BBC
Fox News
"This year, the North has conducted more than 20 ballistic missile launches and one nuclear test explosion, its most powerful yet" (Fox News).
In October, President Trump tweeted that Tillerson would be "wasting his time" in pursuing negotiations with North Korea. Two weeks earlier, North Korea tested a missile that could carry a nuclear warhead to the east coast of the United States. Following this, the UN's Undersecretary General Jeffrey Feltman visited Pyongyang and urged North Korea to consider negotiations.
On Tuesday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stated that the U.S. is ready to have diplomatic relations with North Korea even if they have no intention of giving up their nuclear arsenal program. Rex Tillerson has implied in the past that the precondition for holding negotiations would be North Korea showing a readiness to give up, to a certain degree, their nuclear program. Now, it seems Tillerson is taking a more realistic view, as they are too committed to their nuclear program. Of course, Tillerson maintains that the ultimate goal of these negotiations would be for North Korea to drop the program.
I believe that Tillerson is taking the right approach here, as negotiations have to begin somewhere and this seems like a courteous beginning. It would be unfeasible to have North Korea be willing to drop their nuclear program, which they have worked on for considerable amounts of time, as a condition of negotiations.
Now, as it seems that negotiations with North Korea are bound to begin, although the first meeting could "be about anything". What approach would you guys take to these negotiations to convince North Korea to terminate the program? Do you see this "compromise" as a softening of policy on Tillerson's part?
32 comments:
I think that Tillerson is taking a step in the right direction. Trump's attitude with the North Korea situation doesn't seem to be helping both sides at all, making it seem like he actually wants nuclear war to happen, so it's nice to know that at least one member of Trump's Cabinet is viewing this in a more positive manner. Nevertheless, this relates back to the topic we were talking about yesterday and how Mr. Felder brought up that Trump was considering firing Tillerson. Because of the differences in their ideologies regarding NK, it wouldn't be surprising for Trump to cut Tillerson off the job before any real negotiations have gone down. It might seem unthinkable, but knowing Trump's character, it may very well be a possibility.
I believe that Tillerson is doing a great job with trying to negotiate. While Trump might find it meaningless, it's still important to negotiate with a country who is threatening the lives of millions of Americans with nuclear warfare. Like Miguel said, it's nice knowing that someone is taking action in a positive way to try to resolve the conflicts with North Korea.
I believe that Tillerson is doing what President Trump should have done first. I believe that making negotiations with North Korea is a positive step that we need to go towards whether it is now or in the future, even if President Trump states, that it is "wasting his time". I believe that even if President Trump is right in that North Korea most likely won't be convinced to drop their missile program and consider negotiations, it is necessary to try to make some kind of negotiation. And in response to your questions, I don't see this compromise by Tillerson as a "softening" of policy, and even if it is, I believe that it is a necessary one. I also agree with Miguel in my hopes that Trump doesn't fire Tillerson because of the differences in views and ideologies, especially in regards to North Korea.
Of course, those above make a great point in stating that this is an amazing step in the right direction. The work we did in class about North Korea did make it pretty unlikely that North Korea would do anything because of their citizens and their poverty. I think that listening to North Korea and trying to understand what it will take to get them to let go of their threatening stance is something that may be difficult but should be attempted. I also think this view is a lot better than just banning them and tweeting things about them, for at least this gives the US and North Korea an opportunity to go in a positive direction.
In my opinion, Tillerson is doing the right thing by wanting to negotiate with North Korea. Because we have seen that North Korea is advancing their nuclear technology, they are a potential threat that the U.S. has to come to negotiations with. However I feel like it is very unreasonable to convince North Korea to completely drop their nuclear program. I'd have to agree with Ariana that Donald Trump isn't doing much by tweeting about this serious topic. I think both sides have to be reasonable and cooperative to be able to compromise on this issue.
Trump is not the person you want leading the country, especially when a nuclear crisis arises. Trump doesn't seem to give a thought to negotiations, which is why we need people like Tillerson to propose more peaceful and rational manners of dealing with such problems. Miguel brings up an alarming idea, however. If trump fires people like Tillerson, who's ideas aren't completely in line with his own, we could march straight into a serious nuclear crisis. Convincing North Korea to drop their nuclear program won't be an easy task, however, as they've been so dedicated and focused on building up their nuclear power for quite a while now. We could try to offer certain financial incentives for them to use in other aspects of government apart from nuclear development, but distrust towards the United States is so high that I would find it hard for them to completely stop development.
The North Korean leadership seems to believe that its nuclear missile programs are crucial to its survival, so obviously they most likely won't get rid of their nukes. Also, they are further advancing nuclear technology so to just step back won't make sense for them. However, it is clear that this nuclear technology could pose a threat to the U.S. With that being said, I think Tillerson is taking a step in the right direction. I mostly agree with Julia in that this should have been done before with President Trump who wasn't fond of the idea. Even if negotiation doesn't amount to anything, I still believe it's the right move because it might alleviate North Korea's threatening stance. In order for any compromise to happen, both parts need to address the situation at hand unselfishly. I agree with many of the comments above in that taking initiative is better than remaining politically stagnant. I suppose we could offer some incentives to North Korea, perhaps financial as connor proposed, but we have to be careful to stray away from bad terms with them.
I believe that Tillerson is acting in the best interest of all. North Korea, has or is developing weapons that potentially could lead to widespread war and death. Even though these talks may be futile in the end, the exploration of possible agreements is positive. This trend of increased diplomacy is promising and hopefully through these communications about the current issues with North Korea will be resolved.
I also believe that Tillerson is leading the U.S towards the right direction by trying to negotiate with North Korea, given that it is best to have negotiations before resorting to any type military action.. However, Trump has a totally different view on North Korea, which is evident in his previous tweets. I believe that until the U.S. comes to a consensus on their strategy against North Korea, it's pointless to convince North Korea to drop their nuclear weapons, especially when the White House recently released a statement saying that Trump's view for the North Korea situation has not changed. The North Koreans will not likely agree to stop their nuclear weapons development when the negotiation with Tillerson is not entirely supported by the U.S. government.
The approach I would take is probably one similar to what Tillerson is planning on doing with North Korea. As declaring war would lead to nuclear war, trying to get North Korea to cooperate would be the best option. Unlike Trump who continuously denounces North Korea for its actions, Tillerson is trying to obtain some peace between these two nuclear forces. However, there are many North Koreans that are suffering from hunger, disease, and a lack of basic rights. The only safe way would be to take these talks slowly and carefully in order to achieve some sort of accomplishment that past presidential administrations were unable to achieve.
I don't believe that this is a "softening" of policy, it is the logical thing to do. It is not practical to push for a nuclear attack when solving the issue could be as simple as a negotiation. While it may not be a sudden improvement, it is something that could be built on. With an issue this serious, we cannot put trust in Trump. He favors standing our ground as a nation, we cannot put the whole US at risks because of Trumps pride.
I agree that this is not “softening up,” but instead a turn to realistic foreign relations. Opening any diplomatic channels will be a benefit, even if we don’t get anything immediately. North Korea may refuse to disarm now, but that does not mean that they will not disarm in the future—especially if we can have better relations with them. Open communication with our “mortal enemies” is an extremely importing thing to practice. It worked with the USSR; why can’t it work with North Korea?
I agree that Tillerson is trying to approach negotiations with North Korea in a very practical way by being open to negotiations without preconditions. Trump's fiery rhetoric has only pushed North Korea into further developing their program in order to avoid looking weak in comparison to the United States. In the past, Trump has made unreasonable demands only to be willing to making a deal at the last minute. For example, he said that taxes for corporations would have to be lowered to 20%, but ultimately, he said agreed to 21% to ensure the deal was carried through. So, he may be doing the same thing with the North Koreans by making harsh demands and then approving a deal that Tillerson makes.
Though I believe proper negotiations are crucial, I'm not sure that is the step Trump is ready to make. It seems as if Tillerson is on a different track than the president, seeking a more diplomatic approach rather than the harsh and forceful approach of the president. I foresee strife between the two in dealing with the problem, the violent vs the diplomatic. I agree more with Tillerson's strategy, however I would not be as quick to allow nuclear weapons. Countries such as Sweden, Japan, and Australia don't even have nuclear weapons. Given that the country of North Korea is putting so much money into the program and so little into things like food for their people, the US may want to negotiate also for the people of north korea, to better their situation.
The compromise is a softening of policy, but a necessary one as many have said. I don't think it makes any sense to outright ask for disarmament. We both hold large power, and they
aren't going to just back down. If I were the U.S, I would limit the income of their resources and try to get other countries to do the same, so they would feel threatened from the inside. We wouldn't have to go anywhere near them and they would fall. If they became self sufficient however, I doubt we wouldn't have to do anything and they wouldn't use their weapons, because they have some value of self preservation. In a way, the threat still exists, but at least they probably won't do anything.
I feel like even though Tillerson may be stepping in the right direction by calling for negotiations, it doesn't matter until North Korea sees Trump concede to negotiations, since he is our President and he is the one that seems to be against compromising with North Korea. It wouldn't matter how many other people want to compromise if the main body of our foreign policy is not willing to concede. So honestly, I believe that the first meeting could be about convincing North Korea that the government can convince Trump that negotiating is a good idea, which would then hopefully eventually lead to an actual agreement.
As stated above, I do believe what Tillerson is saying is very important in finding a solution to the hostilities between the U.S. and North Korea. However, it may not be logical because the leader of our country is on a different page on what he would like to happen, compared to what some of American want to happen. It is not "softening" the policy but instead an approach we need to take in order to put an end to the constant threats of a nuclear war. Instead of selfishly thinking for himself, Tillerson is thinking of the best outcome for himself and the rest of America.
I agree with many others who say that this seems like a strong step in the right direction. Unlike president Trump I do not think that pursuing negotiations is a waste of time at all, in fact I think having such a prominent political figure such as Tillerson and Pyongyang pursuing negotiations is a crucial step to a peaceful resolution of conflict. I don't think this is a softening or appeasement but the begging of the ability to compromise and have a civil relationship with North Korea. I think making North Korea drop their nuclear program as a precursor to negotiations is a naive hope, considering that is one of our primary concerns and presumably one of the main topics of negotiations. Hopefully we continue to follow this trend of peaceful relationship building in the future.
Although the degree of success coming from this negotiation is unknown, it is a step that we must take if we want to deal with North Korea diplomatically. As it is right now, it seems Trump wants to keep the image of a "strong" America, using force if necessary to strike down its foes. This could only lead to more fighting and wars, greatly damaging not only our opponents but ourselves as well. I believe that a peaceful approach is the best way to coming to a resolution with North Korea
First I'd like to say that I'm very glad that we are moving towards diplomacy with North Korea - keep in mind that the Korean War is still technically going on. I think in order to get Kim to give up his nuclear weapons we need to do several things that give him some leverage. First we will need to end the Korean war and acknowledge the 38th parallel as the permanent border between the North and South. Second, we to lift sanctions and allow more relief efforts to reach the people of the DPRK. Finally, we need to truly demilitarize the DMZ and assure Kim that the US has no interest in threatening his regime. Eventually the dictatorship in Korea will fall, they always do, but by trying to force a revolution, we are only making things worse. We just need to accept that North Korea is a thing and that we need to treat them as a sovereign nation like they have been for over 50 years.
The way I see it is that there are two options: 1) Work with China on sanctions on North Korea and starve North Korea out 2) Full scale war on North Korea. All this soft talk with diplomacy towards North Korea has not worked for 50 years or so, as they refuse to listen to the demands of the United States. Even now, I doubt they will be willing to listen, as ultimately the purpose of them developing nuclear weapons is to protect themselves from American nukes. To respond to Will, you are basically declaring whatever Kim believes is correct and that America supports dictatorships like the one there. The best way is to work with China, as they are pretty much North Korea's lifeline. If the US can find a way to stop all Chinese business in North Korea, that's pretty much the last country left that feeds the DPRK.
I do not believe that North Korea will be relinquishing their nuclear power any time soon. North Korea has spent years trying to prove their military capabilities, and it is a major area of pride for the country. I believe that Rex Tillerson was overly optimistic in believing North Korea would simply give up their nuclear power, and bringing it to the table as the only talking point would simply anger the country. By taking a different approach, I don't think that Rex Tillerson is being "soft" on North Korea, but is being incredibly diplomatic and attempting to salvage the deteriorating relationship between the US and NK. Asking them to get rid of their nukes is an improbable request, and by taking a different path, Tillerson is massively improving US diplomatic relations.
Considering the US and North Korea's history, it is unlikely that peace will come quickly, if at all. I believe that compromise and "softening" the US's approach is necessary and the only real option of preventing nuclear war. The US has a preoccupation with being seen as a tough dominant power, demonstrated by the president's incendiary language and threats. However, we must prioritize safety over image. Therefore progress made by Tillerson in compromise seems to be the best approach.
By now, it seems extremely unlikely that North Korea will just "drop" its nuclear arsenal, especially after spending such a large amount of resources on acquiring and testing it. The only options seems to be either living with a nuclear capable North Korea for the foreseeable future, or to persuade China and Russia to impose better sanctions and force change in the regime (which is even less likely to happen.
Personally, I believe that compromise is a good approach, and that in order to reason with the insanity that is North Korea, one should take an approach that makes it seem less like they are going to destroy their hard work as a country crushing their goals and what they have been working towards. Therefore I do not think that Tillerson's compromise softens his policy, it only makes it more theoretically effective. Additionally I do not think that Trump's actions toward North Korea have been appropriate, and while North Korea can be difficult, threatening them with fire and flames is not any manner to go about negotiating with a potential nuclear power.
I think there should be more of a compromise between the two. Yes negotiation is never off the table and should always be used when necessary; however, when we are dealing with North Korea, we must remain strong. Rex Tillerson is doing the first step, by negotiating, but even if we somehow reach a compromise, there will still be the threat of North Korea not listening. In the past, North Korea has shown that they will not follow the rules and terms we set and negotiation and maybe giving them something may not be the right move. But like many stated above, it is worth a try.
While total disarmament of North Korea would be ideal here, Tillerson's realistic approach here is duly noted. I just hope that the U.S. doesn't attempt to force North Korea into anything that would have potential consequences for the American people. While on the other hand, no one wants the U.S. to go to soft on North Korea and allow them to retain their arsenal. Funny enough, this situation reminds me of APUSH and the Allies' cycle of appeasement that Neville Chamberland fell into with Hitler, and to those who do not remember, Hitler took advantage of this long leash he was granted and participated in one of the most terrible wars in recent history.
Forcing North Korea to do anything that it does not like can end very badly for the US and North Korea as well. I would say that compromising with North Korea is a much more safe and secure option than simply forcing the country to give up their program. Tillerson is taking the safe route in this conflict we have with North Korea. While I do understand people who see this possible appeasement as "weak", I think this is the smarter alternative than trying to keep America's "world police" image strong and possibly creating a larger conflict with North Korea.
Having diplomatic relations with North Korea is a very good idea and you have to start somewhere so I believe this is a good start. While I also believe getting North Korea to give up its nuclear arsenal is highly unlikely, it is a good idea to start negotiations and discuss what we can change and help now. I don't see Tillerson's strategy as "weak", but I rather see it as taking a safer route where he could later open the possibility of North Korea's nuclear arsenal once relations with them are less tense.
While I see the positivity in attempting to have diplomatic relationships with North Korea, I don't see any way that they end positively and remain diplomatic. I know that the U.S. and the rest of the international community want to get North Korea to dismantle their nuclear arsenal, but this goal is in no way feasible of accomplishing. There is nothing that the international community can do to get North Korea to stop testing and producing nuclear weapons, and any attempt to do will undoubtedly end up angering the North Koreans. Knowing this, while I understand that Tillerson wants to make the effort to peacefully negotiate with North Korea to stop building up their nuclear arsenal, I think that any suggestion of doing so, even if made in a diplomatic and peaceful manner, will anger the North Koreans. Because of this, I think that it would be best for the U.S. and the rest of the international community to just leave North Korea alone. While they would continue to develop their nuclear arsenal if left alone, I do not think that North Korea has the audacity to actually use those weapons. Although their government and leader may seem insane because of the atrocities they have committed, I think that they still have enough sense to realize the potential consequences of using nuclear weapons not only for them, but the entire world. Considering all of this, I think that the best thing for Tillerson to do would be to end his attempt in establishing diplomatic relations with North Korea.
While the ideal scenario would be N. Korea abandoning their nuclear program, that does not seem like a possibility at this point, so Tillerson's decision to negotiate with N. Korea is probably for the best. Since it does not seem possible for N. Korea to be free of nuclear arms, the next best thing would be to have a diplomatic relationship with N. Korea to minimize any risks of nuclear warfare. Even this scenario, however, might be difficult to achieve given the hostilities between N. Korea's dictator and our president. President Trump seems to believe that negotiating would be a waste of time, and Kim Jong Un is a megalomaniac, who might very well be willing to sacrifice any number of his own citizens to maintain his power. Anyone who knows conditions of an average citizen in North Korea would know that the well-being of his citizens is not very high on the dictator's list of concerns.
Post a Comment