More on the Three Tracks: Will Bibimbap Be Served in Singapore?

According to a South Korean analyst speaking on a broadcast May 30, Choi Seon Hee, North Korean diplomat meeting with Song Kim, the US Ambassador to the Philippines, at Panmumjeom, did discuss substantive denuclearization procedures, the first being removal of ICBMs, the second, timing of removal of warheads, and third being means of verification. Phased easing of sanctions was also raised by the North at the meeting. They are looking toward putting together a communique framing the procedures for future implementation. It is only, Kim Chang Seon, in Singapore, who is discussing the security, logistics, and "photo ops," involved.

The primary concern of Kim Jong Un with respect to travel to Singapore, is that of his personal security. Other reports have stated that he's confided to Pompeo that he is concerned about a "coup d'etat." With all the emphasis on so called decapitation exercises by the US in military exercises and war games, the problems with security planning in a relatively open environment like Singapore, and the vulnerability of unpopular leaders inflight, the reports of concern of a coup back home, seem exaggerated. One also might keep in mind the rather checkered history of commercial aviation in the Malaysian region. In light of Korean dynastic history, the age of his aircraft, and the many potential sites for snipers and other assassins in Singapore, the security concerns are valid.

Not surprisingly, there has been continuing misrepresentation of the North Korean position on denuclearization, even from those "experts," who ostensibly should know better. The view presented as of today, seems to be whatever the differences disclosed during the Panmunjeom meeting could be remedied to some extent during the meetings in New York, today, and Washington, D.C. tomorrow. The fundamental misrepresentation from pundits and a large number of "experts," is that North Korea isn't going to denuclearize. Further, that Trump is "being played," and other sophomoric critiques. Lately, the recent North Korean statements reflecting that attitude, are stated in the conditional, "if the US doesn't stop this or that..." The joint statement coming out of the Moon Kim summit at Panmunjeom clearly stated that denuclearization of the Korean peninsula was their policy objective. Of course, the cynical rejoinder is "well we've heard that before, if their lips are moving, they're lying..."

To his credit, even Pompeo gets that the real stumbling block is coming up with US guarantees of North Korean security, normalization of relations, replacing the armistice with a peace agreement, and how to stage these reciprocal moves, in addition to relaxation of sanctions. Pompeo calls it CVIS, complete, verifiable, irreversible, security for North Korea. Without CVIS you won't get CVID.

While there is a notion of bringing out ICBMs, or warheads, in a "bundle" in a relatively short period of time, a framework, (if you'll excuse the term) is going to have to be adopted which presents a structure for negotiations and the execution of any agreement reached, in terms of subject matter, scope and process. It will involve steps, definitions of the scope and timing of those steps, and how US reciprocal concessions will need to be integrated with those steps. The problems here are both political and practical. Various experts with experience have stated that a truly full blown "irreversible denuclearization" of unlimited scope could take "ten years" Some of this has the sound of advertising copy. One expert has said, in the existential sense, there is no such thing as irreversible denuclearization as long as there are scientists who know how to do it. The political side of the problem is that any phased structure with reciprocity will arguably appear similar in design to other agreements that both Trump and neocons have criticized. When making bibimbap, whatever the ingredients, and whoever the chef, it still looks like bibimbap when it's done.

By Sous Chef - https://www.flickr.com/photos/140536182@N03/40636664921/, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=67604999