President Trump Cancels Summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un

 

In a letter to North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un on Thursday morning, President Trump cancelled the planned June 12 summit in Singapore between the United States and North Korea. In withdrawing from the talks, Trump cited Kim’s “tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement,” stating he felt it would be “inappropriate, at this time, to have this long-planned.” The president did express his willingness to meet with Kim at a future date.

Share your reactions in the comments.

There are 48 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    See post on member feed by Bryan Stephens  Maybe they can be joined.

    • #1
  2. Max Ledoux Admin
    Max Ledoux
    @Max

    This makes peace more likely, not less.

    Trump has always said he would not go to, or would walk away from, a summit that he thought would not result in a favorable outcome to the United States. He has once more proven that he keeps his word.

    North Korea was demanding that denuclearization be taken off of the agenda for the summit, even though the only reason to have a summit is to remove North Korea’s nuclear capability.

     

    • #2
  3. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    cdor (View Comment):

    See post on member feed by Bryan Stephens Maybe they can be joined.

    Thanks! 

    • #3
  4. Hugh Member
    Hugh
    @Hugh

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):

    This makes peace more likely, not less.

    Trump has always said he would not go to, or would walk away from, a summit that he thought would not result in a favorable outcome to the United States. He has once more proven that he keeps his word.

    North Korea was demanding that denuclearization be taken off of the agenda for the summit, even though the only reason to have a summit is to remove North Korea’s nuclear capability.

     

    This!

    • #4
  5. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Contributor
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    The chances of anything good coming out of the summit were always nil, so I’m glad to see Trump do the smart thing and cancel it on the Norks.

    Good move, Mr. President.

     

    • #5
  6. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):

    The chances of anything good coming out of the summit were always nil, so I’m glad to see Trump do the smart thing and cancel it on the Norks.

    Good move, Mr. President.

     

    Well, we got three Americans released because of the Summit. 

    • #6
  7. Curt North Inactive
    Curt North
    @CurtNorth

    I think this is setting the table for later.  Rocket Man now knows Trump will in fact “walk away”, we no longer have a US President lying and begging in search of a photo-op handshake over a terrible deal.  

    The meeting will happen eventually, only now even more on Trumps terms than this one would have been.  We’re watching the Art of the Deal play out on the world stage, little Kim is in a lose-lose situation here, he’s got to be starting to see that now.  Nicely done Mr President.

    • #7
  8. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Contributor
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Well, we got three Americans released because of the Summit. 

    I was just thinking of that a moment ago. Definitely a mark in the president’s favor, especially if (as I recall) we didn’t give anything in exchange.

    • #8
  9. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    I’ve always found brinksmanship in negotiations discomfiting.  But it’s often effective and beneficial.  Hoping that’s what we’re watching now. 

    • #9
  10. Jeff Hawkins Coolidge
    Jeff Hawkins
    @JeffHawkins

    Peace comes after surrender, not the other way around

    • #10
  11. Guruforhire Member
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    This is a disappointing setback, hopefully we keep the process going forward and this is just a step in the dance.

    • #11
  12. Roderic Fabian Reagan
    Roderic Fabian
    @rhfabian

    The usual suspects were fretting about the possibility of Trump being played by Kim.  Now, no doubt, rather than congratulating Trump on his steadfastness, they will fret over the possibility of war and gloat over the apparent lack of success.  

    They don’t understand negotiations.  Being able to walk away is an essential skill.  Without that skill you’ll get played like Obama was played by Iran.  

    • #12
  13. Bartholomew Xerxes Ogilvie, Jr. Coolidge
    Bartholomew Xerxes Ogilvie, Jr.
    @BartholomewXerxesOgilvieJr

    I like the fact that Trump has made it clear who’s in control of this process. Kim had been doing a good job of making it look like he was in charge: proposing the summit, releasing prisoners, and making a big deal over decommissioning a nuclear test site. It was all theater, but it made it look like Trump had to run and jump aboard the Kim peace train.

    Now Trump has unequivocally said “Hey, you need to make a deal with us a lot more than we need to make one with you. Call when you’re ready to be serious about it. In the meantime we have other things to worry about.”

    • #13
  14. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Roderic Fabian (View Comment):
    The usual suspects were fretting about the possibility of Trump being played by Kim. Now, no doubt, rather than congratulating Trump on his steadfastness, they will fret over the possibility of war and gloat over the apparent lack of success.

    The first point was not unreasonable; the second is foolish tunnel vision.

    • #14
  15. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Trump HAD to cancel, in order to show dominance.  My worry was always that Kim would cancel first.

    This is how one educates a barbarian: step by step, refuse to accept barbaric behavior.  This is a necessary step forward.

    Trump played this one exactly as I would have, were I in his shoes. So I am delighted.

    • #15
  16. Umbra of Nex, Fractus Inactive
    Umbra of Nex, Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    My greatest fear was that Trump’s isolationist/Paleocon tendencies combined with a desire to be remembered as The Great Deal Maker would lead him to stab the South Koreans in the back. My fears are somewhat lessened after this.

    • #16
  17. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Curt North (View Comment):

    I think this is setting the table for later. Rocket Man now knows Trump will in fact “walk away”, we no longer have a US President lying and begging in search of a photo-op handshake over a terrible deal.

    The meeting will happen eventually, only now even more on Trumps terms than this one would have been. We’re watching the Art of the Deal play out on the world stage, little Kim is in a lose-lose situation here, he’s got to be starting to see that now. Nicely done Mr President.

    I suppose it depends on China. Is Kim a puppet? A rogue? A rogue puppet? How much room does he really have for maneuvering with us?

    • #17
  18. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Contributor
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    Roderic Fabian (View Comment):

    [1] The usual suspects were fretting about the possibility of Trump being played by Kim. [2] Now, no doubt, rather than congratulating Trump on his steadfastness, they will fret over the possibility of war and gloat over the apparent lack of success.

    The former category is far larger than the second, as is evidenced by comments from several Trump-skeptic members on this thread.

    Roderic Fabian (View Comment):

    They don’t understand negotiations. Being able to walk away is an essential skill.

    Alternatively, perhaps they worried that Trump would not follow-through on the tactic.

    • #18
  19. nyconservative Member
    nyconservative
    @nyconservative

    Trump did the right thing and he  should follow it up with more severe sanctions and a statement that N korea has 2 choices….keeping Nukes and having the USA choke it off and  isolate it even further or give up the Nukes and become a real nation

    • #19
  20. Jamie Lockett Inactive
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    The right move. 

    • #20
  21. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    China has no desire to see a potential unified Korea, or even a North Korea that turns to the West. North Korea is their buffer against Japan, and the United States. Perhaps it’s time to start building a military alliance with India. They have a navy based upon the British model. The same model that the US, and Australia has. The Vietnamese government is encouraging US Navy port calls, the Japanese have restarted their Marine Corps.

    • #21
  22. Justin Hertog Inactive
    Justin Hertog
    @RooseveltGuck

    I wonder how many dissidents or enemies of the regime were entoumbed in that nuclear cave Kim blew up. I’m sure he disposed of a bunch of people in that empty public gesture.

    • #22
  23. Jamie Lockett Inactive
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    I agree with the editors at NRO: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/north-korean-summit-should-stay-cancelled/

    This I’ll conceived summit should stay cancelled. Reimpose sanctions and work to deive a wedge between China and the NorKs 

    • #23
  24. Sweezle Member
    Sweezle
    @Sweezle

    I like the letter. He doesn’t call Kim names, he holds out hope for a future meeting and the MSM hate the letter. But they also hated the idea of Trump meeting with NK. 

    • #24
  25. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    I want peace, but if we have to use our “massive and powerful” nuclear arsenal, that’s mostly North Korea’s problem.

    • #25
  26. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    I want peace, but if we have to use our “massive and powerful” nuclear arsenal, that’s mostly North Korea’s problem.

    Because shattering that taboo won’t come back to haunt us.  No way.

    • #26
  27. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    I want peace, but if we have to use our “massive and powerful” nuclear arsenal, that’s mostly North Korea’s problem.

    Because shattering that taboo won’t come back to haunt us. No way.

    Shattering what taboo? 

    • #27
  28. John Peabody Inactive
    John Peabody
    @JohnAPeabody

    Going forward from this point, let’s try to avoid setting terms by Twitter. Let’s use some private, back-door communications…some would quaintly call them “diplomatic channels”.

    • #28
  29. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    I want peace, but if we have to use our “massive and powerful” nuclear arsenal, that’s mostly North Korea’s problem.

    Because shattering that taboo won’t come back to haunt us. No way.

    I said it’s “mostly North Korea’s problem”. How could anyone disagree with that? They’ll be dead. We’ll be alive. Which is better?

    BTW, the fact that a few people who think like me are in the White House now is the only reason the Norks are anywhere near a negotiating table. It’s called a credible threat. Look it up. 

    • #29
  30. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    I want peace, but if we have to use our “massive and powerful” nuclear arsenal, that’s mostly North Korea’s problem.

    Because shattering that taboo won’t come back to haunt us. No way.

    Shattering what taboo?

    Yes, the taboo against using a nuclear arsenal.

    • #30

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.