Slashdot Mirror


Two Koreas Agree To End War This Year, Pursue Denuclearization (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in agreed Friday to finally end a seven-decade war this year, and pursue the "complete denuclearization" of the Korean Peninsula. Kim and Moon embraced after signing the deal during a historic meeting on their militarized border, the first time a North Korean leader set foot on the southern side. They announced plans to replace the 1953 armistice that ended hostilities with a peace treaty by year's end. Their statement on a "common goal of realizing, through complete denuclearization, a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula," stopped short of the "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization" long sought by the U.S. and its allies. The statement didn't elaborate on what the term meant and Kim didn't personally utter the word during remarks Friday. "We have agreed to share a firm determination to open a new era in which all Korean people enjoy prosperity and happiness on a peaceful land without war," Kim told reporters, without taking questions. President Trump hailed the move, declaring "KOREAN WAR TO END!" on Twitter. He has agreed to meet with Kim at a time and place yet to be determined.

7 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Nobel Peace Prize Winner by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If Obama can get one for doing nothing... this should be a slam dunk.

    --
    5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
    1. Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      While I don't think the tweets were helpful, Trump did push for tougher sanctions against North Korea. Meanwhile, Trump also offered to engage in direct talks with North Korea, something past presidents have refused to do. North Korea has walked to negotiate directly with the United States, while previous presidents have insisted that any negotiations should be part of the six party talks. Trump stepped up the pressure, calling it "maximum pressure", while offering North Korea something the direct negotiations they wanted and a possible way out of the sanctions. Both the United States and South Korea have been clear that denuclearization is necessary to get the sanctions lifted. That is a substantial difference from the strategy of past presidents, and is a logical approach to foreign policy.

      The tougher sanctions likely had a significant impact on North Korea and made them more willing to negotiate. Trump's willingness for direct talks signaled a willingness for unprecedented direct talks. The tweets weren't helpful, but Trump's foreign policy did influence North Korea to make real concessions. Trump should get credit for that, and you're ignoring the real substance of his foreign policy.

      When the policies of several past presidents haven't worked, it's time to try something different. That's the same logic that Obama used to justify normalizing relations with Cuba, which is also a reasonable decision. Let's just hope that Trump's threats to about the Iran nuclear deal are an effort to get Iran to extend their promises past 2025 and not a sincere intent to withdraw. If Trump is taking the role of the bad cop while Macron has the role of the good cop to negotiate more with Iran, it may be effective. If Trump actually withdraws, that's incredibly foolish. Trump is just so erratic that it's hard to distinguish legitimate foreign policy from outbursts and uninformed bluster.

    2. Re:Nobel Peace Prize Winner by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People like you said the same BS about Reagan and the dissolution of the USSR: it was all accidental, would've happened anyway, Reagan was an incompetent warmonger, blah blah blah. You simply refuse to grasp that a hardline, belligerent stance backed up with credible threats of military action actually work when facing down tyrannical dictatorships.

      Here's what really happened, and none of it was by accident:

      1. NK developed their nukes with the intention of saber rattling and getting their way since it's worked so well for the last 70 years.
      2. Trump let NK know we can and will turn them into a glowing parking lot if they don't stop doing that.
      3. Trump let China know he's quite serious about pushing the Big Red Button on NK and put pressure on China via tariffs, probably with the deal being China pushes NK to start behaving and Trump will remove the tariffs.
      4. China values their economic ties with the US far more than anything they're getting from NK, and further NK embarrassed the Chinese leadership with his nuclear testing.
      5. China, seeing it in their best interests to reign in NK, told them they wouldn't step in if Trump pushed the Big Red Button and Kim finally figured out he's playing with something that will get him burned. China also probably threatened severe economic pressure on NK if they continued to misbehave.
      6. NK, unable to survive economically without China and unable to withstand a US military without Chinese backing, wisely decided it's time to come to the the peace table before things get out of control.

      Even you ought to be able to put the pieces together. Trump visits China. Then Kim visits China. Shortly thereafter Kim changes its stance. Only a fool would consider this accidental. Trump leaned on China and China leaned on Kim. This is something Obama could've easily done -- and maybe earned a Nobel instead of being given one for "participation" -- but was too naive to do. But no doubt had this happened on his watch you'd have given him full credit and claimed him a master politician. But since it happened on Trump's watch it has to be accidental, right? Can't give Trump credit. That might validate his ideology and invalidate yours and that simply can't be allowed.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  2. Thank you Dennis Rodman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Awesome job Dennis! Thanks for your help!

  3. Trust, but verify by TomR+teh+Pirate · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kim has made a lot of commitments, none of them worth the paper they were printed on. I'll believe it when the inspectors believe it.

  4. Kim won by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    we've acknowledged him as the legitimate ruler of North Korea. That's what this was about. As soon as Trump said he'd meet with Kim, Kim won. He doesn't need the nukes any more. He's still got enough firepower to flatten South Korea, so he's still got his hostage situation. The nukes were just a trick to get us to the table and to get us to legitimize his reign. Worked too.

    On the one hand I should be upset we're giving approval to yet another dictatorship. On the other hand NK is hardly the first and Trump just got outmaneuvered and lost his shot at an Iraq style war. On the other other hand there's still Iran, and they don't have a hostage to protect them.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  5. Wow by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People are really over-reacting to this - on both sides. It's certainly better news than if the two presidents had walked away from the table shouting "LOCK AND LOAD!" - but, right now, it's just words, and there have been plenty of words before.

    Moon isn't an idiot - he's well aware he's got 25 million of his people living in and around a city that's only 35 miles from North Korea. He hasn't committed to much of anything... nor has Kim. "Ending" a war which has effectively been over for 70 years is a symbolic gesture, but little more than that.

    --
    #DeleteChrome