Thread by @NoonInKorea

Here's the official English version of what's now being called the Pyongyang Declaration (vs. Panmunjom Declaration) signed by KJU and Moon yesterday. At least one place is different from what Moon said during his speech. What stands out? The ordering
koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/201…

The bullets are in the order of importance as they were in the Panmunjom Declaration and the Singapore Statement. The first bullet refers to the military agreement signed separately, why? It's necessary for ending the Armistice which is now the official objective of both SK & NK

What's the least important bullet? #6: KJU visiting Seoul. That prolly has less than 50% chance of happening. Next? Bullet 5 re denuclearization which is the most important bullet for the US (but perhaps not for SK any longer). The sub-bullets get weaker and #3 just has no teeth

When Moon said Tongchang-Ri will be permanently put out to pasture, he said "experts will participate," suggesting some level of due diligence. That's not what's in the text: it will be disposed of "under the observation of experts from relevant countries"

Maybe he got the words mixed up since if you alter 1 letter, it's "participate" rather than "observe" in original language. Perhaps it was an innocent mistake. But does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? This is no nuke joint but Tongchang-Ri
news.joins.com/article/229859…

Inspectors would be more important for nuke facilities like Yongbyon or Kangson (if that's legit) than Tongchang-ri. Plus NK has moved away from stationary to mobile missile launches using TELs. So decommissioning Sohae is kind of like an afterthought
news.sbs.co.kr/news/endPage.d…

In fact Tongchang-ri has nothing to do w/nukes. NK even held pressers in prior years to insist it's for satellites, not missiles. But now NK presents it as a key denuking piece. Is this "salami strategy": NK slicing timeline into thin intervals so the effort falls by the wayside?