Am I the only one who thinks this is happening mainly because of political shifts in South Korea? 2013-2017 the South Korean president was Park Geun-hye of the conservative Saenuri Party. They generally have a hostile attitude towards North Korea. In late 2016 she had a major scandal, was impeached, and Moon Jae-in of the more liberal Democratic Party won. They are generally more willing no talk to the North. He is the person meeting Kim today.
I would doubt this because from 1998 to 2008 Korea has had liberal presidents who had a policy of engagement towards North Korea and we didn't get peace in that time.
While getting rid of Park Geun-Hye certainly made this easier - I think this has more to do with Kim Jong Un and also the warm reception N. Korea got at the recent winter Olympics in South Korea.
That said I would be cautious how far this would go. I suspect a lot of N. Koreas militaristic acts and statements over the years is not because of any actual desire but war, but just posturing to help in negotiations over tariffs and aid.
I am also going to take the unpopular opinion and say that Trump does deserve some credit. Under many past Presidents, the N. Korean government knew America would never use military force and acted accordingly. Under Trump, they have good reason to be concerned about the possibility of military force and are taking a more cautious and reconciliatory approach. I think the North Koreans are well aware that militaristic posturing won't get them very far with Trump the way it did with past presidents.
With no viable test site, North Korea's nuclear program is kaput, as are their ambitions of becoming a major nuclear power. Moreover, there is now a massive environmental disaster that will affect people all over the Korean peninsula plus northern China. They have no choice to come to the negotiating table, and South Korea has a strong incentive to reach a peace deal so they can get their geologists, engineers, and inspectors in and mitigate the damage before a massive fall-out plume blows over Seoul.
Unrelated, but the scandal that got Park kicked out was wild. Never thought someone trying to force their daughter into a college would lead to the president of SK resigning.
While Trump clearly had a major role in this agreement (contrary to what some media want to portray), your hypothesis is indeed rather strongly backed by the post-impeachment relevation [1]. I guess this is not well known outside of SK, so I tried to give some outline:
Park Geun-hye in her presidental term had repeatedly stressed that the Korean reunification will be a bonanza ("통일은 대박이다"), but this unusual and ultimately information-free slogan turned out to be coined by Choi Soon-sil, a cult leader behind Park Geun-hye. Choi wanted to, literally, make NK collapse in two years after the sudden closure of the Kaesong Industrial Region in 2016 in order to pave a way to Park's reelection---while the current Constitution of South Korea does not allow for the presidental reelection, critical events like the collapse of NK can force amendments or even allow excuse to the Constitution. Choi even tried to leverage those future events into huge returns by buying land near the 38th parallel.
After Park's impeachment, it was revealed that there were multiple attempts from NK (yes, you read right) during the Park's term to make contact to SK, only to be ignored. For example, top officials from NK visited SK during the 2014 Asian Games in Incheon and (unsuccessfully) asked to arrange a meeting with Park. This breakdown was for a long time attributed to NK, but in reality Park (and in turn, Choi) had just ignored the request.
[1] The primary source is an interview of Jang Shiho from Lee Gyu-yeon's Spotlight (a JTBC programme), but individual points were also independently confirmed via multiple sources. Jang was a niece of Choi Soon-sil and eventually sentenced to 2 1/2 year imprisonment in 2017 after giving much clues to investigators (for plea bargaining).
You’re not alone. It’s just easier to chant “Moon Jae-in said it so it must be true”, and get enough voices to drown out any opposing views. This has been the driving strategy behind Trump’s base since the start.
Singing “Trump made this happen with his childish Twitter diplomacy” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.
There is a blurry line between making something happen through direct action, and allowing it to happen through incompetence.
I never thought I'd see this happen. I know it's Orwellian, but the concept of permanent cold war didn't seem that unlikely. It's weird to think that my grandfather fought in the Korean war and his child and grandchildren all grew up wondering if and when it was going to come to a head again. Though I guess in the grand scheme of things, there have been some much longer (and bloodier) wars in history which are barely a paragraph in history text books today.
I'm not incredibly familiar with the situation as it stands, but is re-unification a legitimate possibility? I mean, I don't see Kim Jong-Un giving up power, but I could see them wanting to claim re-unification at least from a cultural perspective, like they did in the Olympics.
I talked to a "wall expert" in college who mentioned the severe strain East Germany was on West Germany after reunification, because of the economic disparity.
Her theory was that reunification of the Koreas would be very messy given the economic disparity between the two nations, and that SK doesn't want it.
That being said I would hope that NK actually goes along with joint projects with its neighbors. Not like the aid will stop if they're more amicable.
The politics become a bit less rough if we're still talking about 2 regimes I think
I was in S. Korea for a bit and I heard a North Korean ex-patriot speak and she said something I thought was really wise. Which was - what's in it for S. Korea when it comes to reconciliation? N. Korea is way behind in terms of technology, infrastructure, standard of living. If there were any sort of reunification, it would fall mostly on S. Korea's shoulders to build N. Korea up to a reasonable standard of living, and that would involve committing to an enormous public expenditure for a very long time.
S. Korean leaders may publically speak about the desire for reconciliation, but it's unlikely that they would seriously pursue it considering the economic and political strain it would place on S. Korea.
N. Koreans have a much greater interest in reunification than the South does. But that interest doesn't extend to those in power in the North who would certainly be reluctant to give up that power.
So while reunification might seem like a nice sentiment, it doesn't seem like something that those in power of either side actually want.
South Korean willingness is also a question mark for re-unification. From polls and interviews I've heard with young South Koreans, both the culture divide and the economic burden make them unenthusiastic about the idea.
Perhaps a slow process that starts with closer economic and social ties?
Why? Societies/nations/etc always change. Given the state of NK, what's shocking is that it didn't happen sooner.
> I'm not incredibly familiar with the situation as it stands, but is re-unification a legitimate possibility?
Reunification is inevitable just like it was between east and west germany. The only question is when.
In the meantime, if all goes to plan, it looks like the koreas + US/China are going to officially end the korean war and relations between north korea and south korea + US are going to be normalized and we will ostensibly get the "unofficial" end of the cold war. Of course the biggie being north korea giving up their nukes.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that the reason that WE have refused to sign a peace treaty for decades is because of the human rights violations in North Korea. I have no idea how the narrative switched to North Korea wanting a peace treaty as a concession from them.
It's interesting that our continued insistence on not signing a peace treaty because of humans rights violations has allowed them to continue for even longer.
The reasoning in that RAND article is pretty effing bad. North Korea could successfully invade South Korea?! Yeah right. That's not a credible scenario whatsoever, even if the U.S. withdrew.
I haven't read through all the comments here but so far I haven't seen anyone give credit to Kim Jong Un. He's probably a pretty smart dude and has been planning these moves ever since he was a kid. At the end of all this, he will agree to "denuclearize" by reducing his nuclear stockpile over a very long time period; promise to stop doing nuclear research etc. In return he will get a ton of foreign aid, much weakened sanctions against his country and legitimacy in the international stage.
Because the cost of nuclear research and development alone is driving his decision to denuclearize, not some good, humanitarian intentions. North Korean society can't afford the development anymore.
This reminds me a little of the Gorbachev situation. He thought he could reform the Soviet Union but only started an uncontrollable process for its disintegration. Makes me wonder if Kim is just naive thinking he can open up his country while staying in power or has some smart plan. Personally I think he not knowingly has started the process of ending his regime.
Perhaps. On the other hand, China watched the events in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union with great interest and adapted in a way that kept the Communist Party in power. Kim might see that as a model instead.
One should note that North Korea is now in a position where they can appear to make generous concessions. They are a nuclear power, and there is no way they will ever give that up, no matter how much they promise they will. They have done it in the past and will again.
In case it isn't clear, "denuclearization" means the removal of the US nuclear shield from the Korean peninsular and from Japan.
For those who aren't aware, the current US/Japan alliance guarantees the US nuclear arsenal will protect Japan (and South Korea)[1]. That is why those countries haven't pursued their own nuclear arms program.
This will be a big problem.
If North Korea offers to denuclearize then there will be huge pressure on the US to withdraw from South Korea.
North Korea is utterly untrustworthy on this of course, but that's a hard argument to make if they appear to be making reasonable concessions.
South Korea and the United States are politically weak right now -- not necessarily the leaders, but the political systems are at a low point of unity and resolve. Neither country really wants to deal with North Korea right now. People in each country would like this drama to be over, because it feels dangerous and intractable. The leaders in each country would love to deliver that feeling to us.
Kim Jong-un has an incredibly strong hand. He has nuclear missiles at his disposal, with apparently rapid progress toward increasing their range. He knows that other nations are fearful of those weapons, and that they won't do anything that risks putting them on the receiving end of even one.
We've had one bold historic headline after another now: Kim Jong-un has telegraphed a desire to denuclearize and to end the Korean war. He has raised the hopes of South Koreans and of Americans just enough that they each want a deal now, and their leaders now need to deliver.
But the price has not yet been negotiated.
What will be the price? Will Kim promise to stop further nuclear development? Will Kim promise to stop further missile development? Will Kim promise not to help other states develop nuclear missiles? Will Kim promise not to radically modernize his military in other ways as the floodgates of trade open?
Promises are inexpensive and reversible. Will he actually take any real steps to diminish or eliminate his nuclear and military power? I doubt it. Kim's not an idiot. He only needs to present the illusion.
People in the West seem to believe that Kim has experienced some sort of rebirth as a student of peace and nonviolence of late. But there's been no explanation and no demonstration (to my ears) of where that came from. It's possible perhaps that Xi Jinping whispered wonderful ideas and/or threats in Kim Jong-un's ear when he visited, but that's opaque to us and media I've read seems to be ignorant of such potential influence. If Kim were so serious, we should need him to demonstrate that credibly to us, through actions that are costly for him to take: in particular, pitching this change of vision directly and passionately to the populace of North Korea.
Kim Jong-un wants to get out from under the chokehold of heavy trade sanctions. He wants to be legitimized in the international community as the leader of a real nation. He wants to modernize both his military and his nation and his personal life. He probably dreams of visiting Paris and Manhattan.
It is my belief that he will be able to get these things -- without giving up nuclear weapons, missiles, nor giving up his political or military power over North Korea. From Kim's perspective, democratic politicians are weak and manipulable, and he will find it to be especially true right now.
That he's been able to do this with South Korea alone without the US at the table tells you how strong of a hand he has and how weak our hand is.
I think this is a ploy to do two things:
1. Economic growth for North Korea, which has been happened to some extend already.
2. Get the US out of the Korean Peninsula.
A strong economy will allow NK to develop or buy all sorts of updated conventional arms. NK is seriously weak here. Their air force is horribly out of date. I doubt they can actually defeat South Korea in a conventional war even if the US is not helping SK.
Once the US presence is no longer there, it becomes a lot harder for the US to re-enter in times of conflict because now NK can threaten us with nuclear weapons. Most American will not trade Seattle or SF for South Korea.
Unification of Korea is pretty much a non-negotiatable goal for the North Korean regime. It's been their goal since the start and the reason why the leading families in NK support the Kim family.
I think you're exactly right. I see this as the "Peace for Our Time"[1] deal that people will get excited about now, and cause us to take our eye off the real danger. Until tragedy happens.
> South Korea and the United States are politically weak right now ...
I don't know where you're getting news about Korea, but since his inauguration on May 2017, Moon Jae-In has been consistently enjoying approval rating of 60-70%. Even his party is enjoying ~50% support, while the chief opposition party (the conservative Liberty Korea Party) is struggling at 10-15% (although they do have 116 out of 293 seats at congress).
From the Guardian, which can't be accused of being a Trump lover:
> This system of indoctrination and propaganda complicates any official announcement of the Trump meeting. An ideological framework must be devised to explain the talks with the enemy; and regardless of how they are presented, there is an uncomfortable margin for the “infallible” leader to be seen to fail in his aims.
> Trump is a volatile opponent who telegraphed his impatience even before the two men fixed a place to talk, warning he would walk away if he thought the preparations weren’t going anywhere.
> But this unpredictability is the reason there are talks at all. Trump’s barrage of verbal and Twitter attacks on North Koreans – which have been reported there – led Pyongyang to question if it was, for the first time in a generation, facing a US president willing to attack them, experts say.
> Officials there have long calculated that no US president would risk lives in Seoul with an attack on the North. But under Trump that is no longer a safe assumption, says Andrei Lankov, professor of Korean Studies at Kookmin University.
> Kim, like his predecessors, has proved adept at manipulating regional and world powers into providing aid and political support while offering little in return. Now Kim may at last be forced into making real changes to stave off looming political and economic crises.
What are the economic implications of a possible/eventual/inevitable reunification scenario that just become a bit more realistic? South Korea is already an economic powerhouse in its own right. I'm wondering more from the point of view of an investor - the public markets don't appear to be particularly swayed by the prospects, probably because the scenario is still farfetched and decades away, if possible.
It'll be interesting to see if the removal of the DMZ will result in mass migration to the more affluent south. I wonder if they will have NIMBY debates similar to those we have about the Central American migration to the USA and Canada.
What changed that North Korea would be serious this time? I can't think of much. On the contrary, they seem stronger. Maybe they feel they have enough to negotiate more favorable terms than ever before. Maybe the borders have become so porous to outside information coming in that they feel change is inevitable so they'd do better to be in front of it.
I can't get past that on a personal level, the decision-makers, in particular Kim Jong Un's family, are responsible for many people's suffering and deaths, which I would think would make them fear too much freedom among the survivors. People hunted Nazis for generations. Wouldn't the North Korean decision-makers fear being hunted?
Meanwhile, China has been invaded more than once from the Korean peninsula. How willing will they be to lose a buffer between themselves and U.S. military bases?
This won't last, unless the world decides to give up nukes. NK says they've miniaturized a weapon, have the delivery system and will denuclearize when the 'world' does.
Theory: Xi put massive pressure on North Korea to sue for peace during the armored train trip Kim made to China because he doesn't want Trump/Pentagon using it as an excuse for a more immediate military buildup in the region and the possible nuclearization of SK and Japan in response. Japan was already starting to flex more. Xi probably threatened to cut them off and even invade NK if he didn't cool it, they were becoming too much of a liability. I think China thinks Washington is crazy enough now for a pre-emtive strike (Madman theory?), and that could drag China into a war they are not ready for. The US still struck Syria despite Russian threats, its not unfeasible to think the same applies to NK. China's long term goal is to take back Taiwan, secure their back yard and ultimately become the hub of Eurasian continent, but they need to buy a couple more decades time, they are not yet ready for a true face off. That said however, its also possible this has no effect really, China's posturing itself is enough of a reason for a buildup and Washington can still spin it this way. Like I said, buys more time but probably doesn't negate the inevitable face off. In the end, NK will be authoritarian "modern" like China is "modern". I can't imagine Kim giving up that much power, just shifting it to a better model that keeps him in the loop. This was probably the "out" Xi gave him during his visit. China may even turn this form of authoritarianism into a commodity they can sell to other dictators. "Look at NK then and now! See what our political system / AI facial recognition technology can do for you and your people? Just take a low interest loan from us and we will build the system for you and show you how to use it. You can be advanced just like China AND be in power forever!".
It's truly naive to think there is anything less than geo-political calculus here. If you think this is a momentous occasion, you're fooling yourself with rose colored glasses.
That being said, I'd love to hear some alternative theories. Shoot me down. Pop my bubble.
The reason this is happening is that DJT made it clear that he would starve NK until they abandoned their nukes. Then he made it clear to China that the US would hit China's pocket book real hard if they did not cooperate. Then China made it clear to Kim that the jig is up. Kim doesn't want to hang from a lamp post, and neither do his henchmen. So Kim sued for peace.
Journalists, talking heads, etc don't know why something is happening. Only the insiders ( trump/pompeo, moon, kim, etc ) know and they certainly aren't telling the press about it. The noise in the media is just tabloid nonsense to sell ads.
NK's Kim would be stupid to give them up, see what happened to a guy a named Saddam and to another named Muammar. Assad, if not for Russia would have the next one.
He can slow development down in return for aid...and milk them for decades.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Obviously everyone wants peace but realistically doing what you said is the rational thing for NK to do and there is tons of historical precedent. The only state to ever denuclearize and not regret it is South Africa.
I can't find the article, but I read a while back a number of cases where certain heads of states denuclearized. Then the US left them high and dry when the tides turned and they were killed either by another country or by their own people who were angry about all the past oppression. Kim Jong Un is exactly in the second potential situation if he denuclearizes.
So Kim's nuclear test site collapsed, likely destroying years of work, necessary equipment and possibly hit trained human personnel, so he suddenly went on a "tour for peace". Can't say I am unhappy.
That's not how underground nuclear testing works. The bombs are not developed or stored inside the mountain where they test. There would have been no one inside the mountain during the test. The mountain collapsed during the test. Kim probably thinks that his bombs are powerful enough and reliable enough for him to have a strong negotiating position.
[+] [-] TorKlingberg|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vivekd|8 years ago|reply
While getting rid of Park Geun-Hye certainly made this easier - I think this has more to do with Kim Jong Un and also the warm reception N. Korea got at the recent winter Olympics in South Korea.
That said I would be cautious how far this would go. I suspect a lot of N. Koreas militaristic acts and statements over the years is not because of any actual desire but war, but just posturing to help in negotiations over tariffs and aid.
I am also going to take the unpopular opinion and say that Trump does deserve some credit. Under many past Presidents, the N. Korean government knew America would never use military force and acted accordingly. Under Trump, they have good reason to be concerned about the possibility of military force and are taking a more cautious and reconciliatory approach. I think the North Koreans are well aware that militaristic posturing won't get them very far with Trump the way it did with past presidents.
[+] [-] nostrademons|8 years ago|reply
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/214...
With no viable test site, North Korea's nuclear program is kaput, as are their ambitions of becoming a major nuclear power. Moreover, there is now a massive environmental disaster that will affect people all over the Korean peninsula plus northern China. They have no choice to come to the negotiating table, and South Korea has a strong incentive to reach a peace deal so they can get their geologists, engineers, and inspectors in and mitigate the damage before a massive fall-out plume blows over Seoul.
[+] [-] murph-almighty|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lifthrasiir|8 years ago|reply
Park Geun-hye in her presidental term had repeatedly stressed that the Korean reunification will be a bonanza ("통일은 대박이다"), but this unusual and ultimately information-free slogan turned out to be coined by Choi Soon-sil, a cult leader behind Park Geun-hye. Choi wanted to, literally, make NK collapse in two years after the sudden closure of the Kaesong Industrial Region in 2016 in order to pave a way to Park's reelection---while the current Constitution of South Korea does not allow for the presidental reelection, critical events like the collapse of NK can force amendments or even allow excuse to the Constitution. Choi even tried to leverage those future events into huge returns by buying land near the 38th parallel.
After Park's impeachment, it was revealed that there were multiple attempts from NK (yes, you read right) during the Park's term to make contact to SK, only to be ignored. For example, top officials from NK visited SK during the 2014 Asian Games in Incheon and (unsuccessfully) asked to arrange a meeting with Park. This breakdown was for a long time attributed to NK, but in reality Park (and in turn, Choi) had just ignored the request.
[1] The primary source is an interview of Jang Shiho from Lee Gyu-yeon's Spotlight (a JTBC programme), but individual points were also independently confirmed via multiple sources. Jang was a niece of Choi Soon-sil and eventually sentenced to 2 1/2 year imprisonment in 2017 after giving much clues to investigators (for plea bargaining).
[+] [-] cryptonector|8 years ago|reply
Only one major change has taken place, and it's not a change of presidency in SK.
Whether we like him or not, President Trump did this, and we should rejoice. SK's President says Trump made this possible -- shall we ignore that?
[+] [-] opmac|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beirut_bootleg|8 years ago|reply
Singing “Trump made this happen with his childish Twitter diplomacy” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.
There is a blurry line between making something happen through direct action, and allowing it to happen through incompetence.
[+] [-] sudosteph|8 years ago|reply
I'm not incredibly familiar with the situation as it stands, but is re-unification a legitimate possibility? I mean, I don't see Kim Jong-Un giving up power, but I could see them wanting to claim re-unification at least from a cultural perspective, like they did in the Olympics.
[+] [-] rtpg|8 years ago|reply
Her theory was that reunification of the Koreas would be very messy given the economic disparity between the two nations, and that SK doesn't want it.
That being said I would hope that NK actually goes along with joint projects with its neighbors. Not like the aid will stop if they're more amicable.
The politics become a bit less rough if we're still talking about 2 regimes I think
[+] [-] vivekd|8 years ago|reply
S. Korean leaders may publically speak about the desire for reconciliation, but it's unlikely that they would seriously pursue it considering the economic and political strain it would place on S. Korea.
N. Koreans have a much greater interest in reunification than the South does. But that interest doesn't extend to those in power in the North who would certainly be reluctant to give up that power.
So while reunification might seem like a nice sentiment, it doesn't seem like something that those in power of either side actually want.
[+] [-] azernik|8 years ago|reply
Perhaps a slow process that starts with closer economic and social ties?
[+] [-] youpassbutter|8 years ago|reply
Why? Societies/nations/etc always change. Given the state of NK, what's shocking is that it didn't happen sooner.
> I'm not incredibly familiar with the situation as it stands, but is re-unification a legitimate possibility?
Reunification is inevitable just like it was between east and west germany. The only question is when.
In the meantime, if all goes to plan, it looks like the koreas + US/China are going to officially end the korean war and relations between north korea and south korea + US are going to be normalized and we will ostensibly get the "unofficial" end of the cold war. Of course the biggie being north korea giving up their nukes.
[+] [-] mlb_hn|8 years ago|reply
Everyone seems to be forgetting that the reason that WE have refused to sign a peace treaty for decades is because of the human rights violations in North Korea. I have no idea how the narrative switched to North Korea wanting a peace treaty as a concession from them.
[+] [-] gtm1260|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ExactoKnight|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pow_pp_-1_v|8 years ago|reply
But who knows. I am no expert.
[+] [-] malnourish|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] x3n0ph3n3|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxxxxx|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hencq|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amai|8 years ago|reply
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/214...
[+] [-] nl|8 years ago|reply
In case it isn't clear, "denuclearization" means the removal of the US nuclear shield from the Korean peninsular and from Japan.
For those who aren't aware, the current US/Japan alliance guarantees the US nuclear arsenal will protect Japan (and South Korea)[1]. That is why those countries haven't pursued their own nuclear arms program.
This will be a big problem.
If North Korea offers to denuclearize then there will be huge pressure on the US to withdraw from South Korea.
North Korea is utterly untrustworthy on this of course, but that's a hard argument to make if they appear to be making reasonable concessions.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_umbrella
[+] [-] dantillberg|8 years ago|reply
South Korea and the United States are politically weak right now -- not necessarily the leaders, but the political systems are at a low point of unity and resolve. Neither country really wants to deal with North Korea right now. People in each country would like this drama to be over, because it feels dangerous and intractable. The leaders in each country would love to deliver that feeling to us.
Kim Jong-un has an incredibly strong hand. He has nuclear missiles at his disposal, with apparently rapid progress toward increasing their range. He knows that other nations are fearful of those weapons, and that they won't do anything that risks putting them on the receiving end of even one.
We've had one bold historic headline after another now: Kim Jong-un has telegraphed a desire to denuclearize and to end the Korean war. He has raised the hopes of South Koreans and of Americans just enough that they each want a deal now, and their leaders now need to deliver.
But the price has not yet been negotiated.
What will be the price? Will Kim promise to stop further nuclear development? Will Kim promise to stop further missile development? Will Kim promise not to help other states develop nuclear missiles? Will Kim promise not to radically modernize his military in other ways as the floodgates of trade open?
Promises are inexpensive and reversible. Will he actually take any real steps to diminish or eliminate his nuclear and military power? I doubt it. Kim's not an idiot. He only needs to present the illusion.
People in the West seem to believe that Kim has experienced some sort of rebirth as a student of peace and nonviolence of late. But there's been no explanation and no demonstration (to my ears) of where that came from. It's possible perhaps that Xi Jinping whispered wonderful ideas and/or threats in Kim Jong-un's ear when he visited, but that's opaque to us and media I've read seems to be ignorant of such potential influence. If Kim were so serious, we should need him to demonstrate that credibly to us, through actions that are costly for him to take: in particular, pitching this change of vision directly and passionately to the populace of North Korea.
Kim Jong-un wants to get out from under the chokehold of heavy trade sanctions. He wants to be legitimized in the international community as the leader of a real nation. He wants to modernize both his military and his nation and his personal life. He probably dreams of visiting Paris and Manhattan.
It is my belief that he will be able to get these things -- without giving up nuclear weapons, missiles, nor giving up his political or military power over North Korea. From Kim's perspective, democratic politicians are weak and manipulable, and he will find it to be especially true right now.
(edit: s/telescoped/telegraphed/ -- thanks!)
[+] [-] hangonhn|8 years ago|reply
I think this is a ploy to do two things: 1. Economic growth for North Korea, which has been happened to some extend already. 2. Get the US out of the Korean Peninsula.
A strong economy will allow NK to develop or buy all sorts of updated conventional arms. NK is seriously weak here. Their air force is horribly out of date. I doubt they can actually defeat South Korea in a conventional war even if the US is not helping SK.
Once the US presence is no longer there, it becomes a lot harder for the US to re-enter in times of conflict because now NK can threaten us with nuclear weapons. Most American will not trade Seattle or SF for South Korea.
Unification of Korea is pretty much a non-negotiatable goal for the North Korean regime. It's been their goal since the start and the reason why the leading families in NK support the Kim family.
[+] [-] jacquesc|8 years ago|reply
But maybe I'm just a pessimist.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
[+] [-] yongjik|8 years ago|reply
I don't know where you're getting news about Korea, but since his inauguration on May 2017, Moon Jae-In has been consistently enjoying approval rating of 60-70%. Even his party is enjoying ~50% support, while the chief opposition party (the conservative Liberty Korea Party) is struggling at 10-15% (although they do have 116 out of 293 seats at congress).
Moon is politically invincible now.
[+] [-] tantalor|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] toblender|8 years ago|reply
All those people suffering from lack will have a chance to take part in our modern abundance.
I can only imagine what will happen when NK opens it's doors to SK fully. There will be a massive demand for good and services. Exciting times!
[+] [-] 21|8 years ago|reply
> This system of indoctrination and propaganda complicates any official announcement of the Trump meeting. An ideological framework must be devised to explain the talks with the enemy; and regardless of how they are presented, there is an uncomfortable margin for the “infallible” leader to be seen to fail in his aims.
> Trump is a volatile opponent who telegraphed his impatience even before the two men fixed a place to talk, warning he would walk away if he thought the preparations weren’t going anywhere.
> But this unpredictability is the reason there are talks at all. Trump’s barrage of verbal and Twitter attacks on North Koreans – which have been reported there – led Pyongyang to question if it was, for the first time in a generation, facing a US president willing to attack them, experts say.
> Officials there have long calculated that no US president would risk lives in Seoul with an attack on the North. But under Trump that is no longer a safe assumption, says Andrei Lankov, professor of Korean Studies at Kookmin University.
> Kim, like his predecessors, has proved adept at manipulating regional and world powers into providing aid and political support while offering little in return. Now Kim may at last be forced into making real changes to stave off looming political and economic crises.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/20/north-korea-py...
[+] [-] sateesh|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cloudkj|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tobyhinloopen|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] foxyv|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spodek|8 years ago|reply
I can't get past that on a personal level, the decision-makers, in particular Kim Jong Un's family, are responsible for many people's suffering and deaths, which I would think would make them fear too much freedom among the survivors. People hunted Nazis for generations. Wouldn't the North Korean decision-makers fear being hunted?
Meanwhile, China has been invaded more than once from the Korean peninsula. How willing will they be to lose a buffer between themselves and U.S. military bases?
[+] [-] sambull|8 years ago|reply
[0] https://www.reuters.com/video/2018/04/21/north-korea-tv-says...
[+] [-] noetic_techy|8 years ago|reply
It's truly naive to think there is anything less than geo-political calculus here. If you think this is a momentous occasion, you're fooling yourself with rose colored glasses.
That being said, I'd love to hear some alternative theories. Shoot me down. Pop my bubble.
[+] [-] loxs|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cryptonector|8 years ago|reply
The reason this is happening is that DJT made it clear that he would starve NK until they abandoned their nukes. Then he made it clear to China that the US would hit China's pocket book real hard if they did not cooperate. Then China made it clear to Kim that the jig is up. Kim doesn't want to hang from a lamp post, and neither do his henchmen. So Kim sued for peace.
[+] [-] youpassbutter|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] indiv0|8 years ago|reply
I think this is only a contributing factor to their decision, at best.
[+] [-] onetimemanytime|8 years ago|reply
He can slow development down in return for aid...and milk them for decades.
[+] [-] IIAOPSW|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PakG1|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitcurious|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ictoan|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Synaesthesia|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitL|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nsnick|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmartrican|8 years ago|reply