Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Historic Snooker
The headline writers adore the word “historic.” It was ubiquitous in reporting on the April meeting between Kim Jung Un and Moon Jae-in. Kim shook Moon’s hand and then guided him over the military demarcation line to step onto North Korean territory. This prompted swoons. What rot. If that was a bona fide gesture of peaceful intent, time will tell. In the meantime, let’s assume it was a stunt.
So too with the summit between Kim Jung Un and Donald Trump, though in this case the media hype couldn’t compete with Mr. Trump’s own. He has basked in talk of a Nobel Peace Prize and predicted that he and the butcher of Pyongyang were “going to have a great discussion and a terrific relationship.” Obviously panting for a meeting, Trump was reportedly livid with National Security Advisor John Bolton, whose May comments about a “Libya solution” to the nuclear weapons problem apparently spooked Kim into withdrawing from the summit. Trump insisted that it was he who canceled, just as he did with the Philadelphia Eagles’ White House visit.
But he showed quite a lot of ankle in his note. “I felt a wonderful dialogue was building up between you and me,” he cooed, closing with words conceding that it was Kim, not Trump, who had actually canceled. “If you change your mind having to do with this most important summit, please do not hesitate to call me or write.” Kim reeled in his catch. He sent an oversized letter Trump could pose with, grinning like a winner of the Publishers Clearing House sweepstakes.
Why is our president smiling? You can always argue that democratic leaders must treat with dictators and even villains of various stripes for the sake of winning a war or securing the peace. You can even argue that sometimes presidents flatter unsavory leaders to build trust and ease tensions. But no historical comparisons can illuminate Trump’s ricochets between hysterical threats (“fire and fury”) and pusillanimous praise (“very talented”) without any substantive change on the part of the dictator. What has changed since the State of the Union address in which Trump honored the memory of Otto Warmbier and detailed the atrocities of the North Korean regime? In gratitude for the exchange of pleasantries, the release of a few hostages, and vague offers of “denuclearization” Trump has made himself Kim’s doormat.
As a matter of substance, the Singapore summit achieved less than nothing. It was a profound defeat for U.S. world influence and for democratic decency, arguably the worst summit outcome since Yalta. Kim promised to consider “denuclearization,” exactly as his father and grandfather had done repeatedly over the past several decades – breaking their promises each and every time. For this puff of cotton candy, Trump agreed to halt “U.S. war games” (using the North Korean term for joint military exercises with South Korea) which Trump himself called provocative! He invited Kim to the White House. He also issued the risible tweet announcing, ahem, peace in our time: “There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea.”
It’s difficult to determine just how stupid Trump thinks the American people are. But there is no question that Trump’s affection for strongmen and thugs, evident before in his praise of the Chinese murderers of Tiananmen, and his warm words for Putin, Duterte, and Xi, has now extended to the worst tyrant/killer on the planet. Trump did far more than overlook Kim’s atrocious human rights abuses, he became Kim’s PR man. “he’s a very talented man and I also learned he loves his country very much.” He has a “great personality” and is “very smart.”
Trump granted Kim’s legitimacy: “His country does love him. His people, you see the fervor. They have a great fervor.”
In 2014, a United Nations report concluded that North Korea’s crimes against humanity “entail extermination, murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape, forced abortions and other sexual violence, persecution on political, religious, racial and gender grounds, the forcible transfer of populations, the enforced disappearance of persons and the inhumane act of knowingly causing prolonged starvation.”
What of all that? Trump is understanding, even impressed. “Hey, he’s a tough guy. When you take over a country — a tough country, tough people — and you take it over from your father, I don’t care who you are, what you are, how much of an advantage you have. If you can do that at 27 years old, I mean, that’s one in 10,000 that could do that. So he’s a very smart guy. He’s a great negotiator.”
What was Trump’s chief argument in 2016? The U.S. had been the victim of “bad deals,” with other countries and he was the great deal maker. He fingered the Iran deal as the worst deal in history. His defenders will excuse the truckling to Kim as a clever gambit to extract concessions. But Kim has offered absolutely nothing. All of the concessions have come from the United States, including the most crucial one – we’ve put ourselves on the same moral plane as North Korea. That’s what Make America Great Again has achieved.
Published in Foreign Policy
This pretty clearly establishes that verbal flattery is part of Trump’s MO. For better or worse. The extent to which it establishes anything else–oh, like, Trump [hearts] dictators–is far from clear.
Curious how he never seems to be able to say nice things about democratically elected leaders of our allies, but can whip out sycophantic peans to the despots who comprise our enemies.
???
Uh huh…
Trump’s new bestie:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/mar/16/us-student-sentenced-north-korea-15-years-hard-labor-video
Trump is just pure lazy. He wants to believe you can solve a 60 year conflict with a 4 hour slobbering love fest and some bullet points. Sadly, voters want to believe this too. But Mona’s right, we’ve basically achieved nothing with all these stunts. The Iran deal was at least an actual deal, which you can debate. With NK, we don’t even have close to that. I’d like to know more about Trump’s plans for Iran after all this. More slobbering?
Lazy ? I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
4 hours ? Mike Pompeo visited Pyongyang on 2 occasions to negotiate. Summits are for camera’s and slobbering. It’s called politics.
And. Nobody thinks this is snip snap done. Everybody is in a wait and see mode, including Trump.
Mona’s Moan is amiss.
The fact that Iran was an “actual deal” was a distinct negative, and I don’t think there was much of a debate about that, other than from the quarters of the previous administration.
This comment is pure lazy.
How so? I’ll take actual deals over stunts and bullet points every day. Trump ripped up the actual deal we had…..and did the stunts. Can’t see us suddenly getting tougher on Iran after this last display. Please don’t use “there is no debate” type arguments.
The Iran deal took well over a year to negotiate. So a couple of meetings by Pompeo and a photo op are not supposed to create the same results as months of intense negotiations with over ten negotiating sessions on the actual content of the deal.
Was there a “debate” about the Iran deal from anyone who doesn’t have a vested interest in the Obama Administration? Pallets of runway cash, disregard for our only Middle East ally, serious questions about enforceability, removal of sanctions from a prime sponsor of terrorism. I’ll take a stunt lacking commitment over a bad commitment any day.
It is not “there is no debate” meaning what is being said is beyond controversy. The sentence was “there was no debate” as in the terms of the deal were not debated on the American side. Basically this was a “deal” not a treaty.
Yes, primarily from the other countries that are still supporting it. They aren’t Obama lackeys
I just think the North Korea stunt makes tearing up the Iran deal far more troublesome. If you thought we tore it up because we’d push for a better deal or be threatening force….that argument makes little sense now.
.
What do you base this on? Trump said some nice things about a bad person and cancelled a military exercise. That is what we are out right now in NK. In return he basically got a commitment to continue negotiations on nukes.
In Iran we gave up cash, lifted some sanctions, and upset some allies to get a “deal” that really did nothing to stop Iran from continuing its nuclear program.
And don’t forget, “Death to America, Israel and it’s little dog too ! “
By george, you’ve outdone even yourself with this one, George.
You call EdisonParks “materialistic”. You condescend to him as you scold him for imagined condescension of you. You pat yourself on the back for your “well thought-out formulation” and call him and his formulations “superficial”. You finish with a rude, insincere and sarcastic parting comment.
It speaks volumes about you.
Yes it does. They have inspectors and everything . If they could get NK to sign the same deal, it would be an epic win. The only real downside to the Iran deal was acceptance of Iran as a nuclear power in the future. Meanwhile Trump is already accepting NK as a nuclear power….today.
Bwaahaahahahah
This makes not a lick of sense. Boy, how the mighty Columbo has fallen. Too many murder cases I guess. What a shame.
First of all, if you were able to follow my introduction of the word “condescension”, you’d know that it was not about me at all. I implied that was being condescending towards Mona, in the way that he talked about her, and that he felt sorry for her.
Secondly, even though the great Columbo was able to dig up the faintest clues, even he didn’t try to read minds. You have idea if I was insincere. And just to imply it is being rude. Columbo was never rude.
Hang it up, Columbo. I am afraid you’ve been on one too many cases.
Check out the main feed. Michael Ramirez paints the joke of (The Iran Deal) in it’s inglorious light. How timely.