What went right in Singapore
In the short- to medium-term, President Trump's summit with Kim Jong Un has succeeded in one thing: bringing us all back from the brink
The optics of the summit between President Trump and Kim Jong Un were undeniably poor. To see the American flag flying next to the symbol of a Stalinist museum is enraging. So too was it infuriating to hear a murderous dictator exalted as some kind of champion of his people's freedom and prosperity.
The substance of the summit was also hardly worth bragging about. The president is characteristically overselling both the promises listed in the communique and the reliability of the North Korean dictator as a negotiating partner. North Korea has broken many similar vows to denuclearize before.
Yet despite all these caveats, it's important to identify what went right in Singapore. Long term, the summit may simply be the latest addition in the list of U.S. diplomatic failures to deal with the North Korea nuclear problem, but in the short- to medium-term, it has succeeded in one thing: bringing us all back from the brink.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
That is still worth commending — even if much of the summit punditry, so ghoulishly eager for Trump to fail, is incapable of rising to the occasion.
Remember: Just a few months ago, it seemed we were headed toward a greater conflict with a nuclear-armed North Korea. Trump's own rhetorical escalation against "Little Rocket Man" Kim appeared to be a contributing factor.
Preventive war against North Korea would jeopardize the lives of millions, including our own allies in South Korea and beyond. The risks of war at present outweigh the risks of the weapons Pyongyang possesses, though that calculus could always change in the absence of effective negotiations — in which case we will truly be out of good options.
When the talks temporarily fell apart, it was easy to imagine Trump reacting petulantly, as he has done in response to lesser provocations from friendlier international leaders. Instead Trump responded in an unusually somber tone and Kim came back to the bargaining table.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Too much of Trump's approach to diplomacy has consisted of dictating maximalist terms to foreign governments and then becoming indignant when they don't agree to them. Here this has been truer of Trump's critics. And while Trump has puffed up the summit in recent days, the administration reset expectations when they agreed the Singapore meeting was on again, but construed it more as a first date than a wedding.
After a false start in response to a reporter's question, Trump also talked the more conventional Republicans in his administration off the ledge when it came to "Libya model" talk. The government of Libya disarming and then less than a decade later being destroyed with U.S. help is hardly worth touting to a reclusive despot one is attempting to coax away from the bomb.
A moralistic foreign policy is only actually moral if its aims are realistically achievable. If it results in the loss of life in the pursuit of unattainable goals, or, worse, it incentivizes the pursuit of the most lethal weapons by the world's worst governments as an insurance policy against U.S.-initiated regime change, it is not truly moral.
Perhaps Trump will take from this experience that even flawed agreements with loathsome regimes are an alternative to inaction or war. More likely, he will apply "maximum pressure" to everyone from Canada to Iran.
There remain significant risks that North Korea will continue its nuclearization, emboldening those who reject diplomatic solutions to this issue and making military action more politically palatable. It's possible Trump wants this too much to walk away, even at risk to South Korean sovereignty.
So let's not hand out any Nobel Peace Prizes yet. But let's take a deep breathe, be thankful things no longer appear to be spiraling out of control — and give a little credit (even if it's very little) where it is due.
W. James Antle III is the politics editor of the Washington Examiner, the former editor of The American Conservative, and author of Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?.
-
Will AI kill the smartphone?In The Spotlight OpenAI and Meta want to unseat the ‘Lennon and McCartney’ of the gadget era
-
Must-see bookshops around the UKThe Week Recommends Lose yourself in beautiful surroundings, whiling away the hours looking for a good book
-
A Nipah virus outbreak in India has brought back Covid-era surveillanceUnder the radar The disease can spread through animals and humans
-
Israel retrieves final hostage’s body from GazaSpeed Read The 24-year-old police officer was killed during the initial Hamas attack
-
China’s Xi targets top general in growing purgeSpeed Read Zhang Youxia is being investigated over ‘grave violations’ of the law
-
Panama and Canada are negotiating over a crucial copper mineIn the Spotlight Panama is set to make a final decision on the mine this summer
-
Why Greenland’s natural resources are nearly impossible to mineThe Explainer The country’s natural landscape makes the task extremely difficult
-
Iran cuts internet as protests escalateSpeed Reada Government buildings across the country have been set on fire
-
US nabs ‘shadow’ tanker claimed by RussiaSpeed Read The ship was one of two vessels seized by the US military
-
How Bulgaria’s government fell amid mass protestsThe Explainer The country’s prime minister resigned as part of the fallout
-
Femicide: Italy’s newest crimeThe Explainer Landmark law to criminalise murder of a woman as an ‘act of hatred’ or ‘subjugation’ but critics say Italy is still deeply patriarchal
