We are being played. We better be ready to “fight tonight” if necessary

Daily Beast

CROSSING THE LINE
North Korea’s Warm—and Fuzzy—Peace Summit
The carefully choreographed show of good intentions at Panmunjom as Kim met Moon cannot disguise the fact that Kim is a long way from meeting Trump's denuclearization demands.
Donald Kirk
DONALD KIRK
04.27.18 11:31 AM ET

It was a tightly scripted day in which body language counted for more than verbiage in the historic truce village of Panmunjom, but, for all the showmanship and flowery language, the two leaders skirted the one issue that President Donald Trump has said is essential for easing the sanctions and threats that he believes forced Kim to cross the North-South line.


It was a tightly scripted day in which body language counted for more than verbiage in the historic truce village of Panmunjom, but, for all the showmanship and flowery language, the two leaders skirted the one issue that President Donald Trump has said is essential for easing the sanctions and threats that he believes forced Kim to cross the North-South line.



The differences only emerged when Moon and Kim stepped out of Peace House after signing their declaration. “We have reached a consensus on denuclearization,” Moon announced. “I declared I will work with Kim Jong Un for peace on the peninsula.”

Kim, standing beside him, said not a word about denuclearization, preferring to emphasize the possibilities for unification. “We share the same bond and belong to the same nationality,” he said. “We will learn from history.”

Time

What Comes Next, After North Korea's Summit with South Korea | Time

Despite much happy-feeling talk from Pyongyang, it seems highly unlikely Kim will give up all his nuclear weapons. While I believe we should accept a limited arsenal, with an inspection regime and a diminution of the ballistic missiles to deliver them, if we are not going to do so (which President Trump has said already), we should be prepared to walk away from the table.


Kim will more than likely continue to operate from the playbook of his father and grandfather before him: get the West excited about peace, extract concessions, then either walk away or hide the remnants of the program. If “yes” truly means zero nuclear weapons on the peninsula, getting there will probably require a multi-year negotiation and an even longer period of dismantlement, verification and inspections — perhaps lasting five to ten years.

All the while, we should hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Solving this with soft power and diplomacy is the objective, but we better be ready to “fight tonight” if necessary. This is no time to reduce U.S.–South Korean training and exercises. We need close military coordination with other Pacific allies, including notably Japan and Australia.


Whatever our red lines, though, we need to commit to them and see real action from North Korea before we reduce sanctions. Whichever way this goes, there will be an ever higher premium on intelligence and surveillance. This means more aggressive cyber penetration (working closely with South Korea), new exquisite satellite surveillance capabilities and pooling intelligence with our regional allies and possibly even with China (the latter obviously in highly compartmented ways). This is not Ronald Reagan’s “trust but verify,” given the North Korean record of grabbing the football just as we are about to kick it — or the champagne glasses just before we are about to cheers to peace. A better approach would be “verify, then start to trust.”

NYT


How to Understand What’s Happening in North Korea
Nicholas Kristof
By Nicholas Kristof

Opinion Columnist

April 27, 2018

Kim is now aiming to squirm out of sanctions, build up his economy and retain his nuclear arsenal, all while remaining a global focus of attention. It’s a remarkable performance.

Inspiring, but count me skeptical.

North and South Korean leaders have signed grand peace documents before, in 2000 and 2007, and neither lasted. In 2012, North Korea agreed not to test missiles and then weeks later fired one off but called it a “satellite” launch.

When North Korea talks about “complete denuclearization,” it typically means that the U.S. ends its alliance with South Korea, and then North Korea will no longer need nuclear weapons to defend itself. But the U.S. won’t give up the South. And North Korea has been pursuing nuclear weapons since the 1950s, and I don’t know any expert who thinks that it will genuinely hand over its arsenal.

When North Korea talks about “complete denuclearization,” it typically means that the U.S. ends its alliance with South Korea, and then North Korea will no longer need nuclear weapons to defend itself. But the U.S. won’t give up the South. And North Korea has been pursuing nuclear weapons since the 1950s, and I don’t know any expert who thinks that it will genuinely hand over its arsenal.

On my last visit to North Korea, in September, a Foreign Ministry official told me that Libya had given up its nuclear program — only to have its regime toppled. Likewise, he noted, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq lacked a nuclear deterrent — so Saddam was ousted by America. North Korea would not make the same mistake, he insisted.

Kim’s game plan seems to be to sign pledges for denuclearization, leaving details to be worked out in follow-up talks, knowing that the pledges won’t be fully implemented and that there will never be intrusive inspections. This may be disingenuous on the part of North Korea, but that’s not terrible: It provides a face-saving way for both North Korea and the U.S. to back away from the precipice of war.



Trump and Kim both badly want a meeting, so expect North Korea to release its three American detainees in the coming weeks and to make soothing statements. Trump and Kim will present themselves as historic peacemakers as they sign some kind of declaration calling for peace and denuclearization, with some kind of timetable; Trump’s aides will then say that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize more than Barack Obama did.

I hope Trump will also raise human rights issues. A commission of inquiry suggested that North Korea has committed crimes against humanity “on a massive scale” in its labor camps, and we should push for access to these camps by humanitarian organizations.


Both Kim and Trump benefit politically from that scenario, and for that matter so does the world: Hard-liners will fume that we’re being played and that the North is not verifiably giving up nuclear weapons — true — but it’s all preferable to war.

TIME Daily Beast　NYT

どれも、北朝鮮が非核化するつもりとは信じていない。

Time　は検証、と戦争をも辞さない程の、圧力の強化

NYT　のシナリオは、検証なしの、形ばかりの非核化宣言、拘束されたアメリカ人の解放で、シャンシャンシャン。それで、米朝共に面子は保てる、と。戦争するよかいいんじゃない？と。にしても、人権問題は提起してもらいたい、とーーーアメリカのリベラルならこれは忘れない。