Tag Archives: North Korea

Sanctioning the World, the US Inadvertently ‘Locks & Launches’ Multipolarism, by Alastair Crooke

As the US tries to browbeat the world, many countries are deciding they know longer want to play in the American playpen. From Alastair Crooke at strategic-culture.org:

The commemorative medal had already been cast and published. It depicts profiles of Trump and Jong Un, facing each other, at the 12th June historic meeting – at which Jong Un was supposed to disavow and discard his nuclear armament, irreversibly, and then to accept Trump’s gracious benediction. The meeting now is moot (and, since drafting, has been cancelled, blindsiding both Moon and Abe), leaving in its wake, a frustrated and angry Trump. And, as we prefigured earlier, instead of realising that Team Trump had not been listening adequately to what Jong Un was signalling, Trump now blames Xi for upsetting ‘the deal’ from being struck.

China’s Global Times makes the point:

“The US unilaterally demands prompt peninsular denuclearization before it provides compensation to Pyongyang. China will not oppose such a deal between the US and North Korea. However, can Washington achieve it? Pyongyang has just given an answer … It would be OK if Washington pressures Pyongyang to gain an edge in negotiations, but Washington should think twice about the possibility of pushing the Korean Peninsula back to fierce antagonism.

It is clear from China’s perspective that the US has overestimated its weight in forcing North Korea to accept its demands. The US has forgotten the awkward situation it was in last year when it could not stop North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests, and the difficulty of taking military action against North Korea.

The US has always believed it was duped by North Korea, which is, in fact, far from correct. The US was responsible for the aborted peninsula resolutions, multiple times.”

Irritated too, by harsh comments made by ‘trade hawks’ on the lack of tangible result in trade negotiations with China (Steve Bannon, for example, told Bloomberg that Trump “changed the dynamic regarding China – but in one weekend, Secretary Mnuchin has given it away”), Trump now seems to be set to pivot towards a tougher China trade stance, saying that the talks had not achieved much, and that a new framework might be needed.

To continue reading: Sanctioning the World, the US Inadvertently ‘Locks & Launches’ Multipolarism

The Korea Summit: Skeptics Gloated Too Soon, by Justin Raimondo

There may be a summit in Singapore after all. From Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com:

It looks like the Singapore summit may be on after all

resident Trump’s sudden cancellation of the Singapore Summit had his enemies, left and right, ecstatically tweeting “I told you so!” In all the domains of Hate-on-Trump-landia, from the neoconservative netherworld of the Weekly Standard to the highfalutin liberal highlands of The New Yorker, the gloating rose up into the stratosphere like a mushroom cloud, blotting out the sunny optimism that had previously prevailed. A more unseemlyspectacle would be hard to imagine, but this level of nastiness is now considered normal in Washington, D.C.

Brushing aside Korean public opinion, which is overwhelmingly supportive of the peace initiative, #TheResistance only lives to see the President fail. Peace on the peninsula? Who cares?! All they care about is ousting Trump and retaking a White House they claim was stolen from them – because the Russians somehow hypnotized John Podesta into making “password” the password to his sensitive emails. Yes, these are the people who feel entitled to run the country.

When you challenge their presumptuousness they call you “Putin’s puppet,” an idiotic schoolyard taunt congressman Adam Schiff infamously hurled at Tucker Carlson. The scholarly types are more circumspect, albeit no less demagogic and illogical: they invariably make irrelevant references to Trump’s personal style, his colorful history, his many peccadilloes, that reveal more about the authors than about the President. Having declared the entire project doomed from the start – due to inadequate preparation, the allegedly incorrigible nature of the North Korean regime, the long storied history of past agreements that didn’t last, etc. etc. – the Trump-haters on both sides of the political spectrum stand united in their commitment to maintaining the cold war status quo on the Korean peninsula.

The neocons do so openly, and, in true cold war style, call for regime change in the North: National Security Advisor John Bolton, targeted by the North Koreans on account of his public support for this view, may not be a neocon, yet in this case he certainly reflects their stance in every respect.

The liberals, who don’t really care about foreign policy, and never had any firm view to begin with, reverted to their pre-summit rhetoric: Trump wants war! Bolton, we were told, has taken control of US policy, and the apocalypse is upon us. Anyone who thought for a minute that the Trump administration was going to achieve the unachievable was mercilessly mocked by the League of Very Serious People – but not for very long.

To continue reading; The Korea Summit: Skeptics Gloated Too Soon

The “Axis of Gold” Just Got Stronger, by James Rickards

Transacting in gold can be a nifty way around the US’s financial sanctions. From James Rickards at dailyreckoning.com:

As you probably know by now, President Trump backed out of the nuclear deal with Iran and is re-imposing harsh sanctions.

And just this morning, Trump announced that he’s canceling the much-anticipated nuclear summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un because of Kim’s recent belligerent comments.

What does that mean, aside from the added geopolitical risk to markets?

As you’re about to see, you can now expect what I call the “Axis of Gold” to get even stronger. And it has potential to accelerate the demise of the dollar-based international system.

The Axis of Gold includes Russia, China, Iran and Turkey. I would also include North Korea in that list, although as a junior member.

These countries are forming a trading and financial network revolving around gold and are acquiring massive amounts of physical gold to support it. They are steadily moving toward a gold-based balance of payment system.

Why is this happening?

Well, if you’re on the receiving end of American sanctions like Russia, Iran or North Korea, you want a way to work around these sanctions. And gold is a powerful alternative.

Let’s first consider North Korea.

With the summit called off, there’s every reason to expect that North Korea will only intensify its nuclear program.

But how can North Korea obtain the foreign nuclear and missile technology it requires to advance its program?

By using gold.

If a rogue state wants to acquire ballistic missile components or equipment to enrich uranium, it can’t buy them through SWIFT, the international payment system. But it can use gold.

Gold can’t be hacked or traced. Unlike digital money in bank accounts, it can’t be frozen. You just put it on a plane or ship and send it to its destination.

And new U.S. sanctions will once again lock Iran outside of the international payment system. But Iran does a lot of business with Russia and China. That’s where gold comes in.

To continue reading: The “Axis of Gold” Just Got Stronger

A Summer Of Disappointments Will Lead To An Extended Economic Crash, by Brandon Smith

SLL doesn’t always agree with Brandon Smith’s methodology, but this is a forecast worth paying attention to. From Smith at alt-market.com:

The summer season is often about renewed hope and revelry in comfort, and this goes for economic comfort as much as anything else. In parallel to the old tale of The Ant And The Grasshopper, we are all tempted to act like the grasshopper, forget about the trials and tribulations of the world and take a vacation from awareness.

I am seeing quite a lot of this in the past month as mounting global tensions appear to have subsided. But appearances can be deceiving…

I am reminded of the summer of 2008 when those of us in alternative economic analysis were warning of the overwhelming evidence of a debt based deflationary disaster. There seemed to be widespread complacency back then as well. September finally struck and reality began to sink in, and the rest is a history we are still dealing with to this day. Right now, economic optimism is desperately clinging to news headlines rather than data fundamentals, but this can just as easily sink markets as it can keep them artificially afloat.

Consider the numerous powder keg events coming our way over the next few months and what they will mean for economic sentiment if they go the wrong way.

Federal Reserve Meeting June 12-13

The next week will be packed with public statements from various Fed officials which may hint at how aggressive the central bank will be for the rest of the year in its tightening program. However, I think I can guess rather easily what they will do. The Fed has been sticking to its policy of interest rate hikes and balance sheet cuts as I predicted they would for the past couple years. Nothing has changed under new Fed chairman Jerome Powell.

I believe the June meeting will mark an important mid-year shift for the Fed into even more aggressive fiscal tightening. The mainstream media has been heavily pushing the idea that stagflation is now a true threat to the U.S. economy. This is a notion I actually agree with and have been warning about for quite some time.

To continue reading: A Summer Of Disappointments Will Lead To An Extended Economic Crash

Is US Bellicosity Backfiring? by Patrick J. Buchanan

Does Trump want US bellicosity to backfire? From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

U.S. threats to crush Iran and North Korea may yet work, but as of now neither Tehran nor Pyongyang appears to be intimidated.

Repeated references by NSC adviser John Bolton and Vice President Mike Pence to the “Libya model” for denuclearization of North Korea just helped sink the Singapore summit of President Trump and Kim Jong Un. To North Korea, the Libya model means the overthrow and murder of Libya strongman Col. Gadhafi, after he surrendered his WMD.

Wednesday, North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui exploded at Pence’s invocation of Libya: “Vice-President Pence has made unbridled and impudent remarks that North Korea might end like Libya … I cannot suppress my surprise at such ignorant and stupid remarks.

“Whether the U.S. will meet us at a meeting room or encounter us at nuclear-to-nuclear showdown is entirely dependent upon the decision and behavior of the United States.”

Yesterday, Trump canceled the Singapore summit.

Earlier this week at the Heritage Foundation, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo laid out our Plan B for Iran in a speech that called to mind Prussian Field Marshal Karl Von Moltke.

Among Pompeo’s demands: Iran must end all support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza, withdraw all forces under Iranian command in Syria, and disarm its Shiite militia in Iraq.

Iran must confess its past lies about a nuclear weapons program, and account publicly for all such activity back into the 20th century.

Iran must halt all enrichment of uranium, swear never to produce plutonium, shut down its heavy water reactor, open up its military bases to inspection to prove it has no secret nuclear program, and stop testing ballistic missiles.

And unless Iran submits, she will be strangled economically.

What Pompeo delivered was an ultimatum: Iran is to abandon all its allies in all Mideast wars, or face ruin and possible war with the USA.

It is hard to recall a secretary of state using the language Pompeo deployed: “We will track down Iranian operatives and their Hezbollah proxies operating around the world and crush them. Iran will never again have carte blanche to dominate the Middle East.”

But how can Iran “dominate” a Mideast that is home to Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Egypt, as well as U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea and Syria?

To continue reading: Is US Bellicosity Backfiring?

Now Corporate Media Are Undermining a US-North Korea Nuclear Weapons Deal, by Gareth Porter

The mainstream media are following the orders of their Deep State masters and trying to sabotage a potential US-North Korea agreement before Trump and Kim Jong-un ever reach the negotiating table. From Gareth Porter at antiwar.com:

In an interview with Fox News on April 29, Donald Trump’s new National Security Adviser John Bolton tossed a grenade into the process of planning for the Trump-Kim summit. “We have very much in mind the Libyan model from 2003-2004,” he said in regard to the problem of North Korean denuclearization. It was a very obvious deliberate effort to provoke a breakdown in talks between then CIA Director Mike Pompeo and the North Koreans by invoking an historical episode that would infuriate Pyongyang.

Kim Jong Un took more than two weeks before his government issued a stern warning to Trump about Bolton’s suggestion. In a major statementaddressed to the Trump administration, Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan attacked Bolton’s remark as an “awfully sinister move” to impose “the destiny of Libya or Iraq” on North Korea. And he warned against the “so-called Libyan model of nuclear abandonment,” adding, “We have already stated our intention of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and made clear on several occasions that precondition for denuclearization is to put an end to anti-DPRK hostile policy and nuclear threats and blackmail of the United States.” Kim was thus making it clear that North Korea was open to giving up its nuclear weapons but not to giving them away before the United States had taken steps to assure the regime’s security from US attack.

Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo both sought to reassure Kim that the administration had no intention of imposing a Libyan solution on North Korea. “The Libyan model isn’t a model that we have at all, when we’re thinking of North Korea,” Trump told reporters, clearly separating himself from what Bolton had suggested.

Under the circumstances, one might have expected the corporate media to have reported that the North Koreans had pushed back against a malicious Bolton effort to sabotage the summit, and that Bolton had been effectively rebuked as a result. Instead, however, major news outlets portrayed the North Korean response as evidence that the Kim regime was backing away from a commitment to denuclearization and was up to the same old North Korean political-diplomatic trick of manipulating Trump to gain unfair political advantage.

To continue reading: Now Corporate Media Are Undermining a US-North Korea Nuclear Weapons Deal

A Trump Doctrine for Singapore and Beyond, by Patrick J. Buchanan

The American idea of negotiations often looks like unilateral surrender to the rest of the world. There will be no unilateral surrender from North Korea. From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

After Pyongyang railed this week that the U.S.-South Korean Max Thunder military drills were a rehearsal for an invasion of the North, and imperiled the Singapore summit, the Pentagon dialed them back.

The B-52 exercises alongside F-22 stealth fighters were canceled.

But Pyongyang had other objections.

Sunday, NSC adviser John Bolton spoke of a “Libyan model” for the North’s disarmament, referring to Moammar Gadhafi’s surrender of all his weapons of mass destruction in 2004. The U.S. was invited into Libya to pick them up and cart them off, whereupon sanctions were lifted.

As Libya was subsequently attacked by NATO and Gadhafi lynched, North Korea denounced Bolton and all this talk of the “Libyan model” of unilateral disarmament.

North Korea wants a step-by-step approach, each concession by Pyongyang to be met by a U.S. concession. And Bolton sitting beside Trump, and across the table from Kim Jong Un in Singapore, may be inhibiting.

What was predictable and predicted has come to pass.

If we expected Kim to commit at Singapore to Bolton’s demand for “complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization,” and a swift follow-through, we were deluding ourselves.

At Singapore, both sides will have demands, and both will have to offer concessions, if there is to be a deal.

What does Kim Jong Un want?

An end to U.S. and South Korean military exercises and sanctions on the North, trade and investment, U.S. recognition of his regime, a peace treaty, and the eventual removal of U.S. bases and troops.

He is likely to offer an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, no transfer of nuclear weapons or strategic missiles to third powers, a drawdown of troops on the DMZ, and the opening of North Korea’s borders to trade and travel.

As for his nuclear weapons and the facilities to produce them, these are Kim’s crown jewels. These brought him to the attention of the world and the Americans to the table. These are why President Trump is flying 10,000 miles to meet and talk with him.

And, unlike Gadhafi, Kim is not going to give them up.

To continue reading: A Trump Doctrine for Singapore and Beyond

Kim Jong-un: The Commie Who Came in From the Cold, by Justin Raimondo

Maybe Kim Jong Un is tired of presiding over one of the world’s most backward countries. From Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com:

Is he North Korea’s Gorbachev?

Why has North Korea suddenly decided to negotiate with Seoul and Washington, and quite possibly give up its nuclear weapons?

This question has commentators in the West stumped, and so they fall back on the usual self-serving narcissistic America-centric nonsense: Kim Jong-un was so intimidated by President Trump’s outlandish threats that he decided to be a good boy and capitulate. The North Koreans naturally deny this, and their denials are quite credible: after all, the Korean stalemate has been pretty much unalterable since the signing of the armistice in 1953, and there is no reason to believe that this frozen conflict would reemerge as a hot spot – and burst into flame – since both sides would be very badly burned.

Yes, there has been plenty of rhetorical bombast since the North acquired a nuclear capacity and some semi-credible means of delivering a nuclear payload, but in reality this actually lessened the prospect of bombs dropping on either side of the demilitarized zone – for the same reason that deterrence worked to make a nuclear exchange between the US and the Soviet Union unthinkable.

So if Trump’s tweeted bloviations weren’t the cause of the North Korean charm offensive, and subsequent North-South rapprochement during the Winter Olympics, then what is going on here?

There is a lot of evidence that the North Koreans have decided on a major turn toward the West. Although the present opacity of the North gives us only a limited view of what is going on, there is sufficient reason to believe that the last Stalinist regime on earth is on a course of self-liquidation that – they hope – will enable them to survive as a political force in a reunified Korean nation.

In short, Kim Jong-un aspires to be North Korea’s Mikhail Gorbachev: a communist dictator who wants to come in from the cold.

To continue reading: Kim Jong-un: The Commie Who Came in From the Cold

In Korea, We Should Welcome Anything Peaceful, by Lucy Steigerwald

We’re still a long way from a decent Korean agreement, but such an agreement must count as progress if it’s achieved. From Lucy Steigerwald at antiwar.com:

After last week’s momentous meeting of Korean leaders – with North Korean dictator Kim Jung-Un coming to the South – it suddenly seemed like Donald Trump was about ready for a Nobel Peace Prize. Peace on the Korean peninsula and, indeed, an official end to the armisticed Korean War is still far away, but both North and South pledged to work towards it and an end to nuclear wars.

The path to actually get to a substantial, stable destination between the two Koreas is rocky, and there have been countless failures before. Just because there was a shaking of hands doesn’t mean that South Korea wants to risk its prosperity by coming together with their atrophied sibling nation. And just because North Korea swears its nuclear program is halted doesn’t mean it is – they’ve used that line many times before and have reportedly been hoping for nukes since the 1960s.

Two Koreas, Two Trumps

Divided up by the US and the USSR in order to discourage the Japanese from picking it back up as a colony, the bisected Korea conflict quickly turned into the Cold War clash and then the war in 1950. Each country thought it boasted the rightful government. Those in the South lucked out. As unfree as South Korea was and even remains today – there are already crackdowns on anything that might endanger the historic meeting – North Korea is nothing less than a dystopian novel come to life.

And yet, goofy presidential boasts and a fear of nuclear doom over the past months of bloviating suddenly turned into general public incredulity at the moving sight of a North Korean leader coming to the South for the first time since 1960.

To continue reading: In Korea, We Should Welcome Anything Peaceful

Never Underestimate the Power of a Question, by Robert Gore

What if? Why not?

Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert comic strip, has a phrase—mental prisons—for looking and thinking at problems in the same old way. He’s hailed President Trump and Kanye West as escapees. That’s fine as far as it goes, but key to any kind of general escape is recognizing that governments are the wardens.

Hospital administrators and doctors within Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) were little Alfie Evans’ wardens. They determined the 17-month old’s brain condition was terminal and he was in an irreversible vegetative state, and ordered his life support withdrawn. Alfie’s parents, Tom Evans and Kate James, contested the prognosis and the order. That they had to go to a court for permission to seek alternative medical arrangements tells you all you need to know about state-provided medical care. That permission was denied offers a sneak peek into Britain’s impending totalitarianism. Alfie died April 28.

Never underestimate the power of questions, they are the most powerful positive force in the universe. Questions embody curiosity, courage, and a quest for the truth. They initiate investigation, hypotheses, experimentation, new knowledge, and progress. The first questions humanity’s forebears asked began the long, arduous journey to civilization.

MAGA was the Trump acronym; his symbol should have been the question mark. The two are related. The acronym implies America is no longer great, which prompts the obvious question: Why? The source of most of the vitriol directed toward Trump is not so much his answers, which have often been contradicted by his actions. Trump’s transgression is that he dared to question in the first place: immigration policy, foreign military intervention, trade agreements, costs of alliances, corruption, and so on.

Government creates a comfortable status quo for government, string pullers, and beneficiaries. Its prime imperative is to preserve itself. Any change perceived as a threat will be resisted, stifled, and squelched. Questions are inherently threatening, so Trump must be stopped at all costs. Tom Evans and Kate James must not be allowed to challenge their son’s death sentence. Kanye West must be shamed and ostracized.

A deadly deception sells government with terms like “progressive” and “liberal.” Governments are coercion, which is always regressive and illiberal. They are captured by a society’s wealthiest and most powerful and used to cement that group’s status. Crumbs are tossed to the lower rungs, not to improve their station but to make them dependent on the government and ensure their support. Criticism of this arrangement is tolerated only to the extent it can’t be suppressed, but suppression always looms, sometimes blatantly, sometimes in barely perceptible ways.

Scott Adams and other commentators see Kanye West as the start of something dramatically new among blacks. Doing electoral math, some foresee an appreciable downshift in blacks’ usual 90 percent plus support for Democrats, which will, they claim, doom the donkeys. Such triumphalism is misplaced.

It’s not like Kanye West is the first black to question black fealty to Democrats. Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have been skewering shibboleths on race for decades.

Indian-American Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary Hillary’s America examined the Democrats’ long history of overt racism. It’s support of slavery, the Klu Klux Klan, Jim Crow, poll taxes, and segregation, and its opposition to anti-lynching and civil and voting rights legislation made the racist south a solidly Democratic bastion for almost a century. Blacks voted overwhelmingly Republican for seventy years after the Civil War.

Franklin D. Roosevelt switched them to the Democratic column. The impetus was primarily economic and political, not civil rights. The New Deal helped those most devastated by the Depression, many of whom were black. Politically, Roosevelt offered them a place in the Democratic coalition, although it put them in uneasy alliance with the southern racists. The switch offers insight into blacks unwavering support for Democrats since Roosevelt.

Years ago, The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board started referring to the Democratic “plantation” for blacks, and the phrase is still in use, usually by conservative commentators who regard it as a bold badge of political incorrectness. Blacks ignore it and the implicit question: when will they “wake up,” realize their slavery, and flee the plantation? If they’re receiving economic and political benefits from Democrats and governments, paid for in part by taxes coerced from The Wall Street Journal’s editors and conservative commentators, who’s the slaves?

While racism may never be excised entirely, blacks’ legal status and their position vis-a-vis America’s governments have never been better. Many receive substantial economic largesse from the government, including cash, in-kind benefits, and preferences in hiring and contracting. Blacks, almost always Democrats, have been elected to just about every political office in the land, including the presidency. Multi-millionaire West doesn’t need government, but millions of blacks do, and they vote for the party that identifies itself as the party of government.

One can argue that black dependence on the Democrats and government is bad for them; dependence of any kind usually is. Everyone knows overeating can kill you, but we still have an obesity epidemic. Black dependence is a shackle, but it’s durable and won’t be unlocked just because a rich rap star questions it.

Presidents have found shackles easier to break when they don’t involve domestic constituencies. Nixon went to China and Trump is going to the Korean peninsula to negotiate with Kim Jong-Un. While the outcome is uncertain, if Trump eventually gets an agreement by which North Korea denuclearizes, perhaps in exchange for the US withdrawing troops from South Korea—or at least stopping war exercises—and security guarantees from the US and China, it will be a triumph. Moon Jae-in, Kim Jong-Un, and Trump will deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.

Trump asked what if the stalemated status quo that had held sway on the Korean peninsula since the cessation of hostilities in 1953 could be broken. The usual establishment and media suspects said their nays (see “Media Pundits Horrified by Prospect Between North and South Korea”) but had only the usual palaver when Trump asked why not. It’s a measure of how bizarrely ossified their thinking has become that a peace and nuclear disarmament initiative is mocked, lambasted, and rejected out of hand before negotiations have even begun.

Trump is also questioning the status quo on Iran, pulling the US out of the Iranian Nuclear Agreement. Evidently he wants to negotiate a better deal. The move is thoroughly questionable: his strategy has a lot of moving parts and he’s taking significant risks. Time will tell if things work out, but once again Trump is indisputably disrupting the consensus.

The welfare and warfare state consensus should be questioned and disrupted at every turn. The empire and its bread and circuses have corrupted and bankrupted the nation. Government is an intellectual tar pit that slows, traps, and submerges curiosity and inquiry. Questions are the hallmark of free minds. The state is the natural enemy of free thought. A fight for the latter is a fight against the former. Questions will spark the coming battle. They are weapons of independence and revolution which governments can never wholly suppress. Were they ever to do so, we’d all share Alfie Evans’ fate: hitched to their life support until they decided to kill us.

You Should Be Laughing At Them!

amazon paperback

kindle ebook