Putting the Trump/Kim joint statement in perspective
Donald J. Trump and Kim Jong-un signed a joint statement following their five hour meeting in Singapore. You can read the text of the statement in full here.
What does it actually commit to? Nothing new.
What does it not do? Provide specifics. Address the on-going human rights violations inside of the ironically named Democratic People's Republic of Korea (there's no shred of democracy there).
But wait, it provides for the repatriation of POW/MIA remains. That's new. Uh, no it isn't. Between 1996 and 2005, joint US/NK recovery teams were able to locate and return over 200 sets of remains. Then the recovery efforts ended. The North Korean government (then headed by Kim Jong-Il) would no longer guarantee the safety of US personnel in North Korea; and critics of the program said the North Korean government was extorting cash from the US in what was described as "bones for bucks." The recovery effort began again in 2011 and then stopped in 2016.
But wait, the North Koreans demolished their nuclear test site to reduce tensions. Uh no, not really. They destroyed it because to continue using it would risk collapsing the mountain where it was located; releasing radioactive material into the air. There are reports that one of the tunnels at the site collapsed before the "official" demolition, killing over 100 workers.
But wait, they agreed that the DPRK would commit to work toward the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Uh, they'd agreed to that before. In 1985 when they acceded to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, agreeing to conclude a safeguards agreement within 18 months. They failed to complete the agreement. In 1992 when both North and South Korea signed the South-North Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. It contained a provision where both nations committed to not test nuclear weapons.
A quarter of a century later, and nothing has changed. They promise to do one thing and then later do another. Will this time be different? Possibly. But the U.S. made a big concession. Donald Trump agreed to halt joint US/South Korea military readiness exercises. That came as a big surprise to the militaries of both nations, who weren't looped in on this shift in policy.
Why are those exercises necessary? Isn't the U.S. the most powerful military on the planet? Seoul, the capital city of South Korea is only 35 miles away from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). Conversely, Pyongyang is over 120 miles from the DMZ. The U.S. had less than 25,000 combat troops in South Korea. Less than 100 fighter/attack jets. The North Korean Army is nearly twice the size of the South Korean Army in terms of combat-ready troops in active service. Only the threat of an immediate US reaction-force's arrival on the scene keeps the South safe.
Over 1,500 years ago a Roman by the name of Vegetius wrote these words. "Si vis pacem, para bellum." That translates as "If you want peace, prepare for war." It is as true today as it was then. Those military training exercises are crucial to maintaining the highest level of readiness.
What Trump should have done was promise to cancel those joint exercises, as long as progress was being made on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. As long as the DPRK continued to act in good faith. As long as they agreed to begin addressing the issues of human rights within their borders.
Donald Trump did another thing that I find disconcerting. He held a bilateral summit with the leader of a nation whose economy is smaller than those of the nations of Nepal and Gabon; in the wake of sowing major discord with our strongest allies. He launched a trial balloon about readmitting Russia to the G-7 without regard to why they were booted out in the first place. He gave compliments to a despot while dissing the leader of our neighbor to the north.
There is some credit to be given to Donald Trump, IF, this summit leads to more than a meaningless statement. The jury will be out on that for a long time.
What does it actually commit to? Nothing new.
What does it not do? Provide specifics. Address the on-going human rights violations inside of the ironically named Democratic People's Republic of Korea (there's no shred of democracy there).
But wait, it provides for the repatriation of POW/MIA remains. That's new. Uh, no it isn't. Between 1996 and 2005, joint US/NK recovery teams were able to locate and return over 200 sets of remains. Then the recovery efforts ended. The North Korean government (then headed by Kim Jong-Il) would no longer guarantee the safety of US personnel in North Korea; and critics of the program said the North Korean government was extorting cash from the US in what was described as "bones for bucks." The recovery effort began again in 2011 and then stopped in 2016.
But wait, the North Koreans demolished their nuclear test site to reduce tensions. Uh no, not really. They destroyed it because to continue using it would risk collapsing the mountain where it was located; releasing radioactive material into the air. There are reports that one of the tunnels at the site collapsed before the "official" demolition, killing over 100 workers.
But wait, they agreed that the DPRK would commit to work toward the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Uh, they'd agreed to that before. In 1985 when they acceded to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, agreeing to conclude a safeguards agreement within 18 months. They failed to complete the agreement. In 1992 when both North and South Korea signed the South-North Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. It contained a provision where both nations committed to not test nuclear weapons.
A quarter of a century later, and nothing has changed. They promise to do one thing and then later do another. Will this time be different? Possibly. But the U.S. made a big concession. Donald Trump agreed to halt joint US/South Korea military readiness exercises. That came as a big surprise to the militaries of both nations, who weren't looped in on this shift in policy.
Why are those exercises necessary? Isn't the U.S. the most powerful military on the planet? Seoul, the capital city of South Korea is only 35 miles away from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). Conversely, Pyongyang is over 120 miles from the DMZ. The U.S. had less than 25,000 combat troops in South Korea. Less than 100 fighter/attack jets. The North Korean Army is nearly twice the size of the South Korean Army in terms of combat-ready troops in active service. Only the threat of an immediate US reaction-force's arrival on the scene keeps the South safe.
Over 1,500 years ago a Roman by the name of Vegetius wrote these words. "Si vis pacem, para bellum." That translates as "If you want peace, prepare for war." It is as true today as it was then. Those military training exercises are crucial to maintaining the highest level of readiness.
What Trump should have done was promise to cancel those joint exercises, as long as progress was being made on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. As long as the DPRK continued to act in good faith. As long as they agreed to begin addressing the issues of human rights within their borders.
Donald Trump did another thing that I find disconcerting. He held a bilateral summit with the leader of a nation whose economy is smaller than those of the nations of Nepal and Gabon; in the wake of sowing major discord with our strongest allies. He launched a trial balloon about readmitting Russia to the G-7 without regard to why they were booted out in the first place. He gave compliments to a despot while dissing the leader of our neighbor to the north.
There is some credit to be given to Donald Trump, IF, this summit leads to more than a meaningless statement. The jury will be out on that for a long time.
posted by me at 10:40 AM
<< Home