A quick thread on Korean announcement.
The question being asked is whether Trump can take credit for this. He can, negatively, in that the bellicosity of last year encouraged the two Koreas to regain the initiative to avoid being driven towards war by Washington.1/
Trump has also played more positive role in that his own readiness to meet Kim gave Moon cover for his own summit.2/
.
.
There have been deals in the past but this goes further than others. For purposes of comparison note the October 2007 agreement. (usip.org/sites/default/…) /3
The new agreement refers to this, acknowledging that not a lot was done by way of implementation. Implementation therefore is everything. Only then can we see whether this is more than a grand gesture to calm down a situation that might otherwise got out of control. 4/
The same is true for the various provisions with regard to non-aggression and measures to building confidence in peaceful intentions. A peace treaty concludes the war which in practice ended with the armistice of July 1953. 5/
This was signed by the United States (on behalf of the UN) and China (strictly speaking for the Chinese ‘volunteers’) as well as the two Koreas. This is therefore where active American and Chinese diplomacy will still be needed. 6/
The plan for the ‘denuclearization’ of the peninsula is vague. Until 1991 the US kept a nuclear arsenal deployed on South Korean territory. 7/
Last year there was talk of redeploying ‘tactical’ nuclear weapons to South Korea if requested by the government, which is now less likely to happen than it was before.
The US of course has many other means of attacking targets in North Korea without requiring weapons deployed in the South. This is why North Korea still won’t give up its nuclear weapons in a hurry. 9/
A key phrase in the new document is that the two sides ‘shared the view that the measures being initiated by North Korea are very meaningful and crucial for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula’. Thus the South is agreeing that the North is acting in good faith. 10/
The next sentence asksthe international community to help in this process of denuclearisation. It is not clear what a Trump-Kim summit can now achieve beyond this other than consider more the practicalities of denuclearisation. This is an act of diplomatic pre-emption. 11/
Biggest risk for North Korea if measures in para 1 of accord are implemented lies in effects on the sheltered North Korean society. To manage the process Kim will need wider political and economic reform. This will be a challenging and potentially destabilising transition. END
