The Difference Between Iran And North Korea

Call it “A Tale of Two Dictatorships.” There are two rogue nuclear states in the world (now that Saddam Hussein is gone) and the approach that President Trump (and past American presidents) differs starkly between the two. That difference was on display in recent weeks as the president attacked Iran, both literally and figuratively, while proposing new talks with North Korea.

Two weeks after a drone strike on Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani brought the two nations to the brink of war, Axios is reporting that President Trump has proposed new talks with North Korean dictator, Kim Jong Un. The story cites national security advisor Robert O'Brien, who is quoted as saying, “We've reached out to the North Koreans and let them know that we would like to continue the negotiations in Stockholm that were last undertaken in early October.”

President Trump has met with Kim twice at this point, first in June 2018 and again in June 2019. Despite assurances, North Korea has continued testing missiles. Talks broke down last October when North Korea issued a statement accusing the US of a “hostile policy towards the DPRK.”

Throughout the process, President Trump has maintained a friendly attitude towards Chairman Kim. The president covered for the diminutive dictator’s missile launches, denying that the test launches violated their agreement and showing “no interest” in North Korea’s missile program according to aides. The president even sent birthday greetings to Kim earlier this week.

Contrast President Trump’s behavior towards North Korea with his approach to Iran. After the Soleimani strike and Iran’s retaliatory missile attack, the president said in his address to the nation, “As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.”

While both Iran and North Korea are state sponsors of terrorism and international pariahs, the big difference between the two is that North Korea already has a nuclear weapon while Iran does not. Therefore, North Korea is feted while Iran is threatened.

This calculus was undoubtedly under consideration when Iran’s leaders announced the withdrawal from President Obama’s nuclear deal following Soleimani’s death. It is probably clear to Iran’s leaders that they would not be subject to drone strikes if they had their own nuclear weapon.

While Obama’s nuclear deal was a bad idea that, at best, delayed the Iranian nuclear program and always included the possibility of cheating, the IAEA said as recently as May 2019, almost a year after President Trump canceled the deal, that Iran was still in compliance with the terms of the deal. Afterward, Iran began taking progressive steps to breach the deal in hopes of convincing the US to return to the table. Now, Iran has totally canceled compliance which speeds up the timetable for a confrontation over the nuclear ambitions of the mullahs.

Questions in the aftermath of the Soleimani attack have also undercut President Trump’s credibility. The Trump Administration claimed that there was information that the Iranian general was plotting imminent attacks against what President Trump claimed were four US embassies.

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper threw the president under the bus yesterday, telling interviewers, “I didn’t see one with regard to four embassies.″

There are no easy answers to the problems of North Korea and Iran. President Trump’s charm offensive against Kim Jong Un seems to be stymied and the Soleimani attack makes quashing Iran’s nuclear efforts more difficult. Without the deal, there is less time to find a solution and the president’s propensity to bend the truth makes putting together a coalition more difficult.

In the end, neither North Korea nor Iran is ever going to voluntarily end their nuclear programs. They realize that nuclear deterrence may be the only thing that prevents a US-led “regime change” effort or more targeted drone strikes. The two countries will always be willing to talk but the talks will never lead anywhere.

North Korea’s nuclear genie is out of the bottle and won’t be going away short of a long, bloody war. Iran can be stopped but doing so may similarly lead to a prolonged conflict. The irony is that stopping either the North Korean or Iranian nuclear programs may spur other countries to decide that they too need a nuclear deterrent.

After the 1991 Gulf War, India’s chief of army staff said that a lesson of the conflict was “Don’t fight the Americans without nuclear weapons.” Iran and North Korea have both learned that lesson well.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Warning Bells For 2020

In modern turbine airplanes, when something goes wrong it triggers a chime in the cockpit and a flashing light to get the pilots’ attention, along with a message that describes the problem. Problems that are serious but that aren’t yet life-threatening present an amber caution light and single chime. If a problem is serious enough, triple-chime sounds and a red warning light flashes. The chimes continue and the lights flash until the pilot presses the button to cancel the alarm. Sometimes, when things get really bad, the messages are generated so fast that the chimes are going off continuously.

Over the last week leading up to the Resurgent Gathering in Atlanta, that has been the case for the Republican Party. Warning lights have been flashing, one after another, for days on end. Last week began with a discussion about President Trump’s tweets about Baltimore. The tweets were widely interpreted to have racial overtones and, whether that was the president’s intention or not, it put a predominantly white party in the awkward position of explaining to 38 million black Americans why Donald Trump is not a racist.

The president’s tweets were not problematic only for their effect on race relations. On August 2, Mr. Trump tweeted that Kim Jong Un “has a great and beautiful vision for his country” and called the North Korean dictator “a friend” despite North Korea’s launch of two short-range missiles. The president further tweeted that “these missiles tests are not a violation of our signed Singapore agreement” although he conceded “there may be a United Nations violation.”

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1157306452228366336?s=20

Outside of Twitter, last week also gave us the abortive John Ratcliffe nomination to replace Dan Coats as director of national intelligence. Ratcliffe is a Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee, but otherwise had scant qualifications for the top intelligence post except for the fact that he seemed to have caught Trump’s attention with his questioning of Robert Mueller. With public opposition to the nomination from Democrats and little, if any, support from Republicans, President Trump withdrew the nomination on Friday, less than a week after he had made it.

Yet another caution chime is the building wave of Republican retirements for 2020. On Thursday, Rep. Will Hurd, the sole black Republican in the House, announced his retirement. Hurd was a frequent critic of Donald Trump, including saying that Trump’s tweets were “in essence telling someone because you don’t look like them, that you are not American,” but said on ABC News that he plans “to support the Republican nominee.”

More than his differences with Donald Trump, Hurd may be worried about re-election. His 23^rd district in Texas, with a majority Hispanic population, is a swing district that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. In 2018, Hurd won by less than 1,000 votes, a half percent margin.

Hurd isn’t the only Republican stepping down in 2020. Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala.) and Rep. Susan Brooks (R-Ind.), two of only 13 House Republican women are retiring next year. The announcement of Rep. Kenny Marchant brings the total of retiring Texas Republicans to four. The two women won their last elections by comfortable margins, but Marchant was re-elected by only three points.

Republicans are retiring for a variety of reasons, but many of those reasons can be traced back to the Trump Administration. Whether the Republicans are personally opposed to Trump or not, many can read the writing on the wall for 2020. In 2018, Republicans lost 60 percent of women and 78 percent of nonwhite voters. Recent polling suggests that 2020 may be worse among both women and minorities, driven largely by his racial tweets. The 2018 Republican losses were presaged by a similar wave of retirements.

The amber cautions turned to a red warning with the El Paso mass shooting. The murder’s manifesto mirrors President Trump’s rhetoric on immigration is only the most recent incident on a growing list of white supremacist and right-wing violence. While there is no evidence that Mr. Trump directly incited the attack, it is credible that his speeches and tweets contributed to the racially-charged political climate that apparently inspired the shooter. In a clear warning sign, a supporter even mentioned shooting illegal immigrants at a Trump rally in Florida back in May.

As I write this, the president is drawing criticism from both sides for his failure to quickly condemn white supremacy after the El Paso shooting. Despite calling the murders “an act of cowardice” and a “hateful act,” the president waited until today, two days later, to specifically condemn the ideology behind the attack.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1157868518823596032?s=20

Earlier today, President Trump did acknowledge the racist motive of the El Paso shooter, saying, “The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online, consumed by racist hate. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy.”

In an airplane, when these warning and caution chimes go off, the proper response is to “identify, cancel and call for the checklist.” The pilots identify the source of the problem by looking at the message that describes the condition that generated the alert. Then they press the master warning or caution button to cancel the chime and flashing light, acknowledging that they see the problem. Finally, the pilot addresses the problem by calling for the appropriate checklist or memory item for that issue. The problem in today’s GOP is that too many are ignoring the flashing lights and chimes that are warning them of problems.

Often, when there is a serious problem, the stack of alert messages on the screen gets long. A major problem can spark many associated problems in related systems. In many cases, the root cause of the problem is revealed in messages that are near the bottom of the stack since the warning computer posts messages in the order that they occur. An honest appraisal of the current state of the Republican shows that many problem indications can be traced back to President Trump.

Despite all of these things happening over the last week, there was almost no mention of them by the Republican speakers at the Resurgent Gathering. When elected Republicans spoke about the president, it was in glowing terms. One example was Georgia’s Rep. Doug Collins, who said, “The thing I say about this president is that this president is the same on the stage as he is off the stage.”

“He has big ideas that come all the time,” Collins continued. “His ways, at times, can offend people and grate on people. They’re not used to somebody who just comes out and, a lot of the time, just speaks truth. If you hit at him, he will hit you back. I think some people are understanding that now.”

There were hints that some Republicans see that there is a problem. A speaker from the Heritage For America commented, “Some people say the election will be a referendum on President Trump, but that’s defeatist talk.” Reading between the lines, if Donald Trump was a popular president, a referendum on his administration would be a good thing for Republicans and would not be seen as “defeatist.” Likewise, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, while praising the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, remarked that one of the easiest things that President Trump could do to lower taxation and help the economy would be to end the tariff war.

The most direct acknowledgment of the warning chimes was from the Washington Examiner’s David Drucker. Drucker pointed out that while some Republicans look past Trump’s behavior because of his policies, others are being driven toward the Democrats, noting their complaint that, “if one of his rallies is on tv that I can’t watch it with children in the room.” Far from the common assumption that President Trump is assured a landslide in 2020, Drucker said that the Trump campaign is working toward another Electoral College victory with a popular vote loss, but warned, “The election could go either way as of today.”

“As I like to tell Republicans,” he added, “there’s no telling what can happen if Democrats nominate someone who is likable, trustworthy, and not under FBI investigation.”

In airplanes, 12-step programs and politics, the first step is admitting that you have a problem. So far, most Republicans have been unwilling to take that step. Admitting that you have a problem doesn’t mean that the flight will end in a crash. I’ve experienced engine failures, hydraulic failures, and a multitude of other problems, but I’ve always returned to earth safely. Very often it isn’t the fact that you have a problem that leads to disaster but the fact that the problem is ignored.

There is no emergency checklist for dealing with the Republican 2020 problem, but there are several options. The most obvious one is for Republicans to rein in Donald Trump. This might also include taking his phone away or convincing him to let staffers prescreen his tweets. At the other end of the spectrum is replacing Trump with another candidate for 2020. Neither of these options would be easy.

The bottom line for Republicans is that, if they want to win in 2020, it will require more than just pointing at Democrats and yelling, “Socialist!” in a manner reminiscent of Donald Sutherland in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” Republicans have 15 months in which to build a positive case for why voters should return them to power. It is also 15 months in which Donald Trump’s tweets and public comments will be threatening to undermine their argument. Ignoring that problem won’t make it go away.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Trump To Ask Allies To Pay ‘Cost Plus Fifty’ To Host US Troops

Friday afternoon is often the time to drop unpopular and controversial news. As the denizens of Foggy Bottom hurry to leave the District of Columbia for the weekend, it can be a convenient time to unveil news that will reflect poorly on the elites who control the government. That was the case today as the Trump Administration dropped a figurative bomb whose effects will be felt around the world.

As the president toured tornado-ravaged areas of Alabama, Bloomberg reported that Mr. Trump is demanding Germany, Japan, and any other country hosting American troops pay the full cost plus an additional 50 percent. Per Bloomberg, the plan would apply first to Germany and Japan and eventually be applied to every other nation where American troops are based. Under the plan, some countries would pay five or six times their current share of defense costs.

President Trump has reportedly pushed the idea for months and his insistence on the requirement reportedly derailed talks with South Korea about the status of the 28,000 US troops stationed on the Korean Peninsula. Trump allegedly overruled negotiators with a note to National Security Advisor John Bolton that read, “We want cost plus 50.”

The proposal seems tailor-made as an excuse for President Trump to unilaterally withdraw American forces from abroad and bring the troops home. During the 2016 campaign, Trump questioned the need for mutual defense pacts such as NATO and railed against the cost of basing troops abroad. While in office, Trump’s relationship with America’s allies has been rocky and the president has reportedly considered withdrawing the US from NATO. The demand for more money from allies may be intended to resolve the issue by having host countries kick American forces out.

It is possible that the demand is simply a negotiating ploy by the president, who has pushed NATO and other allies to pay a larger share of the cost of their defense in the past. The president may also be swayed by advisors to accept a less harsh deal. This week Mr. Trump reversed himself on a decision last year to withdraw American troops from Syria.

The basing of American soldiers around the world benefits both the host country and the United States. In the War on Terror, the US used bases in Germany as a transshipment point to and from the Middle East. Ramstein Airbase was a vital link in the logistical chain to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Likewise, the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center is the largest overseas military hospital in the world. Many American soldiers injured in Iraq and Afghanistan were sent to Landstuhl for stabilizing treatment before returning home.

It is not clear whether the US is close to making a formal demand of its allies or whether Friday’s announcement is a trial balloon, but the proposal comes at an awkward time. Vladimir Putin’s Russia has been waging an offensive war on the borders of NATO against Ukraine, another US ally, since 2014. In Asia, Trump’s attempted détente with North Korea has yielded little in the way of results while China continues to solidify its hold on the South China Sea.

While basing American soldiers abroad has not been free for the United States, it has been beneficial. The seventy years that American troops have occupied parts of Europe and Asia has been known as the Pax Americana, the American peace. The period allowed the US to become the world’s preeminent trading power and the leader of the community of nations.

It is a virtual certainty that the forward deployment of American soldiers prevented numerous wars including a Soviet invasion of Europe. If President Trump gives in to his isolationist tendencies, it is likely that the world may find that the cost in both blood and treasure of bringing American soldiers home is much greater than the cost of basing them abroad.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Kim Jong Un Warns Trump He May Take 'New Way' Unless US Removes Sanctions

President Trump was quick to celebrate peace on the Korean Peninsula after his summit meeting with Kim Jong Un last year. Since then, however, progress has been mixed as North Korea refrained from nuclear testing and held high-level talks with the South but also failed to dismantle its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. Now, in his New Year’s address, Kim Jong Un is warning President Trump that unless the United States “takes genuine measures for building trust” the North may return to its old ways.

In the speech, reported by Politico, Kim noted steps that he had taken toward the “complete denuclearization” of the Korean Peninsula saying that he agreed “that we would neither make and test nuclear weapons any longer nor use and proliferate them, and we have taken various practical measures” to fulfill this promise. He then challenged President Trump with two words: “Your turn.”

What Kim wants is illustrated by a statement issued in December through North Korean state media. “When we refer to the Korean peninsula, they include both the area of the DPRK and the area of South Korea where aggression troops including the nuclear weapons of the U.S. are deployed,” the statement said and then continued, “When we refer to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, it, therefore, means removing all elements of nuclear threats from the areas of both the north and the south of Korea and also from surrounding areas from where the Korean peninsula is targeted.” The statement called on the US to lift the sanctions on North Korea as well as for “completely removing the nuclear threats of the U.S. to the DPRK.”

Essentially, Kim is telling President Trump that the North Korean position on denuclearization is unchanged. The North rejects unilateral denuclearization and wants the US to remove its nuclear weapons from the Korean theater. The US removed its nuclear weapons from South Korea in 1991, but in his speech, Kim said that “strategic assets,” which North Korea often understands to include anti-ballistic missile systems as well as submarines and aircraft carriers, “should no longer be permitted” in or near the Korean Peninsula.

Kim also wants to be rewarded for the actions that he has already taken over the past year. His price for the détente with South Korea is the removal of US sanctions.

Kim also sought to drive a wedge between the US and South Korea. While President Trump is pushing South Korea to double its funding for US troops [DT1] based on the peninsula, Kim encouraged the South to participate in several bilateral projects that exclude the United States.

In the speech, Kim warned that North Korea “might find ourselves in a situation where we have no other choice but to find a new way” if the US did not uphold its end of the bargain. While Kim was not specific about what “new way” the North might take, most observers doubt that it would involve a resumption of nuclear testing.

“One thing is clear: Kim is not going to return to any sort of posture where the US or its allies would consider a military attack, and that means no missile or nuclear tests for the foreseeable future,” Harry Kazianis of the Washington-based Centre for the National Interest told the South China Morning Post.

Ruediger Frank, an analyst at 38 North, believes that the entreaties to South Korean President Moon provide a clue as to what Kim’s “new way” would be. The speech was a message to Donald Trump, he writes, saying, “You are not our only option for security and economic development. If you refuse to be cooperative, we will ignore you and turn to China. Oh, and we will take South Korea along.”

Kazianis agreed, “Kim can present Trump with a choice: Either play ball with me on a negotiated nuclear settlement and reduce sanctions or I will go to China for help and get the economic development I want and keep my nukes.”

President Trump’s trade war now places him in an awkward position with respect to Korea. President Trump signed a new trade deal with South Korea last year that limits South Korean steel and aluminum exports to the US. The trade spat with China means that Trump now has less leverage with the Chinese against the North Koreans. The three geographical neighbors may become closer trading partners at the expense of US influence in the region.

If North Korea can pull the South into China’s orbit, it would be a major blow to the United States. South Korea is one of America’s largest trading partners in terms of both imports and exports. The nation is also home to 15 US military bases that provide a counterbalance to China as well as protecting South Korea from Northern aggression.

President Trump responded to Kim’s challenge with a New Year’s Day tweet, saying, “I also look forward to meeting with Chairman Kim who realizes so well that North Korea possesses great economic potential!”

Originally published on The Resurgent

---

 [DT1]

North Korea Says No Thanks To Denuclearization

A week of policy failures and missteps for President Trump just got worse as North Korea announced that it would never denuclearize unless the US first removes its nuclear threat. After Trump met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un in June, the president claimed that North Korea was no longer a nuclear threat and even suggested that he deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for his work on nuclear disarmament.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1006839007492308992

Now, six months later, North Korea’s official Korean Central News statement says that the rogue nation will never unilaterally give up its nuclear weapons. Instead, the North Koreans place conditions on disarmament that include a complete or partial withdrawal of American soldiers and nuclear weapons from near the Korean peninsula. This has been the traditional North Korean position in negotiations with past administrations as well.

“The United States must now recognize the accurate meaning of the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and especially, must study geography,” the North Korean statement said per the AP.

“When we talk about the Korean Peninsula, it includes the territory of our republic and also the entire region of (South Korea) where the United States has placed its invasive force, including nuclear weapons. When we talk about the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, it means the removal of all sources of nuclear threat, not only from the South and North but also from areas neighboring the Korean Peninsula,” the statement continued.

Meanwhile, as talks deteriorated between the US and North Korea, the Trump Administration raised the possibility of humanitarian relief from sanctions in exchange for nuclear concessions. In the past, the West has given sanctions relief to the North Korean regime in deals on which the hermit kingdom failed to follow through.

Last spring and summer, there were reports that the North was dismantling some nuclear test facilities. Other reports in recent months have indicated that the Koreans were continuing to work on nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles at secret sites.

“If we unilaterally give up our nuclear weapons without any security assurance despite being first on the U.S. list of targets for pre-emptive nuclear strikes, that wouldn’t be denuclearization — it would rather be a creation of a defenseless state where the balance in nuclear strategic strength is destroyed and the crisis of a nuclear war is brought forth,” the North Korean statement said.

What many experts predicted now seems obvious: The North Koreans will never willingly surrender their nuclear capability which is the one weapon that ensures the survival of the Kim regime. The talks with the Trump Administration seem to have been nothing more than a play for time and a ploy to negotiate for the removal of sanctions.

Expectations of a Nobel Prize for President Trump appear to have been very premature. 

Originally published on The Resurgent

North Korea is Building New Missiles

If at first you don’t succeed, it’s back to the drawing board. According to a new report by US intelligence agencies, that is what North Korea is up to.

The Washington Post reported that the US has evidence, which includes satellite photos, that show work on new missiles at the factory that produced the country’s first intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States. The findings show that as many as two missiles are being constructed at the Sanumdong plant near Pyongyang. The report notes that there is presently no evidence of an expansion of North Korean capabilities, but does indicate that the North Korean weapons programs are still active months after President Trump’s summit with Kim Jong Un.

Earlier in July, The Diplomat reported that North Korea’s secret enrichment facility at Kangson was almost certainly still enriching uranium. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Congress last week, “Yes, they continue to produce fissile material.”

On the other hand, there are also recent reports that North Korea is dismantling some equipment at a at the Sohae Satellite Launching Station. The New York Times reported that a rocket engine test stand and a rail-mounted assembly building for space vehicles were being taken apart.

While there was widespread belief that Chairman Kim was proceeding with denuclearization after the Times report, the evidence from other sites shows that the situation is much more complex. The evidence from other sites shows that the North Korean nuclear and weapons programs are proceeding long after President Trump tweeted, “ There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea.”

It is not clear why some North Korean facilities are being dismantled while work is proceeding on uranium enrichment and new missiles. It is possible that the test facilities are being modernized, moved or are no longer needed.

President Trump and Chairman Kim signed a very vague and general statement, but diplomacy is ongoing with North Korea on more detailed agreements. South Korean generals met with their Northern counterparts on Tuesday for what was termed a “meaningful discussion,” but one that did not produce an agreement. The last report on talks between the US and North Korea was on July 7 when a North Korean statement called a two-day visit by Mike Pompeo “gangster-like” and “regrettable,” saying it had increased the possibility of war.

It seems increasingly likely that the North Koreans are back to the drawing board and continuing with their nuclear and missile programs. President Trump also needs to return to the drawing board with increased sanctions and an acknowledgement that the North Koreans are not dismantling their nuclear weapons program.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Trump Salutes the Norks

If there was any doubt which side “won” the Trump-Kim summit this week, the North Koreans just scored a knockout punch against Donald Trump. North Korean state media just dropped a nonnuclear bomb on the Trump Administration with a behind-the-scenes photo of President Trump saluting a North Korean general in Singapore.

The photo, retweeted by CNN’s Jason Morrell, shows the American president with his right arm moving downward, obviously completing a salute to an unidentified North Korean general dressed in a Soviet-style uniform as Kim Jong Un looks on. The general’s right arm is also moving downward and is at a lower position than Trump’s, indicating the general broke the salute first. CNN also has a video of the moment.

The moment is reminiscent of President Obama’s 2009 bow to Saudi King Abdullah. Republicans, including then-private citizen Donald Trump, criticized Obama’s deference to a foreign leader and the White House denied that Obama had bowed at all.

It is difficult to justify an obvious salute to a soldier representing a hostile foreign power although Trump partisans are certain to find ways to do so. American presidents are not required to salute anyone. Even saluting American soldiers is optional, since the president is a civilian.

The Army Study Guide states that military members are required to salute when a foreign national anthem is played and when they meet the officer of a friendly foreign country. Under these guidelines, even President Trump’s Marine guards would not salute a North Korean general.

The disturbing photo of President Trump saluting an enemy soldier underscores how ignorant the president is about his job. Donald Trump simply does not understand the requirements of his position and, even after almost two years on the job, has not taken the time to learn.

To put it simply: American presidents should never bow to foreign leaders or salute enemy soldiers. Ever.

Just as alarming as the photo are President Trump’s own comments about Chairman Kim since their meeting. President Trump has heaped praise upon Kim and rationalized away the dictator’s brutal murders of political opponents and relatives, calling him a “tough guy” and saying “we understand each other.”

At the same time, the president has angered America’s traditional allies. Trump stormed out of the G-7 meeting in Canada after calling for Russia’s inclusion and objecting to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plans to implement retaliatory tariffs.

Fawning over dictatorial regimes while pushing away America’s traditional friends is not the way to Make America Great Again.

Originally published on The Resurgent

From commenter:

Theoretically, a U.S. President can salute whoever the hey he wants. That said, proper protocol is that it's forgivable though not recommended for Trump to salute ALLIED brass, never the soldiers of our adversaries. As for commissioned and non commissioned officers, saluting foreign military members--friend or foe--will get your butt kicked at least, never mind any official punishment.

The optics of Trump's salute is as appalling as the picture of his shaking Kim's hand in front of American flags standing cheek-by-jowl with those of N. Korea's murderous regime. Still waiting for Trump fans to defend this...

Pompeo: No Sanctions Relief Until Denuclearization Complete

A day after President Trump’s vaunted summit with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, North Korean state media was reporting that the United States had committed to security agreements and an end to sanctions as well ending joint military exercises with South Korea. The North Korean claims prompted a response Thursday morning from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

At a press conference in Singapore with his opposite numbers from Japan and South Korea, Secretary Pompeo said that sanctions would not be lifted until there was complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization of the North Korean regime. Pompeo acknowledged that there was no agreement on denuclearization yet and that talks could still break down.

Mr. Pompeo’s statements seem to contradict President Trump’s tweet from Wednesday which said, “There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea.” The secretary of state said that the president’s tweet was made with “all eyes open” to the fact that North Korea is still a nuclear power and that a full agreement for denuclearization has not been reached.

In the agreement signed by President Trump and Chairman Kim, North Korea “commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.” The wording is not defined, but echoes the longtime North Korean condition that American nuclear weapons must also be withdrawn from the Korean theater. The North Koreans may also insist on the withdrawal of US ground forces, something that President Trump has already said may be a long-term goal of his administration.

When asked by a reporter what made the current talks different from previous North Korean promises of denuclearization, Pompeo said, “The sequence [of providing aid and sanctions relief too early] will be different this time.”

“Chairman Kim understands the urgency of the timing of completing this denuclearization,” Pompeo stated. “Sanctions relief cannot take place at such time until we can determine denuclearization is complete.”

At this point, denuclearization has not even started. 

From The Resurgent

What Will President Trump Put On The Table For An Agreement With Kim?

Fresh from angering allies during and after the G-7 meeting in Quebec, President Trump is heading to Singapore for a historic meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. In the wake of the Canadian meeting, Trump feuded with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, withdrew US agreement from a planned communique, and then abruptly proposed a tariff-free G-7. The question is which Trump will show up in Singapore, the hardnosed negotiator or the conciliatory dealmaker, and what the president is willing to put on the table for Kim.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters ahead of the Singapore summit that the US is committed to North Korean denuclearization and a verifiable agreement. “In light of how many flimsy agreements the United States has made in previous years, this president will ensure that no potential agreement will fail to ultimately address the North Korean threat,” Pompeo said, adding that the "ultimate" U.S. objective remains "the complete, and verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.”

For its part, “denuclearization” to the Koreans has historically meant the removal of US forces and American nuclear weapons from the Korean Peninsula. Kim Jong Un doubtlessly understands that the one thing that prevents his regime from being toppled is his nuclear arsenal. However, Pyongyang’s arsenal is also something that endangers the regime as well.

Kim is painfully aware of the fate of Moammar Gadhafi, who voluntarily gave up his nuclear program in 2003. Less than 10 years later, Gadhafi was dead at the hands of a coalition of Libyan rebels and NATO air forces. Just in case Kim missed the lesson, Vice President Mike Pence explicitly laid it out for him in May.

Kim is between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, he faces the military might of the United States that can destroy him. On the other, Kim faces the possibility of a weakened regime that could invite a popular uprising. Kim also must consider the possibility that a non-nuclear North Korea could invite an invasion by South Korea and the United States.

Kim’s best choice would seem to be to preserve the status quo. His regime can survive sanctions, even if his citizens suffer. The US won’t risk a nuclear war that could involve China by launching a preemptive strike on North Korea. If Kim can offer some vague promises and win aid from the outside world to feed his people, it would represent a win for his regime. Kim has already improved relations with China simply by negotiating.

If Donald Trump is determined to win a meaningful agreement with North Korea, he must be prepared to up the ante. The likely price for verifiable disarmament would be very high, but nevertheless it could be a price that Donald Trump, alone among US presidents would be willing to pay. The price for denuclearization could be bringing American soldiers home from South Korea.

The withdrawal of US troops from Korea would be a nonstarter for any other president. Not so for Donald Trump. President Trump is not only the only president willing to withdraw from South Korea, he may be actively looking for an excuse to do so. As a candidate interviewed by the New York Times, Trump considered the possibility of ending military alliances if they did not seem to be in the interests of the United States. NBC News reported that Trump considered removing troops from Korea prior to the Winter Olympics, but was persuaded otherwise by John Kelley. In March, Trump threatened a troop withdrawal for leverage on trade deals with South Korea. The New York Times also reported in May 2018 that President Trump had requested options for reducing US troop strength in South Korea.

Reducing the US international role, especially at its own expense, was a big part of President Trump’s campaign in 2016. The US has 35,000 troops in South Korea who have been there more than 50 years. There are an additional 40,000 American soldiers and sailors in Japan. South Korea currently pays just under $900 million, about half of the total cost of basing US troops in the country.

President Trump and his base might well view a deal in which North Korea gave up its nuclear program in exchange for the removal of US troops from South Korea as a win-win. The US would save almost a billion dollars in military costs and could claim that Kim would be defanged. Treaties in which the US agrees to protect South Korea could be honored by troops deployed to other US bases in the region such as those in Japan and Guam.

There are some problems with this strategy. US forces would have to be retained in the region so most basing costs would simply be shifted to other areas. Responding to a rapid ground invasion of South Korea would be problematic if the US had to transport in its own ground troops. The defense of South Korea would become even more dependent upon air support and the American nuclear umbrella.

Secretary of State Pompeo hinted that the US is willing to make concessions to get an agreement. “President Trump recognizes Chairman Kim's desire for security and is prepared to ensure a North Korea free of weapons of mass destruction is also a secure North Korea,” Pompeo said. He added that the US is “prepared to take actions that will provide [North Korea] sufficient certainty that they can be comfortable that denuclearization isn't something that ends badly for them.”

Given that President Trump has shown that agreements entered into by one president won’t necessarily be honored by the next, making North Korea “comfortable” is problematic. Kim is unlikely to be reassured by anything short of a US withdrawal.

President Trump and Kim Jong Un will be meeting privately with only their interpreters. If President Trump decides that he can trust Kim enough to promise a US troop withdrawal, there will be no opportunity for discussion with his staff. Politico reported that the US had not held national security planning meetings ahead of the summit.

“I think I’m very well prepared,” Trump said in response. “I don’t think I have to prepare very much. It’s about attitude, it’s about willingness to get things done.”

President Trump, who seems to be looking for ways to reduce US troop deployments abroad, is about to hold a closed-door meeting with the dictator of North Korea. President Trump has shown that he is willing to anger allies and walk away from existing agreements. The possibility of historic agreement is real. The big question is what President Trump is willing to give up.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Why North Korea Won't Disarm

It appears that the on-again/off-again summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un will actually happen. As the world watches, hopes are high for peace on the Korean Peninsula, but it is unlikely that the North Koreans will disarm. Here’s why.

North Korea has a long history of scamming American presidents. Since the North Korean nuclear age began, the country has had several rounds of peace talks – and made several deals – with several presidents. In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed a deal in which the US and its allies provided the North with $4 billion in energy aid, including two nuclear reactors that could not manufacture weapons-grade material. In exchange, North Korea was supposed to give up its nuclear weapons program.

Instead, North Korea announced in 2002 that it had nuclear weapons. President Bush, who had called North Korea a part of the “Axis of Evil,” removed North Korea from the state terror list in order to advance the Six Party Talks, which also included South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan. The group came to an agreement in which Pyongyang agreed to give up its nuclear program in exchange for food and energy aid.

Instead, the North Koreans announced in 1996 that they had exploded a nuclear weapon. The Obama Administration applied sanctions in coordination with the UN Security Council. In 2012, Kim Jong Un agreed to halt nuclear tests in exchange for more aid, but the North continued to test both nuclear weapons and missiles.

For more than 20 years, North Korea’s modus operandi has been to rattle its saber and extort aid from the West and East Asian democracies. Over the past two years, they tried the same thing with Donald Trump. To his credit, President Trump did not fall for this tired North Korean gambit.

When President Trump responded to North Korea’s saber rattling with saber rattling of his own, Kim Jong Un proved that he is a rational actor rather than a crazy person. Instead of continuing to escalate the situation, Kim backed off.

This doesn’t mean that Kim Jong Un is willing to bargain away North Korea’s nuclear weapons. It just means that he has shifted tactics. He is no longer playing the unhinged warmonger. Instead Kim is now using flattery and, if Donald Trump’s past behavior is any indication, flattery will get you everywhere. In the past, Trump has shown that he is eager to hit back when attacked, but he is equally eager to return flattery when complimented.

President Trump may also have benefitted from a good timing. The Wall Street Journal reported in April, about the same time that Kim Jong Un’s détente began, that the North Korean nuclear testing site was unusable. The underground testing site collapsed after the last nuclear test there in September 2017, a large explosion that is suspected to have been a hydrogen bomb. It was after this test that Kim announced a halt to nuclear tests. On May 24, the North Koreans destroyed the tunnels to the already-useless nuclear test site, possibly to prevent the release of radioactive material as well as for public relations purposes.

So far, Kim Jong Un has made three concessions. The first was to stop nuclear testing, which Kim said was now unnecessary because the North’s nuclear capability had been “verified.” At the same time, the North suspended long-range missile tests. North Korea would have probably had to suspend testing anyway until a new facility could be constructed. The third concession was the release of three Americans held prisoner in North Korea. It is worth noting that similar promises have been made to previous presidents.

In contrast, Kim Jong Un has already extracted several concessions from President Trump. The first is Trump’s agreement to bilateral talks. In the past, it has been American policy to conduct Six Party talks with all the regional powers rather than bowing to North Korean demands for direct talks. President Trump also agreed to the North Korean summit." without preconditions, something that past Republicans such as John McCain and Mitt Romney sharply criticized President Obama for considering.

President Trump also canceled a B-52 Stratofortress training mission over South Korea  in May after North Korea threatened to withdraw from the summit. Trump previously agreed to postpone another exercise last January in order to “de-conflict the Olympics.”

In the final analysis, Kim Jong Un is willing to meet with President Trump because it offers him prestige and the opportunity to wheedle more concessions out of the US. What Kim won’t do is put North Korean nuclear weapons on the table.

The North Korean regime has one overriding goal and that is survival. The Kim family has survived 70 years of antagonism with the US for two reasons. First, they have the protection of China and, second, the have nuclear weapons. The North Koreans will maintain their nuclear arsenal as a hedge against the possibility that China will sell them out.

The North Koreans have watched several dictators topple over the past 50 years. The Taliban fell in 2002. Saddam Hussein in 2003. Before that there was Manuel Noriega. Kim probably learned a compelling lesson from the case of Muammar Gaddafi, who voluntarily gave up his nuclear weapons program in 2003 and then was killed with his sons less than 10 years later at the hands of rebels backed by European armies. Kim presumably wants to avoid this fate and knows that his nuclear weapons are the biggest obstacle to regime change on the Korean Peninsula.

“What Kim is unclear about is that he has concerns about whether his country can surely trust the United States over its promise to end hostile relations (with North Korea) and provide a security guarantee if they do denuclearization,” South Korean President Moon told ABC News.

Kim has obviously watched President Trump’s numerous flip-flops over the past few years as well as the unfolding rejection of President Obama’s Iran deal. Going back further, President Obama did not honor the security agreement with Ukraine during Vladimir Putin’s invasion. The North Koreans certainly understand that a deal made with one US president may not be honored by the next. Given the national paranoia and the long history of hostility between the two countries, the chances are extremely remote that Kim Jong Un would agree to nuclear disarmament, which would put his regime at the mercy of presidential whims.  

It hasn’t helped that the Trump Administration has openly likened North Korea to Libya. Vice President Mike Pence said, “This will only end like the Libyan model ended if Kim Jong Un doesn't make a deal,” a statement which Kim would obviously interpret as a threat.

Kim Jong Un is caught between a rock and a hard place. He cannot disarm and his threats no longer work. Without nuclear weapons, he cannot keep the world at bay and continue to prop up his regime. Without aid from other countries, his grasp on the country could also become weaker as he struggles to feed North Korea’s population.

With two untenable options, Kim’s plan is to change strategy and use flattery to extract promises of aid from President Trump. It may take years, but, after the summit is over, look for North Korea to restart its nuclear program and missile testing once the heat dies down.

Originally published on The Resurgent

CIA: North Korea More Likely To Open McDonald's Than Give Up Nukes

Since President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un opened the possibility of holding a summit, there has been much speculation as to whether the North Koreans would be willing to give up their nuclear weapons. A newly revealed CIA assessment reportedly shows that the agency considers it unlikely that the hermit kingdom will hand over its nukes, but did suggest the possibility of a surprising concession to President Trump.

The CIA assessment, reported by NBC News and sourced to three US officials, detailed the agency’s belief that North Korea would not voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons any time soon. The CIA did conclude that Kim is interested in a peaceful overture toward President Trump. The report concluded that the North Koreans might be willing to open a McDonald’s hamburger franchise in their capitol city of Pyongyang, citing Donald Trump’s affinity for the fast food chain.

In 2016, Trump said that he would welcome Kim Jong Un to the United States, but that he would not offer him a state dinner. “We should be eating a hamburger on a conference table, and we should make better deals with China and others and forget the state dinners,” Trump said at the time.

The intelligence report contradicted recent statements by President Trump. In an April 22 tweet, the president said that the North Koreans had “agreed to denuclearization.” The president’s tweet may have been based on another NBC News report detailing South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s claim that the North had agreed to “complete denuclearization” of the Korean Peninsula without conditions.

Since Moon’s statement in April, there has been no further news of North Korean concessions. The summit was canceled by President Trump, but now appears to be on again. CNN reported this morning that Kim Young Chol, the Vice Chairman of North Korea, is flying to New York to assist in preparations for the summit. Vice Chairman Kim is the highest ranking North Korean to visit the United States since 2000.

The Trump Administration has not commented on the CIA assessment, but an early morning tweet by President Trump seemed optimistic that that a meeting between the two leaders would go forward. There was no comment on the possibility of a McDonald’s in North Korea in lieu of denuclearization.

Although North Korea is frequently racked by famines and starvation, settling for Big Macs instead of denuclearization would seem to be a disappointment. In the opinion of this writer, if the North Koreans offer the expansion of a corporate franchise as a concession, President Trump should hold out for permission to build a Trump Hotel, Casino and Golf Course in Pyongyang.

Originally published on The Resurgent

#MeToo: North Korean Cheer Squads Are Really Sex Slaves

[WARNING: GRAPHIC] It was only a week or so ago that the mainstream media went gaga for the North Korean Olympic cheer squads. The beautiful women, who outnumbered the country’s Olympic athletes by 10 to one, performed routines in perfect sync and captivated journalists and audiences alike. Now  North Korean defectors tell that the party leaders’ treatment of the cheerleaders would put Harvey Weinstein to shame.

Some critics of the North Korean regime pointed out that the possibility of having your family killed if you embarrass your country is a powerful incentive to perform well, but the reality is much worse than just the potential threat of death. A former North Korean military musician who defected in 2008 says that a secondary role of the cheer squads is to act as sex slaves for the elites of North Korea’s ruling communist party.

Lee So Yeon described to Bloomberg how the women, informally called the “Pleasure Squad,” are compelled to perform sex acts on party leaders. “They go to the central Politburo party’s events, and have to sleep with the people there, even if they don’t want it,” she said. “Those sorts of human-rights infringements take place, where women have to follow what they are told to do with their bodies.”

The UK Metro reports that the women are constantly monitored to prevent defection. They are not even allowed to make a trip to the bathroom without a teammate and a South Korean government monitor. 

Mi-Hyang, who defected in 2010, described how she was kidnapped from her school at age 15 and pressed into service as a sex slave for Kim Jong-Il. She spent 10 years catering to the sexual desires of Kim and his associates.

Lee Il-Nam, a relative of the Kim family who defected in 1982 and was assassinated in 1997 described the Pleasure Squad in his book, “Kim Jong-Il’s Royal Family.” The women were featured at parties for Kim’s closest associates that lasted into the wee hours and “included eating, drinking and dancing, but usually ended with erotic games.”

“A favorite was a game in which the losers had to take off clothes one by one. It was enforced, regardless of men or women,” he wrote. “If they got heavily drunk, the also played a hair-shaving game. If men lost, part of their head hair was shaved, as if it was mown. For women, their pubic hair was shaved.” At times, Kim had orgies devoted entirely to sex.

When the women get old, they are retired into marriage with elite guards, but remain sworn to secrecy about their activities. Women who break the vow of silence are immediately executed.

Even if they perform perfectly, the women and athletes still face punishment when they return to North Korea. When North Koreans return from abroad, they face the prospect of re-education to deprogram any ideas that the outside world is more attractive than home.

“North Korea makes an effort to plant an idea in their head, that everything that they saw in South Korea wasn’t that wonderful,” said Kim Jung-bong, a former South Korean intelligence official. “And then they are sent to a political school, or a political education system from one to three months for what they call ‘moral education.”’

While American sexual predators are being denounced for far less egregious activities, the members of the Pleasure Squad would face unspeakable punishments if they spoke out. Those of us in the free world should speak up on their behalf.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Lindsey Graham: War With North Korea 'Becoming More Likely'

On Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) became the latest Republican to publicly acknowledge that war between the US and North Korea is becoming more and more likely. On “Face the Nation,” Graham said that the “policy of the Trump administration is to deny North Korea the capability to hit America with a nuclear-tipped missile.” Stopping the North Korean nuclear and missile programs would almost certainly require military action.

“We’re getting close to a military conflict because North Korea’s marching toward marrying up the technology of an ICBM with a nuclear weapon on top that cannot only get to America, but deliver the weapon,” said Graham, who serves on the Senate Armed Services committee. “We’re running out of time. McMaster said that yesterday. I’m going to urge the Pentagon not to send any more dependents to South Korea.”

“South Korea should be an unaccompanied tour,” Graham added. “It’s crazy to send spouses and children to South Korea, given the provocation of North Korea. So, I want them to stop sending dependents. And I think it’s now time to start moving American dependents out of South Korea.”

When asked how close the US was to war, Graham answered, “The intelligence community can tell you that better than I can, but I had an extensive discussion with the administration about this topic. The policy of the Trump administration is to deny North Korea the capability to hit America with a nuclear-tipped missile.”

“Not to contain it. Denial means preemptive war as a last resort,” Graham stressed. “That preemption is becoming more likely as their technology matures. Every missile test, every underground test of a nuclear weapon, means the marriage is more likely. I think we’re really running out of time.”

Graham warned, “If there’s an underground nuclear test, then you need to get ready for a very serious response by the United States.”

Graham said that he thinks that Congress should be talking about the possibility of pre-emptively striking North Korea. “I think the president, as inherent authority as commander-in-chief, has the ability to strike North Korea to protect the American homeland, but this discussion needs to happen among ourselves [in Congress].”

Graham’s comments come shortly after talk show host Joe Scarborough said that White House insiders have believed “that we are going to have a ground war in Korea… for a very long time.” In the past week, other members of the Trump Administration, including UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, have similarly warned that war may be close.  

If the Trump Administration is determined to prevent North Korea from developing a nuclear-armed missile that can target the United States, war might be the only option. North Korea “will not negotiate away its [nuclear] arsenal,” says Todd Rosenblum, a delegate to the Four Party talks with North Korea and China in the 1990s. “Few believe there is anything we, China or anyone else can offer the North to give up its strategic deterrent… on terms remotely viable to us.”

There is also no surgical option in North Korea. Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned in July that war with North Korea would be “horrific” and “would be a loss of life unlike any we have experienced in our lifetimes, and I mean anyone who's been alive since World War II has never seen the loss of life that could occur if there's a conflict on the Korean Peninsula.”

Nevertheless, Dunford argued in September, “I think we should assume today that North Korea has that capability [to strike the continental US] and has a will to use that capability.”

China has warned that it will intervene to aid North Korea if the US launches a pre-emptive attack. In 1950, Chinese intervention in the first Korean conflict led to a stalemate with three years of heavy fighting.

“China prefers a damaged buffer state over one that collapses and ends as a part of a pro-West, unified border state with strong ties to Washington,” says Rosenblum.

The US and South Korea are between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, a North Korea equipped with nuclear ICBMs is a direct threat to the United States. On the other, a pre-emptive strike would set off a long and bloody war that might also directly threaten the continental United States.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Trump Says This Is The ‘Calm Before The Storm’

Speaking before a dinner with military leaders and their spouses on Thursday night, President Trump said that the gathering may represent “the calm before the storm.” The comment occurred at the White House State Dining Room before a group of reporters.

Bloomberg reports that the president asks the reporters, “You guys know what this represents? Maybe it’s the calm before the storm.”

When asked what he meant, President Trump answered, “You’ll find out.”

Earlier in the day, Mr. Trump had said that his Administration was focused on “challenges that we really should have taken care of a long time ago, like North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan, ISIS, and the revisionist powers that threaten our interests all around the world.”

At that point, the president made what seemed to be a warning to North Korea. “We cannot allow this dictatorship to threaten our nation or our allies with unimaginable loss of life,” Trump said. “We will do what we must do to prevent that from happening. And it will be done, if necessary -- believe me.”

The president’s comments may be the latest in a series of attempts to convince the North Korean regime that Trump is unhinged. Over the past few months, President Trump has engaged in a rhetorical war of words with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un in which the two men seemingly try to one-up each other’s martial boasts. Over the weekend, President Trump tweeted that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was “wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man,” Trump’s nickname for the North Korean leader.

Axios recently reported that President Trump had urged his staff to portray him as “crazy” as a negotiating tactic with South Korea. According to the report, Trump told diplomats pressing for a renegotiation of the US trade pact with South Korea, “This guy's so crazy he could pull out any minute.”

The tactic appears to have worked with the South Koreans. On Thursday, South Korea agreed to amend the trade deal.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Why Is Donald Trump Publicly Undermining Rex Tillerson?

Rex Tillerson was picked by Donald Trump to be his Secretary of State. Tillerson represents the president in foreign policy matters and serves at the pleasure of the president. So, why then, is President Trump publicly undermining his handpicked representative in a pair of tweets today?

I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2017

…Save your energy Rex, we’ll do what has to be done!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2017

“I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man,” Trump tweeted. 

A second tweet followed a short time later, saying, “Save your energy Rex, we’ll do what has to be done!”

The pair of tweets raise many questions about the inner workings of the Trump Administration. Has Rex Tillerson gone rogue in his negotiations with North Korea? If President Trump does not support the negotiations with North Korea then why is Tillerson conducting them? Why is Trump raising the issue in a public forum like Twitter rather than in private?

If President Trump doesn’t have faith in his Secretary of State or if Tillerson is disobeying the president’s instructions then why keep him on the job? For that matter, why would Tillerson want to continue to serve a president who publicly undercuts him in such a humiliating fashion?

Has President Trump given up on negotiations? Is he signaling the North Koreans that he doesn’t want a deal and is ready to turn to a military option?

The most likely answer is that Trump’s tweets are a clumsy attempt at a good cop-bad cop routine. Trump is playing the bad cop who is eager to attack North Korea. Tillerson is the good cop who is attempting to restrain Trump and find a diplomatic solution.

It’s easy to imagine the scene in a police interrogation room. Trump turns over a table in a fit of rage and storms out, slamming the door behind him. Tillerson, sleeves rolled up and wearing a shoulder holster turns to a shackled Kim Jong Un. 

“He’s crazy,” Tillerson says. “He’s going to go nuclear on you. I’m trying to help you, but you’ve got to give me something to work with. I need some concessions.”

Tillerson, who is in China, has not responded publicly to Trump’s tweets. In a press conference on Saturday, Tillerson told CNN that the United States was pursuing a peaceful resolution to the dispute with North Korea.

When asked about President Trump’s warnings to Kim Jong Un, Tillerson answered, “I think the whole situation is a bit overheated right now. I think everyone would like for it to calm down.”