By Bernard Rowan
It's spring in the Northern Hemisphere, or at least getting to be spring! A scan of news articles shows it's also summit world with Trump on parade.
U.S. President Donald Trump may have or will have or won't have summits with, variously, Arab League nations, other American nations including Cuba, faith leaders in Washington, and Vladimir Putin. There's little like summits to raise public awareness of issues and promote a leader's diplomatic goals and personal style. The same goes for a planned summit in May with Kim Jong-un.
Don't get me wrong. I hope it happens. Nothing about the ice between the two nations has worked. Despite professions of peaceful intent, the diet remains more tension and more lethality. That's the real problem. Maybe two autocrats will stumble onto something bigger than themselves.
Summits and planned summits raise expectations. The problem is the issues in any U.S.-DPRK summit aren't trivial. Sound bites, stand up spectacles and the like won't satisfy. It's not a meeting of global G's or an annual regional forum. People in the free world and elsewhere want results. At minimum, they want a trajectory to greater stability.
I've read that Trump may raise the symbolic issue of missing war dead. Thousands of American soldiers' remains still are in North Korea. Maybe that could be a goodwill issue to build trust. However, America needs to respond. Unfortunately, we don't have many symbols to give, only real give's such as an end to U.N. sanctions crippling Kim's economy. I don't think Trump will put that on the table. However, his predecessors always dealt this way. And they failed.
I worry that "the summit" may put Trump in a position like Ronald Reagan at Reykjavik. Trump wants to make deals and thinks he's the leader to do it. He's not suffering any hurry to get back to Washington like Reagan, but he does have the fondness for the loose cannons. Perhaps one of his family members can come with a big piece of cellophane tape or a Twitter retractor.
What's on for the summit? Some commentary suggests it's all about the nukes for Trump. Others say Kim wants an area peace treaty including Japan, Russia, China and South Korea, or that he wants denuclearization for a U.S. troop withdrawal from South Korea. Nothing's prepared for anything beyond a principles discussion. What's likely in a summit, the lead-up to which has featured plenty of discussion about how little preparation has occurred? The American side is lacking diplomatic counterweights to Trump. Kim and Trump haven't met, and Dennis Rodman isn't invited.
China sits with a Cheshire cat grin. Before Trump's sudden and incautious acceptance, pressure had been on China to do something about Pyongyang. Now it's all shifted to Trump. China can even host Kim for a big state sendoff to the talks. Trump and Xi haven't worked together on this summit or on trade. China is playing wait and see.
Trump, if he's the tough dude he knows he is, has just fallen into the quagmire by going silent on China. Nothing emits about pressuring the North for particular purposes. I think he plays to Xi and Kim's hands.
The prospects for this summit should be a good first meeting and plan for formal, resulting talks on key issues. At worst, it'll be a path to tacit recognition of the North as a nuclear power. China and North Korea don't want freedom and democracy as peace on the peninsula. The North can't give up its weapons, nukes and conventional, and no one is ready for reunification.
Frankly, the summit between President Moon Jae-in and Kim later this month has better prospects. Hotlines, communication issues, and other less sexy matters are the real stuff of peace building. It's good Pyongyang agrees to respect the South a bit more. Beware romantic aspirations to a grand summit of the two Koreas and the U.S. Small steps for now.
Bernard Rowan ( browan10@yahoo.com) is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University.
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
U.S. President Donald Trump may have or will have or won't have summits with, variously, Arab League nations, other American nations including Cuba, faith leaders in Washington, and Vladimir Putin. There's little like summits to raise public awareness of issues and promote a leader's diplomatic goals and personal style. The same goes for a planned summit in May with Kim Jong-un.
Don't get me wrong. I hope it happens. Nothing about the ice between the two nations has worked. Despite professions of peaceful intent, the diet remains more tension and more lethality. That's the real problem. Maybe two autocrats will stumble onto something bigger than themselves.
Summits and planned summits raise expectations. The problem is the issues in any U.S.-DPRK summit aren't trivial. Sound bites, stand up spectacles and the like won't satisfy. It's not a meeting of global G's or an annual regional forum. People in the free world and elsewhere want results. At minimum, they want a trajectory to greater stability.
I've read that Trump may raise the symbolic issue of missing war dead. Thousands of American soldiers' remains still are in North Korea. Maybe that could be a goodwill issue to build trust. However, America needs to respond. Unfortunately, we don't have many symbols to give, only real give's such as an end to U.N. sanctions crippling Kim's economy. I don't think Trump will put that on the table. However, his predecessors always dealt this way. And they failed.
I worry that "the summit" may put Trump in a position like Ronald Reagan at Reykjavik. Trump wants to make deals and thinks he's the leader to do it. He's not suffering any hurry to get back to Washington like Reagan, but he does have the fondness for the loose cannons. Perhaps one of his family members can come with a big piece of cellophane tape or a Twitter retractor.
What's on for the summit? Some commentary suggests it's all about the nukes for Trump. Others say Kim wants an area peace treaty including Japan, Russia, China and South Korea, or that he wants denuclearization for a U.S. troop withdrawal from South Korea. Nothing's prepared for anything beyond a principles discussion. What's likely in a summit, the lead-up to which has featured plenty of discussion about how little preparation has occurred? The American side is lacking diplomatic counterweights to Trump. Kim and Trump haven't met, and Dennis Rodman isn't invited.
China sits with a Cheshire cat grin. Before Trump's sudden and incautious acceptance, pressure had been on China to do something about Pyongyang. Now it's all shifted to Trump. China can even host Kim for a big state sendoff to the talks. Trump and Xi haven't worked together on this summit or on trade. China is playing wait and see.
Trump, if he's the tough dude he knows he is, has just fallen into the quagmire by going silent on China. Nothing emits about pressuring the North for particular purposes. I think he plays to Xi and Kim's hands.
The prospects for this summit should be a good first meeting and plan for formal, resulting talks on key issues. At worst, it'll be a path to tacit recognition of the North as a nuclear power. China and North Korea don't want freedom and democracy as peace on the peninsula. The North can't give up its weapons, nukes and conventional, and no one is ready for reunification.
Frankly, the summit between President Moon Jae-in and Kim later this month has better prospects. Hotlines, communication issues, and other less sexy matters are the real stuff of peace building. It's good Pyongyang agrees to respect the South a bit more. Beware romantic aspirations to a grand summit of the two Koreas and the U.S. Small steps for now.
Bernard Rowan ( browan10@yahoo.com) is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University.
