Monday, December 2, 2019
Ballhawk
Here is a good summary from FOREIGN AFFAIRS on the history and current options in dealing with Kim.  Knowing Trump as we do, there is risk he will enter a summit meeting (if it does occur) not adequately prepared.  There is also risk that failure of the conference could lead to increased risk of a hot war.  
But these authors think we can effectively deter North Korea by means of upgrading our defense capabilities in the area, including those in Japan, along with marshaling region-wide economic and diplomatic pressure against the North Korean regime, all intended to gradually force concessions by Kim and avoid a sudden outbreak of war.  A shooting war with North Korea would put at risk the 230,000 Americans now located in South Korea. 
We can see in this article that the Trump-Kim meeting will have been preceded by four factors, test firings of missiles by North Korea, the talks between Kim and the leader of South Korea, even if that detente was only superficial, an exchange of boasts and insults between Trump and Kim, and the devastating effects of sanctions on an North Korean economy that was already starved and weak.   Coercive regional cooperation, bulking our tactical military response capabilities, and sustained economic pressure from our side and the UN constitute an approach that could work to avoid nuclear war in the region according to these authors. 






https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/north-korea/2018-04-01/right-way-coerce-north-korea?cid=nlc-fa_fatoday-20180528
Quote 0 0
Delta Flight
Ballhawk wrote:
Here is a good summary from FOREIGN AFFAIRS on the history and current options in dealing with Kim.  Knowing Trump as we do, there is risk he will enter a summit meeting (if it does occur) not adequately prepared.  There is also risk that failure of the conference could lead to increased risk of a hot war.  
But these authors think we can effectively deter North Korea by means of upgrading our defense capabilities in the area, including those in Japan, along with marshaling region-wide economic and diplomatic pressure against the North Korean regime, all intended to gradually force concessions by Kim and avoid a sudden outbreak of war.  A shooting war with North Korea would put at risk the 230,000 Americans now located in South Korea. 
We can see in this article that the Trump-Kim meeting will have been preceded by four factors, test firings of missiles by North Korea, the talks between Kim and the leader of South Korea, even if that detente was only superficial, an exchange of boasts and insults between Trump and Kim, and the devastating effects of sanctions on an North Korean economy that was already starved and weak.   Coercive regional cooperation, bulking our tactical military response capabilities, and sustained economic pressure from our side and the UN constitute an approach that could work to avoid nuclear war in the region according to these authors. 






https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/north-korea/2018-04-01/right-way-coerce-north-korea?cid=nlc-fa_fatoday-20180528



Trump needs to compromise if he intends to get anywhere. His way or the highway will not work here! IMO
Any landing you walk away from is great.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
We hold more cards than Kim.  His regime has been economically crippled.  The UN, Japan, and South Korea are on our side.  And China would clearly wish to avoid nuclear explosions so near to them.  Perhaps some compromise by us will be used to reach a settlement and an easing of tensions.  But we need to make Kim compromise much more than we do.  He is the one threatening nuclear war and threatening his neighbors in the region.  The risk that concerns me is that Trump and his inexperienced foreign policy advisers will screw up the negotiations due to incompetence or due to impulsiveness by Trump.  
Quote 0 0
Delta Flight
Ballhawk wrote:
We hold more cards than Kim.  His regime has been economically crippled.  The UN, Japan, and South Korea are on our side.  And China would clearly wish to avoid nuclear explosions so near to them.  Perhaps some compromise by us will be used to reach a settlement and an easing of tensions.  But we need to make Kim compromise much more than we do.  He is the one threatening nuclear war and threatening his neighbors in the region.  The risk that concerns me is that Trump and his inexperienced foreign policy advisers will screw up the negotiations due to incompetence or due to impulsiveness by Trump.  


I see that you saw the point I had made. Negotiations are bilateral, not unilateral!
Any landing you walk away from is great.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
The ideal outcome for us would be to obtain a commitment from North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons production and destroy all existing nukes, in combination with a plan to allow comprehensive outside inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency without advance notice of inspections.  In exchange for such a comprehensive and verifiable elimination of nukes by North Korea, we and others could sequentially ease sanctions and eventually admit them into international commerce for the purpose of improving their living standards and establishing them as peaceful participants in the community of nations.  It could entail some types of aid from us and others to encourage cooperation and internal development.  This outcome would be the best for all parties but is, at best, a long shot I think.  A major obstacle is Trump himself, a president lacking in vision, lacking in compassion, and lacking in understanding of the value of harmonious relations with other nations.  We are led by a bungling, insecure, and unschooled buffoon more attuned to self-aggrandizement than to real progress toward world peace.  On the other side is Kim who inherited rather than earned his title, leader of a backward nation immersed in the cult of personality rather than democracy, a nation currently suffering shortages of necessities.  It should be possible to achieve a diplomatic solution of our differences with North Korea but their totalitarianism and a brainwashed population make meaningful detente unlikely in the near term.  
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Ballhawk and Delta Flight I missed this exchange. I have learned much from you both in this area and agree of course about the desired outcome.
Quote 0 0