In surprise summit concession, Trump says he will halt Korea war games

By Steve Holland, Soyoung Kim and Jack Kim

 

U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un walk after lunch at the Capella Hotel on Sentosa island in Singapore June 12, 2018. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump made a stunning concession to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Tuesday about halting military exercises, pulling a surprise at a summit that baffled allies, military officials and lawmakers from his own Republican Party.

 

At a news conference after the historic meeting with Kim in Singapore, Trump announced he would halt what he called "very provocative" and expensive regular military exercises that the United States holds with South Korea.

 

That was sure to rattle close allies South Korea and Japan. North Korea has long sought an end to the war games.

 

The two leaders promised in a joint statement after their meeting to work towards the "denuclearisation" of the Korean Peninsula, and the United States promised its Cold War foe security guarantees. But they offered few specifics.

 

The summit, the first between a sitting U.S. president and a North Korean leader, was in stark contrast to a flurry of North Korean nuclear and missile tests and angry exchanges of insults between Trump and Kim last year that fuelled worries about war.

 

Noting past North Korean promises to denuclearise, many analysts cast doubt on how effective Trump had been at obtaining Washington's pre-summit goal of getting North Korea to undertake complete, verifiable and irreversible steps to scrap a nuclear arsenal that is advanced enough to threaten the United States.

 

Critics at home said the U.S. president had given away too much at a meeting that gave international standing to Kim. The North Korean leader is deeply isolated, his country accused by rights groups of widespread human rights abuses and under U.N. sanctions for its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.

 

If implemented, the halting of the joint military exercises would be one of the most controversial moves to come from the summit. The drills help keep U.S. forces at a state of readiness in one of the world's most tense flashpoints.

 

"We will be stopping the war games which will save us a tremendous amount of money, unless and until we see the future negotiation is not going along like it should. But we'll be saving a tremendous amount of money, plus I think it's very provocative," Trump said.

 

His announcement was a surprise even to President Moon.

 

Jae-in's government in Seoul, which worked in recent months to help bring about the Trump-Kim summit.

 

The presidential Blue House said it needed "to find out the precise meaning or intentions" of Trump's statement, while adding it was willing to "explore various measures to help the talks move forward more smoothly."

 

There was some confusion over precisely what military cooperation Trump had promised to halt.

 

U.S. Senator Cory Gardner told reporters that Vice President Mike Pence promised in a briefing for Republican senators that the Trump administration would "clarify what the president talked about" regarding joint military exercises.

 

"VP was very clear: regular readiness training and training exchanges will continue ... war games will not," Gardner later wrote on Twitter.

 

Pentagon officials were not immediately able to provide any details about Trump’s remarks about suspending drills, a step the U.S. military has long resisted.

 

A spokeswoman for U.S. military forces in Korea said it had not received any direction to cease joint military drills.

 

One South Korean official said he initially thought Trump had misspoken.

 

"I was shocked when he called the exercises 'provocative,' a very unlikely word to be used by a U.S. president," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because it was a politically sensitive issue.

 

Current and former U.S. defence officials expressed concern at the possibility the United States would unilaterally halt military exercises without an explicit concession from North Korea that lowers the threat from Pyongyang.

 

The U.S.-South Korean exercise calendar hits a high point every year with the Foal Eagle and Max Thunder drills, which both wrapped up last month.

 

'DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE'

The Republican chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker, said in a statement: "While I am glad the president and Kim Jong Un were able to meet, it is difficult to determine what of concrete nature has occurred."

 

Speaking about the military exercises, Corker told Reuters: “I don’t know if that’s an agreement or an ad hoc statement that was made. It wasn’t in the agreement and sometimes things are said and walked back after talking to people at the Pentagon and other places."

 

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican, called North Korea a "brutal regime" and urged Trump to continue "maximum economic pressure" as negotiations advance.

 

U.S. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer faulted Trump's agreement with Kim as short on details, saying the United States gave up "substantial leverage."

 

World stock markets were little changed on Tuesday, while the U.S. dollar rose slightly against an index of major currencies, as investors brushed aside the summit.

 

The two leaders smiled and shook hands at their meeting at the Capella hotel on Singapore's resort island of Sentosa, and Trump spoke in warm terms of Kim at his news conference afterward.

 

Just a few months ago, Kim was an international pariah accused of ordering the killing of his uncle, a half-brother and hundreds of officials suspected of disloyalty. Tens of thousands of North Koreans are imprisoned in labour camps.

 

The leaders' joint statement did not refer to human rights, although Trump said he had raised the issue with Kim, and he believed the North Korean leader wanted to "do the right thing".

 

Trump said he expected the denuclearisation process to start "very, very quickly" and it would be verified by "having a lot of people in North Korea".

 

He said Kim had announced that North Korea was destroying a major missile engine-testing site, but sanctions on North Korea would stay in place for now.

 

It was unclear if negotiations would lead to denuclearisation, or end with broken promises, as happened in the past, said Anthony Ruggiero, senior fellow at Washington's Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank.

 

"This looks like a restatement of where we left negotiations more than 10 years ago and not a major step forward," he said.

But a note of optimism was struck by Christine Ahn, international coordinator for a group called WomenCrossDMZ.

 

While acknowledging Trump faced criticism for ceding to much to Kim, Ahn said: "We have stopped the potential for a nuclear war. Can't we just celebrate for a moment that peace is in the air?"

 

DENUCLEARISATION

The joint statement said Trump "committed to provide security guarantees" to North Korea and Kim "reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula".

 

North Korea has long rejected unilateral nuclear disarmament, instead referring to the denuclearisation of the peninsula. That has always been interpreted as a call for the United States to remove its "nuclear umbrella" protecting South Korea and Japan.

 

Kim said after the summit he and Trump had "decided to leave the past behind. The world will see a major change."

 

Trump's meeting with Kim followed days of him berating traditional U.S. allies such as Canada and Germany in trade disputes. He left a Group of Seven summit in Canada early last weekend, and described host Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as "very dishonest and weak."

 

The joint statement by Trump and Kim made no mention of the sanctions on North Korea and there was no reference to formally ending the 1950-53 Korean War, which killed millions of people and ended in a truce.

 

But it said the two sides had agreed to recover the remains of prisoners of war and soldiers missing in action, so they could be repatriated.

 

Daniel Russel, formerly the State Department's top Asia diplomat under the Obama administration, said the absence of any reference to the North's ballistic missiles was "glaring."

 

"Trading our defence of South Korea for a promise is a lopsided deal that past presidents could have made but passed on," he said.

Trump said China, North Korea's main ally, would welcome the progress he and Kim had made.

 

Li Nan, senior researcher at Pangoal, a Beijing-based Chinese public policy think tank, said the meeting had only symbolic significance.

 

"There is no concrete detail on the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and the provision of security guarantees by the United States," Li said. "It is too early to call it a turning point in North Korea-U.S. relations."

 

(Reporting by Steve Holland, Soyoung Kim and Jack Kim; Additional reporting by Dewey Sim, Aradhana Aravindan, Himani Sarkar, Miral Fahmy, John Geddie, Joyce Lee, Grace Lee, Matt Spetalnick and David Brunnstrom in Singapore, Christine Kim in Seoul and Phil Stewart, Doina Chiacu, Patricia Zengerle and Richard Cowan in Washington; Writing by Alistair Bell and Warren Strobel; Editing by Frances Kerry and Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-06-13

US military (and with that diplomatic) power in East Asia diminished.

 

China and NK will be delighted.

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

US military (and with that diplomatic) power in East Asia diminished.

 

China and NK will be delighted.

 

While I think Trump's comments with regard to military exercises may have been off the cuff I'm pretty certain the actual concession , if it happens, will have been vetted by both the State and Defense departments.

^ for sure. It’s about time Sth Korea and Japan pony up their own defence resources and capabilities. The days of relying on the US to be the world’s cop, watchdog, protector are over.

4 minutes ago, aircooledflat4 said:

^ for sure. It’s about time Sth Korea and Japan pony up their own defence resources and capabilities. The days of relying on the US to be the world’s cop, watchdog, protector are over.

Ah, yes, so you want the US to move away from Korea. Please do so.

Why is the US even talking to NK?

Because we need a peace deal, above all else. Do whatever it takes to get this guy out from the cold and onside. It’s a start. Kudos to Sth Korea for doing the groundwork for this meeting. 

18 minutes ago, aircooledflat4 said:

^ for sure. It’s about time Sth Korea and Japan pony up their own defence resources and capabilities. The days of relying on the US to be the world’s cop, watchdog, protector are over.

Get a grip. The US is in NE Asia to serve its own interests - and no one else’s. 

 

Post WW2 this was the control the peace and stop a resurgent militaristic Japan.

 

During the Cold War it was to stop the spread of communist influence. 

 

Today it is to push against the influence of China and Russia against its own strategic interests. 

 

The hillbilly clap trap about America as a reluctant world cop is popularist   fodder to feed to the feeble minded. 

8 minutes ago, samran said:

Get a grip. The US is in NE Asia to serve its own interests - and no one else’s. 

 

Post WW2 this was the control the peace and stop a resurgent militaristic Japan.

 

During the Cold War it was to stop the spread of communist influence. 

 

Today it is to push against the influence of China and Russia against its own strategic interests. 

 

The hillbilly clap trap about America as a reluctant world cop is popularist   fodder to feed to the feeble minded. 

 

That's all true, but it doesn't mean that countries with which we have mutual defense treaties shouldn't pay their fair share. Few, if any, do.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

US military (and with that diplomatic) power in East Asia diminished.

 

China and NK will be delighted.

That's why China is removing its missiles from Wood Island? 

Trump played the summit perfectly. 

"Report reveals Trump’s idea to stop ‘war games’ around North Korea may have come from Putin. " Trump had an idea about how to counter the nuclear threat posed by North Korea, which he got after speaking to Russian President Vladimir Putin (conversation Trump had with Putin at the G-20 summit last summer.),” The Journal wrote of the plan.If the U.S. stopped joint military exercises with the South Koreans, it could help moderate Kim Jong Un’s behavior,” " 

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/06/report-reveals-trumps-idea-stop-war-games-around-north-korea-may-come-putin/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/talking-to-trump-a-how-to-guide-1516303402

Of course they should stop these war games. If you really want peace, don't provoke.

 

Looks though he only got some vague promises in return.

 

But ending these exercises is positive imo.

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

That's why China is removing its missiles from Wood Island? 

Trump played the summit perfectly. 

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/11/asia/south-china-sea-woody-island-missiles-intl/index.html

 

"A series of Chinese missile systems have reappeared on a disputed island in the South China Sea, days after satellite imagery appeared to show they had been removed."

 

China seems to got the correct message from the summit results.

All i know is that i fell in love with the Female NK Interpreter who was sitting beside Trump at the conference table...

Wow, what a stunner....?

It should be noted that the talks and decisions were discussed and settled well before Trump and Kim even met face to face. 

This is pretty much the same concession Trump got in return for the US to move the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem:  absolutely nothing. 

 

In the end Trump either gave up concessions (which probably don't really change that much) for nothing in return, or the US will fail to carry through on random impromptu promises he made. 

 

This is what happens when you let a reality TV star / crooked and inept businessman negotiate with foreign leaders.

7 minutes ago, honu said:

This is pretty much the same concession Trump got in return for the US to move the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem:  absolutely nothing. 

 

In the end Trump either gave up concessions (which probably don't really change that much) for nothing in return, or the US will fail to carry through on random impromptu promises he made. 

 

This is what happens when you let a reality TV star / crooked and inept businessman negotiate with foreign leaders.

Trump plays the card that opponents hope for, not the one they expect. He did it already with TPP, to China's pleasure,  Trump now invites countries like Iran (before any negotiation) and Japan (to ensure its independence) to acquire nuclear weapons as quickly as possible. 

2 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

That's all true, but it doesn't mean that countries with which we have mutual defense treaties shouldn't pay their fair share. Few, if any, do.

The US gets its pound(s) of flesh in other ways. UN votes, arms purchases, diplomatic influence. Plenty of countries follow the US lead despite their own better instincts. 

 

Again, the ‘fair share’ stuff is hyperbole designed for the people who think you can see Russia from Sarah Palins front porch. 

15 minutes ago, honu said:

This is pretty much the same concession Trump got in return for the US to move the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem:  absolutely nothing. 

 

In the end Trump either gave up concessions (which probably don't really change that much) for nothing in return, or the US will fail to carry through on random impromptu promises he made. 

 

This is what happens when you let a reality TV star / crooked and inept businessman negotiate with foreign leaders.

Do you really not know why the embassy was moved?  Do some research.  Not this topic or up to me to inform you. 

2 minutes ago, samran said:

The US gets its pound(s) of flesh in other ways. UN votes, arms purchases, diplomatic influence. Plenty of countries follow the US lead despite their own better instincts. 

 

Again, the ‘fair share’ stuff is hyperbole designed for the people who think you can see Russia from Sarah Palins front porch. 

I don't think so.  What does the USA get from Germany? 

21 minutes ago, honu said:

This is pretty much the same concession Trump got in return for the US to move the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem:  absolutely nothing. 

 

In the end Trump either gave up concessions (which probably don't really change that much) for nothing in return, or the US will fail to carry through on random impromptu promises he made. 

 

This is what happens when you let a reality TV star / crooked and inept businessman negotiate with foreign leaders.

I’ve met a couple of narcissists in my life and trump is certainly one. 

 

What does he get out of this? The echo chamber telling him how wonderful he is, feeding the attention he craves. Screw US influence...

5 minutes ago, Rarebear said:

I don't think so.  What does the USA get from Germany? 

It gets to station it’s forces on German soil for starters. This extends the US sphere of influence up to the balitics. Not bad for a country wedged between the Pacifc and the Atlantic. 

2 minutes ago, samran said:

It gets to station it’s forces on German soil for starters. 

That's a benefit for Germany not the USA. 

9 minutes ago, Rarebear said:

That's a benefit for Germany not the USA. 

Keep telling yourself that.

 

I mean this is a country that at one stage controlled half of Europe militarily and still does economically. You think they don’t have the capabilities to look after themselves if they really want to? 

 

No the US of A gets what it wants out of this relationship just fine. 

3 hours ago, aircooledflat4 said:

^ for sure. It’s about time Sth Korea and Japan pony up their own defence resources and capabilities. The days of relying on the US to be the world’s cop, watchdog, protector are over.

Good, get your troops out of every foreign base and fight your oil wars on your own.

2 minutes ago, samran said:

Keep telling yourself that.

 

I mean this is a country that at one stage controlled half of Europe militarily and still does economically. You think they don’t have the capabilities to look after themselves if they really want to? 

 

No the US of A gets what it wants out of this relationship just fine. 

Of course they do.  But previous US administrations paid for it so Germany could tax it's own citizens less. 

 

3 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Good, get your troops out of every foreign base and fight your oil wars on your own.

USA has plenty of oil.  I think most Americans will agree not to spend money on some loony cause in far away places.  Better to give them MacDonald's and Trump hotels and let the Chinese tourists support the economies. 

This was a win-win-win agreement.

 

China who masterminded the agreement, had N. Korea destroy its nuclear testing site on its border which was an environmental disaster.  They also got the U.S. to halt combined military exercises which it perceived as a threat.

 

Kim got a photo-op and propoganda for his regime that will last for years.

 

Trump got the media fawning over a fabricated "historic" meeting knocking the Russia-Stormy-Cohen-Manafort headlines out for a few days.  Trump probably also got the $500 million investment from China in the Trump Indonesian resort, which was blocked when Congress put the kibash on his ZTE bailout.

Seems that some people are going to miss having NK as an enemy. One might suppose that is simple-minded paranoia and insecurity, but there's the creeping sense that they have got high all these years on the thrill of nuclear threat and sense of moral superiority that the conflict they manufactured for that purpose gave them. They are dangerous fools and warmongers.

 

NK developed nukes because it felt threatened. Remove the threat and you won't hear a peep out of them, especially now that their nuclear programme is finished. Provoke if you want conflict, don't if you want peace. It's that simple. Those of us with a grasp of psychology have been saying for years that insecurity is the only reason behind NK aggression. War games are fatal for peace and are therefore bad for security. Here is an opportunity not to go back to square one.

8 minutes ago, Rarebear said:

Of course they do.  But previous US administrations paid for it so Germany could tax it's own citizens less. 

 

Well that’s one of the things you get to do if you win a war. You get to control the peace and dictate who gets to be the benevolent overlord. 

 

Similar to Japan, the US dictated terms to only allow token military’s to remain. 

 

Im sure the Germans would be happy to start reinvesting 5-7% of GDP into arming themselves. Would the US be happy with the loss of diplomatic and military clout as a result? Probably not. 

 

The problem as as I see it is that trump wants his cake and to eat it to. As the largest funder of NATO you get the largest say.

 

Now he wants the countries who are members to stump up more of the money themselves. 

 

Fine - they will say. But now we have more of a collective say as a result. 

 

The US however doesn’t like that answer. 

2 minutes ago, samran said:

Well that’s one of the things you get to do if you win a war. You get to control the peace and dictate who gets to be the benevolent overlord. 

 

Similar to Japan, the US dictated terms to only allow token military’s to remain. 

 

Im sure the Germans would be happy to start reinvesting 5-7% of GDP into arming themselves. Would the US be happy with the loss of diplomatic and military clout as a result? Probably not. 

Not.  Germany won't pay the bills owed.  They won't meet their little 2% goal.  It is like pulling teeth.  Read a bit about how Trump wants Germany to start paying Nato bills.  USA gets nothing but aggravation and lopsided balance of payments from Germany.   What do you think Trump has been on about for the past year. 

3 minutes ago, Rarebear said:

Not.  Germany won't pay the bills owed.  They won't meet their little 2% goal.  It is like pulling teeth.  Read a bit about how Trump wants Germany to start paying Nato bills.  USA gets nothing but aggravation and lopsided balance of payments from Germany.   What do you think Trump has been on about for the past year. 

Your last sentence is the only thing I agree with: what the #@$% has he been on about!?

?