Not just theatre - U.S. officials defend Trump-Kim meeting

[webfact]

Not just theatre - U.S. officials defend Trump-Kim meeting

By Doina Chiacu and Pete Schroeder

 

FILE PHOTO - A combination photo shows a Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) handout of Kim Jong Un released on May 10, 2016, and Donald Trump posing for a photo in New York City, U.S., May 17, 2016. REUTERS/KCNA handout via Reuters/File Photo & REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. officials on Sunday defended President Donald Trump's decision to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, saying the move was not just for show and not a gift to Pyongyang.

 

"President Trump isn't doing this for theatre. He's going to solve a problem," said Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo on the "Fox News Sunday" programme.

 

The United States expects North Korea to halt all nuclear and missile testing in advance of any meeting, Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said on Sunday news shows.

 

The goal of the meeting remains denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula, something Kim has agreed to discuss, they said. Pompeo said U.S. military exercises in the region would continue in the lead-up to the talks.

 

The Republican president agreed on Thursday to accept an invitation from the North Korean leader to meet by May after months of escalating tensions over Pyongyang's advancing nuclear and missile programs.

 

Trump would become the first sitting U.S. president to meet with a leader of the reclusive country. The two men would face each other after a public volley of insults, with Trump calling Kim "Little Rocket Man" and Kim referring to Trump as a "dotard."

 

No venue or date for the meeting has been determined, but Trump's prompt acceptance set off a flurry of activity.The South Korean officials who carried Kim's invitation to Washington will split up to visit the leaders of China and Japan this week to update them on the talks, a South Korean presidential official said on Sunday.

 

China, North Korea's main ally, has encouraged dialogue over Pyongyang's nuclear programme, and its state media on Saturday credited Beijing for helping ease tensions.

 

"China continues to be helpful!" Trump tweeted on Saturday.

 

North Korea's leaders have sought a face-to-face meeting with a U.S. president for decades, but have been rebuffed over human rights concerns as well as the nuclear ambitions.

 

U.S. student Otto Warmbier died last summer shortly after his release from a 17-month detention. Three Americans remain detained in North Korea.

 

Many Democrats as well as Trump's fellow Republicans said the United States should have demanded concessions before granting North Korea a meeting.

 

"Before they get that kind of prize, we should insist that they make some real changes, verifiable changes to their programs," Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

 

Warren said she was worried the North would "take advantage" of Trump.

 

"EYES WIDE OPEN"

 

Pompeo and Mnuchin said the United States would make no concessions and would keep the pressure on North Korea by maintaining economic sanctions and a strong U.S. defence posture before the meeting. They also dismissed criticism that Trump's decision to meet elevated the North Korean leader on an international stage.

 

"This administration has its eyes wide open, and the whole time this conversation takes place the pressure will continue to mount on North Korea," Pompeo said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

 

The United States slapped sanctions on individuals and groups in North Korea in October over "flagrant" human rights abuses and added sanctions in February.

 

Six Republican senators last week sent a letter asking Trump to share his plan to keep up pressure on "this heinous regime."

 

One of them, Republican Cory Gardner, told CBS on Sunday it was important to see concrete steps from North Korea before the meeting. "After this meeting, there's going to be very little left of that diplomatic runway," he said.

 

Mnuchin addressed criticism that Trump has not used more diplomacy to contain Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions. "So the president is going to sit down and see if he can cut a deal," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

 

The prospect of doing something no American president has done - especially on such an intractable geopolitical problem - was irresistible to Trump, Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer said on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

 

"So it's the first. It's incredible television. Clearly Trump wants to make this happen," Bremmer said. "But that doesn't mean it's going to happen."

 

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu and Pete Schroeder, additional reporting by Christine Kim in Seoul and Ben Blanchard in Beijing; Editing by Caren Bohan, Jeffrey Benkoe and Richard Chang)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-12

[Samui Bodoh]

45 minutes ago, webfact said:

U.S. officials on Sunday defended President Donald Trump's decision to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, saying the move was not just for show and not a gift to Pyongyang.

At the moment this does look like "show and a gift to Pyongyang", and the onus will be on the White House to demonstrate that it is not.

 

That said, perhaps there is some kind of merit in this. Regular posters will know that I am not a fan of Trump, but all other policies towards NK haven't worked, so I am willing to wait a bit to see if this new departure yields any results.

 

My real concern is with Trump himself. He claims to be a "great negotiator", but as of yet has not demonstrated any evidence to back that up. My fear is that he will make an already dangerous and terrible situation worse.

 

It is TRULY a curse; 

 

May you live in interesting times...

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

The United States expects North Korea to halt all nuclear and missile testing in advance of any meeting, Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said on Sunday news shows

no way that can be assured, little incentive for N Korea to do it, no inspectors onsite; thus no meeting

[BobBKK]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

At the moment this does look like "show and a gift to Pyongyang", and the onus will be on the White House to demonstrate that it is not.

 

That said, perhaps there is some kind of merit in this. Regular posters will know that I am not a fan of Trump, but all other policies towards NK haven't worked, so I am willing to wait a bit to see if this new departure yields any results.

 

My real concern is with Trump himself. He claims to be a "great negotiator", but as of yet has not demonstrated any evidence to back that up. My fear is that he will make an already dangerous and terrible situation worse.

 

It is TRULY a curse; 

 

May you live in interesting times...

 

You might be wrong there. All the other POTUS just acted like Ostriches and what if he pulls it off?  worth a punt in my view.

Edited March 12, 2018 by BobBKK

[dcutman]

These stupid democrats are such hypocrites, after screaming for the last six months about the need for diplomacy and dialog with NOKO.

 

"Before they get that kind of prize, we should insist that they make some real changes, verifiable changes to their programs," Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Warren said she was worried the North would "take advantage" of Trump.

 

This from August 2017

 

Democratic Party Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement: "Isolating the North Koreans has not halted their pursuit of nuclear weapons. And President Trump is not helping the situation with his bombastic comments."

"The United States must quickly engage North Korea in a high-level dialogue without any preconditions.

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/alarm-in-us-calls-for-restraint-after-trumps-warning-of-fire-and-fury-against

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[Credo]

Everything with this man is Theatre.   He simply can't be trusted to make informed decisions.   Kim will play him like a cheap fiddle.

 

[klauskunkel]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

"President Trump isn't doing this for theatre. He's going to solve a problem,"

He is going to turn a problem into theatre.

[mrdome]

That Mike Pompeo is a right old BSer but we get it, it comes with the territory. The North Koreans have no interest in losing the only "power play" they have, they are trying to improve their position while giving up as little as possible. And the WH administration is in the hands of inexperienced fools.

 

To quote Seinfeld "Oh yeah, this can't fail."

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.  

[Thaidream]

As much as I dislike Trump- I must support this move. Talking is always better than fighting a war.  The US positions will not be carved out by Trump alone- they will be thought out by experts in diplomacy with  a goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. That means a series of actions on both sides with a verification protocol. Kim will need to be convinced that the Us will not force regime change if he gives up his nukes.  At some point China may act as a guarantor and eventually all parties will formally sign a peace treaty that formally ends the Korean war.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

As much as I dislike Trump- I must support this move. Talking is always better than fighting a war.  The US positions will not be carved out by Trump alone- they will be thought out by experts in diplomacy with  a goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. That means a series of actions on both sides with a verification protocol. Kim will need to be convinced that the Us will not force regime change if he gives up his nukes.  At some point China may act as a guarantor and eventually all parties will formally sign a peace treaty that formally ends the Korean war.

I doubt that anything will persuade Kim to give up nuclear weapons. He's seen what's happened to other dictators who have done that. It's odd though, that whereas Kim has been repeatedly characterized as a madman by the right, now some of them think it makes sense to negotiate with him? Negotiate with a madman?

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 

You might be wrong there. All the other POTUS just acted like Ostriches and what if he pulls it off?  worth a punt in my view.

So you don't agree with this part of the post you disagree with " all other policies towards NK haven't worked, so I am willing to wait a bit to see if this new departure yields any results. "?

 

IMO it is worth a go, however I do foresee problems due to this " Pompeo said U.S. military exercises in the region would continue in the lead-up to the talks. ". So NK is supposed to stop all nuclear activity, while the US continues with (in NK's eyes) threatening NK?

[lannarebirth]

5 hours ago, dcutman said:

These stupid democrats are such hypocrites, after screaming for the last six months about the need for diplomacy and dialog with NOKO.

 

"Before they get that kind of prize, we should insist that they make some real changes, verifiable changes to their programs," Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Warren said she was worried the North would "take advantage" of Trump.

 

This from August 2017

 

Democratic Party Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement: "Isolating the North Koreans has not halted their pursuit of nuclear weapons. And President Trump is not helping the situation with his bombastic comments."

"The United States must quickly engage North Korea in a high-level dialogue without any preconditions.

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/alarm-in-us-calls-for-restraint-after-trumps-warning-of-fire-and-fury-against

 

 

We here in the peanut gallery can say, and do say, anything we wish. Members of government on the other hand should be supportive of peace efforts unless they've some strong evidence that peace effort will lead to greater strife. I'm not seeing that yet, so they should keep their yaps shut, and work with the president (shudder) to help carve out the best peace resolution we are capable of.

 

Politicians tend to be really small thinkers. I would like to see us engage North Korea, not only to get a nuclear stand down but to bring them within the sphere of influence of other Asian -American treaty nations. That would be a helluva coup but probably way too much to wish for at this juncture. We should be laying the groundwork however.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

As much as I dislike Trump- I must support this move. Talking is always better than fighting a war.  The US positions will not be carved out by Trump alone- they will be thought out by experts in diplomacy with  a goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. That means a series of actions on both sides with a verification protocol. Kim will need to be convinced that the Us will not force regime change if he gives up his nukes.  At some point China may act as a guarantor and eventually all parties will formally sign a peace treaty that formally ends the Korean war.

 

That's the real problem here, China. They will interject themselves here at some point.  Ostensibly as a guarantor perhaps, but that won't mean anything. Best to leave them out of it, which of course, they won't stand for.

[lannarebirth]

32 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So NK is supposed to stop all nuclear activity, while the US continues with (in NK's eyes) threatening NK?

 

Yes, if the want peace as they claim. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yes, if the want peace as they claim. 

Because as all the world knows, Donald Trump's word is his bond.

[heybruce]

The US should talk with North Korea, along with South Korea, China, and Japan.  The negotiations should be conducted through knowledgeable diplomats (yeah, I know, many have left and Trump hasn't replaced them).  Having short-attention span Trump in the negotiations is a huge risk. He will be distracted by praise and shiny objects.

Edited March 12, 2018 by heybruce

[lannarebirth]

Just now, heybruce said:

The US should talk with North Korea, along with South Korea, China, and Japan.  The negotiations should be conducted through knowledgeable diplomats (yeah, I know, many have left and Trump hasn't replaced them).  Having short-attention span Trump in the negotiations is a risk. He will be distracted by praise and shiny objects.

 

It's true some have left and that has been lamented by others who also draw a government salary, but I think it is fair to point out that Kim's current nuclear build up all came under their watch.

[heybruce]

11 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

It's true some have left and that has been lamented by others who also draw a government salary, but I think it is fair to point out that Kim's current nuclear build up all came under their watch.

"lamented by others who also draw a government salary"

 

Do you think the diplomatic corps is overstaffed by North Korean experts, or just overstaffed in general?  You do realize that diplomacy is much cheaper than war, don't you?

 

The rest of your reply doesn't address my post.  However I'll point out that North Korea's nuclear activities were contained by agreements made during the Clinton administration.  The on-site UN inspectors were expelled after President Bush included them in his "axis of evil" speech, and the first nuclear bomb was exploded in 2006. 

 

It's likely North Korea was cheating even when it officially discontinued its nuclear program, but actual testing could not take place until after Bush effectively ended all diplomatic efforts at containing it. 

 

As noted, I want diplomacy to continue, but I want it done by experts, with our allies in the region as full partners, and with no concessions without meaningful, irreversible steps to contain the nuclear program. Trump hasn't the knowledge or skill to accomplish this, and my fear is that in pursuit of headlines he will betray allies and leave North Korea and China in more powerful, dangerous positions.

[boomerangutang]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. officials on Sunday defended President Donald Trump's decision to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, saying the move was not just for show and not a gift to Pyongyang.  "President Trump isn't doing this for theatre..." said Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo on the "Fox News Sunday" programme.

 

The article opens with three negatives in a row.  Right wingers are defensive, and so they should be.  If it was a positive move (for US prez to meet with Kim), they would say the reasons it should happen.  The talking heads on FOX are showing their doubts and weaknesses.

 

As an American, I want Trump to negotiate as serious int'l issue about as much as I want trench foot. Stormy Daniels would do a better job of it than Trump.  She's smarter than him, would represent America's best interests, and she probably wouldn't become bosom buddies with Kim (Trump emulates dictators), ....and therefore Stormy wouldn't be manipulated by Kim the way Trump is manipulated by Putin and Xi.

 

 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

So you don't agree with this part of the post you disagree with " all other policies towards NK haven't worked, so I am willing to wait a bit to see if this new departure yields any results. "?

 

IMO it is worth a go, however I do foresee problems due to this " Pompeo said U.S. military exercises in the region would continue in the lead-up to the talks. ". So NK is supposed to stop all nuclear activity, while the US continues with (in NK's eyes) threatening NK?

 

SK/US military exercises do not really equate with a nuclear ballistic threat. Other than that, NK retains all them artillery barrels pointed at Seoul.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Because as all the world knows, Donald Trump's word is his bond.

 

Not as if NK's track record on keeping its word is all that great.

[mikebike]

59 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

SK/US military exercises do not really equate with a nuclear ballistic threat. Other than that, NK retains all them artillery barrels pointed at Seoul.

In the sense that nuclear weapons are not the same as traditional ballistic weapons they do not equate.

 

But also in the sense that the US military could easily eliminate the entire country of NK vs NK's possible ability to do some damage to some part of the US or its allies, they do equate. In fact the scale weighs totally towards the US side in any conflict.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Not as if NK's track record on keeping its word is all that great.

In previous US-NK negotiations, neither side was particularly good at keeping its word. But the problem is only magnified when you are dealing with someone who denies have said things that has has publicly in the presence of video recorders.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, mikebike said:

In the sense that nuclear weapons are not the same as traditional ballistic weapons they do not equate.

 

But also in the sense that the US military could easily eliminate the entire country of NK vs NK's possible ability to do some damage to some part of the US or its allies, they do equate. In fact the scale weighs totally towards the US side in any conflict.

 

In no sense whatsoever, unless you're into hyperbole. The US forces deployed in SK and conducting exercises with SK cannot do what you claim. Not with ease, and not without NK almost immediate retaliation against SK.

 

This is not just about the possible threat to the US, but the actual threat to SK (and maybe Japan as well).

[dunroaming]

I applaud the positive reaction from many of the posters.  Everyone wants a peaceful solution but I do have serious doubts that this will bring that about.

 

I doubt that the people around Trump think that this will work either.  I suspect that they will try to put as many obstacles in the way as they can to try to scupper this meeting.  Probably made up of unrealistic demands from NK before the meeting can take place.  They know this is a tremendous coup for Kim and raises his status enormously.

 

If you were to put Kim and Trump in a room together then Kim is by far the more savvy.  Consequently measures will have to be taken to save Trump from himself.  A lot will depend on the interpreters in the room, even though Kim understands English perfectly well. 

[Jingthing]

Even though I of course want peace talks to actually work, here's my prediction. I actually kind of think this is just theater. 

 

A meeting happens --

 

"trump" agrees to stuff but doesn't get any real way to verify in NK.

"trump" declares historic victory (nobody ever did this before, aren't I the best ever?) and can use that to help his party not lose so badly in the 2018 midterms

The reality that NK isn't keeping their side of the agreement doesn't hit until after November 2018.

 

I hope I'm wrong. 

[heybruce]

12 minutes ago, mikebike said:

In the sense that nuclear weapons are not the same as traditional ballistic weapons they do not equate.

 

But also in the sense that the US military could easily eliminate the entire country of NK vs NK's possible ability to do some damage to some part of the US or its allies, they do equate. In fact the scale weighs totally towards the US side in any conflict.

A huge difference is that no one--the US, South Korea, or China--want to invade North Korea.  Nobody wants the responsibility of repairing that backwards, impoverished country.   However North Korea would love to unite the Korean peninsula under the Kim dynasty.  That is why every act of military aggression between the Korea's since, and including, the war, was initiated by North Korea.

 

In short, South Korea's and the United States' militaries are there to defend South Korea, North Korea's military is geared toward offense and invasion.

Edited March 12, 2018 by heybruce

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

In previous US-NK negotiations, neither side was particularly good at keeping its word. But the problem is only magnified when you are dealing with someone who denies have said things that has has publicly in the presence of video recorders.

 

Yeah, this wasn't offered as a defense of Trump's character - just a reminder that making it all about Trump is off-mark. Maybe the problem is magnified by having to deal with a guy who's into executing family members, starving his own people and running his mouth at the world at large. Don't think either one is a great improvement over the other.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I applaud the positive reaction from many of the posters.  Everyone wants a peaceful solution but I do have serious doubts that this will bring that about.

 

I doubt that the people around Trump think that this will work either.  I suspect that they will try to put as many obstacles in the way as they can to try to scupper this meeting.  Probably made up of unrealistic demands from NK before the meeting can take place.  They know this is a tremendous coup for Kim and raises his status enormously.

 

If you were to put Kim and Trump in a room together then Kim is by far the more savvy.  Consequently measures will have to be taken to save Trump from himself.  A lot will depend on the interpreters in the room, even though Kim understands English perfectly well. 

 

"If you were to put Kim and Trump in a room together then Kim is by far the more savvy." 

 

Based on what? Alright, Trump's a doofus, yeah. What do we actually know about Kim? It's not like he was voted in, not like the decision making processes in NK are all too clear, and not like his policies took the country places. Neither is a self-made man, neither is a scholar, neither seems the paragon of mental stability....