The Evolving US Negotiating Position

April 4

The US demand is complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization, with no discussion of US reciprocity in the process. That's an ultimatum. Right now the North Korean purpose is to get the US to accept a three phased approach, freeze, reduce, eliminate, (nuclear weapons infrastructure and capabilities) with good faith US/ROK reciprocity at each step. This is what the South Koreans had envisioned at the beginning, though it was never mentioned in the western press. Clearly this is the point of contention with the maximum pressure, nothing conceded till you completely capitulate US demand. China has acted to protect its own national security interests in the region against US threats of war. It is weighing in on behalf of the north.

An A Channel Youtube from South Korea, published on April 1, showed the respective positions of the four states, North and South Korea, China and the US. The US position was first eliminate your nuclear infrastructure, later reward. The other three states all envisaged a phased approach to build trust and accomplish complex tasks. The South Koreans see a single agreement for denuclearization, followed by steps for implementation. The North Koreans and Chinese see a phased step by step approach, accompanied by simultaneous reciprocal acts by the US, South Korea, and the international community.

Finally, the Blue House, has issued a public statement saying the "Libyan method" is impossible (불가능 不可能) and that the US must demonstrate flexibility.

April 29

"Il gwol" (one bundle) v. "dan gae" (phased) negotiations. The American position seeks complete verifiable irreversible denuclearization in one bundle. The other parties except Japan seek a phased implementation with reciprocal action for action. S. Korea tries to bridge the differences with a bundled package agreement with a phased implementation. Maintaining "maximum pressure" (sanctions) until total CVID won't work. The US hardline position initially proposed by Trump has the potential to fail catastrophically in one meeting. North Korea isn't going to accept just "sweet words," in exchange for tangible implementation of denuclearization. Pompeo seems aware of this. Will Trump move into a give and take reciprocal step by step implementation, or stick with the so called Libyan method of denuclearization?"

May 14

Brian Hook, State Dept senior advisor at the policy planning office, said it would take until 2020 to irreversibly denuclearize North Korea. In other words, it would take the entire remainder of Trump's term in office...One view has it that the missiles, warheads, nuclear materials like plutonium, and enriched uranium could be removed within months if it were properly planned and executed. It was also suggested that 4 to 5 hundred thousand tons of chemical weapons could be shipped out or destroyed during this same shorter term time frame. On the other hand, the longer term projection of Hook probably concerns the ability to permanently remove and assure that the regeneration of these weapons programs would not be possible. One of the latest concerns is what about the personnel who know how to make such weapons?

The high level diplomatic representative, Thae Yong-ho (Korean: 태영호) who defected from the N.Korean embassy in UK, has said, in the recent past, that the nuclear program was essential to Kim. The removal of the program therefore is going to harm any measure of legitimacy that his administration of North Korea has internally. The defector says the stuff about the parallel economic policy (byung jin 병진) is just a pretense, that it doesn't exist. I don't entirely agree, but I agree that whatever economic advances there were are now virtually destroyed. So if the sanctions will be kept on until CVID/ now PCVID + WMD, then his regime could collapse.

Will China come forward at risk to itself to compensate for the catastrophic failing of the North Korean economy under the sanctions before the ever increasing list of US demands are satisfied? Doesn't this appear to be a shifting of all the risks and costs of "CVID," to North Korea and China?

May 21

Trump blames China

Trump apparently has no idea what the "Libyan method" is and what the reference implies - lack of reciprocal and binding obligations on a step by step basis to build confidence. Trump seems to think that his vague promises, of rewards later, are going to reassure Kim. Senator Graham now calls it "win-win," or war. This isn't how negotiations work. The people who criticize Kim or the North Koreans as people who can't be trusted, who broke the agreement before, who are back to the their old tricks, etc., are simply cheering for the US, and don't understand the problem.

May 31

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.

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 had earlier criticized.

June 4

After President Trump's meeting with Kim Yong Chol at the White House:

So the real concession here is allowing for the possibility of a step by step process of denuclearization. Trump said he didn't expect to get everything resolved in one meeting, and allowed for the possibility of additional meetings. He didn't really give up any sanctions, and didn't say he would. He said he wouldn't impose more as long as talks were progressing. The statement about declaring an end to hostilities is really in the same category, symbolic. He said he'd discuss it. That's all. What he basically did was signal that he understood what the North Korean objectives were. He didn't concede anything tangible yet.

What's good for the goose...

Transport Courtesy China Air

It was anticipated that Kim would use a Chinese jet to travel to Singapore. His sister used Kim's aged Il-72 to go to Singapore. This JTBC graphic shows Kim's route after the China Air 747 picked him up in Pyongyang. As expected the air route stayed inside China as far as it could for security reasons. Kim's cargo aircraft brought his limousine and food supply. It looks like the most vulnerable part of the route was when the aircraft was out of the protection of any air defense forces that could be stationed in Hainan. So on the way back, the most vulnerable portion of the flight will be just after the aircraft takes off and before it once again approaches the Hainan air defense zone. On the way back, they won't be much guessing as to which aircraft Kim will board as people will be watching for his departure.

It was reported that Kim would get Chinese fighter escorts at least for some of the way to Singapore. I haven't seen that confirmed.

CIA Assessment Sways Trump?

Okay Channel A is reporting based upon an Asahi Shin Moon (Japanese newspaper) story, that Trump's decision to meet Kim, was based upon a CIA assessment that he was attracted to western culture, affected by his education in Switzerland, and would be easier to deal with than previous North Korean leaders in negotiations. Wow, what a brilliant deduction! Dennis Rodman figured this out a few years back. What was the giveaway? The beach and ski resorts or the fact that he loves basketball?

On the other hand, that the powerful attraction of westerners for eastern culture is playing a role in this as well. The role of South Korea in propagating Korean culture internationally has played an enormous role in this development, as well as the active efforts of President Moon's administration to capitalize on South Korean media sophistication in its messaging to both the North and the US.

The idea that the CIA unlocked this possibility is an overstatement, but I'll give Pompeo credit for a certain level of intelligence if he saw the opportunity while listening to his CIA experts, and grabbed it.

It's the Lawrence of Arabia hubris lurking in the heart of westerners that is being seduced as well. So we are treated daily to the spectacle of endless politicians and pundits purporting ludicrously to be experts on negotiating with the far east. Cecil Rhodes and his "secret agents" are about to make another conquest.

Trump Unpacks the One Bundle Approach to Negotiations

I spent some time watching this program because it correctly analyzed Trump's statements after meeting with Kim Yong Chol at the White House. I drew the same conclusions after listening to Trump's remarks on the White House lawn afterwards, several times. This was a significant breakthrough but certainly not some kind of risky capitulation to North Korea as depicted in the NY Times, Washington Post and US Senate.

So the upper left corner of the screen identifying the subject matter of the show (and this was the headline number one out of ten on Top Ten) US retreats on from speedy CVID. Here's the link for the A Channel Top Ten program from which the graphic was taken on youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35YFc0YbH3U

Across the top it says secretly, a lot of communications- did Trump offer North Korea carrots?

Here is the three part imaginary dialogue depicted which was reflected in Trump's public statements on the White House lawn.
Kim: Phased denuclearization? Trump: You can go slow: Kim: Relax sanctions? Trump: I don't want to use the term maximum pressure; Kim: Guarantee for our system? Trump: We can discuss a declaration of the end of the war.

So the real concession here is allowing for the possibility of a step by step process of denuclearization. Trump said he didn't expect to get everything resolved in one meeting, and allowed for the possibility of additional meetings. He didn't really give up any sanctions, and didn't say he would. He said he wouldn't impose more as long as talks were progressing. The statement about declaring an end to hostilities is really in the same category, symbolic, words on paper. He said he'd discuss it. That's all. What he basically did was signal that he understood what the North Korean objectives were. He didn't concede anything tangible yet.

Trump also emphasized that the US wouldn't be paying for anything, and the costs for any economic matters would be borne by S.Korea, China and Japan. So he's basically picking up at the point where previous talks failed and has avoided any commitments, while conveying that he wishes to remain engaged, and make tangible progress. So what's the panic in DC and New York all about?

Terrified of Peace, Democrats Demand Trump "Hold the Line."

The Times and WP are out to destroy the negotiations. Meanwhile, Kim had to replace the top generals who may not go along with his plan. I said from the beginning that this plan was destabilizing to his regime, and now that he's publicly committed to it, the Army leadership has to be adjusted accordingly.

Bloomberg just published Moon's economic plans for North Korea. It's a lot more significant than the bs stories about McDonalds in Pyongyang. Moon's plan was published by A Channel about the time of Moon's second summit with Kim Jong Un, and was basically ignored here in the US in preference for the McDonalds tale that Trump was going to concede all to North Korea in return for a McDonald's franchise in Pyongyang. Americans open McDonalds and Starbucks while nations in the far east have substantial plans for capital investment in economic infrastructure.

There is, by the way, already one fake "mcdonalds" shop in Pyongyang. I saw it on a S.Korean broadcast weeks ago.

Here's the headline from the Times: Trump Veers to a Korea Plan That Echoes Failures of the Past. Of course it's a David Sanger article. We know how trustworthy he is as spokesperson for the US establishment. Such articles are invariably supported by abbreviated and generally false histories of what happened to unravel previous negotiations.

Here's a Wash Post headline: Senate Democrats demand Trump hold the line in North Korea talks

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-democrats-demand-trump-hold-the-line-in-north-korea-talks/2018/06/04/bd88b644-6808-11e8-bea7-c8eb28bc52b1_story.html?utm_term=.0de8a5ebd081

The Congress is going to "save" the negotiations. We know they can be trusted right?

This post article describes North Korea as a brutal and unpredictable regime, a criminal regime etc.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-softens-on-north-korea/2018/06/02/0deaf06a-6666-11e8-a768-ed043e33f1dc_story.html?utm_term=.eb83098cb429

What kind of US government have we been operating for the last 18 years? How many countries have we destroyed?

How's the genocide in Yemen going? Are we rewarding, supporting and arming the belligerents conducting that crime against humanity? Oh, our despotic "allies" torture their victims and we get the results of their interrogations? Sounds very democratic. Coincidentally, a torturer was just ratified by the US Senate as CIA director. We are certainly morally superior to any other country threatened with war by us.

Small Tree Stumps

Ri Son Gwon, came to Panmunjeom today with a North Korean delegation to meet working level South Korean negotiators. The military talks will resume on June 14 at PMJ. A facility is to be established in Kheseong, NK, for communications between North and South. Education talks were set for June 18. Red Cross talks for June 22. The Red Cross talks apparently will take place at Gumgangsan in North Korea.

Ri was a bit irritated and sarcastic with reporters, as he regarded the meeting of the day, as related to inter-Korea affairs, and not related to the upcoming summit with the US. Apparently, he is not accustomed to stupid questions.

There were a number of replies like this to questions. "Are talks in session with the US in the Unification House?" "That has nothing to do with me."

They asked him about the Trump summit. "...this is Panmunjeom....go to Singapore and ask there."

A reporter asked him, what is the prospect for the talks (here) today? He replied that they will turn out well, "...did you reporters want them not to turn out well?"

They asked Ri about the prior indefinite delay in the talks. He gave a response that suggested they knew where the serious situation had originated, so was it appropriate to ask him about the solution? It is already in the past, it would be best not to bring it up (make that mistake) in the future.

His response implied that the fault lay with others. Really, what was the point of such questioning? He criticized the reporters for asking questions not in the spirit of reconcialition and cooperation inspired by the Panmunjeom summit of North and South, but rather aimed at sowing distrust. He said he regarded such questions as rude if they were to continue.

Apparently, the subject of the earlier sudden cancellation of the talks came up again at the beginning of the meeting itself, where Ri said something like this to Unification Minister Cho, Chief of the South Korean delegation, in the respectful voice, " let's not engage in self criticism, and get over this." He also made reference to an old adage, "small tree stumps turn over the big cart." After his barbed comments to the press outside, Lee wanted the meeting to be open to the press. Minister Cho wanted the meeting closed to discuss the matters at hand for the meeting. Initially Lee objected, but Cho said we'll bring the press in right after.

I think maybe that Cho didn't appreciate Lee being so riled up at the time, and wanted to remove the press that played a role in the problem so they could get down to business. A writer for the Seattle Times suggested that the reporters questions should have been anticipated by Ri.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/senior-north-korean-official-chastises-south-korean-reporter/

Fortunately, it appears that President Trump's meeting with Vice Chairman Chol went a lot better than this. Credit to A Channel for the information here which I have translated at the reader's risk.