Analysis: How does Kim tell North Korea he's giving up nuclear weapons?

[webfact]

Analysis: How does Kim tell North Korea he's giving up nuclear weapons?

By Josh Smith and Soyoung Kim

 

FILE PHOTO: North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un smokes a cigarette at the General Satellite Control and Command Center after the launch of the Unha-3 (Milky Way 3) rocket carrying the second version of Kwangmyongsong-3 satellite at West Sea Satellite Launch Site in Cholsan county, North Pyongan province December 12, 2012, in this picture released by the North's KCNA news agency in Pyongyang December 13, 2012. KCNA/via REUTERS/File Picture

 

SEOUL (Reuters) - State media calls North Korea's nuclear weapons a "treasured sword of justice".

 

Pyongyang has released commemorative stamps and built monuments in honour of its ballistic missile tests, while nuclear and rocket scientists have been named national heroes.

 

For Kim Jong Un, fully giving up nuclear weapons would mean a dramatic reversal for an authoritarian leader who has not only staked his security on his nuclear arsenal, but also spent years publicly celebrating such weapons as an integral part of his regime’s legitimacy and power.

 

South Korean envoys who met Kim in Pyongyang early this month quoted Kim as saying he was "committed to denuclearisation", and that he "expressed his eagerness to meet U.S. President Donald Trump as soon as possible".

 

Absent any public confirmation from Pyongyang, analysts are sceptical Kim will suddenly give up the nuclear arsenal he and his family have spent decades developing.

 

Instead, Kim is likely to seek a more nuanced and long-term approach that could allow him to emerge looking victorious in the minds of his people and domestic elites, they say.

 

"Kim Jong Un does not need to sell anything to the North Korean population, particularly because denuclearisation is a process that will take at least 10 years to realistically achieve," said Michael Madden, an expert on North Korea leadership at Johns Hopkins University's 38 North website.

 

"Pyongyang most likely envisions ... a series of incremental agreements around this, rather than one or two large grand bargains."

 

CONCESSIONS NEEDED

Former South Korean officials who have negotiated with the North in the past say such a pivot could be difficult, but not impossible - if the United States makes major concessions Kim Jong Un can take back and parade to his people.

 

"Kim Jong Un would seek to propagate the idea that he induced the U.S. and international community’s ‘surrender’ by having mastered nuclear weapons," said Kim Hyung-suk, who served as the South's vice unification minister between 2016 and 2017.

 

"If talks go well, sanctions are eased and the economy grows. Then the people would understand Kim’s denuclearisation decision and become strongly supportive of it."

 

That may not be the kind of deal Trump envisions as he plans to sit down with Kim sometime in May for an historic first summit between sitting leaders of the two countries.

 

Trump's new national security adviser, John Bolton, recently said Trump should insist any meeting he holds with Kim be focused squarely on how to eliminate that country's nuclear weapons programme as quickly as possible.

 

SILENCE IN PYONGYANG

The lack of comment from North Korean state media on the proposed talks between Kim and Trump was not unexpected, analysts said.

 

"It might reflect an ongoing internal discussion about how to deal with public opinion, certainly, although I would characterise that as a broader discussion of how to proceed overall," said Christopher Green, a senior adviser with the International Crisis Group, which researches conflict.

 

Given the importance he has attached to the weapons, and the money poured into their development, Kim will have to tread carefully to ensure any talk of abandoning the nuclear programme started by his grandfather and continued by his father wouldn't undermine his legitimacy at home, experts say.

 

To try to balance factions in his government, Kim Jong Un embraced a policy of "byungjin," or simultaneous military and economic development, after he came to power in 2011.

 

Since 2013, the pro-military factions have been ascendant, but a Trump summit could lend heft to arguments by officials who prefer to prioritise economic development, Green said.

 

A number of military authorities and other senior elites might be less receptive to denuclearisation.

 

"For them, it’s unthinkable to ensure regime security with conventional forces alone, so they could object to Kim’s decision and continue to argue for keeping the bombs," said Kim Hyung-suk.

 

'FOREBEARERS' TEACHING'

According to South Korean officials who met in Pyongyang, Kim Jong Un told them denuclearising the Korean peninsula was forebearers' teaching - a potential talking point if he does try to justify curtailing his much-vaunted nuclear programme.

 

Kim Jong Un's predecessors, grandfather Kim Il Sung and father Kim Jong Il, both publicly promised not to pursue nuclear weapons, but secretly continued to develop the programmes, culminating in the country's first nuclear test in 2006 under Kim Jong Il.

 

Even after that test, Kim Jong Il insisted in a 2007 summit with his South Korean counterpart that he didn't "have the intention to own nuclear weapons".

 

The history of failed negotiations with Pyongyang makes many observers, including former senior U.S. diplomat Evans Revere, sceptical the latest negotiations will be any different.

 

In past talks, North Korea had said it could consider giving up its arsenal if the United States removes its troops from South Korea and withdraws its so-called "nuclear umbrella" of deterrence from South Korea and Japan, a stance Washington has found unacceptable.

 

"Those of us who have negotiated with the North Koreans know what they mean (by denuclearisation)," Revere said.

 

"About the only thing that the North Korean leader might need to 'sell' to his people - and particularly to the military - is the idea of a 'freeze' on some elements of his programme."

 

(Additional reporting by Hyonhee Shin and Heekyong Yang in SEOUL. Editing by Lincoln Feast.)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-28

[Samui Bodoh]

17 minutes ago, webfact said:

Analysis: How does Kim tell North Korea he's giving up nuclear weapons?

 

A better question is;

 

"Why do people think Kim is going to give up his nuclear weapons?"

 

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

A better question is;

 

"Why do people think Kim is going to give up his nuclear weapons?"

 

Nobody thinks Kim is going to give up his nuclear weapons, he seems to have payed it pretty smart so far, why would anyone think he will  turn stupid all of a sudden, not to mention pretty dead?

If Trump and Kim are to both be successful, maintaining the status quo is the only option.

Perhaps a North and south federation?  

[Khun Han]

22 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

A better question is;

 

"Why do people think Kim is going to give up his nuclear weapons?"

 

 

And an even better question is: "Why on earth would Kim give up his nuclear weapons?" It would be political and personal suicide for him and his country to do so.

[Khun Han]

14 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Nobody thinks Kim is going to give up his nuclear weapons, he seems to have payed it pretty smart so far, why would anyone think he will  turn stupid all of a sudden, not to mention pretty dead?

If Trump and Kim are to both be successful, maintaining the status quo is the only option.

Perhaps a North and south federation?  

 

Some kind of semi-loose alliance has to be the way forward. But this won't do for the interests who only want capitulation from NK (the same interests that want Russia out of the way of their advance through Syria toward Iran).

[webfact]

China's Xi affirms friendship with North Korean leader, gets denuclearisation pledge

By Ben Blanchard and Joyce Lee

 

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping, in this still image taken from video released on March 28, 2018. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visited China from Sunday to Wednesday on an unofficial visit, China's state news agency Xinhua reported on Wednesday. CCTV via Reuters TV

 

BEIJING/SEOUL (Reuters) - China said on Wednesday it won a pledge from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to denuclearise the Korean peninsula during a meeting with President Xi Jinping, who pledged in return that China would uphold its friendship with its isolated neighbour.

 

Full story: https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1031081-chinas-xi-affirms-friendship-with-north-korean-leader-gets-denuclearisation-pledge/

[KeeperRik]

The problem Kim has is his own insecurity, if he is happy with the alliances he has with China and Russia then he can live under their Nuclear Umbrella and support. I think giving his people Food and work opportunities should be his priority whilst trying to integrate with the rest of the world and maybe unification of Korea, which his people would love him for!

[klauskunkel]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

How does Kim tell North Korea he's giving up nuclear weapons?

Well, he could tell his subjects that he ate them. A midnight snack.

[Anak Nakal]

Lie?

 

[HLover]

He starts by doing some sit ups, changing his nerdy hair style, gives up eating whatever crap made him look like a human bowling ball, then tells his nation of drones whatever he wants.

 

[Scott]

More troll posts removed.   It would appear that a few members would like to be given a suspension.  

[geriatrickid]

China has a vested interest in  having  NK get rid of its nukes. May I remind some of the testing facility  under the mountain that is close to collapse? In the event that it does, there will be a radioactive mess the likes that has not been seen since Chernobyl, but worse.

We all know that China shares a border with the North Koreans. It desires neither refugees nor radioactive  fallout. China doesn't need a nuclear armed  North Korea with its faulty missiles that could go wrong and end up exploding over Shanghai or elsewhere.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

And an even better question is: "Why on earth would Kim give up his nuclear weapons?" It would be political and personal suicide for him and his country to do so.

He doesn't have to say anything. No one is going to bring the subject up in public if he doesn't want it brought up.

[Morch]

33 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

China has a vested interest in  having  NK get rid of its nukes. May I remind some of the testing facility  under the mountain that is close to collapse? In the event that it does, there will be a radioactive mess the likes that has not been seen since Chernobyl, but worse.

We all know that China shares a border with the North Koreans. It desires neither refugees nor radioactive  fallout. China doesn't need a nuclear armed  North Korea with its faulty missiles that could go wrong and end up exploding over Shanghai or elsewhere.

 

And also, a non-nuclear NK would be much more dependent on the PRC, and so much easier for the PRC to control.

[StraightTalk]

China has valid concerns for having neighbors not influenced by American politics.

[Thaidream]

Kim knows full well that if he keeps his nuclear weapons the sanctions remain and even get tighter. He also knows full well that  if he denuclearizes- he gets the sanctions lifted; gets a Chinese guarantee for survival; gets a peace treaty with all former belligerents; and gets the US to most likely relocate its troops outside of the Korean Peninsula. He still maintains a vast military apparatus that can level Seoul; gets real economic growth; tourists pour in and his people love him. Plus he still has the technology to re establish a nuclear program if all of the above fails.

[billd766]

7 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

And an even better question is: "Why on earth would Kim give up his nuclear weapons?" It would be political and personal suicide for him and his country to do so.

 

Possibly because he now has a good friend now on his northern border backing him.

 

I don't think that DT or john Bolton would like to take China on especially as they also have nuclear weapons plus a large and effective armed forces.

[mike324]

The fact that Kim went to Xi first for talks with denuclearization is because China is NK's biggest trading partner. China will be the first to cut NK some slack and give them some economic breathing room, so far NK is suffering greatly from China's sanctions. Not only that China is NK's biggest ally and by meeting Xi first, Kim is using China to influence decisions made by the US later down the road.

 

Its also giving Kim more credibility that he just met with Xi and will meet Trump in the future. Boosting his appeal with his people, meeting the worlds two biggest powers back to back.

 

I suspect this is so that his people won't revolt / lose trust against him in the future even with denuclearization, and Kim is showing that he is making progress and will be seen by his people as a great leader.

[Srikcir]

9 hours ago, Lungstib said:

Exactly. Give some thought to the leaders who did give up the chase, Gaddafi and Saddam. Both accepted verbal deals with America that it would be a good idea. 

Add Ukraine that gave up its nuclear arsenal stockpiled by the USSR in exchange for an agreement with the UK and USA that, if afterwards it was attacked by Russia, UK and USA would defend Ukraine. Russia later attacked and neither the UK or USA came to Ukraine's defense to repel Russia.

[Jingthing]

He's dancing because he has to dance now.

Regime survival is all that matters to Kim.

But he's going to demand a lot from "trump" that "trump" isn't going to be willing to give.

So he can then blame "trump" for the breakdown in this, continue with nukes, and at the very least have China fully on his side, sanctions-wise. 

[Morch]

Wonder how this fits in....

 

North Korea Is Firing Up a Reactor. That Could Upset Trump’s Talks With Kim.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/27/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear.html

 

Quite a few angles here, and the US is probably not led by the best leader to address complex issues. All the more so with his new, belligerent, advisor - and a state department lacking in personnel and resources. Did they get around to appointing an ambassador in SK, even? (checked, nope).

[Scott]

A post from a questionable source and replies removed.

 

[Jingthing]

War is definitely a risk. Not new but if these talks are a disaster or don't happen a higher risk.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[mrwebb8825]

On 28/3/2561 at 5:00 PM, Srikcir said:

Add Ukraine that gave up its nuclear arsenal stockpiled by the USSR in exchange for an agreement with the UK and USA that, if afterwards it was attacked by Russia, UK and USA would defend Ukraine. Russia later attacked and neither the UK or USA came to Ukraine's defense to repel Russia.

Sadly true of past administrations but corrected under President Trump in the case of the Ukraine.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2017-12-23/us-officials-say-lethal-weapons-headed-to-ukraine

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-trump-weapons-ukraine-20171222-story.html