Posted on 10/17/2019 4:13:22 AM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
By Yi Whan-woo, Kim Yoo-chul
As nuclear negotiations between North Korea and the United States remain in a stalemate after no "substantial outcome" from their recent encounter in Sweden, the lack of visible progress in the denuclearization dialogue is raising concerns that the North is "buying time" for its military and nuclear advancement.
During an Asan Institute for Policy Studies security forum held in Seoul, Tuesday, Bruce Bennett, a senior defense analyst at the Washington-based RAND Corporation, claimed that despite North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's promise to end his nuclear program, Pyongyang has not taken any meaningful measures toward this. Instead, the North has increased its capability since the failure of the summit between Kim and President Donald Trump in Hanoi, he said.
Bennett estimated that North Korea now has about 45 nuclear weapons, something the Asan Institute confirmed.
"Has Kim given up one nuclear weapon yet? Has he shut off production 0at one production facility, let alone taking it down? No, he hasn't done that. Quite the opposite. According to my estimates, since March of last year, Kim Jong-un has increased his nuclear destructive potential about 50 percent."
Just days ahead of the working-level talks with Washington's negotiators, the North tested a submarine-launched ballistic missile, a move viewed by many as aimed at increasing its leverage in the search for concessions and sanctions easing.
"It's an irony that denuclearization talks are extending time for the North's nuclear advancement," said Shin Yul, a political science professor at Myongji University. "The North has pursued nukes for decades. The North's nuclear ambitions have continued through three generations of the North Korean leadership lineage. This is not something that can be resolved within a year or two."
Bennett also added the North is unlikely to unilaterally dismantle a single weapon if Kim doesn't have the support of Pyongyang's military elite.....
South Korea and Japan should immediately go nuclear. It wouldn’t be good for the US but it would immediately provide a counterbalance to China and the Norks.
South Korea and Japan should immediately go nuclear. It wouldn’t be good for the US but it would immediately provide a counterbalance to China and the Norks.
It’s nice to know that there are other parts of the globe besides the Middle East that are FUBAR.
South Korea and Japan could each go nuclear over a long weekend. Without US overwatch - I think it is inevitable.
Next!
“As nuclear negotiations between North Korea and the United States remain in a stalemate after no “substantial outcome” from their recent encounter in Sweden, the lack of visible progress in the denuclearization dialogue is raising concerns that the North is “buying time” for its military and nuclear advancement. “
Who in the administration did NOT understand that from day one that was all Kim was interested in achieving - buying time. I understood that, why didn’t they??
That is all that all of the Kims have ever used any negotiations for. Why? The core of their constitution, their foundation, their core understanding of themselves REQUIRES reunification of the penninsula UNDER THEIR BANNER.
They do not even recognize the government of South Korea as legitimate, and that is why the most serious negotiations about war and peace to them must be with the United States, not South Korea. When they sit with the United States in negotiations, in their mind they are there representing all of the Korean people, north and south.
To them the aspirations of the people of South Korea are irrelevant to war and peace. To them it is all about the Kim regime versus the United States.
Given the U.S. and South Korea’s understanding of themselves in the situation, it is more than the fact that together they are on an opposing side verus North Korea, they are on a different mental plane.
You have to understand that to understand how simple words about the negotiations or any result of them means different things to North Korea than they do to everybody else.
The U.S. administrations have been caught in that conundrum over and over again. They hear the North say one thing, without consulting the foundational concepts of the regime in the North, to understand what that means IN THEIR TERMS.
Correct
Actually there was experienced repeated warnings early and often as to what to expect from North Korea. Almost unanimous from NSC staff, State experts, intel. Many of these people were fired, resigned, or are still there but with their heads down. Essentially there was only one person who did not listen to the detailed reports and real time indications but chose to overrule and try an untested path, and, well, here we are.
Yes, some people have a great vision of America, but not always a realistic vision of other countries or their leaders.
Yes, some people have a great vision of America, but not always a realistic vision of other countries or their leaders.
The implication in this article, and in some of the replies, is that the Norks wouldnt have done this if on Pres. Trump had done things differently.
We all know that short of a decapitation move against the Norks, they would continue to make nukes. Should the President have blockaded the North, including their borders with China and Russia? Should he have tried to take out their nuke facilities? Maybe he could have convinced the Chicoms to overthrow Lil Kim.
He was on the right track actually January 2017 to May 2018 time frame. Doing most of the things that would have been the best option.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.