1. Thread 👇 Let's talk about NK's reaction to Pompeo's Pyongyang trip, that "US attitudes" during the talks were "truly unfortunate." I read the statement in Korean. This was expected cuz (a) it's typical NK negotiating & (b) Singapore statement foreshadowed this would happen...
2. On (a), NK likes to stall and draw out negotiations, blame US, wants US to make first big move, paints itself as good responsible guy and US as bad irresponsible evil guy, and lodge threats. On (b), Singapore statement's 1st 3 points showed NK's priority in sequential order...
3. Recap, Singapore statement first 3 points:
(1) commit to new relations for peace and prosperity
(2) build peace regime
(3) reaffirm Panmunjom Declaration and NK commits to complete denuke of KP
NOTE: Denuke comes AFTER relations/peace/prosperity and peace regime....
(1) commit to new relations for peace and prosperity
(2) build peace regime
(3) reaffirm Panmunjom Declaration and NK commits to complete denuke of KP
NOTE: Denuke comes AFTER relations/peace/prosperity and peace regime....
3. I raised this right after statement released on @CBSNews Special Report @jeffglor in Singapore: So it's denuke after first 2 or together or? @CBS doesnt have video weblink unfortunately. Had it in latest @BulletinAtomic column, editors scrapped before publishing. It happens..
4. I mention tweet #3 *not* to self-promote but cuz today's rxn was expected but public discourse didnt seem to catch it at/since Singapore. NK sees denuke not in vacuum but part of package and AFTER 'threat' removed, so after peace, which I said here: voakorea.com/a/4471722.html ..
5. So, NK's rxn reaffirms/confirms again its priorities in order. Yes, they said "phased" and "synchronized" today, but these concepts get tricky (chicken or egg), who makes first move & how truly simultaneously can these things be...
6. Wish I could do line-by-line deconstruction of their statement, lots to chew, but thatd be the size of a novel for twitterland. So, NK was apparently expecting talks on relations and peace this time, but US "only unilaterally and like a robber demanded denuke"...
7. Btw, NK didnt say "gangster-like." 강도적 means robber-like. So, "unilat denuke" is like "robbing" them of crown jewels. & in context w/entire NK statement, they feel robbed and deceived vs the "spirit" of Singapore of 2 other priorities nyti.ms/2KCcX36 ...
8. BOTTOM LINE (before I unpack more): Welcome to NK Negotiations 101, it's one of many stumbling blocks we'll encounter, but US should press ahead with negotiations but must NOT let nuke talks be held hostage to peace talks. (I explain here: thebulletin.org/2018/07/kim-jo…) ...
9. To be continued... need a break and live life offline a bit 😋 ...
10. BOTTOM LINE #2: It "threatens" twice ("these talks made us face a dangerous situation where we may be shaken in our unshakable will for denuclearization" and "there is no guarantee that this will not result into yet another tragedy"), BUT ...
11. (BOTTOM LINE #2 contin...) But, it's saying it is not breaking talks cuz it ends with an "appeal" to Trump - it's like a new slogan, "In Trump We Trust" - and it is basically "hoping" (? perhaps too strong a word) that they can implement the wishes of Trump and Kim. So ...
12. This raises 2 Qs: a) Did US&NK have 2 different understandings of what was 'agreed' in Singapore? (History says, most likely), or b) Did Trump make promises his staff doesnt know about, i.e. the typical disconnect between Trump & bureaucracy? (New norm says, highly likely)...
13. So far:
Round 1 (Singapore summit):
ㄴTrump 0 : 1 Kim
Round 2 (Pompeo PY trip):
ㄴTrump 0 : 1 Kim
But the game just began. Many more tough rounds to come if neither side walks away. Negotiations need to be allowed to function properly to give diplomacy a real chance ...
Round 1 (Singapore summit):
ㄴTrump 0 : 1 Kim
Round 2 (Pompeo PY trip):
ㄴTrump 0 : 1 Kim
But the game just began. Many more tough rounds to come if neither side walks away. Negotiations need to be allowed to function properly to give diplomacy a real chance ...
14. Here's the clip of the "odd" exchange between Pompeo & Kim Yong Chol. I explain how to make sense of Kim's comments/style to CBS News here: cbsnews.com/news/pompeo-an….
15. Thanks to @NarangVipin I discovered another translation issue. Not error this time, but KCNA made it misleading, altho the Korean text also plays tricks/plays with words. NK never implied or said they'd halt ICBM production. See thread here:
16. Re: Tweet #15, Ya know, translating ain't easy & I especially sympathize for simultaneous interpreters. But the reality is, words and accurate communication is pretty much everything in intl relations. Bad translations can cause serious diplomatic damage...
17. So what's the big deal about this translation issue? Cuz blowing up an engine test site does NOT mean theyre halting ICBM production. You can still produce ICBMs w/o testing engines. Plus, NK claims it no longer need to test anymore & can just mass produce weapons. BUT...
18. But, that said, Team USA could (should) still "play dumb" and say "uh, you said in your foreign ministry statement that you'd halt ICBM production" and push for this during negotiations (even tho NK never meant/said it'd stop making ICBMs)...
19. Going back to tweets #3-5 on NK's preference for sequential, action-for-action on normalized relations, peace regime, denuke. Why can't we have peace first, then denuke? I explain here: washingtonpost.com/world/pompeo-p…. So...
20. Why cant we have peace talks before nuke talks? Can end up w/ nuke-armed, economically vibrant NK w/normal relations w/US. And most likely NK's game plan. 4 Party Talks 1997-1999 tried peace treaty first, but NK demanded US troop withdrawal & China demanded rid UNC...
21. That said, nuke talks and peace talks can happen 'simultaneously' BUT we shouldnt start them until NK has dismantled enough of its nuke weapons program, or else we face the problem I describe in tweet #20...
