by Jane Zhang, '21

President Trump agreed this Thursday to meet with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-Un, an act of diplomacy unprecedented by any previous president of the United States. Taking into account the longstanding military tension and the seemingly unbreakable impasse between the two nations, the sudden concession of both sides has sent shockwaves through the rest of the world. This controversial meeting has instigated a series of questions, most of which revolve around North Korea’s promise of

The decision occurred this Thursday when the South Korean official Chung Eui-yong visited the White House, bearing an invitation extended by the mercurial North Korean leader to discuss his  intention of giving up the nuclear program. Trump’s sudden answer of “yes” stunned not only Mr. Chung but also the assembly of White House officials, including his national security advisor Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, who cautioned Trump about the potential risks and repercussions of his agreement.

Despite President Trump’s optimism that the high-stakes gamble would produce fruitful results and epitomize a significant breakthrough in dismantling North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, critics have expressed rather reserved and wary optimism at Trump’s diplomatic agenda. Among the voices of dissent include Danny Russel, a senior Asia director at the National Security Council, who stated that “the fact that [North Korea] is looking for the legitimization and validation of direct engagement of the president of the United States is not new”. When taking into consideration North Korea’s established history of inconsistent nuclear policies—agreeing to halt nuclear weapon and missile development while performing missile launches discretely, it becomes apparent that the critics’ fear of North Korea not holding up its end of the bargain is not unjustified.

Indeed, Donald Trump comes from a long line of presidents whose attempts of resolving North Korea’s nuclear crisis were rendered futile, whether it’s Clinton’s temporary solution of the Agreed Framework, Bush’s Six Party Talks, or Obama’s refusal to cave into North Korea’s provocation by not visiting the country. Decades of unkept promises, ineffective negotiations, and strictly imposed sanctions have severely deteriorated the relations between United States and North Korea, making mutual trust almost impossible. Now that North Korea has cracked under pressure and initiated a negotiation to which President Trump gladly agreed to, we are at a crossroad in terms of reversing the irreversible. Whether or not Trump’s unorthodox foreign relation policy could contain North Korea’s nuclear program and mitigate the risks it poses to world peace is a mystery yet to be unveiled. We could only remain hopeful but with caution about the outcome.

Sources:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/asia/trump-north-korea.htmlhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/north-korean-leader-kim-jong-un-has-invited-president-trump-to-a-meeting/2018/03/08/021cb070-2322-11e8-badd-7c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.5a8f52275e80http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/08/north-korea-trump-kim-meeting-proves-our-presidents-strategy-worked.htmlhttps://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/09/diplomat-who-made-deal-with-north-korea-warns-trump-they-will-cheat.htmlhttps://www.cnn.com/2018/03/09/politics/north-korea-trump-obama-bush-clinton/index.html