3 ms·

> Only one major change has taken place, and it's not a change of presidency in SK. This is so wildly inaccurate. First off, a colossal scandal and changing of

> Only one major change has taken place, and it's not a change of presidency in SK. This is so wildly inaccurate. First off, a colossal scandal and changing of power from one party to another party in one of the countries involved in the treaty certainly counts as a major change, especially when it's a transition from an anti-reconciliation government to a pro-reconciliation one. In fact, this is the first time that the president of SK has held that position during the reign of Kim Jong-Un. In addition to that, NK has finally actually demonstrated nuclear capability, turning that into a FAR more credible threat than ever before. Lastly, China's position on NK has been shifting over time (definitely started during the Obama presidency) and they have become increasingly impatient and intolerant of NK. That has accelerated during (and likely because of) Trump, but he 100% didn't start it. I am sure that Trump played a role in this, but to suggest that he is the only major change is pure American exceptionalist nonsense.

cryptonector 9y ago
NK had been working towards ICBMs + nukes for decades. This had been the biggest source of conflict with the U.S. during all that time. That their project completed is not enough to explain why the DPRK is coming to the table. Giving up their nuclear capability means they can never do this again, and they'll have no way to ensure that we keep giving them whatever it is that we'll agree to give them. Which is why I fully expected them to insist on a continuation of the status quo, with them retaining their nukes. That they are willing to [verifiably, presumably] give up their nukes is a very big deal. It means that the DPRK was faced with something very bad for them. That can only have been Trump's twisting of the screws on the DPRK. My impression is that Trump would starve them to the point that Kim would end up hanging from a lamp post, and that he has the leverage on China needed to make that happen. The change in the American approach to the DPRK nuclear weapons issue is the biggest change, and it is the direct cause of Kim suing for peace.

cryptonector 9y ago

NK had been working towards ICBMs + nukes for decades. This had been the biggest source of conflict with the U.S. during all that time. That their project completed is not enough to explain why the DPRK is coming to the table. Giving up their nuclear capability means they can never do this again, and they'll have no way to ensure that we keep giving them whatever it is that we'll agree to give them. Which is why I fully expected them to insist on a continuation of the status quo, with them retaining their nukes. That they are willing to [verifiably, presumably] give up their nukes is a very big deal. It means that the DPRK was faced with something very bad for them. That can only have been Trump's twisting of the screws on the DPRK. My impression is that Trump would starve them to the point that Kim would end up hanging from a lamp post, and that he has the leverage on China needed to make that happen. The change in the American approach to the DPRK nuclear weapons issue is the biggest change, and it is the direct cause of Kim suing for peace.