By Andrew Salmon
The morning had gone splendidly.
The first hour of the historic/precedent-smashing/groundbreaking (choose your phrase) Singapore summit had been a perfectly choreographed diplomatic waltz: U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un had met, shaken hands and smiled for the cameras against a backdrop I don't recall seeing before, ever: The massed flags of North Korea and the United States. Trump would subsequently tell reporters that his chinwag with Kim was going better than anybody had expected.
Then came the afternoon declaration.
After the signing ceremony, there was ― to the surprise and frustration of the thousands of journalists in the summit media, set up in Singapore's Formula 1 Pit ― no release of the document. Eventually, a photograph of Trump holding it up for the cameras was blown up.
Having read the text of the measly, one-page declaration, expectations plummeted. A storm of criticism was unleashed against the unconventional and deeply polarizing U.S. president by media, pundits, political opponents and the online chattering class.
Still, we should be careful to separate legitimate critiques of the summit from the bile.
Some say he was naively unprepared, and ended up being "played" by the crafty Kim. Last year, after deploying the kind of rhetoric never before heard from a US president and maneuvering US forces in the region, he had terrified Kim into coming to the table - then further spooked him by cancelling the summit at the last moment. But when the two finally met, instead of dominating the meeting, the "master negotiator" caved to Kim's demands.
The statement contains the preferred Pyongyang term ('total denuclearization of the Korean peninsula") rather than the more precise U.S. acronym (complete, verifiable, irreversible denucluarization). He walked away with a vague statement that contains no concrete commitments, no timelines, no roadmap at all. Moreover, he halted joint South Korea-US military drills ― a long-standing North Korean objective.
In other words: Trump had pinned Kim down just where he wanted him, but let him wriggle out without making a single commitment, while granting him the high status in global affairs his father and grandfather never had.
These criticisms have legitimacy: My immediate headline at the summit was "Optical success, substantive failure."
But speaking more broadly, Trump deserves credit. No U.S. president had been willing (or dared) to meet a North Korean leader. Trump has placed North Korea front-center of his foreign policy. This is high risk. If it proves not to be a "win" Trump's credibility is shot.
The lack of meat in the declaration makes it a vision statement rather than a roadmap, but offers both sides flexibility moving forward. Even Trump's halting of exercises is reasonable ― reciprocating Kim's nuclear and missile tests moratorium and release of three U.S. hostages. And the halt is easily reversible.
More importantly, he has kick-started a process. Where it will lead? Key officials on both sides look like they can do business. Once the process gets underway, it may develop a momentum of its own.
The drearily reiterated conventional wisdom is that Kim will never denuclearize. But only yesterday, I spoke to one uber expert - a former US National Intelligence Council chief - who admitted that he has changed his thinking, and now reckons Kim may have made a strategic decision: Having gotten maximum mileage out of his nukes, he now wants to cash in.
He is not alone. In addition to Trump, the two key external players ― South Korea's Moon Jae-in and China's Xi Jinping - seem convinced of Kim's sincerity. Neither man is a fool.
There are grounds a-plenty on which to slam Trump when it comes to social, domestic and trade policies. But on North Korea, if you accept that the best human behavior is motivated by hope and conditioned by optimism, Trump has taken a huge risk and done the right thing.
 |
The first hour of the historic/precedent-smashing/groundbreaking (choose your phrase) Singapore summit had been a perfectly choreographed diplomatic waltz: U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un had met, shaken hands and smiled for the cameras against a backdrop I don't recall seeing before, ever: The massed flags of North Korea and the United States. Trump would subsequently tell reporters that his chinwag with Kim was going better than anybody had expected.
Then came the afternoon declaration.
After the signing ceremony, there was ― to the surprise and frustration of the thousands of journalists in the summit media, set up in Singapore's Formula 1 Pit ― no release of the document. Eventually, a photograph of Trump holding it up for the cameras was blown up.
Having read the text of the measly, one-page declaration, expectations plummeted. A storm of criticism was unleashed against the unconventional and deeply polarizing U.S. president by media, pundits, political opponents and the online chattering class.
Still, we should be careful to separate legitimate critiques of the summit from the bile.
![[ROUNDTABLE] North Korea: Why are we so impatient?](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/K2018062200049-590(0).jpg/dims/resize/84/optimize)
Some say he was naively unprepared, and ended up being "played" by the crafty Kim. Last year, after deploying the kind of rhetoric never before heard from a US president and maneuvering US forces in the region, he had terrified Kim into coming to the table - then further spooked him by cancelling the summit at the last moment. But when the two finally met, instead of dominating the meeting, the "master negotiator" caved to Kim's demands.
The statement contains the preferred Pyongyang term ('total denuclearization of the Korean peninsula") rather than the more precise U.S. acronym (complete, verifiable, irreversible denucluarization). He walked away with a vague statement that contains no concrete commitments, no timelines, no roadmap at all. Moreover, he halted joint South Korea-US military drills ― a long-standing North Korean objective.
In other words: Trump had pinned Kim down just where he wanted him, but let him wriggle out without making a single commitment, while granting him the high status in global affairs his father and grandfather never had.
These criticisms have legitimacy: My immediate headline at the summit was "Optical success, substantive failure."
But speaking more broadly, Trump deserves credit. No U.S. president had been willing (or dared) to meet a North Korean leader. Trump has placed North Korea front-center of his foreign policy. This is high risk. If it proves not to be a "win" Trump's credibility is shot.
The lack of meat in the declaration makes it a vision statement rather than a roadmap, but offers both sides flexibility moving forward. Even Trump's halting of exercises is reasonable ― reciprocating Kim's nuclear and missile tests moratorium and release of three U.S. hostages. And the halt is easily reversible.
More importantly, he has kick-started a process. Where it will lead? Key officials on both sides look like they can do business. Once the process gets underway, it may develop a momentum of its own.
The drearily reiterated conventional wisdom is that Kim will never denuclearize. But only yesterday, I spoke to one uber expert - a former US National Intelligence Council chief - who admitted that he has changed his thinking, and now reckons Kim may have made a strategic decision: Having gotten maximum mileage out of his nukes, he now wants to cash in.
He is not alone. In addition to Trump, the two key external players ― South Korea's Moon Jae-in and China's Xi Jinping - seem convinced of Kim's sincerity. Neither man is a fool.
There are grounds a-plenty on which to slam Trump when it comes to social, domestic and trade policies. But on North Korea, if you accept that the best human behavior is motivated by hope and conditioned by optimism, Trump has taken a huge risk and done the right thing.
