How the fuck is this legal?!
Everything’s “legal” if the people who enforce the law are fine with what you’re doing. In this case the people who would enforce the emoluments issue are Congress. Guess how many fucks they give right now.
Only a dozen?
North Korea is having its annual pout regarding joint U.S. / South Korea military exercises. Only, this time, in response to the exercises, they’re cancelled talks which were supposed to happen with South Korea this week, and they’re threatening to cancel the Kim / Trump summit over it.
I think the talks will happen – too much has been invested, talked about for them not to happen. At this point, Kim actually has more to lose than Trump by scuttling the talks. I wonder if he’s testing to see the reaction among South Koreans, to see whether his reaction will be supported by the average Korean in Dongdaemun.
Just in:
A statement from the First Vice Prime-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kim Kye Gwam.
Essentially, he’s saying that due to recent remarks by Bolton and others, the summit is in doubt.
Oh, I don’t think that’s true at all. Mr. Kim has very, very little to lose if he cancels the talks. In fact, it will make him appear to be “in charge” and strengthen his position at home and with China. It will force SK and the US to ask (read that as “beg”) politely that he come back to the table, which will give him ‘face’.
The alternative is that the US gets belligerent, which again works in his favor politically.
Or he gets ignored by the US and carries on with SK and China with renewed and elevated status.
The Kims have been playing this game for 3 generations now; they’re good at it.
From lots of places.
What I think is happening, is that Kim is seeing if Trump will go to the table without NK committing to denuclearization. If yes, Kim gains face, goes to the table and gets some relief on sanctions or whatever - which agreement he then abrogates once it’s convenient to do so. If no, he’ll say that NK tried to negotiate, but the US asked for too much up front. Win/win for Kim, and very familiar.
Yeah, they played Trump like a chump. His primary negotiating tactic is to give away the farm while getting nothing in return.
I also posted this in another thread, regarding the letter from 1st vice-minister of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK Kim Kye Gwan:
I think this part is important:
(bolding mine)
The DPRK expects to be treated as equals: they have nuclear weapons. This goes along with how I interpret Mr. Kim’s sudden willingness to talk: he has nukes; he can no longer be treated as a “lesser” leader.
I think Kim might not need the meeting in June, but I think the meeting at some point in the near future would benefit Kim far more than it would benefit Trump. I see the meeting itself as a trap for Trump. Sure, in the initial aftermath, Trump stands to be validated as a competent, albeit unconventional and downright erratic, leader on the world stage. But a meeting validates Kim as well, and this is important to remember. It makes him look reasonable and rational, and less totalitarian. That’s something he can exploit in the near term. If he meets with Kim and then Kim backs out of his agreement - which is highly likely - then in the longer term, he makes Trump look like a dope, which makes Trump weaker domestically. And if he can charm East Asia in the process, then he could make Trump look like a warmongering, bully dope internationally the next time Trump threatens fire and fury.
The key is what Trump’s administration (which includes John Bolton) can walk away with. If they can lower expectations and tolerate a nuclear-tipped North Korea with a verifiably limited arsenal sufficient for self defense but not much else, then maybe there’s no more crisis. But if they can’t accept that, then I think Trump is setting himself up to get played, and embarrassingly so.
I’m no NK expert, but I find it impossible to believe that NK would agree to denuclearize. Well, unless China gave them an ultimatum to do so, and I don’t see that happening. If a precondition of the talks is that they result in denuclearization, the only way I can see Kim agreeing is that he wants the meeting badly enough that he’s willing to set it up and have it fail. Which might be exactly what he wants so he can blame on the US.
It seems to me that a belief that NK would ever give up its nukes is delusional. If that is a precondition for talks, then talks will never happen. If that is a non-negotiable treaty requirement, then the treaty will never be signed. If there are lesser deals that can be reached without NK giving up its nukes, then that is well and good. All this talk about denuclearization, demilitarization, and reunification is for the moment just pie in the sky. Baby steps first, but the toddler-in-chief is incapable of understanding that. He thinks this will get him the Nobel Prize but that isn’t in the cards.
I don’t see them giving up nukes either. At most, we may get some sort of limit to how many nukes, what types of nukes, and what sorts of numbers of delivery systems for the nukes.
But no nukes? Not gonna happen.
Just look at Libya after giving up nukes. Not so great. Look at Iraq, they tried to get nukes, but failed, then were invaded. Iran is being bullied around because of its lack of nukes, and we’ll probably be at war with them before too long.
If you don’t have nukes, yu aren’t taken seriously. Kim isn’t too stupid to see that.
Unless they don’t happen, in which case Trump will Tweet that the talks were never a big deal and his followers will go around denying anyone ever said otherwise.
I’ll go one step further and say I doubt Kim would give up his nukes even in the face of a Chinese ultimatum. North Korea’s nuclear weapons represent as much an insurance policy against Beijing as it does against Seoul and Washington. I think Kim’s more likely to be overthrown by a Chinese-backed coup than by an American military attack.
Well it looks like Kim Jong Un’s upset over some comments made by John Bolton – who knew his hire could make international negotiations so complicated?
Trump might like Bolton’s balls but pretty soon, it’s going to dawn on him that Mr. “I like to be unpredictable” has hired a very predictable GWB holdover who earned a reputation as a neoconservative foreign policy goon. He’s going to complicate Trump’s foreign policy ‘winning’ – bigly.
I agree with your last point (about a Chinese backed coup) which is why I think Kim might very well bend to a Chinese ultimatum. about nukes.
I could only see a Chinese-backed coup if the Chinese truly worried about Kim’s mental health, though I’m sure that China would probably not hesitate to use some muscle on North Korea if they continue to amass a more menacing nuclear stockpile.
Trump’s warning to Kim Jong-un: make a deal or suffer same fate as Gaddafi
That Trump as an international statesman and Nobel Peace prize nominee thing still working for you?