decades.
When all you use is the hammer of the US’s unparalleled military might, every problem resembles a nail, to the servile media as well.
It seems as though the media, which uniformly advocated for the US missile strikes on Syria (a violation of international law, BTW), doesn’t want us to get our hopes up for successful negotiations with the dastardly Kim, who may even resort to clever negotiating tactics.
When a country spends over half its discretionary outlays on the military, the world must be portrayed as a dangerous place.
1
It's not economic pressure Kim is worried about.
It's President Trump's stated willingness to use fire and fury against Kim like the world has never seen.
A clear threat to destroy Kim and his despicable junta through overwhelming force -- including nuclear weapons.
I hope that the American press will point out that what is driving Kim to change is not the threats from Trump but the control decisions being made by Xi. Xi is smart. He can keep some control over North Korea while giving credit for the possible reduction to this dictator's tyranny to Trump. Trump and his supporters will be thrilled for little benefit while Xi will make certain China increases their trade with a growing nation of better educated people. Is it not better to make more money than to be seen as some kind of Hollywood personage?
I tend to believe the analysts and North Korean defectors who believe that economic pressure will not change the behavior of Kim and the North Koreans. It is more likely they will tighten their belts even further. They would eat the roots of weeds or die before they surrender. We cannot get smug with Kim. Already, the reports coming from Seoul and Pyongyang are different. 'Denuclearization' is not the same as 'no longer need nuclear and missile tests'. Their demand of withdrawal of US presence has been withdrawn. But that's not really important if the North Koreans decide on a sudden preemptive strike. It would be suicidal for Kim but surely his neighbors, our allies, will go down with him, whether Americans are present or not. Our smug assumption that Kim will capitulate fully to our demands is foolhardy and wishful thinking at best.
2
One aspect of the situation not mentioned is China. They have helped North Korea evade sanctions in the past. Now China is under pressure to stop helping North Korea. So Kim's response: " Maybe we should negotiate with South Korea and the U.S. and create a big western backed alliance on China's border. I'm sure the Chinese have been secretly hoping for that prospect all along. And Kim will turn to China and say: " Did you have a better deal for us or should we continue to talk with this guy Donald, instead?" If it sounds too good to be true.. ....
The anti-Trump media conglomerates keep raising the bar for the US negotiation position vis a vis NK. Unconditional surrender of NK regime seems to be the goal that must be achieved. This raises an interesting question:
Is the media working in favor or against a fair nuclear deal with NK? after all, a successful negotiation with NK will greatly enhance Trump's chance of being reelected in 2020.
1
Why should Kim Jong-un give in?. He's getting everything he wants so far and playing Donald Trump like a violin. Trump is agreeing to the meeting without getting anything in return. At a minimum, the release of all Americans held by the North Koreans should have been a precondition for any meeting. Trump also should have set the time and the place for the meeting. Kim Jong-un has taken control of the process and has elevated himself in the eyes of other world leaders to be the superior of the passive, blustering U.S. president. He's also taught other world leaders how to roll Donald Trump in negotiations.
Kim Jong-un has gotten everything he wanted with his nuclear program; he really doesn't need to test anymore.
The Art of the Deal? Haha! the great deal maker is inept and completely passive. All Twitter and no accomplishments.
4
'Bombarded by daily propaganda appeals, North Koreans are more likely to see themselves as citizens of a small nation persecuted by hostile Americans than they are to blame Mr. Kim’s government for their economic hardship, recent visitors and defectors say.' It would seem that residents of the DPRK are capable of accurately analysing the situation in which they find themselves, irrespective of 'daily propaganda appeals'. They are indeed being persecuted by a superpower, which, with sanctions and threats of 'fire and fury like the world has never seen' (backed up by constant military exercises along its borders) has been attempting to crush them ever since the Armistice of 27 July 1953, which brought an end to the armed conflict in which some 20 % of the DPRK's population were killed (according to the SAC estimate). Article author Choe Sang-hun may regard this understanding of the situation as the result of 'daily propaganda appeals', but to the residents of the DPRK, it is the reality they have lived for nigh on seventy years....
Henri
1
All these reports of pain in north Korea - all Pyongyang centric. These analysts, reporters and several do gooders rarely go out of the capital or not allowed access.
I have been to North Korea one time - and never again. Pyongyang is not North Korea. It's a Potemkin. We went to the country side - and privation there is visible and in the air.
We saw men pulling agricultural equipment - not machines or oxens, women carrying metal buckets of water on their shoulders trudging through barren fields. Children laboring. Electricity in many villages is non existent - except to power loud speakers from day break to sunsets blaring revolutionary songs.
Heck, even in Pyongyang, I took a day off from this highly indoctrination tour as I could not take it any more. Had my own guide and minders. Asked them where for lunch. They all wanted pizza. I insisted on Korean food which greatly disappointed them.
Soon, we were joined by other minders. When it came to paying for meal, I was shocked that I was billed for takeaway food that all these minders had organized. The bill was a months salary of at least two minders.
What we need to do in addition to "maximum" pressure which are working is stop these humanitarian folks.
They may think they are doing good, but they are helping the devil in its place. It's a palliative at best but more a poison just to keep these wretched folks live more in misery.
It's time to put an end to this horrible, nightmare.
2
The people who make the decisions are not close to being hurt by sanctions. When your people are already eating dirt, what else can be taken away?
Why the North Korea Government should give up his nuclear program? President Kim just have to look of what happen to Muammar Gaddafi of Libya. He gave up his nuclear program in exchange for good relations with the West. In 2011, the West (NATO) bomb him and he is dead.
I don’t know whether it’s the sanctions, a new generation of leadership in NK, or America finally, in the face of a long emerging threat, acting with determination, but the situation clearly is changing faster than the Cold Warriors in the media can keep up with.
So many of our old paradigms are being shattered that we don’t even know what questions to ask, anymore.
2
What is not mentioned in this or any other article on a North Korea-US meeting is what North Korea wants in return for halting nuclear tests. They have to want more than just lifting sanctions. Diplomatic relations? Entry into the world's financial institutions? Foreign aid? What will Trump give them? And what about the Americans North Korea has imprisoned?
3
I think that the question may consider, "What will South Korea offer in terms of economic benefits and cooperation to pay for peace that would likely include an armistice treaty?" The South Korean political-economy offers much more benefits to a 'stable' North Korea. It is a segway into the entire South-East Asian markets and recovery of diplomatic-economic links to Japan-China growth. Outside of the economic region, NK is not a player and Kim is not expecting much more than a drop of sanctions.
The question is: What has the US goal been? Is the model what happened to East Germany after the fall of the Soviet Union -- an end to the Communist dictatorship and reunification? Or is the goal what happened with China, writ small -- a transition to an authoritarian capitalism, with the Communist dictatorship remaining in place, playing a major role in overseeing the transition to a more market-oriented economy that is integrated into the global trading system. I'm starting to think that previous US governments were basically holding out for the first option, while the North Korean regime, of course. resisted that with all its might. And now, the Trump administration has accepted the second outcome -- and on that basis, Kim is perfectly willing to do a deal.
1
North Korea isn't going to give up its nuclear weapons nor is it going to agree to inspections related to its nuclear weapons program. Kim Jong-Un's military has achieved the same thing that Israel did decades ago: Self-preservation. North Korea doesn't need thousands of nuclear weapons to prevent an attack on its country. No adversary of North Korea is willing to sustain a successful nuclear strike on its territory.
3
At no time since the armistice ending the Korean War, has the US been as weak as it is today. Not in terms of economic or military power, we remain the world leaders. But today our diplomatic corps are rudderless, hollow and weakened.
What better time to negotiate? And with who? A president who foolish enough to view diplomacy as merely transactional. A president the world laughs at behind his back. A president seeking a diversion from his own predicament so desperately, that any "win" will ultimately label him as the man who lost Asia.
Even as traditional post-war allies consider deserting the US and kindly asking to to be left to their own best devices (China, the TPP alliance), Trump will claim victory. The Art of the Deal perfected, revealed as The Art of the Bluff and Empty Threat.
Why not negotiate with this man, the chance will never come again.
6
Kim Jong-un is completely in control of the negotiating process so far. He's rolling Donald Trump like a ball. Kim is deciding where the meeting is, Kim is deciding to hold the meeting, and Trump got nothing in return. Trump is so weak and incompetent that he didn't even require the release of all Americans held by the North Koreans as a precondition to meeting. Kim is showing other world leaders that Donald Trump is all Twitter fingers and no competence. Other world leaders will be able to roll Trump just as easily.
1
Kim hasn't changed his politics with China and Russia pulling the strings, but the free world has to go along til his plan is fully exposed. North Korea hasn't been able to feed its nation's people. Remember the wheeling and dealing we did with his father during the Clinton administration. Food for nukes would be a relief.
Perhaps rather than plotting about how to make North Korea "give in" we might better be thinking about what new opportunities, in terms of increasing their GNP, might tempt them to change their thinking. Vietnam, which once was our favorite "bad boy", is now turning into a producer and exporter of consumer goods. They now rival China in the production and export of cell phones.
2
Folks, this is about Chairman Xi wanting to keep Trump in office so that The President will further withdraw the US from its traditional roles. China is only pleased to be able to fill the resulting political, economic and military vacuums.
Given Trump an apparent victory over Kim will immunize Trump against congressional action just as Reagan's dealings with Gorbachev immunized him against Iran Contra. All it took was summoning Kim Jong-un up to Beijing for an offer he couldn't refuse.
4
No economic sanctions alone have ever brought a rogue state to its knees. There are always loopholes and ways to circumvent sanctions by finding willing trading partners. For the latter, the drive after profit follows the proverb "money has no smell".
2
Choe Sung-Hun’s excellent reporting on the effectiveness of North Korean sanctions reinforces my insistence that food should never again be used for economic sanctions. For decades, our Presidents (Republican and Democrats) have been hurting our farmers—most especially our soybean farmers who produce an excellent product.
Beginning with the soybean embargo against Japan, to Jimmy Carter’s embargo of food to Russia after Afghanistan, then onto President Trump whose tariffs on Chinese goods impose what is effect an embargo, the use of food to force people to do what we want is shameful.
1
The question is what game Mr. Kim is currently playing. The news the last week has sounded like a dream - especially for Trump: Kim ready to talk denuclearization; Kim willing to accept American Troops on the peninsula; Kim willing to make peace with the South. All of that is reported without the rest of the world giving an inch. It sounds as if Kim is simply caving right and left, handing Trump everything on a platter. It sounds that way. I would not be surprised if Trump believes that Kim is simply caving because Trump is the most fantastic, wonderful leader America (heck, the world) has ever had.
Could it all be that easy - more sanctions, a bit of tough-guy bluster and name calling from Trump and voila N. Korea problem fixed! Tough sanctions have been endured before; tough talk and name calling surely do not bother Kim. From where I sit, it seems that Kim is playing Trump. Will he agree to terms, then break them as his father did? Is he hoping to snow Trump? Does he think he can extract major concessions for Trump? What's his game?
9
Kim is undoubtedly playing Trump and very skillfully too. For example, Kim's announcement that NK no longer needs to test its nuclear arsenal is not a concession, but a statement of achievement and will be understood as such by all world leaders, other than Trump. Trump's narcissism and ignorance of world events makes easy to manipulate and confuse.
1
The basic problem is expressed in phrase "give in." If we expect this to be all one way, then nothing will happen at all.
Is it on the table, for a price? Yes, we already know that.
Will they give it up for nothing? No, we already know that from decades of experience.
What will it take? Major concessions, about regime security and the future of the North, and the future of the border of China.
They are not going to "give in" without something that deals with those concerns.
And they are not going to trust us very far either, nor should they, because we have already proven ourselves untrustworthy. We cheated on deals with them when our own politics changed, and with Iran and Libya on nuclear deals.
They cheated too? That is changing the subject, from whether we can be trusted -- we can't. Sad, isn't it?
4
Unless sanctions are making Kim and the North stronger, materially and mentally, there is no need to worry about their impact at this very early stage. Remember, all previous attempts of sanctions were cheated by the likes of PRC. We are only beginning the first stage of a little more verifiable set of sanctions.
3
Good point. The sanctions dissolve if China decides we are abusing the situation. China wants to see a deal, they've made that very clear. The deal they want is not some version of conquest of the North nor of trusting the US.
4
The writer brings up a very good point. How will Mr. Kim define Nuclear disarmament? If you follow the Kim family playbook, then you know it would be foolish to assume the North Koreans will begin laying down their arms and hugging their neighbors in the South. They have shown a willingness to lie on deals and play dirty. The South seems to get taken each time their leaders boast of a sunshine policy that results in, cash payments to the Kim dynasty, while the North's military attacks the South and sinks one of their Naval vessels. The Seoul government gets bullied and then recoils, however, not after first giving Mr. Kim the money and aid he can extract from the South.
2
This whole nuclear issue with North Korea is a red herring, a distraction. China obviously controls North Korea, so one might as well say that China is developing nuclear weapons in North Korea.
It seems logical, in a Machiavellian sense, that China and North Korea will allow a peace accord, a win, for Trump because if he can remain president he will surely destroy our democratic institutions by loading them minds equally criminal as his own, turning this country into a mockery, a twisted joke of what it has always supposed itself to be. The longer Trump stays in power the more certain it is that the FBI, the CIA, the DOJ will be gutted from within.
Doesn't anyone see this?
27
Yes. Very much. And I think Putin is involved.
The only way to redeem the situation is to have a Princely President not beholden to dumb Deplorables, and a Secretary of State whose mind is wise like a grandmother yet nimble like a Yoga master. A President Obama and SoS Hillary Clinton would surely resolve this issue in 3 months, but we're too racist and sexist to ever elect them.
1
China is pushing the USA out of the South Pacific to recuperate Taiwan and consolidate his hegemony in the whole area.Japan is scared and , with a united Korea, will have to develop his own nuclear weapons...
8
Surely there's a better way to bring NK into the family of nations than just beating up on it.
4
The flow of goods and services is to countries what blood is to people. When you create a fever (ie outspending the Soviets on the military during Reagan) you can kill the regime and not the people. Here, denying DPRK (read, the North Korean people) raw materials and trade is starving the body, not really creating a fever. Is it the same thing? Is it humane? Is it a proper lever to discuss nuclear warfare? I wish I felt better about reading how fertilizer for farming has to smuggled over a frozen river. I wish we had more efficient tactics to accomplish this existential mission.
4
In response to Stu Freedman's thoughtful comment
"Kim will demand a quid-pro-quo that he knows The Donald won't accept"
What Kim will demand is largely irrelevant. If a deal should comes to pass it will be a deal between the PRC and the US. Each consulting its client states, (NK and SK) but be not bound by their feedback.
So the real question is: Will The Donald will accept what Xi will put on the table?
14
Exactly, and sanctions will always be only as effective as China wants them to be.
3
I don't suppose a bag of groceries would be as effective as another sanction. Why aren't we promising the benefits of joining the world economy instead of squeezing the life out of an already burdened people?
1
Sanctions work when they cause a regime to fear revolution, or when they hit the leaders directly -- neither of which is happening in this case. When you have a leader who is willing to let his people starve, and who shows no chance of losing his grip on power, then sanctions won't work. It's sort of like the $1 billion fine on Wells Fargo: it doesn't affect the decision-makers or leaders, so it won't change behavior.
6
No. Threats have nothing to do with this. Putin: puppeteer. Trump: Putin asset. Kim: Putin asset. Mueller: threatens Trump. Kim: helps Trump by flip. Putin shares the Korean Oscar with Kim. Puppet dances, Trump dances, Mueller hammers, Congress blinks. Kleptomania wins.
6
Failing economy destabilized communist East Germany and led to overthrow of it's government.
1
Oh, haven't you heard? Sanctions don't work. Funny how that is the line when a dem is president but now that we have Mr. America in office ... going to get TOUGH! with ... more sanctions.
Kim and his predecessors don't give a hoot about their people - that has been obvious since post-ww2. As long as China and Russia (and others?) provide them with trade or enough aid to sustain the government and military, nothing will change. Kim's 'offer' to no longer insist that the U.S. get its troops out may be withdrawn or it could be recognition that having the troops in S. Korea actually puts Americans in harm's way very quickly, especially for a president who doesn't give a hang about harm coming to non-Americans as well as not caring about many Americans (but cares about the military).
4
It’s Friday, so let’s be optimistic.
Let’s say North Korea gives up its nuclear weapon and ICBM programs in exchange for an end to sanctions, perhaps some economic assistance, and a normalization of relationships with South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. Kim Jong Un remains in power as an authoritarian, but not an expansionist one.
In the short term, this is clearly a victory for the U.S. We avoid the two worst options – living under the threat of North Korea nuking the U.S. or the expense of blood and treasure to eliminate that threat.
In the longer term, however, we will have established a basic principle for every authoritarian regime around the globe – economic sanctions can be broken or avoided by feverishly working on a nuclear weapons and ICBMs. This is best done under the protection of a U.S. adversary like Russia or China.
Oh well, for every Friday, there’s always a Monday.
22
I agree, except that it’ll be very hard for any country to replicate what North Korea has been doing for over sixty years. I tend to see the situation in North Korea as a very unique one that because of a whole host of political, social, economic, and cultural factors has been able to maintain a highly authoritarian regime with little dissent. Can other countries try to initiate North Korea? Sure. Will they be able to do so successfully? I highly doubt it.
Why would North Korea give up its nuclear capability when it is all it has? Without nuclear weapons what is North Korea in the eyes of the world? It is not going to happen.
7
North Korea is not going to be giving up its nuclear capacity. Kim can announce that they don't need to test anymore because they've achieved their initial goals. This is not a victory for the US no matter how Trump tries to spin it. Rather, it's an announcement of achievement by North Korea and will be understood as such by world leaders who are smarter than Trump.
1
Same story different year.If the North Korean citizens haven't risen up yet with all the hurt that they been through then they never well. every time I hear one of these North Korean defectors or experts say there is discontent I write it off as wishful thinking
3
What happens in N. Korea is determined by China. Based on my discussion with Chinese, the Chinese leadership became increasingly alarmed about the escalating insults between "rocket man" Kim and "dotard" Trump. China's own analysis seems to be that a N.K. armed with intercontinental missiles tipped with nukes is unlikely be tolerated by any US administration.
Hence " China’s apparent willingness to enforce many of them".
Indicative of Chinese displeasure with N.K. is that KCNA reported after the XI-Kim meeting that Xi had accepted an invitation “with pleasure” from Kim to visit North Korea.
China’s statement, however, made no mention of Xi accepting an invitation
17
Although, with some noticeable differences, Kim has embarked on a striking similar strategy to the one that the North Vietnamese used in that interminable conflict: geography and time to pressure US policy makers.
By brilliantly waiting until a new administration arrived in DC to launch his latest missile technology and thus show a "credible" (that infamous word from Vietnam conflict) capability to produce an ICBM, Kim put the onus on Trump ( who famously vowed that "rocket man" would not achieve that on his watch) to either get an agreement by treaty or force. Kim then in another brilliant move did a 360 by using the Olympics with his sister as an "angel of Peace" to start the fissures to create a wedge between US and allies ( similar to the angelic NLF representative at Paris Madame Binh).
With his geographic partner China, Kim and Xi have already devised a master plan for the next decade concerning Korean talks and what they can accept. Who needs the "win" more? And Trump like Nixon is facing Political "time" restraints in the form of elections 18 midterms and 20 general so a "win" for Trump is the more exigent politically.
In the final analysis, Kim and Xi could very well decide to forgo Kim nuclear ICBM program in exchange for treaty and sanctions relief and aid while keeping a civilian missile program for commercial space launch vehicles.
And here's the rub, regime change off, and Kim keeps the " knowledge" acquired to produce an ICBM in very rapid fashion.
3
Bill Clinton gave China the space launch guidance technology needed to accurately place a space vehicle, which is the same as the tech needed to have one go up and fall back down in a specific spot, e.g what we call an ICBM. After than, China was able to target us accurately, which increases the effectiveness of their nuclear arsenal dramatically.
Remember, all naive people from the free world:
All dictator governments pass the pressure and hardship eventually to their people. Kim III will still live lavishly with all he wants. It is the way how the totalitarian regimes work - the small fraction of dictators and his loyalists suck the blood from the rest of people.
Now the question is if we sanction these countries, we effectively sanction their ordinary people, do we still want to do it?
Look at the Communist China. It was isolated from 1949 till 1976. The result is that Chairman Mao still had a big belly, so were his loyal lieutenants. The regime was still there at the end.
North Korea plays the same game, so was Stalin in USSR, Assad in Syria, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and other countless dictators in Africa and South America.
This is like a chemotherapy - you want to kill the cancer, nut at the same time, you kill other good cells.
We need new ways of thinking, just like in the modern medicine to TARGET the cancer.
7
If the North Koreans have the will, they can overthrow Kim. They will have to endure pain, but once 1/4 of the army changes sides it would be over. But they do not have the tradition of self government, they've been brainwashed from birth, and they don't have small arms to take an armory, then vehicles, then become a credible force. Small arms and the will to use them (knowing initial retaliation is certain) would also deny safety to government officials.
ISIS started with AKs and crude improvised RPGs, then built than into captured Abrams tanks. They were willing to die in whatever way necessary and would not quit until dead, with the result that their opponents generally fled in terror.
That's why we have the 2nd amendment, it was not written with any regard to hunting.
China and the DPRK have us right where they want us. We'll be out of the western pacific inside 10 years.
6
The screws have been tightened, so the pain is now bigger, but I don’t think it is lethal. This is a quote from a reporter. I simply dont understand why should sanctions be part of arsenal in the hope of inflicting lethal pain on entire population? Is there no humanity? Whole population punished for the acts of a government you dont like? That is barbaric. Preventing fertilizer, oil so that they cannot grow crops and die of hunger? What kind of people can support such policy?
8
On March 2, on MSNBC, Richard Egel reported from Vladivostok that Russia was loading ships bound for No. Korea and enabling No. Korea to evade International sanctions. He further reported that Russia supplied the technology and engines to enable No. Korea's rapid advancement nuclear bombs and intercontinental ballistic missiles. Looks like Russia may have supplied the poison Kim Jong Un used to kill his brother. It worked like the poison the Russians used to attack the Skripals in England. It kills the victim on contact with their skin rather than being ingested orally.
14
It's not a question of whether the N Koreans can withstand a famine. They have done so before and survived.
It's a matter of Kim opening up N Korea to improve the lives of everyone there including his regime. His allowing some free market is an indication he could lean in this direction.
And yes Donald Trump's tough stand may be the breaking point for Kim to move into this direction as long as he receives assurances his regime is secure.
1
ok. here's how the Chinese want this to go. 1: Kim gives up nukes, 2: the Koreas start to join together their economies and politicians. 3: the economy starts to collapse. 4: we are called to help control the coming civil war and gain another military commitment this time with shooting and civilian casualties for years. 5:the Koreans start looking for a strongman savior. Kim. The Chinese choice and Trump's. The World's best democracy then gets to do what what its done best for 100 years : support dictators.
1
Well, now is Trump's chance to show Obama how it's done. It took a multinational team a decade to come up with the Iran nuclear agreement that Trump must know frontwards and backwards from the way he criticizes it. All that knowledge about what NOT to do should lead to a nuclear agreement with North Korea that will cement Trump's place in history. Stop laughing!
5
"Many analysts ... have doubts about whether economic pressure alone ... can change the behavior of an impoverished, tightly controlled nation that has endured extreme hardship before."
Kim is a tinhorn dictator who's received more than his share of world attention for only one reason: He has nuclear weapons. It's not immediately clear why he would give up that leverage -- especially when his own people have eaten weeds to enable him to keep it.
I'm not optimistic about the odds of any agreement, though I think we're wise to do what we're doing: Tighten up the sanctions.
2
It's not the sanctions and it's not Trump's threats. The North Koreans are willing to sit down because they think they are dealing with a bunch of rubes whom they can take advantage of, and they are probably right about that. Regardless the outcome, this is a win for NK because they have nothing to lose.
14
Anybody else remember the Liberal fad of the month a short while ago that Trump was so stupid and had so many mental health issues that he couldn’t possibly even know what he wanted in a negotiation with N. Korea?
And then there was the narrative that he was a warmonger that would get us into WWIII.
Well he is making tremendous progress now and it’s due to a smart long term strategy.
Where Obama failed to enforce his own red line against the animal Assad, Trump bombed him twice. Where Obama refused to provide Ukraine with lethal aid even though it was authorized by Congress, Trump did, and hundreds of our best Javelin antitank missiles have been shipped to kill Russian soldiers. Where Obama was afraid to confront Putin in Syria, Trump’s military recently killed hundreds of Russian soldiers (disguised as mercenaries). Where Obama failed to get THAAD antimissile defense installed in S. Korea, Trump succeeded. Where Obama was universally perceived as weak, Trump sent three aircraft carriers to practice in unison off Korea’s coast (first time in decades). Where Obama refused to confront China over its unfair trade practices and IP theft, Trump started a trade war showing he is willing to withstand short term pain for long term gain. Where China never helped us before wrt NKorea, it is enforcing sanctions now
Of course Kim Jong Un notices and starts making concessions. Libs would have you think it is all coincidence. Haha.
32
Progress? We haven't had talks yet, and they could easily collapse - and even if they succeed, you actually think KJU won't go back on the deal as soon as is feasible, as North Korea has always done? If history has shown us anything, it's that even skilled negotiators have problems bringing NK to heel - let alone the guy who didn't even write his own book about dealmaking.
I'm not even gonna go into the whole "Trump's been tough on Russia" thing because I'm in a quiet place and can't risk laughing out loud.
10
I loathe Trump and think he's a total moron. But if he succeeds at bringing NK into the family of nations; if he succeeds in bringing peace to the ME; if he gets our infrastructure started on the road (no pun intended) to modernity; if he does anything at all that improves the lives of Americans and world, I will be the first to applaud him. I don't see any of this happening, and I think you are speaking very prematurely, but I will be as happy as you if any of it comes to pass.
4
There is still a lot that can go wrong with the upcoming Summit. And if the President is not careful, he will get boxed into a corner by the North Koreans, who are a lot more worldly and shrewder negotiators than we in the US tend to think they are.
And the real credit for making this Summit happen should go to the South Koreans. While the President was still seriously toying with the idea of launching air strikes, the South Koreans were actually communicating with the North and preparing to negotiate with them. So unless you want to argue that this was some kind of “good cop, bad cop” routine (which I doubt), then I’d be careful with bragging too much about a situation that is far from being resolved.
2
Most articles in recent days have focused on whether the United States can trust North Korea. I'd like to see more written about the many reasons to question the United States' dependability, and how that may play a legitimate role in future discussions. One doesn't have to be a cynic, or unpatriotic, to recognize that the word of the American government is good for only four years. Think the Iran nuclear deal. Or, with Trump at the helm, the word of the government is good for only 4 minutes.
10
Jim,
Look into the history of the current Armistice and America's purposeful refusal to allow the UN Force (and south Korea much later) to turn it into a Peace Treaty. The worse of it however is America's actual breaking of article 13 of the armistice about bringing in new weapons onto the peninsula and which in 1958 America started bringing Nuclear missiles, launchers and other weaponry.
We cannot continue looking at history from American bias and refusal to take any responsibly of its actions...from North Korea, Vietnam and Iran among others...the full backstory is never mentioned or admitted. Despite so often being vast and not in America's favor at all.
4
No, it's not the sanctions. It's The Donald's taunts and tweets and threats that have brought Kim to the table. Or so his supporters would have us all believe. Time will tell but it seems very likely that cagey Kim is going along with this meet-up simply to please his benefactors in Beijing. It makes absolutely no sense that he would give up his nuclear arsenal after having invested so much time and money to develop it (would the U.S. do such a thing to escape sanctions imposed by other nations?). Kim will demand a quid-pro-quo that he knows The Donald won't accept and will then be able to say that he sat down with him as an "equal" but was unable to move those ugly Americans to a peace deal on the Korean Peninsula.
26
Not only is Trump the author of the taunts, tweets, and threats you deride, but he is responsible for the sanctions that some quoted in the article have attributed as bringing Kim to the table. Give credit where credit is due: in the eight year of his administration, Obama, through 'strategic patience' and 'leading from behind,' watched as Pyongyang accelerated its nuclear program and failed to exert any pressure on those governments and entities enabling the hermit regime. Surprisingly, the blowhard Mr. Trump has gotten results - results worthy of recognition and acknowledgement.
2
@Seth Gorman: We've had sanctions in place against the North since roughly the time Jesus was a boy. So long as Beijing continues to trade with the PDRK (and that hasn't changed, Trump or no Trump) those sanctions won't much matter to a tyrant whose regime is upheld only by those nukes.
1
"So long as Beijing continues to trade with the PDRK (and that hasn't changed, Trump or no Trump) those sanctions won't much matter to a tyrant whose regime is upheld only by those nukes."
Good point, but pay closer attention Stu as the Chinese who had been playing the West in the past, are for the most part now adhering to the sanctions. Do you think it's a coincidence that the DPRK's recent announcements about denuclearization came almost immediately after Kim's meeting with the Chinese leader?
Refresh my memory, how helpful were the Chinese in reeling in the North Koreans during Obama's 8 years?
Can sanctions make Kim "give in"? This is the Trump version of diplomacy: twist the other guy's arm until he gives in. For adults, diplomacy would consist of identifying -- and validating -- each party's needs and then working in good faith towards a compromise both sides can live with.
11
I wonder if perhaps the story has moved on to another chapter. Kim Jong Un has been in the news for his nuclear program and rule of fear (executions by anti-aircraft guns and killing his uncle and brother, among hundreds of others), but he also has been successful on the domestic economy side. He's achieved economic growth and a markedly improved living standard for his people, the elite in particular.
The maximum pressure line that South Korean president Moon Jae In went along with was probably more to inflate Trump's ego and need for over-the-top compliments and glorification.
Kim Jong Un may be looking not just to get sanctions lifted or eased, not just get more time for his nuclear program, he may have moved his goal posts completely. By all accounts the economic reform, growth front might be what he wants next and not just growth. They may be aiming to open up, leap frog into the 21st century, modernize, and become a major country attracting investment, innovation and developing the economy. Maybe Kim Jong Un wants to go to Davos, hang out at G20 meetings, attend state dinners, and all of that stuff. Maybe he wants Pyongyang to become a start-up hub.
Geopolitically he's already got victory in the form of renewed explicit public support and military alliance from China in the case of a US attack, and on behalf of China (and even benefiting Russia) has succeeded in deepening a wedge into the US / S. Korea / Japan alliances, perhaps irrevocably.
12