Over at One Free Korea he has a posting up that analyzes the recent joint statement between President Trump and Kim Jong-un:
Yesterday, I said the best we could hope for from the Trump-Kim summit would be “a vague agreement that North Korea will denuclearize, without Trump making any concessions for such a nebulous promise.” We have that vague agreement (full text here). It is so vague, in fact, that it’s hard to even say what concessions were given, implied, or will be given in the coming months.
As always I recommend reading OFK’s entire well thought out analysis at the link.
I fully agree that everyone should be skeptical of this joint statement. However, just like the concessions the Kim regime has made so far, the concessions the Trump administration have made are all easily reversible. Something else to keep in mind is that we don’t know what was privately agreed to during discussions with the regime. I think we should wait for some time to pass to see how this plays out before we declare this summit just more failed diplomacy between the US and North Korea. If the Trump administration drops sanctions for little to nothing in return, that should be the trigger to hit the panic button and declare that Groundhog Day has restarted once again with North Korea.
However, the way President Trump has criticized past administrations for getting little to nothing in return from North Korea in past agreements, I would be very surprised if he chooses this route. I tend to think that the Trump administration is giving the Kim regime one last chance to rejoin the world community and if they don’t reach a comprehensive agreement sanctions will remain in place. As long as the sanctions are in place ROK President Moon Jae-in will not be able to invest billions into North Korea, re-open the near-slave labor Kaesong Industrial Complex, and open the tourism projects on North Korea’s east coast.
This causes me to think that current negotiations are about what irreversible actions the Kim regime must execute in return for dropping of sanctions. If the North Koreans drag out negotiations like they historically have done, the Trump administration can easily turn back on the Key Resolve joint exercise scheduled each spring and implement more sanctions to pressure the regime to get a deal done. If the Kim regime begins another provocation cycle in response the Trump administration can say they have tried everything to peacefully resolve the nuclear issue and military action may become a more viable option.
Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that and diplomacy between the US and North Korea works for once, but history does indicate we should all remain skeptical until we actually see it happen.
Here is what another so called North Korea expert says should be done to resolve the ongoing nuclear crisis which is basically more of the same that has led to the slow motion acquisition of North Korean nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles:
Kelsey Davenport
Diplomacy is the only way to achieve a peaceful resolution of the North Korea nuclear crisis, according to Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association.
She said that in order to bring North Korea back to negotiations, U.S.President Donald Trump and his administration should send a sincere, consistent message that the offer of engagement is real.
“Diplomacy is the only path forward to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis,” Davenport said in a recent interview.
“The Trump administration purports to advance a strategy of maximum pressure and engagement but U.S.actions and rhetoric expose a serious diplomacy deficit,” she added.
She pointed out that mixed messages from Trump and top administration officials about U.S.intentions to engage in talks further complicate the environment.
“The Trump administration can and must signal to North Korea that it is willing to engage in talks without preconditions,” she said.
“Direct talks would give the U.S.an opportunity to discuss a path forward with North Korea to reduce tension.”
Davenport stressed that the U.S.Congress should also refrain from activities that heighten tension and muddy the waters regarding the prospects of diplomacy.
“That may require putting denuclearization on the back burner, voicing support for shorter-term, more manageable goals, and giving existing sanctions time to work before pushing new measures,” she said. [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but all I read was more of the same strategy used for the past 25 years that has led to where we are at today.
Ms. Davenport’s strategy is to once again reward the North Koreans for their bad behavior by limiting US-ROK military drills. She says it would not impact military readiness, how would she know that? In my opinion cancelling a UFG or Key Resolve exercise would impact readiness considering the constant change over of personnel in Korea and the amount of off-Pen augmentees that participate in the training.
Ms. Davenport believes offering up a military exercise will lead to the “freeze deal” that many in the academic world are calling for. I think if any freeze deal is pursued it should include robust inspections and the risk of a retaliatory bombing strike if it is not complied with. However, I am doubtful the Kim regime will ever sign up for vigorous inspections when they know the so called experts are more interested in making a deal than actually denuclearizing North Korea.
