これまでも、、
Korean history repeats itself first as farce, second as tragedy ?
We are being played. We better be ready to “fight tonight” if necessary
Peace Talk at Panmunjom: Déjà vu?
Analysts: N.Korea's not anywhere near giving up its Nuclear Weapons
The results of the summit were insubstantial.
Don't forget human rights in North Korea, U.N. says | World | Reuters
南北会談前後の記事を取り上げてきましたけど
（耕論）南北、そして米朝会談へ 礒崎敦仁さん、佐橋亮さん、木村幹さん
2018年4月28日05時00分
先程読んだ記事にでてくる
いそざきあつひと １９７５年生まれ。専門は北朝鮮政治。北京の日本大使館勤務や米韓での北朝鮮研究の経験もある
きむらかん １９６６年生まれ。専門は比較政治。韓国政治に詳しい。主な著書に「日韓歴史認識問題とは何か」など。
このお二人の議論をみて、ああ、おれの取り上げ方が偏っているのかなあ、と思ったりもしました。が、今日も何本かみてみて、磯崎さんのように見込みがあるとする見解や、木村さんのように成果があったなどの楽観論は、英語圏ではかなり特異だとは思う。
CNN
Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe could barely conceal his doubts. "I strongly ... hope that North Korea will take concrete actions. I will keep close eyes on North Korea's actions from now," he said. In other words, I'll believe denuclearization when I see it.
Some longtime North Korea watchers harbor significant doubts that there could have been any real transformation of the man who just under a year ago spoke of intercontinental ballistic missiles that could reach the US mainland as a "gift package to the Yankees."
"How many pictures of him are there where he's at a nuclear facility at a missile test and he's smiling and happy?" asked Catherine Dill, a Senior Research Associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.
"Just because he seems like a jolly man doesn't mean that his intentions are pure, or that he's unable to launch a missile again," she told CNN. "A lot of the summit, even if the true intention of President Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong Un was to work towards peace at some point, there's a lot of pageantry involved. So in some sense, he was acting."
"The prospects of North Korea dismantling its nuclear and ballistic missile arsenals remain as dim as ever," said Miha Hribenik, a senior Asia analyst at global risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft.
Hribenik wrote that the North Korean "sudden charm offensive" was designed to "extract as many economic and security concessions as possible while sacrificing as little as it can in return."
The devil is certainly in the details, agrees Catherine Dill. "It's a very overused term but in this case it's absolutely true, if denuclearization is on the table -- which in fact I'm skeptical it is even though it's mentioned in the joint declaration -- that is a very complex process that requires agreement on the tiniest of details and I'm skeptical we'll get to that point anytime soon."
I think we should keep in mind that there have been a number of agreements in the past that have never been successfully implemented," said David Maxwell, retired US Army Special Forces colonel and a fellow at the Institute of Korean American Studies.
"Can a one-day event change the nature of the brutal Kim family regime that has existed for some seven decades? We should never forget the people living in severe oppression in the north while we admire the charm offensive conducted by Kim Jong Un," Maxwell said.
"Every day I watch North Korean TV and I read the newspapers and media, but actually, the propaganda work of North Korea is saying quite different things to its citizens," Thae Yong-ho, North Korea former deputy ambassador to the UK told CNN.
"It's saying that the current, this kind of peaceful atmosphere around North Korea is the direct achievement and outcome of the completion of nuclear weapons development."
It's unlikely the US will do anything to help Kim resolve economic challenges at home before North Korea shows is actively dismantling its nuclear program and allows inspectors in to carry out tests and verifications.
China sent congratulations on the "successful summit," while reinforcing its desire to be included in future talks. "We hope and believe that the North and South Korean sides will be able to implement the consensus reached by their leaders and continue to push for reconciliation and cooperation," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lu Kang.
Independent
The Korean summit has left both Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un feeling more confident – so what happens next?
Trump greeted people with the tweet ‘KOREAN WAR TO END’ and then, unsurprisingly, claimed credit for the talks. But Kim Jong-un knows full denuclearisation would put his country in a vulnerable position
Kim Sengupta a day ago
But, in reality, matters are more complicated. Soothing as the words were in Panmunjom, nothing concrete was decided. There is, for instance, no timeframe on offer for the North to denuclearise. The US demand remains that the North carries out unconditional nuclear disarmament with international monitoring to verify that it is taking place. And the West has experience of Pyongyang offering negotiations and making promises in the past with it all coming to nothing.
Trump’s reneging of the deal, with its hugely damaging repercussions, would take place soon before he is due to meet Kim Jong-un. The North Korean leader cannot be blamed for thinking that the US has shown it is not a country which can be trusted to abide by international agreements
Express
Kim’s brutal regime is accused of a catalogue of human rights violations, including public executions and imprisonment in forced labour camps.
But the dictator will maintain his grasp on power either by negotiating “unbreakable guarantees” from the United States and South Korea in exchange for denuclearisation, or by holding on to his nuclear arsenal, Richard Lloyd Parry said.
The veteran foreign correspondent said the Kim dynasty has made no attempt to hide the fact that its nuclear programme is designed as an “insurance policy” to ensure the regime’s future survival.
But for the same reason he will never give up his nuclear weapons for anything less than unbreakable guarantees of his future security.
Guardian
But experts on North Korea warned that Kim’s statement should be seen more as diplomatic manoeuvring, with relatively limited real costs to Pyongyang, than as a prelude to any genuine moves to gut the prized nuclear programme.
Kim is under huge pressure. For the first time in decades North Korea may actually fear an American military attack, and its fragile economy is at huge risk from the strictest sanctions it has ever faced.
they will not include America’s stated aim – the total and irreversible destruction of the nuclear programme. The fate of other dictators who confronted America, but gave up weapons programmes, including Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, has not gone unnoticed.
“People like to talk about North Korea as ‘crazy’. The absolute ‘craziest’ thing they could do is give up their nuclear deterrent in a situation where they have an aggressive nuclear-armed enemy,” Alex Wellerstein, a historian of science and nuclear weapons and a professor at the Stevens Institute of Technology, said. “Does anyone think they are that crazy? I don’t,” he added.
Guardian
North Korea's state media plays down Kim's nuclear pledge
Kim Jong-un’s promise to denuclearise the Korean peninsula given little coverage
Experts, however, have long warned that Kim is unlikely to give up missiles and warheads that have taken decades of work to build, particularly when they are the very reason the US president is coming to the negotiating table.
“It would be extremely strange – by basically any theory of human or political behaviour – for Kim to give up a deterrent right after attaining it,” said Alex Wellerstein, a historian of science and nuclear weapons. “Nothing is impossible, but it would be very unexpected, the strangest possible outcome.”
“The emphasis is all on peace, the nation, dialogue and unification. Denuclearization is a small side issue,” wrote Peter Ward, a north Korea watcher based in Seoul, wrote in a detailed analysis of coverage in Pyongyang’s paper of record on Twitter.
“It is still unclear whether North Korea still believes that it can have its cake and eat it too,” said Victor Cha, who until January was in the running to become US ambassador to South Korea.
The meeting had positive atmospherics but did not clarify whether Kim was genuinely considering giving up his nuclear weapons or just hoped to freeze programmes in return for sanctions relief and aid, he told the Associated Press.
論調で濃淡はありますけど、専門家、評論家、ベテラン記者など、
１）板門店宣言については、成果なし、あるいは、ほぼ成果なし
２）核放棄については、懐疑的、悲観論、ないし絶望論
３）北朝鮮の人権問題、どうにかしろ、と。
というのが大勢をしめている、というか、楽観論や会談を高く評価する議論は皆無。それは、左翼やリベラルメディアでも同じ。
因みに、
ian bremmer
認証済みアカウント
Japan “informed.” They’re completely out of the picture in these negotiations.
ブレマーさんのツイートが、安倍批判の文脈で取り上げられているようですが、これは、安倍を軽視するトランプを批判する文脈でみたほうが的確ではないか、と思います。
