Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Spring Fund Drive: Keep CounterPunch Afloat
CounterPunch is a lifeboat of sanity in today’s turbulent political seas. Please make a tax-deductible donation and help us continue to fight Trump and his enablers on both sides of the aisle. Every dollar counts!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Getting to “Yes” with North Korea

For the first time in quite a few years, direct US-North Korea dialogue seems within reach thanks to North-South Korea talks involving Kim Jong-un and top officials of the Moon Jae-in administration. Whether or not North Korea’s complete and verifiable denuclearization, which has long been the chief US demand, will actually be on the table much less be agreed upon remains to be seen, of course. Kim Jong-un surprised the South Korean delegation by apparently indicating a willingness to discuss denuclearization. But most media reports neglected to mention that Kim wants concessions in return—concessions that his father and grandfather have long sought in return for surrendering a deterrent to feared American attack.

From what I can piece together, here is the North Korean position as reported in US and South Korean publications.

North Korea wants:

· Recognition as a “serious partner for dialogue”

· Summit meeting with ROK and resumption of exchanges

· Security assurances, namely, “eliminating the US military threat to North Korea and a guarantee of its security.”

· Normalization of relations with the US

In return, North Korea

· Is willing to discuss denuclearization.

· Will refrain from threats to South Korea: North Korea “will not attempt any strategic provocations, such as nuclear and ballistic missile tests.”

· Will not demand as a precondition for talking that US-ROK joint exercises scheduled for April be cancelled.

· Will not test missiles or a nuclear weapon during talks with the US.

Note, however, the following qualifications. First, North Korea is willing to discuss denuclearization, but wants compensation for it, notably security guarantees and “eliminating the US military threat to North Korea.” Second, what exactly “denuclearization,” “security guarantees,” and “US military threat” mean aren’t spelled out and clearly will require long-term negotiation. Third, symbolism counts: North Korea wants acknowledgment of its legitimacy in the form of acceptance as an equal negotiating partner. Fourth, North Korea wants normalized relations with the US, an aim previously discussed in 2005 when the six parties reached a step-by-step nuclear agreement.

In a nutshell, the news out of Korea is welcome for defusing tensions and laying out a path to a new negotiated agreement among North and South Korea and the US. But the path is likely to be strewn with obstacles, first, because Seoul is probably far more willing than Washington to work with North Korea’s position and possibly accept less than complete and verifiable North Korean denuclearization; and second, because of the negative US attitude, already on display among “experts” and Trump officials, using expressions such as “we’ve seen this movie before” and “a fig leaf for ulterior purposes.” Such deep pessimism that North Korea will abide by any agreement reached—a pessimism surely shared by some of Kim Jong-un’s inner circle—may well destroy any serious effort to engage Pyongyang.

For what it’s worth, Donald Trump’s initial reaction is the usual “we’ll see.” He’ll have to say and do a lot more than that. In testing Kim Jong-un’s seriousness, Trump should not only refrain from tweeting threats and be willing to settle for less than the North’s total denuclearization, such as a verifiable nuclear freeze. He should also make the kinds of symbolic gestures that are meaningful to the North Koreans, such as sending of high-profile political figure to Pyongyang and indicating respect for North Korea as a negotiating partner.

More articles by:

Mel Gurtov is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University, Editor-in-Chief of Asian Perspective, an international affairs quarterly and blogs at In the Human Interest.

May 24, 2018
Gary Leupp
Art of the Dealbreaker: Trump’s Cancellation of the Summit with Kim
Jeff Warner – Victor Rothman
Why the Emerging Apartheid State in Israel-Palestine is Not Sustainable
Kenn Orphan
Life, the Sea and Big Oil
James Luchte
Europe Stares Into the Abyss, Confronting the American Occupant in the Room
Richard Hardigan
Palestinians’ Great March of Return: What You Need to Know
Howard Lisnoff
So Far: Fascism Lite
Matthew Vernon Whalan
Norman Finkelstein on Bernie Sanders, Gaza, and the Mainstream Treatment
Daniel Warner
J’accuse All Baby Boomers
Alfred W. McCoy
Beyond Golden Shower Diplomacy
Jonah Raskin
Rachel Kushner, Foe of Prisons, and Her New Novel, “The Mars Room”
George Wuerthner
Myths About Wildfires, Logging and Forests
Binoy Kampmark
Tom Wolfe the Parajournalist
Dean Baker
The Marx Ratio: Not Clear Karl Would be Happy
May 23, 2018
Nick Pemberton
Maduro’s Win: A Bright Spot in Dark Times
Ben Debney
A Faustian Bargain with the Climate Crisis
Deepak Tripathi
A Bloody Hot Summer in Gaza: Parallels With Sharpeville, Soweto and Jallianwala Bagh
Josh White
Strange Recollections of Old Labour
Farhang Jahanpour
Pompeo’s Outrageous Speech on Iran
CJ Hopkins
The Simulation of Democracy
Lawrence Davidson
In Our Age of State Crimes
Dave Lindorff
The Trump White House is a Chaotic Clown Car Filled with Bozos Who Think They’re Brilliant
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Domination of West Virginia
Ty Salandy
The British Royal Wedding, Empire and Colonialism
Laura Flanders
Life or Death to the FCC?
Gary Leupp
Dawn of an Era of Mutual Indignation?
Katalina Khoury
The Notion of Patriarchal White Supremacy Vs. Womanhood
Nicole Rosmarino
The Grassroots Environmental Activist of the Year: Christine Canaly
Caoimhghin Ó Croidheáin
“Michael Inside:” The Prison System in Ireland 
May 22, 2018
Stanley L. Cohen
Broken Dreams and Lost Lives: Israel, Gaza and the Hamas Card
Kathy Kelly
Scourging Yemen
Andrew Levine
November’s “Revolution” Will Not Be Televised
Ted Rall
#MeToo is a Cultural Workaround to a Legal Failure
Gary Leupp
Question for Discussion: Is Russia an Adversary Nation?
Binoy Kampmark
Unsettling the Summits: John Bolton’s Libya Solution
Doug Johnson
As Andrea Horwath Surges, Undecided Voters Threaten to Upend Doug Ford’s Hopes in Canada’s Most Populated Province
Kenneth Surin
Malaysia’s Surprising Election Results
Dana Cook
Canada’s ‘Superwoman’: Margot Kidder
Dean Baker
The Trade Deficit With China: Up Sharply, for Those Who Care
John Feffer
Playing Trump for Peace How the Korean Peninsula Could Become a Bright Spot in a World Gone Mad
Peter Gelderloos
Decades in Prison for Protesting Trump?
Thomas Knapp
Yes, Virginia, There is a Deep State
Andrew Stewart
What the Providence Teachers’ Union Needs for a Win
Jimmy Centeno
Mexico’s First Presidential Debate: All against One
May 21, 2018
Ron Jacobs
Gina Haspell: She’s Certainly Qualified for the Job
Uri Avnery
The Day of Shame
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail