P’yŏngyang
The American people don’t mistake the absence of a final agreement for the absence of progress. We made progress; we must be patient. We made historic advances; we will not turn back.–Ronald Reagan
Bruce Cumings is an American historian of East Asia, professor, lecturer and author. He is the Gustavus F. and Ann M. Swift Distinguished Service Professor in History, and former chair of the history department at the University of Chicago.–Wikipedia
Do Americans understand Korea? Fifty years of propaganda and North Korean isolation have made that unlikely. Many are concerned that the Singapore meeting might fail due to lack of preparation and misunderstanding; Korea is different from other countries and different from what we imagine. The Korean language is loosely related to Japanese, unrelated to Chinese, and much like no other language. Translators at Singapore may face a difficult challenge in making Korean views clear to Americans.
Bruce Cumings writes:
Visiting Seoul in March, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson asserted that North Korea has a history of violating one agreement after another; in fact, President Bill Clinton got it to freeze its plutonium production for eight years (1994–2002) and, in October 2000, had indirectly worked out a deal to buy all of its medium- and long-range missiles. Clinton also signed an agreement with Gen. Jo Myong-rok stating that henceforth, neither country would bear “hostile intent” toward the other.
The Bush administration promptly ignored both agreements and set out to destroy the 1994 freeze. … The simple fact is that Pyongyang would have no nuclear weapons if Clinton’s agreements had been sustained.
American hostility toward North Korea is much like decades of hostility toward Cuba–in both cases bitterness from defeat resulted in decades of sanctions. I am also reminded of a prospective agreement on nuclear arms nearly reached by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev at Reykjavik, Iceland, an agreement which eventually led to progress.
What will come of the Singapore meeting is unpredictable. Do Trump, Pompeo, and Bolton even have a common goal, one wonders? Was Giuliani’s claim that Mr. Kim came begging intended to forestall agreement? Which Donald Trump will show up–Dr. Jekyll who wants a Nobel Prize or the “take it or else” bully, Mr. Hyde?
Perhaps President Trump meeting and discussing with Kim Jong-un will unexpectedly produce progress on peace for Korea. Let’s hope so.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=36598
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n10/bruce-cumings/a-murderous-history-of-korea
https://www.thenation.com/article/this-is-whats-really-behind-north-koreas-nuclear-provocations/
http://thehill.com/opinion/international/391373-the-koreas-are-moving-ahead
This entry was posted in Trump and tagged Bruce Cumings, Kim Jong-un, Korea, Singapore. Bookmark the permalink.
“I continue to say it to people today and I’m going to continue to say it during the next few days as we celebrate and commemorate the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. That when you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have a moral obligation to do something. You cannot afford to be quiet or to be silent. We have to continue to work, continue to speak up and speak out.”–Rep. Lewis
Liberals rage against the Trump-Ryan plan for a lot of reasons, but most of it boils down to anger that fewer people will have coverage. Conservatives are raging too, because, as Kentucky Senator Paul put it, Congress’s proposal will “do nothing” to bring health care costs down or to restrict the steady rise of premiums.–Leslie Danks Burke
Carl Hulse, writing in last Sunday’s New York Times, discusses firearm legislation. His account starts in 1994 when the subject arose. About the 1994 assault weapons ban, Hulse writes: