Slashdot Mirror
North Korea's Leader Kim Jong-un Says He'll Give Up Weapons if US Promises Not to Invade (nytimes.com)
Several readers have shared a report: North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, told President Moon Jae-in of South Korea when they met that he would abandon his nuclear weapons if the United States would agree to formally end the Korean War and promise that it would not invade his country, a South Korean government spokesman said Sunday. In a faith-building gesture ahead of a summit meeting with President Trump, Mr. Kim also said he would invite experts and journalists from South Korea and the United States to watch the shutdown next month of his country's only known underground nuclear test site.
The comments by Mr. Kim were made on Friday when the leaders of the two Koreas met at Panmunjom, a village on their shared border, the spokesman, Yoon Young-chan, said on Sunday, providing additional details of the meeting. "I know the Americans are inherently disposed against us, but when they talk with us, they will see that I am not the kind of person who would shoot nuclear weapons to the south, over the Pacific or at the United States," Mr. Kim told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon's account of the meeting. It was another dramatically conciliatory statement by Mr. Kim, whose country threatened to do exactly those things during the height of nuclear tensions last year.
The comments by Mr. Kim were made on Friday when the leaders of the two Koreas met at Panmunjom, a village on their shared border, the spokesman, Yoon Young-chan, said on Sunday, providing additional details of the meeting. "I know the Americans are inherently disposed against us, but when they talk with us, they will see that I am not the kind of person who would shoot nuclear weapons to the south, over the Pacific or at the United States," Mr. Kim told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon's account of the meeting. It was another dramatically conciliatory statement by Mr. Kim, whose country threatened to do exactly those things during the height of nuclear tensions last year.
you'll be just fine
maybe we'll send a few cruise missiles or something, but boots on the ground is reserved for petro-nations
Just make sure they never find oil in NK and you'll be safe, Mr Kim.
The vendetta against Gaddafi after he had capitulated to giving up his nuclear weapons program is the primary reason NK hasn't given up its weapons program.
It will probably take the withdrawl of US forces from SK and aid to NK, and the formal acknowledgment of the continuation of the current NK regime in order to denuclearize NK. Even then, I wouldn't be certain they don't retain an actual nuke or two secretly now that they have them. This still probably won't address the effectively bigger threat of all of the NK artillery pointed at SK.
If a (D) President had accepted a invitation from NK, Conservatives would be calling it High Treason, but a (R) can do no wrong
You would think Ukraine and Libya would be lessons about what giving up weaponry for promises is worth.
1) Is contra-indicated by his behavior up until this year. Reportedly in some ways he was even more ruthless than his father. His rhetoric was even more aggressive.
2) More likely this, specifically the aftermath of the nuclear test site collapse seemed to be a key turning point. Not only would this have likely set back their program, perhaps beyond recovery, it also demonstrated how much damage their messing around could do to the geology, right on China's border.After that point, everything toned downed rapidly. A few weeks ago he suddenly was willing to meet.
Then a couple of weeks ago, presumable at China's insistance, Kim Jong Un went to Beijing. We are note privy to what happened in that meeting, but afterward, NK was much more concrete about terms to wind things down, though the general overtures were promising prior to that.
Trump's rhetoric *probably* wasn't it, perhaps the elevated sanctions contributed, but I suspect if not for the test site incident, they'd still be betting on threat of force by nukes to keep things going until they'd control South Korea on their terms. Now it seems they've decided to appease the international community in exchange for guarantees their internal affairs would be left alone (which the rest of the world has already seemed content to leave alone, regardless of severity of atrocity).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I wonder what would've happened if Cliton won the vote. Actually... Nothing would've happened, NK would've started WWIII already.
Nah, given her history, Hillary would have started WWIII.
And "Cliton"? Freudian slip for the candidate whose sole claim to being qualified for the Presidency was "muh vagina!"? "I'm with her!"?!?!? Seriously? What an arrogant and empty campaign slogan. Even turning it around to "She's with me!" would have done wonders for HIllary not projecting herself as Her Entitledness.
Hillary: uniting the US just enough so that it votes Donald Fucking Trump in as President. What a legacy.
It's: My guy can do no wrong. And the other side's guy is Hitler/Stalin/$Satan_Figure.
If something good happens while my guy is in office it's totally his doing. If something good happens while the other side's guy is in office it's totally due to luck/the previous guy.
Etc, Etc, lather rinse repeat.
And my side is virtuous unlike the immoral other side that has mostly the same human in_group/out_group motivations.
We'll still figure out how to guarantee President Trump gets zero credit for this foreign policy win!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Another way of looking at it is that Kim built up his political capital bother at home and abroad with the nuclear weapons and missile programmes. The war of words with Trump and the fact that his threats ultimately proved hollow, combined with the election of a liberal, progressive president in South Korea gave Kim the opportunity to sue to peace.
Now Kim is putting all the responsibility for this failing on America. He has made huge concessions, and all it needs is for the US to do the same. If Trump refuses then he looks like the one who scuppered the deal.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
"Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of[..]"
The Russian Federation,[...] reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, [...], to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine
The Russian Federation, [...] reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine[...]
The Russian Federation [...] reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine [...], to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
etc, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Remember how badly America lost its shit after 911? Now imagine what this place would be like if a hostile foreign power leveled every American city in an illegal war, and since the 90's had been conducting the world's largest war games each and every year to practice for another invasion.
That's what the U.S. did and is doing to North Korea. Their pursuit of nuclear weapons and threats to use them - in a response to an attack on their country - is entirely rational.
Didn't Iraq try that? Worked really well.
The real problem is that the USA is not trustworthy. Even if Trump and the current Congress make promises, the next election can change things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Nah, it probably has more to do with the fact that they have Nukes and long range missiles.
I wonder how they plan to credibly enforce the Denuclearization. It's relatively easy to monitor the development of Nukes, you need nuclear plants to get the plutonium and testing ranges to debug the tech. But once a country has working Nukes I don't know how you verify that they've been surrendered.
I stole this Sig
The problem being that if NK is the least bit insincere about their intentions, they may be able to roll over SK and Japan in such a case.
You are watching the wrong SF. How should a third world army, like NK, run over a first world army like SK, without using nukes?
A NK vs SK war would be over in two weeks. First week NK will lose its air capabilities and ground based radar. If they dare to sent tanks and infantry it will get utterly destroyed afterwards. And then NK has nothing left to throw into the battle. 1 or 2 million soldiers with hand guns do nothing against 100 fighter planes.
And most likely you had mass desertions. Are you americans really so stupid fucking morons that you believe any NK citizen or soldier is really voluntarily in that situation?
As soon as they can they run and try to escape, just to bad the regime holds their families hostages.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The Warlord Hillary would have sent in ground troops?
If the Annointed One had won the election, there would be three or possibly low four figure US casulties by this time in the ground war in Syria.
For her clients, the coveted gas pipeline across Syria is worth that much.
Kim Jong Un could still be quite insane and it seems he at least learned enough of the regular saber-rattling technique from his old man to keep up appearances, but I think that he just ran into someone who was even more unhinged. Someone like a U.S. president that constantly shit talks everyone and anyone on twitter, constantly opens his mouth to invite even more legal trouble that wouldn't exist if he'd just shut up, and who seems to have no problem changing his mind about something mid-sentence.
Kim was like the deranged homeless guy that everyone wanted to stay away from and so people would just let him rummage through their dumpsters because no one really wants to confront the guy for fear of what might happen, and to some degree that homeless guy probably drums up the act a bit because he knows that this works. However, Trump is like a new homeless dude that's caked in mud and smells like piss that's screaming about god or the government that even the other homeless people don't want to fuck with because even they're a little bit worried about what this crazy mother fucker is going to do.
Trump kind of terrifies everyone else because they aren't quite sure how he'll act or behave and most other political leaders really don't want someone to introduce enough chaos that it causes their own gravy train to come crashing down as well. Trump is the new crazy man that the rest of the world leaders will seek to appease because even thought it means giving in a little, it seems to be less painful than what might happen if he doesn't get his way.
Some people want to argue that all of this is somehow brilliant political maneuvering on Trump's part, but that's being far, far too gracious. He may not be the type of complete idiot that much of the media would like to portray him as, but that doesn't make him some kind of chess master playing a highly skilled game that leaves his opponents caught in any number of clever snares. I think it's more of an idiot hero trope comparison where's he's so far out of his league that he's outmaneuvering opponents who were expecting a second best duelist instead of someone who looks like him might stab himself at any given moment.
Yes, that's what I was thinking too. Maybe Sun-Tzu's art of War. Feign weakness when you are strong, and feign strength when you are weak.
I have a suspicion, based on not much beyond "what would *I* do in his place?" contemplations.
Had Kim attempted to negotiate peace at the start of his rule, it likely would have resulted in a coup attempt. Peace is almost certainly going to ruin a lot of NK's "aristocracy" - the generals and the others who aren't at the top, but are still higher than everyone else. They'd be willing to kill to keep the power and wealth they have.
So Kim had to make his rule unquestioned. He's purged plenty of people, presumably those who'd be positioned to fight over it. He had some family murdered to keep them from even potentially being puppet replacements. And he's done plenty of internal propaganda about their nukes and missiles so the peasants and soldiers will see this as a negotiation from a place of strength, not a surrender.
Not only that, but dictators don't often retire peacefully. You die in office, of old age (if you're lucky) or to assassins, rebels or a foreign army (if you're not). And living in fear of peasant revolt or American drone strikes doesn't seem like a good way to live, to me. But if he negotiates peace, he gets to keep basically all his money, and then goes down in the history books as a generous, benevolent peacemaker.
Is this what happened? Maybe. We don't know, maybe never really will. But it's not impossible.
Trump's rhetoric *probably* wasn't it
You can be in denial for as long as you like, but the fact is: the only country that could put pressure on North Korea is China, and the only country that can put pressure on China is the US. Obama and Hillary as Secretary of State didn't do anything. Trump getting tough on China is what made this happen. The question now is whether China and North Korea will hold up their end of the bargain. I expect they will as long as Trump is in office, they they'll test the next President.
They've likely been set back decades.
No, they haven't been. Really, they've not.
- South Korea is offering a hand of friendship. This isn't usual, contrary to popular belief.
Actually it's very usual.
- We've pretty much faxed a picture of Jim Mattis to Pyongyang.
Huh? Did he switch chairs with Pompeo while I wasn't looking?
- We have China's balls in a vise...
Now you're a comedian.
- Kim Jong-un was never the heir apparent for North Korea in the first place.
It might not have been apparent to you.
You're already 5 for 5, I'll leave the rest alone.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
If NK can get the US to agree not to invade and officially end the war with SK, there is a non-zero chance that Trump will pull all the US troops out of South Korea ("the war is over, why should we spend billions on troops over there? "). With the US out of South Korea China's position in Asia strengthens considerably. China is playing the long game here and Trump will prpbably fall right in line. And dont forget, the US is always one drunken rape away from getting kicked out of Japan. If fhat were to happen too, the US would essentially loose all geopolitical influence in Asia.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil