First off, all involved wanted it to be splashy. This was a big deal. Kim was accompanied by his wife, Ri Sol Ju, who is rarely seen in public. Lots of formal pictures of them with Xi and his wife Peng Liyuan in various contexts. A big banquet in the Great Hall of the People. A visit to the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Crowds at each departure-and-arrival point.
This was carefully orchestrated, given that recent news reports had given the world a picture of two leaders who, on a personal level, regarded each other with contempt.
Kim made a point of stressing that this was his first foreign visit and that he very explicitly wanted that to be to China.
What kind of message is this meant to send regarding the planned May one-on-one between Kim and Trump?
Consider how much evidence has come before us just recently about Xi's aims. The Chinese constitution was changed to enable him to be president for life. More revelations have surfaced about Chinese cyber-mischief, as well as military buildup.
The message to the US may take some time to parse, but it sure looks like Xi's message to Kim was, "Kid, if you'll play ball, we can have us one powerful east Asia."
I'm not sure, but it's possible that you (like Trump) are underestimating the North Korean leader. He's pressing a meeting face-to-face with Trump at a time of political and personal weakness at home and abroad (I mean, smacked in the ass by a porn star, for christ sake?). So, he checks in with Xi before the meet to see just how firmly (or not) the People's Republic has his back. To me, I think that means Kim is likely to walk into the meet with Trump better prepared and (like the Jerusalem washout) the bankrupt developer will give away much and get little.
ReplyDeleteCould be, but consider what an excellent team there is now giving the VSG advice: Pompeo, Bolton, Haley. They're not likely to leave any possibility unconsidered.
ReplyDeleteNew actors, riveting drama but really,how much has changed since Ike initiated the cease fire except that now we have a loose cannon for a Commander in Chief that has disparaged everyone who came before him I'm both their statecraft and their war mongering. Do not forget that this remains a UN action.
ReplyDeleteThat's IN both their statecraft and their war mongering. Spell check errror.
ReplyDeleteExcellent team if you're a war monger.
ReplyDeleteMarvelous team, super, beats that sorry old Ike who couldn't go the distance.
ReplyDeleteHaley's few redeeming actions as a Southern Governor are quickly receding under a blanket of Trump sycophancy – that is, when she isn’t vehemently denying an affair with Trump that no one has accused her of having (except, perhaps, metaphorically).
ReplyDeleteBolton is a soulless hack who routinely and cavalierly dismisses fraudulently losing thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of American G.I.s permanently and horrifically wounded, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties, as well worth sacrificing to remove Saddam, the most effective block at the time on the unchecked Iranian expansion we now witness. Textbook example of the classic never-served-a-minute-in-the-military chicken hawk.
Which leaves Tea Party Benghazi enthusiast Mike Pompeo, who was approved just last year by the Senate after promising to curb his zeal for torture, as the Mo in this Stoogical trio.
This is NOT America's "A" team...
Your ability to see commitment to principle is badly diminished. All three have a clear understanding of the distinction between US allies, adversaries and enemies, and are determined that this country not confuse those categories. They all understand that threats must be addressed as early as possible.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the problem with putting the hurt on a jihadist if it can get information that prevents catastrophic attacks?
Perhaps the American people still want peace like Ike said and we thought at one time we had leaders beginning to become concerned about it too. Not no more. Oh no, we're moving on with a Space Force. For someone who reveres feeedom so, bloggie and his ilk sure grease the military where the taxpayers foot for food, lodging, pensions (what's that unless you got a union behind you?) and lifetime free healthcare whilst the troops follow orders from the gummit without question. Well, we all realize it's good for some in a military-industrial economy.
ReplyDeleteRe: hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties, mongers of war don't care bout enemy kill counts unless it's to increase them. We offed over 1 Mil gooks in Nam (to our 47K) by dropping more firepower on em than all the Allied forces dropped during the last Big one. Kill counts came over the tellie daily. Now we have this wall everybody cries at in DC for our side. I pray all this is not forgotten, but I get that it is from the likes of the elite expensive high school military man who is our Commander in Chief and here come his latest appointees--a first in his class cadet from West Point who worked his way into the spy game--and a former high school student for Goldwater (that took a real real nerd back then) who stayed out of Nam by going into the Air National Guard (when the goin' was still good for the guard, ironically becoming dangerous and rough going with our Middle East military involvements he fostered and furthered).
ReplyDelete"I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. I considered the war in Vietnam already lost." written by John Robert Bolton in his Yale 25th reunion yearbook
So I suppose with this new fearful team if they get er done it will all be the Donald. Oh dear, how did we survive without Him and where will we be without Him!
ReplyDeleteWe need people with a realistic view of a dangerous world.
ReplyDeleteYeah like Bolton who wrote in his Yale reunion yearbook that he did not want to die in a rice paddy, diddy womp
ReplyDeleteDying prematurely in a dangerous world is for chumps. We shall see, we shall just wait and see..,,
ReplyDeleteWe need peacemakers. You keep peace now or you make peace later. We have the experience of 2 previous world wars and a slew of conflicts to draw on.
ReplyDeleteIndeed. we can look at why they started and what could have been done to make them less prolonged.
ReplyDelete