11 ms·

What changed that North Korea would be serious this time? I can't think of much. On the contrary, they seem stronger. Maybe they feel they have enough to negoti

• empath75 9y ago
  Combination of trump’s unpredictability, being able to negotiate from a position of strength and a South Korean leader who wants to pursue peace.
• asfasgasg 9y ago
  A possibly highly irrational US president in a world where other US ground conflicts are winding down? I wonder this too. I expect we won't really know until we have a decade or two of hindsight to try to understand.
  • fahadkhan 9y ago
    Let's hope Trump weakening the US politically and economically plays out well for the world.
    • smhost 9y ago
      It won't, because America has a habit of doing American things whenever it has too much economic anxiety.
      • cvwright 9y ago
        What are these "American things" that we do when we have economic anxiety? Electing our first black president after the great financial crisis? Bailing Europe out of WW2 after the depression?
    • rdtsc 9y ago
      > Let's hope Trump weakening the US politically and economically plays out well for the world. Well even CNN gave him credit for getting the two Koreas to talk and possibly end the 70 year old war: https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/world/korea-summit-kang-kyung-wha-amanpour-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/world/korea-summit-kang-kyung... "Clearly, credit goes to President Trump," Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one." So in this case political "weakness" does seem to play well for the world?
  • ropeadopepope 9y ago
    Is it possible he's not highly irrational at all and you're projecting your own fears onto him?
    • nlh 9y ago
      It is possible, but extremely unlikely given the evidence.
      • cvwright 9y ago
        They said the same thing about Reagan, and he brought down the Soviets in a similar way. It seems that no amount of evidence is enough for some people.
        • bjourne 9y ago
          Reagan didn't: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/lets-please-stop-crediting-ronald-reagan-for-the-fall-of-the-berlin-wall/262647/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/le... The SU was brought down by Gorbachev, economic stagnation, the Afghan war and alcoholism -- not Reagan.
        • Clubber 9y ago
          Ya Reagan just took credit for it. They took down the wall 2 years after his "tear down this wall speech." It's a myth.
        • paulie_a 9y ago
          Reagan didn't. The Soviet Union crashed their own empire. This myth of him being a fiscal conservative while outspending the ussr on misguided military programs is something that needs to go away.
      • ConceptJunkie 9y ago
        If you ignore his tweeting, which frankly, is embarrassing more than it's informative, and get your news from somewhere other than CNN, you might realize that Trump's actually getting a lot of good stuff done.
  • nailer 9y ago
    Trump confronted Kim, which was different, whether you think that was rational or not really depends on whether you think that was dangerous or stupid or a reasonable response to someone threatening the US.
  • rdtsc 9y ago
    Irrational behavior from world leaders can be effective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory Not saying this is going on necessary, but from the game theoretic point of view it makes sense.
    • carapace 9y ago
      M.A.D. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
    • ForRealsies 9y ago
      aka How North Korean leaders have acted for self-preservation. Act crazy, and people respect you. Trump's crazy tweets are incredibly persuasive in this realm.
    • stcredzero 9y ago
      Trump has been talking to Kissinger quite a bit.
• JulianMorrison 9y ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/26/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-collapse-may-be-out-of-action-china https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/26/north-korea-nu... They may have suddenly lost the ability to use their regular test site due to collapse.
  • mulletbum 9y ago
    I keep seeing that people think a test site collapse caused this, but if that was the case it isn't like they were going to suddenly be invaded. I think if anything, something internally was to cause this negotiation of peace.
    • findyoucef 9y ago
      I think Kim is paranoid and scared. Maybe someone convinced him that he's the next Saddam, so he's getting ahead of it to avoid the same fate?
      • astine 9y ago
        It's impossible to know for certain, but perhaps having invested so much in nuclear weapons and finding that it only made the US more belligerent, they realized that they had to shift their strategy? Or maybe they've been waiting for the opportune moment to extend the olive branch? Become a nuclear power so that they could negotiate from a position of power and get better terms?
        • pishpash 9y ago
          It's not that complicated. To get the best concessions you come with biggest chips of your own to trade. Even if NK's intention was to negotiate from day one, they would have gone for nuclear weapons first, given that prior negotiations did not net them satisfactory concessions. What's changed is that they believe they have big enough chips now and Trump is high-variance enough that the gamble is worth it.
      • zipwitch 9y ago
• pavlov 9y ago
  Nazis were a special case. Most of the time those who served a tyrannical government get to go on with their lives and adapt to the circumstances. For example, Russia’s current ersatz Tsar is a former Soviet KGB agent. The NK leadership could be envisioning a state like Russia with a market economy and many theoretical freedoms, but practically controlled by a mob-like oligarchy that entwines personal and military interests.
  • soperj 9y ago
    Yep, even in WW2. Japanese committed equally gross atrocities. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731 The Americans granted them immunity.
    • astine 9y ago
      Unit 731 were granted immunity because the Americans wanted access to the research which was apparently rigorous and useful. There were Nazi scientists who got similar treatment (Operation Paperclip). A better comparison would be with the Japanese and German political leadership. Japanese leaders such a Tojo and others were executed for war crimes.
  • stcredzero 9y ago
    practically controlled by a mob-like oligarchy that entwines personal and military interests Don't forget industrial. Pretty much the slowly improving state of humanity since the mid 1800's. The US powers that be had a stranglehold on the media since the 1980's. It's just that the disruption in the media industry has finally started showing the cracks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
• sykh 9y ago
  I think it is completely because of Trump. He is unpredictable. He is in charge of a nation with the capability to carry out his threats. He talked to North Korea in the sort of bombastic way they talked to the U.S. for decades. This was a sudden change for the U.S. and certainly was unnerving to North Korea. I think North Korea must be quite weak too. They don’t appear stronger to me but I’m no expert on the matter. I wonder how much longer that regime can maintain power. It’s lasted a lot longer than I thought it would be able to so there must be a high level of resiliency in terms of preventing rebellion and regime collapse.
  • saiya-jin 9y ago
    You overestimate the image that clown has outside US. Nobody gives a fk about his emotional ego swings, everybody just patiently waits till he disappears in a same way Bush jr was perceived. Also, you completely overestimate US president's powers - he is a bit bigger and more powerful puppet than most presidents out there, but he is still at mercy of truly powerful people in government and outside (ie Murdoch).
    • sykh 9y ago
      Perhaps you should reevaluate things. It appears your strong, anti-Trump feelings may be clouding your judgment. Trump is a terrible President. He is an emotionally insecure person. He is consumed with a fear of narcissistic injury. He lies constantly. He is a terrible human being. But he is not always wrong. There have been benefits due to his presidency.
      • dawnerd 9y ago
        Such as?
        • sykh 9y ago
          In what follows I might be wrong on everything. It's just my opinion and I'm not an expert in these matters. The broader issue to me is the seeming inability of people to see any benefits from those in power with politics we don't share. We had 8 years of idiots saying Obama was a muslim and that he did nothing good. I don't want to be like those idiots. I want to try to evaluate things on their own merits. Is it really feasible to think that there is absolutely nothing positive in what Trump has done? I think it is borderline fanaticism to think in such a way. Positives of Trump: Apparent North Korean desire to make peace. Nato countries starting to realize that they can't forever rely on America to disproportionately defend them. Same for Japan. This may lead to the U.S. being able/willing to cut back on defense spending at some time in the future. Trump's rhetoric on trade deals seem like they may end up generating results in the form of cracking down on abuses of the system. Other countries are realizing the U.S. is not as stable as it once seemed and the over reliance on the Pax Americana may come to an end. I think this is a good thing. By proposing major cuts to non-defense related federal programs there's a possibility that power will shift back toward states. Northern and west coast states largely prop up the southern states and Republican leaning states. There's going to be a shift in outlook on the issue of states rights if Mississippi, for instance, realizes that they may not be able to rely on federal funds to prop it up. In the coming years we'll see more left leaning people start using "states rights" as justification for policies and right leaning people will start shifting toward more federal power. The wealthy states ought to be advocating for decentralization of federal power since too much of their money goes toward the backwards states. I think that is a good thing.
• pjc50 9y ago
  > On the contrary, they seem stronger. I think this is it. After all this time, they were never going to surrender; it has to be something that can be pitched as a voluntary agreement between equals that doesn't compromise NK sovereignty. It can only be "the end of the beginning". The war isn't even formally over yet. I wouldn't expect elections in Kim's lifetime, but perhaps he can become merely an ordinary dictator like Turkmenistan.
  • Mtinie 9y ago
    > [...]something that can be pitched as a voluntary agreement between equals[...] This is true in most negotiations, but something we tend to forget. Forced acceptance of an ultimatum when one party is at a significant disadvantage is the perfect environment to breed subversion and partisan resistance. The stakes may differ, but it fits human nature whether in matters of global politics or at a personal level, for instance, negotiating the scope of the next software release.
• major505 9y ago
  With all the nukes and missiles, Kim pressed for better terms. The end of war, os innevitable, this year, or years to come, and he knows he can win this war. But at least he can go down with more in his pockets.
  • viraptor 9y ago
    On the other hand there's this: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-43894394 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-43894394 They'll be out of the test grounds for a while. And it's not like their launches went great.
• 6d6b73 9y ago
  What changed? Nothing.. China is slowly but steadily working on its plan to push the US as far away from their borders as possible. Next step Afganistan or Taiwan.
• lmm 9y ago
  > I can't get past that on a personal level, the decision-makers, in particular Kim Jong Un's family, are responsible for many people's suffering and deaths, which I would think would make them fear too much freedom among the survivors. People hunted Nazis for generations. Wouldn't the North Korean decision-makers fear being hunted? My own background is Ireland, where the peace deal included an amnesty that has largely been respected. People from the same organisations that killed and tortured now walk the corridors of power joking with each other about who killed who's cousins; plenty of citizens aren't too happy about that, but twenty years of peace beats the alternatives.
  • hyperbovine 9y ago
    There was blood on everybody's hands in Ireland though. Hard to make the same case for N. Korea.
    • fasj82 9y ago
      Don't forget about the sanctions.
    • umanwizard 9y ago
      Everyone? I’m pretty sure most people (from both ethnic groups or religions or whatever you want to call them) were civilians...
      • hyperbovine 9y ago
        Everyone who participated in the conflict, yes. The IRA and UDA/UFF were both unquestionably guilty of committing atrocities during the Troubles. The North Korean situation is much different -- one-sided persecution of the masses by the ruling class. The GDR would perhaps be a better analogy. It's hard to envision an end to this situation that does not involve Kim Jong Un and thousands of others on the gallows, which is why I absolutely do not believe in the sincerity of these overtures.
    • throwawaymanbot 9y ago
      Good Point!
• vinceguidry 9y ago
  North Korea was always completely driven by internal politics, that's what happens in a nation that completely isolates itself from its neighbors. So it stands to reason that its internal political climate finally worked its way around to peace and trade. And the geopolitical utility of buffer states has been steadily eroding over the last few decades.
• javiramos 9y ago
  I believe they have been under really tough sanctions. Maybe this triggered change?
  • assblaster 9y ago
    Yes, the sanctions strangled the North Korean economy and they were actually enforced this time around. China had too much pressure from the US to violate the sanctions. Kim probably felt that his rule was coming to an end if he didn't cave in.
    • pishpash 9y ago
      Except your theory doesn't fly: https://www.ft.com/content/db738fb8-3ed2-11e7-82b6-896b95f30f58 https://www.ft.com/content/db738fb8-3ed2-11e7-82b6-896b95f30...
• ataturk 9y ago
  What happened in NK to cause that long stalemate will be written about and studied for generations to come. It just isn't what you think and the bad actors aren't who you think. Once those bad actors were removed, the process could go forwards. Here's a hint: Kim Jong Il was a hardliner, but his son studied in Europe and was co-opted by the intelligence agencies. Look at every time the US had some domestic issue that needed a distraction and you will find NK saber rattling as if on cue. Then look at what Trump and company have been dismantling within the US (hint: "draining the swamp"). My conclusion is that the people who controlled NK were not in NK and that the entire conflict was fomented and kept alive by a faction located in the West. That faction has been dissolved or at least severely undermined beginning around last October.
• ransom1538 9y ago
  "What changed that North Korea would be serious this time?" China. Follow the money. China cannot have a nuclear conflict breakout. China is making a killing* exporting. China also knows Kim and Trump are totally insane and something could go terribly wrong. I would guess during this train ride Xi Jinping put down the hammer. http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/With-secret-armored-train-journey-to-China-North-Korea-s-Kim-Jong-Un-follows-in-his-father-s-footsteps_166807276 http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/With-secret-armored-tr...
  • ForRealsies 9y ago
    Can a Nation Attack a Country? http://blog.dilbert.com/2017/07/30/can-a-nation-attack-a-company/ http://blog.dilbert.com/2017/07/30/can-a-nation-attack-a-com... Dilbert-man advises going against the 10 Powerful conglomerate Chinese Companies that handle all the trading with NK, back in July 2017.
  • noetic_techy 9y ago
    Exactly. That train trip is the key factor here everyone is forgetting. The whole scenario was causing Japan and SK to invite too much US hardware so close to China and was looking more and more like an excuse for pre-emption. China isn't fully ready for a face off.
  • simonh 9y ago
    Came here to say this. For the first time, in the last 6 months China properly put the economic screws on North Korea. They shut down the border markets and routes and also banned North Korean sales of coal, seafood and textiles. They have made token gestures after previous nuclear tests and such, but this was real, consequential action. Also Kim recently returned from a rare train trip to Beijing. If you want to understand what's going on, follow the money. Yes North Korea has improved a bit economically in the last 5 years or so, but China has finally made it crystal clear to Kim that the show is over.
• overcast 9y ago
  My guess is that their nuclear program is a failure. While this collapse may not be the absolute cause, I'm assuming they've had much bigger related issues, and are no longer able to sustain their threats. Combine that with the number of sanctions on them, they really have no choice. https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test-site-punggye-ri-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test...
• mc32 9y ago
  The only significant thing to change was American policy. The admin put great on China to end smuggling goods across the border and ending the hijinks in the high seas, basically putting an end to doing an end around sanctions as well as the bluster. The South Koreans indeed mention that the US played a major role in having this happen. It would be cosmically ironic if peace is achieved in this instance given the prev admin winning the peace Nobel while achieving no peace at all.
  • ceejayoz 9y ago
    > The only significant thing to change was American policy. Sure, if you ignore the fact that South Korea had a massive political scandal resulting in impeachment of the President and switch in ruling party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Park_Geun-hye https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Park_Geun-hye
    • mc32 9y ago
      SK has ongoing scandals, every admin. Their foreign minister, I imagine, knows SK politics, they are crediting the American administration for having this happen.
      • ceejayoz 9y ago
        The foreign minister is likely smart enough to fluff up the leader of their most critical ally, regardless of how much they feel he contributed internally, and especially when you know that specific foreign leader responds really well to praise. Every country has their scandals, but let's not pretend this one didn't change the political landscape a bit when the leadership swung from one party to another.
        • blhack 9y ago
          This mindset is so insane to me. You've got one of the biggest foreign policy wins in a long time staring you in the face, and you've got the Korean President, the Japanese President, and the Korean foreign minister all agreeing that the Us Government had a strong hand in making all of this happen. Somehow that isn't good enough to admit that maybe the country with the biggest military, the largest GDP, and a president who has at least claimed committment to helping find peace in Korea could have had something to do with finding peace in Korea. What would it take? If Kim Jong Un himself writes a book titled "It was all Trump", then every person in South Korea, China, and Japan all write personal letters to Trump and the American people thanking them, are people still going to entertain these wild conspiracy theories that somehow everybody in the world is lying, and that they have some secret knowledge on this topic?
• hh3k0 9y ago
  > I can't get past that on a personal level, the decision-makers, in particular Kim Jong Un's family, are responsible for many people's suffering and deaths, which I would think would make them fear too much freedom among the survivors. People hunted Nazis for generations. Wouldn't the North Korean decision-makers fear being hunted? Many Nazis not only walked away scot-free but even held positions of power after WW2. See Hans Globke, who had part in the Nuremberg Race Laws back when he worked as Ministerialdirigent in the Office for Jewish Affairs in the Ministry of Interior. And after WW2? Secretary of State and Chief of Staff of the German Chancellery in West Germany from 28 October 1953 to 15 October 1963. That kind of career was not a rarity.
• cryptonector 9y ago
  NK's leadership is vulnerable to being starved -- not just themselves, but the people, who if starved hard enough would hang the leadership from lamp posts. President Trump evidently knew this and threatened to do this. It helps that China is so dependent on trade with the US, which means that DJT could threaten China's pocket book as well (which he did). China cooperated with the US, and Kim folded. It's that simple. Sure, Kim was in a strong position but for this.
  • carapace 9y ago
    Do you think Trump could get America to go Metric? I'm kinda trolling but not really. It occurred to me a week or two ago that he, of all people, might actually be able to switch US to the Metric System and make it stick.
    • ConceptJunkie 9y ago
      If he were somehow motivated that this was in our interest, I think he maybe he could. I think the difference between Trump and most other politicians is not the level of BS, but that he's always winking. I've often heard that his supporters don't take him literally, but take him seriously, and his haters take him literally, but not seriously. I think there's a lot of truth to that, and despite the carpet bombing of propaganda and hatred from the MSM won't be able to cover up forever that he's accomplished some good things.
    • cryptonector 9y ago
      Switch to the metric system? I'm all for it. I doubt it rises to the level of the President's attention, honestly. It might not be until we get an engineer or scientist as President that we switch.
  • openasocket 9y ago
    Citation needed. Sanctions placed on the DPRK under the current administration are not more intense than those under previous administrations. The World Food Program, which analyzes the food security of North Korea, reports the food situation in North Korea is continuing to gradually improve. Current sanctions target various North Korean exports and the import of oil, natural gas, and textiles, but not food. DPRK agricultural production in 2017 was higher than it was in 2015. Additionally, the DPRK has gone through massive food shortages before without a regime change. Between 1994 and 1998, between 5-10% of the population died from starvation, and yet no regime change.
• e40 9y ago
  I think China had a private conversation with him and told him, in direct terms, he needed to start playing well with others. The risk to China was just too great, given their proximity.
• adventured 9y ago
  > What changed that North Korea would be serious this time? Four things in my opinion. 1) China summoned North Korea to meet after their nuclear test site collapsed. That much is known factually. China had drawn a public redline, about the risk of their nuclear program harming Chinese people, from fallout reaching across the border. The collapsed mountain is speculated to be at high risk for leaking fallout and that it may have left a chimney. China publicly warned North Korea on this prior to the mountain collapse. It's very likely that when China summoned North Korea afterward, they were given an intimidating ultimatum. 2) There's nowhere left for North Korea to go. Kim got his nukes, a lot of them apparently. Now what? Nukes don't do anything for developing your country. They won't convince the world to get rid of the sanctions, they won't force the US to give you a lot of trade or money. 3) North Korea must see that the US is able to massively trade with other formerly hostile Communist nations in Asia, such as Vietnam and China. The US fought a horrific war with Vietnam, not dissimilar to that of North Korea. Now the US and Vietnam are large trading partners, and the US just floated an aircraft carrier next to its shores on a military buddy-buddy mission. It's impossible that Kim could see that all occurring and not understand there can be a different future. 4) North Korea can't compete in any regard militarily outside of nuclear weapons. They're 40-60 years behind the US and South Korea. That's because they're so extraordinarily poor. They do not have the resources to wage a competitive traditional war with advanced nations. You know what's great for fixing that? A dramatically bigger economy. They have a ~$25 billion economy today. You know what would be a better security context if you're them? Having a $250 billion economy, lots of money to modernize the military, lots of money for military R&D, lots of money for cultivating education domestically, and still having the same nuclear know-how to re-arm with nukes if necessary. It's the ideal outcome if you're Kim Jong Un - you plausibly remain the dictator for life as in China with Mao or Xi, and you dramatically bolster your economy.
  • noetic_techy 9y ago
    I would expand and point 1 and say that the whole situation was also starting to draw too much military hardware to SK, Japan, and US bases. 3 Carrier battle groups were starting to partol the South China sea. China is not ready for a major conflict on its border. NK was becoming a liability in more than just a mountain collapse.
• mozumder 9y ago
  I think it's mostly due to their nuclear program being successful at producing an H-Bomb as well as a warhead. People here say their nuclear program is a failutre, but they already tested the H-bomb as working, and it does look like it can fit in a warhead: http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/lg/public/2017/10/25/1025kimjongunnorthkoreahydrogenbomb.jpg http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/lg... They probably feel they're in a strong enough negotiating position now to resume six-party talks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-party_talks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-party_talks
• vondur 9y ago
  I'm going to guess the sanctions were actually biting the people in the upper echelons of NK leadership. Probably due to the fact that the Chinese were actually helping out in enforcing the sanctions on their border with NK. I've read that North Korea is run kind of like a feudal society, so long as Kim Jong can keep the military leaders happy with luxury goods and keep the military relatively well cared for. Once that stops happening, it can probably cause some extra anxiety for Kim Jong Un.
  • drak0n1c 9y ago
    Russian and Chinese smugglers were specifically targeted with sanctions and asset freezing. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-sanctions-chinese-and-russian-companies-and-individuals-for-conducting-business-with-north-korea/2017/08/22/78992312-8743-11e7-961d-2f373b3977ee_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-sa...
• ThomPete 9y ago
  Trump happened and that's what changed I think. Not because Trump is some genius or something but just because he have unlocked things by his shear un-orthodox, not following the rules and keep everyone guessing approach.
• reggieband 9y ago
  A lot of Americans are giving Trump the props on this one. But what about Xi Jinping? He just recently secured his position, just met with Kim Jog Un and has the most vested interest in cooling off NK. He has a brand new naval fleet asserting dominance over the South China Sea. I think Xi Jinping is quietly going to allow Trump to take the public credit. And meanwhile Xi is going to build a new bridge into Korea based around Capitalism with Chinese characteristics. I think we'll need to look back and reflect in 10 years to see if Korea has moved closer to USA or closer to China before the real credit can be given.
  • belorn 9y ago
    I expect the reason for the public response is largely thanks to the media reaction a year ago when everyone predicted that Trump would bring in a nuclear third world war. People put forward the dooms day clock, but the result today is very much the opposite. When people look back in 10 years I suspect that this will be the main story, and the China angle taking a large backseat position. When people make bold predictions and the opposite happens then that make for a better story than details of geopolitical results.
    • jquery 9y ago
      Not everyone. The status-quo wasn’t working and Trump said he would use China to get to NK even in the campaign. It appears he may have done it. This does put egg smack on the face of a lot of people though so I fully expect Trump’s role to be downplayed as much as possible. I’m already hearing and reading Trump had little/nothing to do with it but that’s ok, peace is more important than credit, and the American people can judge for themselves what happened.
    • vkou 9y ago
      > I expect the reason for the public response is largely thanks to the media reaction a year ago when everyone predicted that Trump would bring in a nuclear third world war. People put forward the dooms day clock, but the result today is very much the opposite. ...Except for his continuing antagonism of Russia (A nuclear power that, unlike North Korea, is capable of a global nuclear war) in Syria. Which, I suppose, nobody expected, but for a different reason.
• justicezyx 9y ago
  China wont let 2 Koreas unite as you suggested. Unless, US withdraw their military presence. And US wont let that happen. It's now in the hands of NK dictator to maneuverer between the two most powerful nations on this planet. (The SK president is not too much better than US puppet, and probably wont have much wiggle room).
  • killjoywashere 9y ago
    Recall Xi had Kim over for dinner a few weeks ago. This is Xi signaling to the world and his internal constituents that he can exert soft diplomatic control of Asian satellites.
    • justicezyx 9y ago
      Kim definitely shows the prowess to profit from these 2 countries. I am very eager to see what he can pull off. As much as I desire democracy and power to everyone, these kind of powerful people conflict is so tense and entertaining.
• quietbritishjim 9y ago
  My personal (probably garbage) theory is that Kim Jong Un knows that Trump makes America significantly weaker, and therefore indirectly makes NK stronger, so wants to give a reason to vote him back in for a second term.
  • jquery 9y ago
    This event is certainly a fascinating study in cognitive dissonance.
  • ConceptJunkie 9y ago
    > significantly weaker ISIS would beg to differ.
    • quietbritishjim 9y ago
      This is classic Poe's law: so ridiculous it surely must be satire, but some Trump supporters actually would believe something like it. I mean, ISIS lost all its major strongholds well before Trump was president. If you really did mean this, you presumably have a theory that involves time travel.
• jonathanyc 9y ago
  Two main things. First, North Korea can now semi-credibly threaten to nuke the US, which makes invading them tantamount to political suicide in the US. It’s likely their nuke would fail or miss or be intercepted, but no President wants to be the guy that got Hawaii or San Francisco nuked. This has always been the end-game for rogue states, and means Kim Jong-Un is basically home free. If we wanted to get rid of him we missed that opportunity when we let them get nukes. Second, South Korea elected a liberal president as a reaction to the previous conservative president who was involved in a giant scandal. He had a strong mandate to negotiate. Trump played a part as well, but it’s not immediately clear how much of an effect his policies had. On the other hand the first two things I mentioned are unambiguously big.
  • drak0n1c 9y ago
    On the US side there was a shift in policy under Trump toward sanctioning and freezing specific Russian and Chinese companies and individuals who were enabling loopholes for the North Korean elite around the general sanctions. Previous US policy avoided targeting smugglers for whatever reason - possibly due to fear of North Korean retaliation if their elite were cut off. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-sanctions-chinese-and-russian-companies-and-individuals-for-conducting-business-with-north-korea/2017/08/22/78992312-8743-11e7-961d-2f373b3977ee_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-sa...