What Happens Next

I find myself in material agreement with Nicholas Kristof’s take, expressed in the New York Times, on the failure of the talks between President Trump and North Korean Supreme Leader Kim:

President Trump was right to walk away from his summit with Kim Jong-un rather than accept a bad nuclear agreement, but the outcome underscores that he was bamboozled last year at his first summit with Kim. Whatever genius Trump sees in the mirror, “the art of the deal” is not his thing.

At this meeting, Kim apparently sought a full end to sanctions on North Korea in exchange for closing only some nuclear sites. That was not a good deal, and Trump was right to walk rather than accept it.

“Basically they wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety, but we couldn’t do that,” Trump said, adding: “Sometimes you have to walk.”

and also find myself wondering what the implications of that failure may be:

Still, there are significant risks ahead. The most important is that North Korea may return to testing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, for that would mark a huge escalation of tensions and renewed concerns about brinkmanship and war.

I think that domestic politics will largely determine what happens next. If North Korea can maintain a low profile, we’ll probably go back to ignoring North Korea. If North Korea resumes its truculence and testing, things won’t go nearly so well. We don’t have any more carrots to offer and the only stick we have left is war.

IMO these talks were worth conducting but were doomed to failure. When you’re worried about your neighbor’s dog biting you or your kid you don’t talk to the dog—you talk to the neighbor. Two party talks are now and always have been futile. If the dog keeps snarling and trying to jump over the fence, the neighbor shouldn’t be surprised when you shoot the dog. There are no police to call.

As I have said before my preference would be to ignore North Korea, possibly treating its occasional missile test over international waters as opportunities to test our anti-missile technology, but, if it actually uses its nuclear weapons against us or our allies or attempts to sell its technology, shoot to kill.