According to South Korean officials familiar with the situation, they believe that President Trump and Kim Jong Un may issue a joint statement during this week’s summit declaring an end to the Korean War, which began in 1950.
This is something Kim clearly would want out of the summit, and which
the South Korean government has also urged. The Trump Administration has
expressed some support for the idea, but had previously suggested they
were holding out until total denuclearization.
Interest in ending the generations-long Korean War is a major priority
for North Korea though, and of all the things that Kim could get out of
this summit, that would likely be the most sought after.
Kim has also made clear that his nation’s nuclear arsenal wouldn’t be
needed if the war ended and the US is no longer threatening to attack.
This would be a cost-free concession from the US to keep North Korea’s
denuclearization on track.
Lets hope so. Let there be peace on earth.
Since the local editor-at-large advocates the theory that Trump is capable of putting on a large show over the heads and safety of whole populations and international stages, just for some political or egotistical gain, while calling it the road to peace, one can only hope this is not just another of those shows to nowhere.
Then again, politics has become a stage for showmanship with ridiculous, giantic, mostly empty gestures to make. And this is the best prediction for this summit as well. At least it’s a consistent policy as well a consistent outlook but sadly enough to become consistent one needs to drop the word “peace” here since peace is also linked to truth, to words actually having to mean something still.
You have to wonder how ending a war that should have ended shortly after 1950 is really going to change much when you look at how we treat other countries we’re not at war with.
If Trump can pull it off, then he deserves credit for it. I don’t see how it keeps the NK people any safer than before when no nation is safe from the corporate fascist regime of the Five Eyes nations and their hostage countries.
My impression is that South-Korea is mainly driving the process but also China for many regional economical reasons. North-Korea is about survival and they need time, breathing room and some basic economical uplift to prevent simply collapsing. So the timing is good.
Any big changes right away cannot be expected. Trump however needs this show for his internal politics and Kim seems to like big shows as well but probably because he’s a sociopath and just enjoys it, not caring that much about the outcome personally. But the train seems to be on track and Trump should be savvy enough to make it “his” deal while all he needs to do is stop blocking the process.
You “dissed” Justin (I think) and Trump above,
“…the local editor-at-large [Justin?] advocates the theory that Trump is capable of putting on a large show … just for some political or egotistical gain…”
I don’t think Justin advocates that at all. It’s the anti-Trumpers who disparage Trump with claims that he is ***exclusively*** a self-serving narcissist, not Justin.
…and Kim — as a “sociopath” — here.
Then you assert, somewhat obliquely, that Trump is blocking the process, when you write, “…all he [Trump] needs to do is stop blocking the process.”
You are a Trump critic, not-well-hidden, and not original. Your choice,… but that also informs your bias.
You are completely – not to mention ‘ungenerously’ — wrong, when you assert that he’s “blocking the process”. Quite the opposite. He has been, and continues, leading the process. Both North and South Korea have been ready for this for decades, but have been blocked by all prior US administrations. Then Kim forced the issue by developing nukes and the missiles to deliver them, whereupon Trump jumped in and joined Kim — and Moon — to put an end to 70 years of Imperial militarist BS.
You might consider getting over your bias and giving Trump — and Justin — their due.
Hi Yo, not “dissing” but “disagreeing”. You have problems with people expressing disagreements and willing to discuss them? I have not.
Yes, Justin claimed indeed that Trump put on some show vs Venezuela with some ultimate aim to discredit neocon plans. And while l like to believe it, my point was that it’s over the heads of many innocent people and potential risk for escalation or triggering other events. Which makes it a very bad plan if it was his plan. And no peace in sight.
You are misinterpreting my statement on the blocking. Trump represents the USA, not just himself. The USA has blocked the process in the past and I think he doesn’t need to do much there, just not walk in the way too much and let it happen!
If he has a bigger role with befriending Kim, so be it. But I’m not privy to that kind of detail. Are you? It seems to me South Korea and Moon are the drivers.
I do expect a somewhat positive outcome for the Korean people but I do not believe Kim will change ultimately his grip on power over the nation. North Korea has a rich tradition doing exactly what they are doing now during this process. There’s no reason to expect that they want anything else than before. Which is far removed from our values.
But yes, I do think Justin is grossly mistaken by ignoring the idiocy of the *entourage* Trump keeps. Actually he himself railed for years against these people, against Israel, against all Trump stands for right now in the foreign policy realm. And I would like him not to forget! Trump put people inside Syria which he now removes.
“…the local editor-at-large [Justin?] advocates the theory that Trump is capable of putting on a large show … just for some political or egotistical gain…”
I don’t think Justin advocates that at all. It’s the anti-Trumpers who disparage Trump with claims that he is ***exclusively*** a self-serving narcissist, not Justin.
Justin said this in his earlier article about regime change in Venezuela:
Oh, don’t get me wrong: Trump would surely like to see Maduro overthrown and the country opened up to American development (“Have you seen their beaches? And the condos you could build!”)
But that’s a side issue. All told, success is highly unlikely – and the neocons will be the ones to take the “credit.” John Bolton will own this 21st century version of the Bay of Pigs. And the America First nationalists in the administration can turn to their adversaries and say “See guys, we tried it your way and look what happened – the same thing that happened in Syria.”
Instead of taking on the neocons directly, Trump embraces them – and we can see the knife go in as this whole scenario plays out.
Indeed, wars. I hadn’t read that most recent piece by Justin when I replied to JanD, so some adjustment to my criticism is probably called for. That said I took JanD’s use of the word “just” to be problematic, and my reply took note of that where I used “***exclusively***”.
But I’m stepping back from my criticism of JanD on account of my incomplete information at the time. My bad. JanD, “con permiso”, cancel my comment, and allow me to start over.
“…the local editor-at-large [Justin?] advocates the theory that Trump is capable of putting on a large show … just for some political or egotistical gain…”
I don’t think Justin advocates that at all. It’s the anti-Trumpers who disparage Trump with claims that he is ***exclusively*** a self-serving narcissist, not Justin.
Justin said this in his earlier article about regime change in Venezuela:
Oh, don’t get me wrong: Trump would surely like to see Maduro overthrown and the country opened up to American development (“Have you seen their beaches? And the condos you could build!”)
But that’s a side issue. All told, success is highly unlikely – and the neocons will be the ones to take the “credit.” John Bolton will own this 21st century version of the Bay of Pigs. And the America First nationalists in the administration can turn to their adversaries and say “See guys, we tried it your way and look what happened – the same thing that happened in Syria.”
Instead of taking on the neocons directly, Trump embraces them – and we can see the knife go in as this whole scenario plays out.
Good.
Things would start adding up – truce between the USA and NK, a NK abandoning nuclear development – and “OH NO” by any corporation getting rich on our occupation of South Korea. Expect Bolton, Pompeo, Abrams, et.al. to spring into action to save the bacon.
Richard, What’s the “et.al” thing? I clicked on the link and got a sort of “Page in progress” announcement. Can you provide a short note as to what that’s about? (Following as it did mention of B, P, & A, I was expecting a longer list of Neocon criminals.)
Discus has linkified this Latin expression. (Actually it should be written “et al.”)
yomama,
a longer list of neocons? Why? If I could just get a list from AIPAC of everybody on their payroll, I’d just publish that.
Anyway et.al. includes Max Boot, the whole Kristal family and anyone married into that brood of vipers, Joe Biden, Ben Cardin, Joe Manchin (my Senator), Shelly Whore Capito (again my Senator), Paul Wolfowitz (he is still breathing proving that there is no God), Joe Biden, Marco Rubio, the Koch Brothers, half of Wall Street, 90% of the Federal Reserve, John Hagee, Jamie Dimon, Paul (the Vulture) Singer, Lloyd Blanckfein, Sheldon Adelson, et. al. again.
Longer List of Criminals? – atomic bombs could probably hit NYC and Washington DC without shedding much innocent blood. Get some metropolitan phone books.
Bonkers Bolton, Pompous Pompass and Elliott Abrams are traitors who should either be imprisoned for life w/o any chance of parole, or hanged. They’re also responsible for the murders of 4 US troops committed by an ISIS suicide bomber. These 3 traitors and war criminals should’ve been fired by Trump when they undercut his decision to withdraw all US troops from Syria back in December, 2018, and handed over to the DOJ to prosecute them for murder and treason.
Great. Then what ? I see no mention of the nuclear weapon deployments in Guam. Trump deployed 3 nuke carrying B-2s, and 6 nuclear B-52s to Guam in late December. What “process” is being advanced here ?
Any chance he could end the dozen or so other wars we are illegally and immorally engaging in??
And actually fighting in….
The United States cannot unilaterally end the “police action” which is the U.N. vs the DPRK.
Puleeese! The UN will do whatever the Security Council members agree to. And since the US has been the only one blocking the end to the Korean non-war, the US is “The Decider”.
A positive (n) of UN membership is that the larger body provides insulation and limits the public relations damage of single sovereign entities blasting away. The US routinely waives that advantage.
The advantage of ending that war is that the US withdraws troops. We have 25 thousand there, and that’s expensive. I would expect the drawdown to be perhaps 90% of those troops, and we would leave behind pre-positioned weapons. Then the next President, or the one after, could remove the remainders. Meanwhile, more business & civil cooperation between NK and SK creates stakeholders, and that facilitates peace and stability.
Any normal person would find this the obvious “concession” that DPRK has been waiting for for 65 years, but who would now believe the word of the USA??? The Koreans are trying to arrange joint commitments and want peace and harmony, which is certainly not the US point of view-they prefer S Korea as a vassal State and to pretend that DPRK is an existential danger to the defenseless USA!!!