And Back to Korea Again

Well, well.  Things are moving a lot faster than I anticipated.  I had assumed that we and the North Koreans would hold a summit amid euphoria and wildly unrealistic expectations and issue some sort of joint communique papering over differences that we could interpret to mean that the North Koreans would give up all nuclear weapons and the North Koreans could interpret as freezing their existing program.  Disillusionment would set in once we realized just how far apart the sides truly were.  But no need to despair; a freeze of North Korea's nuclear program and reduction of tensions on the Korean peninsula would be well worth doing.

What I did not expect was the disillusionment would set in before we even held the summit.  But apparently the North Koreans decided that the euphoria was getting badly out of hand can could use a dash of cold water. They have made clear they are not giving up their nukes.  No big surprise there.  In threatening to cancel the summit over military maneuvers they knew about when the summit was announced, they are also demonstrating the sort of incredibly arrogant behavior that has made them such a difficult negotiating partner for all previous Presidents. 

So now what?  Clearly the North Koreans are testing us.  How to we respond.  I would say, don't cancel or scale by the military exercises.  The North Koreans knew about those and agreed to the summit despite them.  Canceling pre-planned exercises looks very much like being pushed around.  Don't fire John Bolton.  Much as I loath the guy, I loath the idea of North Koreans meddling in our government even more.  But do muzzle him. 

And above all, do recognize that lowering tensions is well worth doing even if it does not mean total nuclear disarmament by North Korea.  I highly recommend this column by David Clapper pointing out why insisting that we will not negotiate until the other side surrenders is a futile policy, and why reducing tensions will have to precede, not follow, any effort at nuclear disarmament.*  Clapper faults Obama for sticking to this longstanding policy, but can you imagine the outcry if he had abandoned it. General hysteria would have broken out warning that any negotiations before the other side surrenders is appeasement, and that diplomacy failed at Munich and must never be attempted again.  Even Trump has been running into that buzz saw, for Pete's sake.  And, of course, if John Kerry had achieved anything, Trump would be going out of his way to wreck it.


*One can certainly argue that the Obama Administration made a serious mistake in not seeking to reduce tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran before entering into a nuclear agreement.  Although it is far from clear that any of the parties would have been willing to reduce tensions regardless.