Truce or unification between North & South Korea can only be achieved by them with the help of unbiased mediators. Let this not be another case of the Israeli Palestinian conflict where the mediator is the superpower that's supports one side. Should North & South Korea decide to sign a peace accord or unify that would end the conflict. The United States would have no reason not to align with the agreement. Let the problem be solved by the Koreans who on the problem.
Bolton is a bore, a lifetime of playing tough guy to cheers by a sub set of policy making factions one can only presume he would be happy if nothing moves in the process and he can return to his favorite ‘regime change.’
On the good side is Trump’s tendency to avoid his advisors; he could get his Nobel yet if Kim responses to American offers for security and the end to the Korean War agreement. The first has always been the underlying reason for nuclear development.
Where is John Lennon when you need him? "All we are saaayying . . . ."
1
I believe that the the root of the problem lies with the Seoul government. Its hard to believe that with their strong economy and larger population than the North, they still depend on the US to protect them from their neighbor. If in fact the US military were not in the South, the North would never have been a nuclear threat to the US. Mr. Moon needs to stop depending on the US to take care of their defense and deal with their inter Korean differences as only they can.
4
@Pepperman
Much truth but it was not the presence of the US military that was the push but the destruction of 20% of DPRK population by Gen Curtis LeMay’s air force during the war with the order t o bomb, mostly with napalm the new weapon, any standing building. Many in the world saw that as a war crime, the Kim dynasty saw it as a reason to do whatever that could to see that never happened again.
2
Why not ask BOTH NK and SK leaders to prepare an estimate of number of Korean deaths (not US or visitors) if a single nuclear bomb explodes in either N or S Korea?
1
It's irrational to demand that Pyongyang give up its nuclear arsenal without offering clear and unequivocal assurance that the arsenal isn't needed.
Seems to me a peace treaty -- as demanded by Pyongyang -- would fit the bill nicely without any real sacrifice on the US side.
History has shown that lasting peace never results when one side perceives itself to be stronger and tries to bully the other to make unilateral concessions.
Ask Hitler.
Bolton has a similar mentality and Trump would be best served ignoring him and following his gut in this particular instance.
4
A warm letter. From Kim Jon-un. I guess our foreign policy these days is set by such"warm and fuzzy" actions. And as to those who see the absence of ICBMs in North Korea's military parade as positive indicators, they are grasping at the smallest of straws.
1
In the absence of a coherent administration policy on North Korea committed to rapprochement, peace and eventual reunification of Korea depends on the willingness and courage of the North and South to create their own path toward reconciliation. The challenge is greatest for South Koreans who, for three generations, have become accustomed to a junior partnership in the US - Republic of Korea alliance. With support from peace-minded forces in Korea and globally, their president, Moon Jae-In, can be a truly revolutionary leader by remaining steadfast in his determination to end 70 years of conflict with Koreans in the North.
2
So this is the payoff for elevating Kim to international statesman status: they don't parade their missiles. Boy do I feel safe.
1
Nobody loves a good propaganda photo-op more than America's Phony-In-Chief and North Korea's Cult Of Personality-In-Chief.
Who needs details when two authoritarians are falling head-over-heels in love with each other ?
Just take the photo of these two miscreants embracing each other and get this charade over with already.
3