March 7, 2018--Korea

Finally, maybe, perhaps, could it be at last that there is some good news from Korea?

Change often comes about in unexpected ways.

South Korean leaders worked hard to convince North Korea to join an all-Korean contingent of athletes at the recent Olympics. 

Even maxim-leader Kim Jong-un's sister attended, sitting in the VIP box fewer than 10 feet from Vice President Pence, who did not even have the manners to smile in her direction. (His wife travels with him wherever he goes to keep him from paying attention to beautiful young women.)

Things felt so frosty that it seemed as if Trump couldn't wait for Pence to leave so he could get on with the business of nuking Pyongyang.

For the new president of South Korea, Moon Jae-in, having North Koreans participating in figure skating and ice hockey was less about sports or medal counts than high-stakes geopolitical politics.   

Moon ran for office as a new-style leader who would not wake up every morning with his marching orders delivered to him by our ambassador (assuming we ever again have one) but as one who would find his own way on the Korean peninsular, especially testing to see if there is any chance to make a deal for some sort of rapprochement before we, "fire and fury," incinerate both Koreas.

That opportunity may be coming into focus. Earlier this week high-level South Koreans travelled north where they had substantive discussions with their North Korean counterparts, including in the North Korean delegation, Kim's sister--the "Korean Ivanka." 

After the two days of meetings Kim announced that he would order the suspension of missile and nuclear testing during any talks Moon might be able to broker between the North and the United States. Further, Kim hinted, he is willing to discuss the denuclearization of North Korea, America's and the world's ultimate objective.

Trump's response? Moderate. Reasonable. Rational. No tweets about "Little Rocket Man" and "whack job." Just indications of appropriately skeptical openness to Kim's initiative.

Could this be, might this be, perhaps this represents . . .

I am reluctant to compete these sentences and jinx the situation.

But here's the framework for a deal. Admittedly, a stretch--

We agree to discussions (remember during the campaign how Trump said he would be willing to meet with Kim, that to do so would be "his honor"). South Korea, China and even Russia eagerly await the results and, back-channel, encourage Kim to be negotiable. 

After a couple of months, there is the outline of the deal--

In exchange for ratcheting-back their nuclear program, on route to reducing it, the North agrees not to develop nuclear weapons that are small and dependable enough to be delivered by their ICBM missiles that already have the capacity to reach the United States.

In return, we agree to draw down our military presence in South Korea, withdrawing the bulk of our current contingent of 23,500 troops. The UN agrees to deploy inspectors on both sides of the border to guarantee that North Korea and the U.S. fulfill their commitments.

Longer term, the country is unified, following the examples of Vietnam where there is now one Vietnam, and Germany where there is now one Germany. To help in the process, the economic behemoth, South Korea, devotes trillions to the modernization of North Korea, which in turn over time also becomes an economic powerhouse.

Trump one way or the other is forced to give up carrying out any tail-wag-the-dog actions in a desperate attempt to deflect attention from the now rapidly encroaching Mueller investigation. He has to settle for stumbling into helping to promote world peace.

Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump share the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump finally, with this at least, reaches parity with his predecessor. 

OK, too much, scratch that. But they are widely adulated. Enough so that Trump decides not to run for reelection, reminding us endlessly how he fulfilled all his promises. How the mission has been accomplished.

In fact, if anything like this plays out, unlikely partners as Kim and Trump are, they would deserve a lot of credit.

January 4, 2018--Let the Games Begin!

Kim Jong-un and Trump Donald-un are at it again. We've moved from "Little Rocket Man" to back-and-forths about whose nuclear button is bigger than whose. (Fortunately, on both sides, there are no such buttons.)

Do you think these world leaders have a size problem? We know that "Little Marco" Rubio felt that way about candidate Trump's hands and other body parts. 

This ends the entertainment portion of this posting. 

The rest is perhaps even hopeful.

Remember back in the early 1970s, after 20 years of estrangement between the United States and "Red" China, both sides were looking for a face-saving way to begin to engage each other.

The U.S. ping pong team was in Japan competing in the world table tennis tournament. Since they were in the neighborhood, the People's Republic of China invited them to come to Beijing for a series of exhibition matches. 

Never mind that our team was trounced. What turned out to be important was not the ping pong but the fact that this represented the beginning of communication between both sides which culminated in 1972 with fierce Cold Warrior Richard Nixon visiting China, most remarkably sitting down to talk with maximum leader, Mao Zedong. The rest is the history we are living with today.

There may be, may be something similar happening right now on the Korean peninsular.

With the Winter Olympics less than a month from opening in South Korea, in his annual New Years address to the world, North Korea's president Kim Jong-un hinted that he would like to talk with his South Korea counterpart, Moon Jae-in, about the possibility of the North sending athletes to the games. I suppose in the tradition that enemies put aside their weapons to compete in the Olympics.

Quickly, President Moon took up Kim's offer. They or their representatives have already made plans to meet in the demilitarized zone as early next week and they have already reconnected the hot line between the two Koreas. We know that when they meet they will be talking about more than ski jumping.

Obervers in Asia and the West are noting that this is an attractive strategy for each side--for Kim it shows some flexibility in regard to talking to those who oppose him and his nuclear program. It also, as many are putting it, "drives a wedge" between two erstwhile allies--South Korea and the United States. Presuming that if Moon agrees to meet it will be in defiance of Trump, president of South Korea's longest time ally, the United States.

On President Moon's side of the table, it shows his independence from the United States. That his is not a puppet regime. We have been a huge presence there from the years of the Korean War until today. Nearly a remarkable 70 years. Currently there are 37,500 U.S. military personnel in South Korea, and for decades we have been the the major patrons of most South Korean political leaders.

But Moon, who recently come to power as a "liberal" has sought to put some distance between us and his country. So this wedge may be just what he is seeking--some measure of independence from our influence.

In a frenzy of threatening tweets about Pakistan, the Palestinians, Iran, and North Korea, President Trump has indicated he has no problem with the two Koreas talking with each other.

Perhaps he too is hoping that this small opening, not unlike the ping pong diplomacy of the 1970s, will lead to a way for us to back off while saving face. 

This has not been Trump's MO--backing off or looking for ways to save face--but one never knows with someone as unpredictable and as embattled as he. Maybe he will switch to becoming as obsessed with Pakistan or Venezuela as he is with North Korea. In his world, that could be a version of a good thing. And it does fit an America First agenda of sorts, though Pakistan has at least 100 nukes and I'm not sure provoking them as he recently has is such a good idea.

It is fragile things of this sort that we hope for and cling to.

October 5, 2017--Back to North Korea

While the country has been preoccupied with hurricane news and now the mass murder in Las Vegas, concern about North Korea has largely faded from the front pages. 

It will be back.

In the meantime, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was in China last week where he openly stated that the U.S. and North Korea are seeking channels through which to talk with each other about a way forward--"Stay tuned," he said.

Donald Trump, though, did/or did not chide him for that, tweeting, "Rex, don't waste your energy" trying to talk with them. Soon enough they will bear the consequences of their intransigence.

Were they playing good cop/bad cop or did Tillerson go rogue and got slapped down for it?

The over/under betting line is that Tillerson will be gone in a few weeks, or days, especially after he called Trump a "moron." This reliable reported by NBC, among others.

Apparently, after hearing about that, Vice President Mike Pence frantically tried to talk Rex down. We'll see how that works out.

My comment about Trump and Tillerson--that he "did/or did not" chide his Secretary of State--suggests that some or all of this public back forth might be more an act than a reality. To confuse the North Koreans and terrify them that Trump is not bluffing but is actually as crazy as he seems. If true, Trump and Tillerson may be concocting confusing signals that remind one of the crazy-act Nixon put on which was orchestrated by his Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, to perplex and frighten the Russians and Chinese.

Last week I wrote about a breakfast conversation with Phil, who laid out four options that might explain what is going on between us and the Kim Jong-un regime.

I have heard from quite a few people about that blog posting, including my ex-wife yesterday who asked, among those options, which I think are most likely. 

Here then is how I see the possibilities, acknowledging I have no special insights or inside knowledge about to what is transpiring. Who does?  

I have ranked these possibilities from the most likely scenario to the least--

Most likely--back channel discussions are in fact inching along. Recall that it took two years back in the early 1950s for us to work out an agreement to suspend the war between North and South Korea, with us, of course, the principal player on the side of the South. 

Are you old enough or immersed in history enough to recall the months it took just to work out the shape of the negotiating table and the height of the chairs? Yes, that was a complicated point of contention. It finally was resolved and the negotiations proceeded. The war was eventually suspended via an armistice (we are thus still technically at war with North Korea) and the rest should have been history. 

I suspect something of this sort is underway now. Tillerson, no Kissinger, carelessly leaked what is happening and therefore needed to be publicly chided to assure the North Koreans we can be trusted to keep our diplomatic mouths shut.

Second most likely--Kim Jong-un will be assassinated. The South Koreans have revealed that they are making plans for this and I suspect they are with our direct assistance. The gamble is that there is enough under-the-surface dissatisfaction with Kim on the part of the North Korean leadership class and that though they may be cowed and/or terrified by him, they also want to live on and not be bombed to smithereens by us. They have their Swiss bank accounts and condos in the West and are as a result not part of a suicide cult. Thus, some of them are likely involved in helping to overthrow Kim, or worse. Or better.

Next--The U.S. has all-encompassing cyber warfare and traditional military capabilities that we have not revealed to potential adversaries. Capacities, if they were known to the Russians or Chinese they could devise ways to counter. 

According to this scenario, using these weapon systems, we pull the plug on North Korea--we bunker-bust their underground facilities, using cyber methods we cut off their power supply, their connection to the Internet, disrupt their financial system, their access to fuel and food supplies, and even disrupt, perhaps disable their nuclear and missile activities. In other words, we may have the ability to shut them down and dramatically reduce their ability to engage in warfare. 

If we did this, if we have the capacity to do this, unleashing these new kinds of weapons would, the theory holds, bring them rapidly to negotiations. It would also mean war. But of a less bloody sort. But a war, nonetheless, with all its surprises, complexity, and dangers.

The good news: least likely--all-out war itself. Shock and awe times ten. What Trump said about "totally destroying" them. This puts Saigon's millions and our 28,000 troops currently in South Korea at great risk, and, who knows, more players in the region--Japan also gets bombed as does Guam and the Seventh Fleet. 

And then there is China--what would they do about the outbreak of a major war, perhaps a nuclear war, on their border? Back in 1950 when U.S. troops pushed across the 38th parallel and began an advance toward the Yalu River that separates Korea from China, China sent nearly 3.0 million "volunteers" across the Yalu to directly confront the American military. 180,000 Chinese were killed as were many thousands of Americans.

They hate Kim and the North Koreans but they do provide a buffer for the Chinese who do not want to see a united Korea with the South and the U.S. dominating. They also do not want millions of North Korean refugees pouring into China.

If I have this right, of the four most likely scenarios, I am seeing the most optimistic one as most likely--negotiations--and the most cataclysmic one--all-out war--as most unlikely. 

At least that's my hope.

Negotiations in Panmunjom

December 17, 2014--This Is Nuts

The daughter of the chairman of Korean Air Lines recently forced a plane she was on to go back to the gate so she could have the head steward kicked off because she had been served macadamia nuts in their bag instead of on a plate. This according to the reliable New York Times.

I say "reliable" since if this story had appeared in, say, the New York Post I would have thought it preposterous, made up. Who in their right mind would do such a thing? But there you have it--Cho Hyun-ah is unlikely to have much of a mind.

This, though, is not the whole story.

While waiting for the plane to get back to the gate, Ms. Cho forced the steward to kneel before her and apologize for the way one of the cabin  crew in first class had served the nuts. There was no word about how the peanuts were served in coach.

After the incident, the steward went public which is unusual in class-bound South Korea. Not only did he tell about the kneeling but also alleged that while he was on his knees, Ms. Cho hit him repeatedly with a folder of papers before tossing them at the junior steward.

As the story spread it added to the roiling resentment in Korea toward the families who own the county's sprawling conglomerates. It appears they have their own Occupy-Wall-Street going on.

The patriarch of the Cho family, Hyun-ah's father, so concerned about the implications for his widespread business interests not only kicked his daughter off the Korean Airlines board but also stripped her of her other nepotistic no-show jobs and forced her to apologize. Not on her knees of course.

In the meantime, as fallout from the nuts incident, sales of macadamia nuts in Korean are surging to the point that merchants can't keep them on the shelves. Everyone, it seems, wants a taste of first class. Even if in bags.

December 10, 2014--One Jong-un

Isn't it frustrating that we know so little about what's going on in North Korea.

With all our human and technological intelligence assets we don't really know who's in charge, who is slated for execution, what's happening with supreme leader Kim Jong-un's health (minimally he seems to be limping), how his sister has seemingly somehow wheedled her way into his inner circle--assuming he even has one--and what's with those Kim family bouffant hairdos?

OK, so his father and grandfather, as well as Jong-un himself were barely five-feet tall. Not that impressive when it comes to leaders-for-life. The hair adds another inch or two of stature. On the other hand, Napoleon and Hitler weren't much taller and they both sported comb-overs. No wonder Jong-un likes 6' 7" Dennis Rodman so much.

More important, we're not sure if North Korea has two or ten atomic bombs or how close they are to being able to miniaturize them enough to stick one on top of missile capable of reaching our West Coast.

But one thing I do know is that I'm happy not to be Kim's uncle. We do know what that gets you--the firing squad.

Now there's another thing publicly known--there will be no more Jong-uns.

According to the New York Times, back in January 2011, soon after Mr Kim took office (if that's the proper way to describe his ascendency) there was a government document that declared that there can be no more Jong-uns in North Korea. Since it's a common name, anyone with it was required to change it to something else and now no new babies can be named Jong-un.

This should have come as no surprise because the North Koreans did the same thing when his father and grandfather took over.

How charming. But also disturbing. Disturbing because it took nearly four years for the South Koreans, who should have some idea about what's going on in the north, to find out. If we can't keep track of what names are or are not allowed in North Korea how will we ever get a line on their military capacity and intentions.

I suppose one reason that there is no electricity anywhere in the country except the capital, Pyongyang, is to keep both the North Koreans and the rest of us in the dark.

December 10, 2013--Cold War Redux?

Is the toppling of the statue of Lenin in Kiev a sign that the Cold War is finally fully ending or will there be a Russian response that will suggest it is being revived?

Is Beijing's move to begin the process of expelling Western journalists a sign that the Cold War with "Red" China is reheating?

Is North Korea's expansion of its no-fly zones and the beefing up of its military forces close to the border with South Korea another example of going back to the future?

Some are claiming that the presidency of Barack Obama is foundering, America's influence is waning, and this represents an opportunity for leaders who wish to extend their reach and power to take advantage of the situation.

Vladimir Putin has clearly made moves recently to expand Russia's influence, especially in the Middle East where he rescued Obama from his carelessly drawn red line about Syria's use of chemical weapons against his own people.

And in Ukraine, where there is an incipient revolt underway among those who want to see their country tilt toward Western Europe and not affiliate with the Russian led Customs Union, the government there, with clear Russian support, is as I write moving to suppress the uprising. Will we soon see Russian tanks on the streets of Kiev as we did in 1956 on the streets of Budapest to put down the Hungarian Revolution?

I would not be surprised.

China, in addition to playing with the idea to expel journalists who have been writing probing stories about corruption at the highest levels, has recently reengaged with Japan about control of a couple of rocky, uninhabited islands they both claim is in their historic and national interest. To underline the point, China established a "air defense identification zone," airspace that overlaps a region that Japan and South Korea claim is theirs to manage or is over international waters. To emphasize the point, the United States, without informing China, sent two B-52s into the disputed airspace as a way to demonstrate that we do not recognize China's claim of sovereignty and will stand by our two East Asian allies.

Will an unintentional incident ignite this now heating up situation? I would not be surprised.

And in North Korea, Kim Jong-un has purged his uncle and others in a move to consolidate his one-man rule--to secure his position as what they call the "unitary center." To underscore this he simultaneously made a series of moves to threaten South Korea and its principal ally--the United States. Like the Chinese, perhaps inspired by them, he is attempting to expand the area that he claims is essential to North Korea defending itself and has apparently resumed processing nuclear material to replenish North Korea's stockpile of atomic weapons.

This is sounding spookily familiar to me.

Though it is unlikely that China, Russia, and North Korea are seeking to precipitate an actual clash, there are so many moving pieces, so much bad history and national ego involved--including among the new Japanese and South Korean leadership (with the U.S. right in the middle)--that events could easily spin out of control. All at a time when our president has been seriously weakened and might be tempted to restore his credibility by allowing the tail to wag the dog.