The Singapore Agreement: Analysis

Comment on articles posted to The DEFCON Warning System
User avatar
DEFCONWarningSystem
Director
Director
Posts: 5320
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:24 pm

As the world watched, the United States of America and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) signed an agreement in Singapore.

Note the word used there. Not “treaty.” Not “deal”. “Agreement.”

For those who looked to the Singapore Summit as the beginning of a new era, they are in for a disappointment.

When looked at from an analytical view, there really wasn’t a lot to the agreement that wasn’t already on the table. Aside from the United States pledging to end war games in the Korean theatre, no one really got anything new or substantial out of Singapore.

Here is what was agreed to, taken directly from the text of the Agreement document:

* President Trump committed to provide security guarantees to the DPRK

No security guarantees were actually made. The United States talked about reducing troops in some unspecified future, but nothing was set in stone, and the United States even said that things could change should North Korea not live up to its side of the agreement.

* Chairman Kim Jong Un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

North Korea has been saying that a lot recently. But as many have brought up, the definition of “denuclearization” may not mean the same thing to North Korea as it does to the United States. (See North Korea’s definition of ‘denuclearization’ is very different from United States’ and No Good Choices With North Korea) Future negotiations will have to specify what exactly is meant by “denuclearization” and how to go about verifying that. Much criticism was made of the deal the United States made with Iran regarding the lack of real inspections and verification. The United States does not want to make the same mistake with North Korea as it did with Iran.

* The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new US – DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the population of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.

The United States has, in the past, held a philosophy of bringing its style of representative government and living to other nations. It will be hard pressed to avoid imposing that on a country that is deeply suspicious of outsiders as well as fearful of having its own power usurped. It certainly can happen, but political forces in the United States are already working to sabotage any deal the U.S. makes with North Korea by attempting to impose irrelevant conditions on to it.

Critics are already complaining that the agreement did not address human rights issues in North Korea. While laudable, it isn’t in the best interest of the United States to muddy the waters with side issues. When you’re talking about nuclear missiles aimed at your country, you worry first about that and then maybe tackle other things you deem important. In the same way, if someone is holding a gun to your face, you don’t really worry about the fact that he also beats his kids. Get the gun away first and then deal with the other thing.

* The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

Always a good goal, but touchy-feely. Doesn’t really mean anything. What does stable mean to the U.S.? to North Korea? Likely different things.

* Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

It is typical of new agreements to reaffirm old ones. Happens all the time. But it isn’t anything new and brings nothing new to the table.

* The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

While this is one of those side issues, this works to North Korea’s advantage as North Korea has, at least internationally, has been working to put on a new, more positive image. This will help that.

* The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-up negotiations

This is key, good news, and not surprising given how relations have gone over the last few months. Despite a number of detractors who (strangely) seem to want negotiations between the United States and North Korea to fail, talking with your adversary is always a good thing. Breaking off communications can be used as a short term tactic, but in the long run you can’t negotiate anything unless you are negotiating.

So what exactly does the Singapore Agreement mean? It means that there are more talks, more negotiations in the future.

The United States has already said that sanctions will not be coming off of North Korea at this time. It has, however, said that the war games with South Korea will stop. North Korea has said it will destroy its rocket engine testing facility. (This was already going to happen, so this is not a new thing to come out of this meeting.)

Ultimately, it remains to be seen what is going to happen. Certainly, there has been a significant change in North Korea’s approach to the United States. Whether this was the result of sanctions crippling the country and North Korea was facing internal unrest, whether this was because China finally told North Korea to start negotiating its nuclear arsenal, or whether because North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un was replaced by a doppelganger (sure, why not?), we’ll never know.

Some speculate that North Korea has grown nervous about China and is using its new approach to the United States in the same way India uses its relationship with Russia as a check on the United States. There could be some truth to that. Who knows?

For the world, this all means that a tentative step toward peace in the Korean theatre has happened. But history cautions us. North Korea has made agreements and broken them in the past. Could this be different?

We’ll see.

In the words of another U.S. President, “trust…but verify.”

Obreid
Regular contributor
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:51 am

Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:23 pm

I read an interesting take on Kim’s bellicose behavior after he assumed control of DPRK. I do apologize I can’t remember where to give credit to, it was however just a opinion piece.
The writer believed his aggressive bellicose behavior since taking control has just to establish domestic control and provide some leverage on the international front. The writer argued that Kim’s real intentions were for modernization and opening of country to a degree.

Other than extrapolating the obvious moves he has made there is little proof to indicate this is what he’s thinking. The one thing I consider might validate this it that Kim received his education in the west, Switzerland. The seeds of opening his nation to 21 century might have been planted there.
Time will tell, playing tough and the madman might just have been necessary for him to survive the first few years, politics is theater.

User avatar
DEFCONWarningSystem
Director
Director
Posts: 5320
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:22 pm

Yes, Kim had to assert control aggressively once he took over. I don't think the elite respected him, so it was important that they fear him.

willrod1989
.
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:07 am
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA

Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:59 am

DEFCONWarningSystem wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:24 pm
Ultimately, it remains to be seen what is going to happen. Certainly, there has been a significant change in North Korea’s approach to the United States. Whether this was the result of sanctions crippling the country and North Korea was facing internal unrest, whether this was because China finally told North Korea to start negotiating its nuclear arsenal, or whether because North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un was replaced by a doppelganger (sure, why not?), we’ll never know.
It's rather interesting that you've brought up the idea of Kim Jong Un being replaced by a doppelganger. I remember during the height of tensions last year, there were several news articles talking about South Korea training a "decapitation squad" to go in and take him out. This definitely borders on "tinfoil hat" territory, but who knows if maybe he was replaced with a double who would slowly back North Korea away from the brink and towards normal relations? But in all seriousness, I feel that they are probably looking towards better relations with the United States due to China flexing their military muscles. Look at what happened back in the 70s when China normalized relations with the US due to uneasy feelings with the USSR.

User avatar
DEFCONWarningSystem
Director
Director
Posts: 5320
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:48 pm

willrod1989 wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:59 am
But in all seriousness, I feel that they are probably looking towards better relations with the United States due to China flexing their military muscles. Look at what happened back in the 70s when China normalized relations with the US due to uneasy feelings with the USSR.
China wants the peninsula stabilized, and if that means NK had to eat some crow, China didn't care. If China cuts off NK, what exactly is NK going to do?

Now, NK believes it could get along without China. They really are all into the self-sufficiency thing.

So, tbh, I am not quite sure what is behind NK's change of heart. I really doubt NK had a "come to Jesus" moment. Maybe the sanctions bit into their cocoon a little too deeply?

Post Reply