On Monday, US officials reported that a “belligerent letter” from North Korea’s Kim Yong Chol was the reason President Trump cancelled Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s planned visit to North Korea.
Today, officials are offering more details on what the letter actually said, warning the US that North Korea believes the denuclearization talks are “again at stake and may fall apart.”
The letter is said to have retreated North Korea’s desire for a peace treaty, and noted that they believe ending the Korean War is crucial to lowering tensions. US officials reiterated that they’re not ready to end the war.
How this amounts to a “belligerent” letter, as described by US officials, isn’t clear, since seeking peace seems the exact opposite of belligerent. North Korea did, however, warn that if the talks crumbled, they might resume nuclear and missile testing.
President Trump’s comments on the cancellation were totally different from this, as he suggested he was personally upset the denuclearization wasn’t going faster. Moreover, he blamed China for the lack of progress, though there is no indication China was at all mentioned in the letter.
The US isn’t following the Panmunjon Declaration sequence. Peace comes before disarmament (especially when the US is involved).
>from Korea Times, ROK National Intelligence Service (NIS) chief Suh Hoon was quoted as saying that the US position is not to end the war before DRPK disarms:
>from the Panmunjon Declaration:
Uhh, by that list phased disarmament is 3(2), then and end to the war is 3(3). Only total denuclearization comes after at 3(4). And asking for a list of nuclear weapons pretty clearly seems like it belongs in 3(2) to me.
Disarmament in a “phased manner”, buddy, concomitant with “confidence building”.
“Complete denuclearization” is also #4.
Yeah? That’s pretty much what I said, unless you think an accounting of your weapon stockpiles = “complete denuclearization”, which would be silly since the US and Russia account for each other’s stockpiles.
By stockpile, do you believe it means a mere inventory of weapons? Or inventory and location? Likely, it includes the latter as well or else the NKoreans wouldn’t be balking.
Phased disarmament with denuclearization as a common goal is dependent upon a reduction in military tension which (obviously) includes an end to the war. A country which is at war with another country is foolish to demand that its opponent disarm. That doesn’t pass the giggle test, as General Bogdan once said about another matter. The US should be glad that DPRK isn’t demanding that the US denuclearize, as it promised years to do ago when it signed the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).
The US will continue with its belligerence against North Korea.
–Washington Times
The US is not complying with President Trump’s agreement with Chairman Kim at Singapore.
The State Department at yesterday’s press briefing wouldn’t confirm the charge of “belligerent tone” in any diplomatic letter from DPRK.
“joint efforts to alleviate acute military tension” The first target for NK nukes would most likely be against US naval assets attempting a seaborne invasion of the north. This is the horrible “usable” nukes theory in practice. NK has no other defense against such an exercise. For the US to begin these exercises again is the exact opposite of anything resembling sanity. NK has contributed in real terms to the peace process, ending testing of nukes, and ranged missiles. The US still, has not responded in kind. So far, the Singapore Summit remains an expensive photo op.
“US officials reiterated that they’re not ready to end the war.”
Which official was that Mr. Ditz?