US Hostility Toward North Korean Sovereign Independence Why Talks Go Nowhere
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org - Home - Stephen Lendman)
The US under both right wings of its war party is militantly hostile toward nations it doesn't control.
It's longstanding aim throughout the post-WW II era is to transform them into client states under pro-Western puppet regimes — eliminating their sovereign independence, gaining control over their resources and populations.
The US has been hostile toward North Korea since the peninsula was divided post-WW II — a nonbelligerent nation threatening no one, its nuclear/ballistic missile deterrent solely for self-defense.
Throughout DPRK history, it never preemptively attacked another country. In June 1950, it responded defensively to belligerent South Korean cross-border provocations, its legitimate right.
Orchestrated by the US, it was all about seeking a pretext for war, waged by Harry Truman, not North Korean leader Kim Il-sung, turning much of the country to smoldering rubble, killing millions, mostly defenseless civilians.
Banned weapons were used like in all US wars of aggression, including incendiary, cluster, and radiological munitions, along with chemical and biological agents.
Research conducted by Professor Stephen Endicott revealed that US aircraft "dropped strange objects, including live spiders, flies, bees, snakes, fleas (with bubonic plague), ticks, dead rats, and mosquitos encased in US military tubes" on North Korea.
Since 1991 US aggression on Iraq, illegal depleted uranium (DU) has been and continues to be used in all its wars.
The 1907 Hague Convention banned use of any "poison or poisoned weapons."
DU munitions are radioactive, chemically toxic and poisonous. Developing, stockpiling, transferring, and use of chemical and biological agents is strictly prohibited by international law — unlawfully used by the US in all its war theaters.
Since the uneasy 1953 armistice on the Korean peninsula was agreed on, the US waged dirty war on the DPRK by other means.
It remains ongoing because Washington needs enemies to unjustifiably justify pursuit of its hegemonic aims. Since none existed earlier or now throughout the post-WW II era, they've been invented — unfairly demonizing North Korea one of many examples.
Despite its genuine good faith outreach to the US and West for normalizing relations, fruition never happened.
Nor is it conceivable with the most hawkish ever US regime in power, militantly hostile toward all sovereign independent states, waging wars of aggression in multiple theaters, economic terrorism against Iran and Venezuela, and unwillingness to negotiate with North Korea in good faith.
Two Kim Jong-un/Trump summits failed over unacceptable/one-sided US demands — offering nothing in return but empty promises.
That's where things now stand. If past is prologue, things are going nowhere because the US doesn't negotiate in good faith.
US history is clear – a record of breached treaties, conventions and other deals, Washington agreeing to one thing, then going another way – why it can never be trusted.
Candidate Trump vowed to be non-interventionist in relations with other countries. Instead, he escalated wars he inherited and wages terror war on Iran and Venezuela by other means — intended to crush their economies and immiserate their people, his actions flagrantly illegal.
Bolton is gone. Likeminded right wing extremist Robert O'Brien succeeded him as national security advisor. Militantly hardline Pompeo and his likeminded henchmen remain.
These figures assure continuation of the Trump regime's all take and no give in dealings with North Korea — leaving things at impasse, likely as long as DJT remains president with little prospect for positive change when new leadership succeeds him.
Reportedly, February Hanoi summit talks broke down over unacceptable US demands for Pyongyang to transfer its nuclear weapons and bomb fuel to the US, offering no concessions in return as a show of good faith.
The Trump regime also demanded full dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear infrastructure, ballistic missiles, launchers, related facilities, and elimination of chemical and biological weapons if any exist in the north — empty promises alone offered in return to be broken like countless times before.
On Saturday in Stockholm, Sweden, North Korean and US representatives held face-to-faces talks for the first time since Hanoi summit negotiations broke down February over unacceptable Trump regime demands.
Norway's Dagens Nyheter broadsheet reported that DPRK delegation head Kim Myong-gil said the following:
"We are disappointed that the United States did not put anything on the negotiation table. Now the United States has the responsibility to continue the negotiations," adding:
"We clearly expressed our position. The suspension of nuclear and intercontinental ballistic missile tests, the demolition of a nuclear test site in the north of the country, the return of the remains of US soldiers."
"We were the first to take steps to denuclearize and build confidence. If the United States sincerely responds to this, then we can move on to the next stage, of a serious discussion of denuclearization measures."
Talks in Sweden broke down "entirely because the US has not discarded its old stance and attitude."
In Hanoi, Kim reportedly asked Trump for partial sanctions relief alone, wanting only ones affecting North Korea's economy lifted — as a US good will gesture.
Trump refused, insisting on full compliance with his regime's unacceptable one-sided demands, refusing even a modest good faith gesture in return.
Bilateral talks were suspended following the failed summit. At the time, DPRK Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui blamed Trump regime officials for the breakdown, saying:
"We have no intention to yield to the (one-sided) US demands in any form, nor are we willing to engage in negotiations of this kind," adding:
Pompeo and Bolton "created the atmosphere of hostility and mistrust and, therefore, obstructed the constructive effort for negotiations between the supreme leaders of North Korea and the United States."
Choe quoted Kim saying:
"For what reason do we have to make this (65-hour) train trip again? Choe added: "I want to make it clear that the gangster-like stand of the US will eventually put the situation in danger."
"We have neither the intention to compromise with the US in any form nor much less the desire or plan to conduct this kind of negotiation."
On October 4, Time magazine reported that "Trump is prepared to offer Kim a three-year suspension of United Nations sanctions on textile and coal exports if Pyongyang agrees to dismantle its main nuclear facility at Yongbyon and halt its production of highly enriched uranium" — citing unnamed US officials.
On October 2, Vox.com reported the same thing. If true, why did Saturday talks in Stockholm break down with no progress cited by DPRK delegation head Kim Myong-gil.
Two weeks ago, Trump said he could meet with Kim Jong-un "soon."
If his regime offers no meaningful good faith gestures, further summit talks if held will fail like twice before.
VISIT MY NEW WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at email@example.com.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."