“Kim threatens to abandon talks with Trump.” That’s the message my newspaper wants me to focus on. I’m supposed to get the impression that Kim Jong-un is a whimsical, unpredictable dictator impossible to negotiate with. North Korea’s real reason is mentioned only in passing, and as if it was just a prevarication.
I watched TV with some friends the day the presidents of North and South Korea embraced and walked across the border back and forth. My first reaction was: “US will not allow that to go any further”. I didn’t have to wait many days to have that prediction come true.
The means by which US showed its intention was to launch a military maneuver in the South, in the middle of a sensitive peace process, fully aware of what reaction to expect from North Korea. That was a demonstration of arrogant condescension beyond decency, but an action our “civilized media” hardly observed.
There is no possible interpretation of this brazen action other than that the United States don’t want peace in Korea. Short of unconditional surrender, regime change and North Korea joining the other US puppet states, there will be no peace. That’s a low-odds estimate.
Peace in Korea could threaten one of US’s important strong-holds in a region where the Chinese competition becomes increasingly critical. And the US military-industrial complex will have nothing to gain from peace, either.
A no-brainer guess is that US will keep the Israeli-like, perpetual and low-intensive conflict alive in Korea. That will best serve the interests of the global hegemon. Peace-loving people may perhaps have to wait for the 90 percent of world’s population that don’t live in US or EU to put an end to war-mongering (and join China in peacefully “conquering” the world with aid, investment and trade).
How far from simple common sense have we come when we hear from our media about the possibility that the Peace prize could be given to Trump. The peculiar rationale would be that Trump has put pressure on Kim Jong-Un to make him compliant enough to cancel his nuclear weapons program.
Are we blind or is it just that Asians on average have a few points higher IQ than we? The whole scenario is of course a strategic triumph for the North Koreans. They have an enemy that never have hidden their wish to defeat or even obliterate them. This enemy is the strongest military power in history, performing regular maneuvers in which nuclear attacks on North Korea are simulated.
Despite its strength, this overwhelming power prefers to attack defenseless countries, for every possible aim (except legal once). The militaristic nation in question has declared North Korea one of its prime enemies. What would a North Korean leader with his head screwed on do in that situation?
He would to begin with see to it that his country gained enough military strength (to avoid the fate of Iraq and all the other victims of the merciless aggressor). A nuclear weapons program is the ultimate deterrence. Any aggressor is forced to think twice before doing anything stupid.
When the nuclear weapons are functional, and the defender has shown to the world that they have missiles to carry the warheads all the way to their most threatening adversary, there is a position of strength from which to negotiate. And so did North Korea.
One possible outcome of such negotiations could be that United States takes its military forces out of South Korea, an important prerequisite for a peace treaty. Without nuclear weapons as a trump card (sorry!) in the talks an outcome like that would certainly be unthinkable.
This seemingly self-evident scenario is obviously too difficult for western media to grasp. Or more likely perhaps: they don’t want to grasp it. It’s important to stick to the dramaturgy of children’s fairy-tales: the evil one is always evil and cannot do anything benign. The good ones are us.