한국정치 노트 Notes on the Politics of Korea


1.

페이스북 이용자 5천만의 개인 정보가 유출되었다.   연방 거래 위원회 (the Federal Trade Commission) 가 캠브리지 아날리티카 (CA)가 어떻게 페이스북 데이터를 불법적으로 사용했는가 조사에 들어갔다. 



2. 엘론 머스크가 페이스북에서 지워버린 회사 이름들

스페이스 X (SpaceX: 우주선 회사)

테슬라 (Tesla: 전기 자동차 회사)

솔라시티 (SolarCity, 태양 에너지 공급하는 테슬라 자회사)

하이퍼루프 (Hyperloop: 국가간 초고속 운송망 건설 기획) 



3. 흥미로운 것은 2016년 엘론 머스크와 페이스북 마크 주커버그 사이 악연이다.


2016년에 엘론 머스크의 스페이스 X와 마크 주커버그의 페이스북 사이 좋지 않았던 하나의 사건이 발생했다.
2016년 9월 팔콘 9 로켓이 발사 직전 연료를 주입하는 과정에서 폭발하고 말았다. 

그런데 이 폭발로 인해 이스라엘 통신 위성이 폭발 (아모스 6)하고 말았는데, 마크 주커버그가 이에 대해서 장탄식을 한 적이 있다.  페이스북이 사하라 사막 이남 아프리카에 인터넷을 설치하려면 아모스 6를 사용해야 하는데, 이 폭발로 인해 주커버그 원래 계획에 차질이 생겼기 때문이다. 


그 폭발 때문에 페이스북은 ‘우주기반 인터넷’ 사업을 중단해야 했지만, 스페이스 X 는 자체 노력으로 그 기술에 선수를 치고 나가버렸다. 

작년에 스페이스 X는 2개의 원형 인공위성들을 쏴 올렸다. 이 기술 실험 목표는 전 지구 인터넷을 통합하는데 필요한 1만 2천개의 인공위성들을 하나로 묶어내기 위함이다. 



Why Did Elon Musk Delete His Facebook Pages?

Considering SpaceX accidentally blew up one of Mark Zuckerberg’s projects, this is a little awkward.


Max Whittaker / Getty

This week’s revelations about a British political consultancy’s use of data from 50 million Facebook users for potentially shady purposes has prompted many people to declare they will quit the social network in protest. One of the newest additions to the bandwagon is Elon Musk, the wealthy entrepreneur with companies like Tesla and Space X to his name—and he followed through in a very public way.

It happened, as these things do, on Twitter.

“It is time. #deletefacebook,” Brian Acton, the cofounder of the messaging service WhatsApp, tweeted on Tuesday, the day the Federal Trade Commission opened an investigation into how Cambridge Analytica accessed the Facebook data. For whatever reason, Musk decided to respond to Acton’s tweet on Friday. “What’s Facebook?” he replied. He appeared to be joking, but someone decided to call his bluff.

“Delete SpaceX page on Facebook if you’re the man?” @serdarsprofile said.

“I didn’t realize there was one. Will do,” Musk replied. At this point, it wasn’t clear whether Musk was trolling or being serious, so others joined in.

“We’re waiting,” tweeted Ryan Mac, a BuzzFeed News technology reporter, and included a screenshot of SpaceX’s Facebook page. “This should be deleted too, right?” tweeted Bryson Masse, a reporter at The Wire Report, with a screenshot of Tesla’s page. “Definitely. Looks lame anyway,” Musk replied to Masse.

When Mike Murphy, a technology reporter at Quartzaccused Musk of simply trolling, Musk replied, “What, a troll, me!? How dare you, sir!”

By Thursday afternoon, the Facebook pages for several of Musk’s brands were no longer online. They included SpaceX, the spaceflight company; Tesla, the electric-car manufacturer; SolarCity, a Tesla subsidiary that provides solar energy; and Hyperloop, the project to build a cross-country, high-speed transportation system.

Others were spared. The page for the Boring Company, the construction company Musk created to try to drill underground tunnels in Los Angeles, was untouched. So was the page for OpenAI, an artificial-intelligence research nonprofit Musk cofounded.

Musk is one of the most high-profile people to ditch Facebook in the wake of the growing scandal. When the Facebook pages disappeared, reporters bombarded the companies’ spokespeople for answers. None of the brands have released any formal statements about Musk’s tweets, perhaps choosing to let them stand on their own. The speed with which the pages came down suggests those companies’ social-media managers probably didn’t have much time for discussion. (SpaceX declined to comment on the record about the tweets.)

Musk’s boycott is particularly amusing because SpaceX has some history with Facebook and it’s not ... great. In September 2016, a Falcon 9 rocket exploded on the launchpad during fueling ahead of its scheduled launch. The explosion destroyed the rocket’s payload, which included Amos-6, an Israeli communications satellite that Facebook was going to use to provide internet coverage to parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

“As I’m here in Africa, I’m deeply disappointed to hear that SpaceX’s launch failure destroyed our satellite that would have provided connectivity to so many entrepreneurs and everyone else across the continent,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a Facebook post at the time.

The explosion put Facebook’s efforts for space-based internet on hold, but SpaceX has forged ahead with its own. Last month, the company launched two prototype satellites to test the technology it wants to use to someday create a constellation of nearly 12,000 satellites for global internet coverage.

All this is to say: Zuckerberg can’t be pleased with Musk’s very public boycott after SpaceX quite literally blew up his dreams for space-based internet, and then went ahead with their own.

Musk is aware of this uncomfortable situation. When Kerry Flynn, a technology reporter at Mashablereminded him of that, he replied, “Yeah, my fault for being an idiot. We did give them a free launch to make up for it and I think they had some insurance.”

Musk claims he doesn’t use Facebook and never has. The effects of the removal of the Facebook pages will be felt most by the people employed to run them, so Musk doesn’t deserve any praise for publicly boycotting the troubled social network. For Musk, the harder thing to do would be to swear off Instagram, which Facebook owns and which he loves. “Instagram’s probably ok imo, so long as it stays fairly independent,” Musk said Friday. Perhaps, but it’s no playground, either. Instagram allows advertises to target users based on demographics, including political views, and the platform didn’t escape Russian propaganda ads during the 2016 election


Comment +0

지금 중국과 러시아는 미국 알래스카와 해저 철도(150~200km)를 뚫을 계획을 수립하고 있다. 향후 30년,50년 안에, 미국 와싱턴 뉴욕에서 알래스카를 거쳐 블라디보스톡, 함흥, 서울, 광주, 부산까지 철도 여행이 가능한 시대가 올 것이다.

.








https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/chinese-experts-discussions-high-speed-beijing-american-railway

Chinese experts 'in discussions' over building high-speed Beijing-US railway

'China-Russia-Canada-America line' would run for 13,000km across Siberia and pass under Bering Strait through 200km tunnel

 A magnetic-levitation train leaves Shanghai. The proposed US rail line would take two days, with the train travelling at an average of 350km/h. Photograph: Aly Song/Reuters

China is considering plans to build a high-speed railway line to the US, the country's official media reported on Thursday.

The proposed line would begin in north-east China and run up through Siberia, pass through a tunnel underneath the Pacific Ocean then cut through Alaska and Canada to reach the continental US, according to a report in the state-run Beijing Times newspaper.

Crossing the Bering Strait in between Russia and Alaska would require about 200km (125 miles) of undersea tunnel, the paper said, citing Wang Mengshu, a railway expert at the Chinese Academy of Engineering.

"Right now we're already in discussions. Russia has already been thinking about this for many years," Wang said.

The project – nicknamed the "China-Russia-Canada-America" line – would run for 13,000km, about 3,000km further than the Trans-Siberian Railway. The entire trip would take two days, with the train travelling at an average of 350km/h (220mph).

The reported plans leave ample room for skepticism. No other Chinese railway experts have come out in support of the proposed project. Whether the government has consulted Russia, the US or Canada is also unclear. The Bering Strait tunnel alone would require an unprecedented feat of engineering – it would be the world's longest undersea tunnel – four times the length of the Channel Tunnel.

According to the state-run China Daily, the tunnel technology is "already in place" and will be used to build a high-speed railway between the south-east province of Fujian and Taiwan. "The project will be funded and constructed by China," it said. "The details of this project are yet to be finalised."

The Beijing Times listed the China-US line as one of four international high-speed rail projects currently in the works. The first is a line that would run from London via Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Kiev and Moscow, where it would split into two routes, one of which would run to China through Kazakhstan and the other through eastern Siberia. The second line would begin in the far-western Chinese city of Urumqi and then run through Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Turkey to Germany. The third would begin in the south-western city of Kunming and end in Singapore. The routes are under various stages of planning and development, the paper said.

Wang was not immediately available for comment. A man who picked up the phone at his office said he was traveling and would not respond to interview requests."

 This article was amended on Friday 9 May 2014. The project is nicknamed the "China-Russia-Canada-America" line, not the "China-Russia plus America line" as we said first. This has been corrected.




Comment +0


우리말 명사 유래- 어디서 빌어왔는가? 그리고 어떻게 우리말을 만들어 낼 것인가? 

중국어는 그 뿌리가 그림 언어 (pictorial language)이고, 한국어는 소리, 음성, 표음문자 (phonetic language:表音)이다.


우리말 명사 유래: 어디서 빌어왔는가? 중국어는 그 뿌리가 그림 언어 (pictorial language)이고, 한국어는 소리, 음성, 표음문자 (phonetic language:表音)이다. 어린시절 한자를 배울 때는 상형과 그림을 포함 6가지 한자 조어 원리가 있다고 했다. 그 당시만에 해도 우리말과 한자 혹은 중국어의 차이를 알 지 못한 채, 천자문을 그리고 외우고 그랬다. 


1. Democracy . 우리가 가장 많이 쓰는 단어 중에 하나가 민주주의라는 명사이다. 중국어는 democracy 를 민주국, 민주정치, 민주정신 등으로 번역하고 있다. 좌측은 영어-중국어 (중-영) 사전, 오른쪽은 '명'이라는 중국 친구가 선물로 준 중국어-한국(조선어) 사전이다. 중국과 북한과 언어 교류의 역사는 한국과 중국보다 더 오래되었다. 중국과 북한 사이에 이미 만들어진 번역어들에 대해서도 검토와 학습이 필요하다. 


2. 일반 명사들. 자비, 비애, 비관, 비분, 비극, 비읍, 비탄 이런 명사들은 중국어 단어들이다. 슬프다, 눈물난다, 마음이 짠하다, 마음이 찢어지다, 가슴이 매어지다 등에 해당하는 명사들이다.


 3. 정치 용어들 .  코뮨(commune)을 중국에서는 공국으로, 혹은 최소행정구으로 번역했다. 그런데 코뮤니즘은 공산주의 혹은 공산주의 학설, 공산주의 운동, 공산주의 제도로 번역했다. 


코뮨에서는 '대중, 공공성'을 의미하는 공국이라는 단어를 사용한 반면에, 코뮤니즘에서는 일하다 생산하다는 뜻을 지닌 '산'을 사용했다. 코뮤니즘은 생산뿐만 아니라 인간 생활 전반을 다 포괄하는 말인데, 경제적으로 제한되기 쉬운 '생산'만을 강조해 번역하는 것은 내가 볼 때는 적절하지 못하다. 


마르크스나 엥엘스는 코뮤니즘이 생산 안에서만 이뤄지는 것이 아니라, 생산 바깥, 비생산 영역들에서 참 자유가 실현될 수 있다고 믿었기 때문이다. 코뮤니즘을 우리 말로 번역할 때, 적절한 단어를 고르는 것도 또 하나의 과제이다.


 4. society, socialism 은 모두 '사회'라는 단어를 사용했다. 사회, 사회주의. society 를 사회, 제도, [정식 용어] 교왕 (사귀고 친분을 맺다) 이렇게 번역했다. 


5. association 은 협회, 사단, 연합으로 번역했다. 그리고 (심리적) 연상 작용을 의미하는 '연합'으로도 번역했다.




1. Democracy  . 우리가 가장 많이 쓰는 단어 중에 하나가 민주주의라는 명사이다. 중국어는 democracy 를 민주국, 민주정치, 민주정신 등으로 번역하고 있다. 






좌측은 영어-중국어 (중-영) 사전, 오른쪽은 '명'이라는 중국 친구가 선물로 준 중국어-한국(조선어) 사전이다. 

중국과 북한과 언어 교류의 역사는 한국과 중국보다 더 오래되었다. 중국과 북한 사이에 이미 만들어진 번역어들에 대해서도 검토와 학습이 필요하다.






2. 일반 명사들. 자비, 비애, 비관, 비분, 비극, 비읍, 비탄 이런 명사들은 중국어 단어들이다. 슬프다, 눈물난다, 마음이 짠하다, 마음이 찢어지다, 가슴이 매어지다 등에 해당하는 명사들이다. 





3. 정치 용어들 .

코뮨(commune)을 중국에서는  공국으로, 혹은 최소행정구으로 번역했다. 

그런데 코뮤니즘은 공산주의 혹은 공산주의 학설, 공산주의 운동, 공산주의 제도로 번역했다. 

코뮨에서는 '대중, 공공성'을 의미하는 공국이라는 단어를 사용한 반면에, 코뮤니즘에서는 일하다 생산하다는 뜻을 지닌 '산'을 사용했다. 

코뮤니즘은 생산뿐만 아니라 인간 생활 전반을 다 포괄하는 말인데, 경제적으로 제한되기 쉬운 '생산'만을 강조해 번역하는 것은 내가 볼 때는 적절하지 못하다. 마르크스나 엥엘스는 코뮤니즘이 생산 안에서만 이뤄지는 것이 아니라, 생산 바깥, 비생산 영역들에서 참 자유가 실현될 수 있다고 믿었기 때문이다. 

코뮤니즘을 우리 말로 번역할 때, 적절한 단어를 고르는 것도 또 하나의 과제이다. 






4. society, socialism 은 모두 '사회'라는 단어를 사용했다. 사회, 사회주의. society 를 사회, 제도, [정식 용어] 교왕 (사귀고 친분을 맺다) 이렇게 번역했다. 





5. association 은 협회, 사단, 연합으로 번역했다. 그리고 (심리적) 연상 작용을 의미하는 '연합'으로도 번역했다.


Comment +0


이명박이 잡혀가기 전에 페이스북에 남긴 글에 대한 논평:

이명박은 '나의 참 모습' 그러니까 참 자아 'true self' 를 되찾고 싶다고 했다.그래야 한다. 한국 교도소 기능 그 자체를 믿어보자. 이 기회에 자기가 지은 죄를 반성해야 한다.교소도가 이명박이 '참 자아'를 찾는데 도움을 줄 것이다. 


두번째 해석, 이명박은 '누굴 원망하지 않고 자책했다'. 이 말은 권력을 뺏긴 자의 신세 한탄이다.그리고 박근혜보다 더 못한 처지에 대한 비관이다. 박근혜도 구치소로 잡혀갈 때 팬들이 나왔는데,  이명박은 혼자 외롭게 잡혀갔다. 아무도 손 흔들어주지 않았다. 


세번째, 이명박은 국민의 눈높이가 높은 것을 탓했다. 한마디로 운이 없었다는 한탄이다.만약 국민의 민주주의에 대한 눈높이가 낮았더라면, 자기가 잡혀가지 않았을 것이라고 생각하고 있다.


네번째, 이명박은 치적을 내세웠다. 2008년 미국 금융공황을 '세계대공황 Great Depression'이라고 올바로 표현했다.이명박 재임기간에 2008년 금융공황을 잘 극복했다고 자화자찬했다. 그러나 한국에서도 빈부격차는 더 커졌다.지방 경제는 죽고, 서울 수도권과 격차는 더 늘어났다. 


다섯번째, 노동자와 자본가를 '노와사'라는 단어로 표현했다. 현대건설 사장 말투다.

 이명박이 제일 좋아하는 단어가 '노와사'이다. '노와사'가 하나로 뭉쳐 노조는 사용자의 머슴이 되는 것이다. 이명박이 제일 좋아하는 것은 '노와사'가 휴일도 반납하고 일하는 것이다. 죽도록 일하는 '노와사'가 그리운 것이다.'노와사'가 죽도록 등꼴 빠지도록 일할 때, 이명박은 땅 사재기하고, 뇌물받고, 바지사장 내세워 DAS 사장질 하는 시절을그리워한다.


이명박 현대건설 사장이 '이윤 논리'를 마치 '관료제'보다 세련된 것처럼 포장했다. 이명박은 시민들의 자율적인 정치의지와 실천을 개무시하고,모든 것을 '자본주의 시장 논리'에 맡기자는 '정치 무능론' '시민 참여 무용론'의 주범이었다.자본주의 시장논리는 화장술(make-up)이고, 속내는 뇌물 쌍끌이었다.   


여섯번째, 이명박이 노동자들의 가족들을 생각한 적이 있던가? 위선이다. 자기 가족들의 안전을 마치 악당들이 위협하는 것처럼 묘사했다. 마피아 조폭들 사이에 자기 가족들이 위협을 받는 것처럼 묘사했다.조금이라도 가족을 염려했더라면, 에르메스 보기를 '돌같이'하라는 최영 장군의 '정치가로서 덕목'을 미리미리 실천해야 하지 않았을까? 



- 나의 참모습을 찾으러 떠나는 이명박 - 


총체적 잡범 명박 투옥 위해

봄인데도 눈발이

그렇게 날렸나 보다


종합세트적 날강도 구속 위해

촛불은 추운 광장에서

또 그렇게 촛농 떨궜나 보다


빵집, 재미교포, 삼성 안가리고

코묻은 돈도 마다하지 않던 뒤안길에서

인제는 영포빌딩 덜미잡혀 빵 앞에 선

차라리 현대건설 쪼인트까던 시절이 그리운.


이렇게 무기징역형 받으려고

대선에 532만표 차이로 대통령에 당선되고

‘나도 그때 세상이 미친게 아닌가 하여 잠도 오지 않았나 보다’




지금 이 시간 
누굴 원망하기 보다는
이 모든 것은 내 탓이라는 심정이고
자책감을 느낀다.


지나온 날을 되돌아보면,
기업에 있을 때나 서울시장, 
대통령직에 있을 때 
나름대로 최선을 다했다고 생각한다.


특히 대통령이 되어 
‘정말 한번 잘 해 봐야겠다’는 각오로 임했다.


과거 잘못된 관행을 절연하고
깨끗한 정치를 하고자 노력했지만
오늘 날 국민 눈높이에 비춰보면
미흡한 부분이 없지 않았다.


재임중 세계대공황이래 최대 금융위기를 맞았지만
대한민국은 세계에서 가장 모범적으로 
위기를 극복했다.


위기극복을 위해 같이 합심해서 일한 사람들
민과 관, 노와사 그 모두를
결코 잊지 못하고 감사하고 있다.


이들을 생각하면 송구한 마음뿐이다.


지난 10개월 동안 견디기 힘든 고통을 겪었다.
가족들은 인륜이 파괴되는 아픔을 겪고 있고
휴일도 없이 일만 했던 사람들이
나로 인해 고통받는 것을 생각하면
잠을 이룰 수가 없다.


내가 구속됨으로써
나와 함께 일했던 사람들과 가족의 고통이
좀 덜어질 수 있으면 좋겠다.


바라건대 언젠가 나의 참모습을 되찾고
할 말을 할 수 있으리라 기대해본다.


나는 그래도 대한민국을 위해 기도할 것이다.


2018. 3. 21. 새벽
이 명 박













Comment +0

1849년 독일 쾰른 노동운동 

주요 표제어, 슬로건, 자유, 형제애, 노동

Freiheit, Brüderlichkeit, Arbeit



Comment +0

정당은 지식생산자이다.

사회현실에 대한 지식은 어떻게 만들어지는가? 누가 만드는가?

사회적 실천을 기록하고 평가하고 분류하고 개념화한다. 

지식이란 무엇인가를 생각해보자. ‘사회적’ 지식이란 사람들이 서로 대화하고 실천하고 목적을 달성하고 평가하는데 쓰인다. 

정당은 이러한 사회적 실천 주체들 중에서 가장 중요한 실천 단위, 행위자이다. 

정당은 정치권력 쟁취를 목표로 하지만, 이러한 사회적 지식의 생산이라는 측면에서도 이해해야 한다.

(2017.july 24) 


Comment +0


여성 60%, 남성 33%가 페미니스트라고 답변

남성 5%, 여성 2%만이 페미니즘에 반대

남성 50%, 여성 30% 는 페미니스트가 아니다 답변


페미니즘하면 떠올리는 단어, "권력을 부여하기 Empowering" 70%

"화나다" 43%

"시대착오적이다" 30%


18-34세 사이 여성이 가장 급진적, 나이가 들수록 약간씩 변화되는 추세 


페미니즘 운동이 불공평하게 남자들을 비난하고 있는가?

전체 46%가 그렇다. 여성 41%, 남성 52%가 그렇다 답변.


남성과 동등한 권리를 실현하는데 방해가 되는 더 큰 요소는 무엇인가?

여성들 해당 답변 : 44% 여성 스스로 선택이 중요하다. 44% 여성을 차별하는 사회구조 


선거에서 후보가 여성 권리를 옹호했기 때문에 선택한 적이 있는가?

여성 40%, 남성 26%가 "그렇다" 답변


50-64세 미국 여성 17% 이메일, 전화를 통해 자기 정치적 의견을 표현했다 (다른 연령대보다 훨씬 더 높은 참여율)

18-34세 연령 집단의 45%는 사회미디어 (페이스북, 인스타그램, 트위터 등)를 통해  정치적 견해 표출 






What Americans think about feminism today

A national survey by the Washington Post and Kaiser Family Foundation finds 6 in 10 women and one-third of men call themselves a feminist or strong feminist, with roughly 7 in 10 of each saying the movement is empowering.


 Yet over 4 in 10 Americans see the movement as angry, and a similar portion say it unfairly blames men for women's challenges.


 Younger women are more optimistic about movement across a variety of measures, and more than 4 in 10 say they've expressed their views about women's rights on social media. Read complete poll results and how it was conducted.



By Weiyi Cai and Scott Clement

Jan. 27, 2016



페미니즘 운동이 불공평하게 남자들을 비난하고 있는가?

전체 46%가 그렇다. 여성 41%, 남성 52%가 그렇다 답변.




출처:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminism-project/poll/

Comment +0



국무장관 렉스 틸러슨은 트럼프가 김정은과의 회담을 수락하는 것에 대해 언급했다. " 김정은과 회담 수락은 트럼프 혼자 결정한 것이다. 이런 북미회담은 트럼프가 오랫동안 생각해오고 있었다. 이런 것을 감안하면 그렇게 놀랄 일은 아니다."



한국 정의용 서훈 방미 특사팀은 김정은의 메시지를 전달한 이후, 적어도 2주 정도 후에 트럼프의 답변이 올 것으로 예상했다. 그러나 원래 금요일에 만나기로 한 약속을 목요일 오후로 앞당겨서, 트럼프는 한국 특사팀의 이야기를 듣고, 2시간 동안 한국과 미국 사이 의견 조율을 통해서, 전 세계에 트럼프와 김정은의 회담을 발표했다.


트럼프는 과거 미국 대통령과 정치 스타일이 다르다. 트럼프의 충동적이고 즉흥적인 정치 방식이 고스란히 반영된 사건이었다.







https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-trumps-decision-on-north-korea-the-world-glimpses-a-president-who-is-his-own-diplomat-negotiator-and-strategist/2018/03/09/1f5eb80a-23b7-11e8-94da-ebf9d112159c_story.html?

utm_term=.a128a89abe05



In Trump’s decision on North Korea, the world glimpses a president who is his own diplomat, negotiator and strategist

 3:39

  

Over the past six weeks, the Trump administration’s roster of Korea experts, already depleted, grew even thinner. The White House mysteriously dropped its choice for ambassador to Seoul. The State Department’s top North Korea specialist resigned. And the senior Asia director at the National Security Council was out the past two weeks on paternity leave.

But when a high-level South Korean delegation arrived at the White House on Thursday afternoon for two days of meetings over the North Korea threat, one person swooped in to fill the vacuum: President Trump.

In a stunning turn of events, Trump personally intervened in a security briefing intended for his top deputies, inviting the South Korean officials into the Oval Office, where he agreed on the spot to a historic but exceedingly risky summit with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. He then orchestrated a dramatic public announcement on the driveway outside the West Wing broadcast live on cable networks.

The news shocked Washington, Seoul and everywhere in between. But inside the White House, the president — whose exchange of taunts and threats with Kim has set Northeast Asia on edge over a potential military confrontation for months — was said to be reveling in his big reveal, which overshadowed the growing scandal surrounding his alleged affair with a pornographic film star and concerns with tariffs he announced earlier in the day.

Trump’s personal involvement in the White House’s deliberations over the world’s most serious and vexing security situation has placed a president who considers himself a master dealmaker into the most fraught faceoff of his 71 years. A breakthrough that would reduce Pyongyang’s nuclear threat would be a legacy-defining achievement. A stalemate that gives Kim a photo op for nothing in return could fracture U.S. alliances and be seen as a devastating embarrassment.

South Korean national security adviser Chung Eui-Yong speaks to reporters and members of the media outside the West Wing on Thursday. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

But what the whirlwind evening at the White House also illustrated was that in his un­or­tho­dox presidency, which centers so singularly on his force of personality, Trump has little worry about a dearth of qualified staff because he considers himself to be his own diplomat, negotiator and strategist.

“The president is the ultimate negotiator and dealmaker when it comes to any type of conversation,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said. “And we feel very confident in where we are.”

The question is where exactly is the Trump White House — and how did it get there?

The answer wasn’t clear Friday as Trump aides struggled to explain whether concrete steps from Pyongyang toward denuclearization were a precondition ahead of the summit, what the agenda of the talks will encompass and how a president known to disdain dense briefing books intends to prepare for an adversary that U.S. intelligence officials don’t know much about.

In fact, it was not the details of the planning process but rather Trump’s impulsive, improvisational style that was the biggest selling point as top aides fanned out to explain why the president had taken this enormous gamble. Asked why the administration did not engage in lower-level talks with the North to build out preconditions and an agenda for a leaders-level summit, one senior aide offered that Trump “was elected in part because he is willing to take approaches very, very different from past approaches and past presidents.”

Across Washington, foreign policy experts tried to make sense of the news, with many betting that the talks would not happen after the Trump team heard negative feedback from Tokyo, conservatives in Seoul opposed to President Moon Jae-in’s liberal government and some in Congress who fear the move is too rash.

The Japanese, who have been wary of offering Kim a propaganda platform, were blindsided by the news. Diplomats at the Japanese Embassy in Washington, gathered for a goodbye party for Ambassador Kenichiro Sasae on Thursday evening, scrambled to react when the news broke.

Trump hastily called Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and invited him to visit the White House in April to confer ahead of the summit with Kim, which officials said will take place by the end of May.

“Nobody thinks the North Koreans are serious in Japan,” said Michael Green, the NSC’s Asia director under President George W. Bush, who is meeting with officials in Tokyo this week. “Given how he blindsided the entire national security team . . . I would bet this does not happen.”

The South Koreans, who have fretted over Trump’s saber-rattling over the past several months, landed at Dulles International Airport midmorning Thursday. Perhaps battling jet lag after the 13-hour flight, they arrived at the White House in early afternoon for what they thought was the warm-up act: a meeting with Trump’s top aides, including Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan and Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats.

Led by South Korea’s national security adviser, Chung Eui-yong, the delegation’s aim was to debrief Trump’s team on the four-hour meeting Chung held with Kim in Pyongyang shortly after the Olympics, which had provided the two Koreas a chance to reopen a long-dormant diplomatic dialogue.

But what was supposed to be an hour-long briefing took an unexpected turn when Trump himself intervened midway through. The Koreans had been scheduled to see Trump on Friday, but the president had gotten wind of the meeting and told aides he wanted to get involved immediately.

In the Oval Office, Chung explained to Trump that he had brought with him a personal invitation from Kim for a meeting — a stunning offer given Kim has not met with any foreign heads of state since assuming control of the North after his father’s death in 2011.

Chung later told associates that he believed the South Koreans had a strong hand to play with Trump. The North Korean leader had agreed that joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises, which had been delayed because of the Olympics, could go on. And Kim pledged that the North would not take provocative actions, including missile tests, ahead of the summit.

The risks of such a meeting, however, were well known on the U.S. side: The North has violated past agreements to freeze its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, and no sitting American president has met with a North Korean leader over fears of being set up for failure.

Earlier this week, Vice President Pence, who was supposed to meet with North Korean officialsduring the Olympics to deliver a hard-line warning, vowed that the administration’s “posture toward the regime will not change until we see concrete steps toward denuclearization.” On Thursday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, traveling in Africa, told reporters that the administration was “a long ways from negotiations.”

In the Oval Office, some of Trump’s aides raised concerns, according to a person familiar with the discussion. But Trump, seated in an armchair next to Chung, with their aides arrayed on couches, dismissed their fears and “made the decision” on the spot.

Korea experts were dumbstruck by Trump’s impulsiveness.

“He’s much more of a TV personality than business person,” said Christopher R. Hill, who led the U.S. delegation in the six-party talks with the North during the Bush era that produced a weapons freeze that Pyongyang later violated. “This is not the art of a deal here — it’s the art of a teaser.”

The South Koreans, stunned they had gotten done in 45 minutes what they thought might take weeks, prepared to depart. But a White House aide asked them to stay because Trump, always aware of the production value of such a moment, had an additional request: Would they help draft a statement and read it to the press outside the West Wing?

Over nearly two hours, the two teams collaborated on a brief statement. Meanwhile, Trump popped his head into the White House briefing room — where he has never made remarks since taking office — and told reporters that the Koreans would be making a “major announcement” at 7 p.m.

A large group of reporters, which had spent most of the day focused on Trump’s morning announcement of new tariffs on steel and aluminum, assembled on the West Wing driveway at the “sticks” — journalist lingo for the bank of television microphones set up in case of impromptu press statements from White House visitors.

Shortly after the hour, with cable networks talking live to reporters in the driveway, a Marine guard opened the doors of the West Wing and Chung emerged, flanked by Suh Hoon, South Korea’s intelligence chief, and Cho Yoon-je, the South Korea ambassador to Washington. It was dark out and the camera lights cast a harsh light onto the officials.

Chung delivered the news in a 245-word statement. He took no questions.

subscribe
The story must be told.
Your subscription supports journalism that matters.

The cable stations turned quickly to their analytical panels. Diplomats lit up international phone lines. And White House aides praised the president for his artful turn from bellicosity to diplomacy.

“That’s a decision the president took himself,” Tillerson said Friday. “This is something that he’s had on his mind for quite some time, so it was not a surprise in any way.”

Josh Dawsey contributed to this report


Comment +0


사라 샌더스 브리핑 나온 이유

(1)  트럼프와 김정은 회담 비판자들, “미국이 북한에게 공짜 선물 주는 것이다. A giveaway” 의 걱정을 잠재우기 위해서, 사라 샌더스 브리핑 나왔다.

 비판자들 “북한 김정은 정권이 몇 십년 동안 미국 대통령과 회담을 하려고 노력해오고 있는데, 이런 북한의 요구사항을 성급하게 들어주는 꼴이다.  미국이 북한으로부터 받는 것은 적다"고  불평. 


(2) 사라 샌더스 트럼프 태도 다시 강조


북한이 비핵화와 관련된 구체적인 절차와 행동을 취해야만 북한 김정은과 회담한다.

북한이 말한 약속을 지켜야 한다. 

김정은이 약속한 내용은 북미회담이 열리는 기간 동안에 핵실험과 미사일 실험을 중지(halt)하겠다. 북한이 핵 프로그램을 북미회담 이전에 ‘축소 scale back(down)’하겠다는 말은 하지 않았다. 김정은이 ‘비핵화’를 진지하게 실천하겠다고 말했지만, 트럼프와 회담 이전에 그 회담 선행 조건으로 ‘비핵화’를 할 것이라고는 말하지 않았다.


(3) 트럼프 행정부 정치 스타일

트럼프가 먼저 행동하고 난 이후에 그 스태프들은 나중에 뒷수습과 해명을 한다.


(4) 사라 샌더스 백악관 대변인 발표 내용과 국무장관 렉스 틸러슨의 인터뷰 내용과는 차이가 있다.


렉스 틸러슨 "미국은 북한과 ‘비핵화’ 관련 협상을 할 것이다. 미국 협상단과 북한 팀이 얼굴을 맞대고 직접 만날 때가는 미국이 어떤 조건들을 내걸 수 있을지 아직 정해진 바가 없다."


(5) 최악의 경우, 미국 행정부는 북미회담에서 발을 뺄 수도 있다.


북한이 취해야 할 구체적인 절차와 행동이 무엇이어야 하는가도 정해진 바가 없다. 이것이 의미하는 바는 미국이 북미회담 국면에서 완전히 발을 빼버릴 변명거리를 미리 만들어놓은 것이다.





 

Aaron Blake is senior political reporter for The Fix.






https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/03/09/the-white-house-sounds-like-it-might-have-cold-feet-about-trumps-commitment-to-meet-kim-jong-un/?utm_term=.dc2ec542d231

The White House sounds like it might have cold feet about Trump meeting Kim Jong Un

  
 1:50
Sanders lists conditions for Trump’s meeting with Kim Jong Un

This post has been updated to reflect a new anonymous White House comment.

Apparently President Trump's commitment to meet with Kim Jong Un was to be taken seriously, not necessarily literally.

South Korean officials said Thursday night at the White House that President Trump “said he would meet Kim Jong Un by May to achieve permanent denuclearization.” The White House followed that up with a statement saying the president “will accept the invitation to meet with Kim Jong Un at a place and time to be determined.”

So invitation accepted, right? Just awaiting the details, it seems.

Except ... maybe not. Appearing at the daily White House briefing Friday, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders suggested the meeting was not a done deal after all. She seemed to retroactively attach denuclearization preconditions to the whole thing.

“The president will not have the meeting without seeing concrete steps and concrete actions take place by North Korea,” Sanders said, specifically mentioning denuclearization. “Look, they’ve got to follow through on the promises they’ve made.”

But the original agreement, as outlined by the South Koreans, was only that Kim would halt nuclear and missile tests while talks were underway. Until Friday, there was no indication it had to actually scale back its program beforehand. They said Kim was “committed to denuclearization,” but they did not say he would denuclearize before the meeting as a precondition.

Nor did the White House's statement attach this caveat to the meeting. Here is the full statement from Sanders on Thursday night:

President Trump greatly appreciates the nice words of the South Korean delegation and President Moon. He will accept the invitation to meet with Kim Jong Un at a place and time to be determined. We look forward to the denuclearization of North Korea. In the meantime, all sanctions and maximum pressure must remain.

Update: An unnamed White House official tells Bloomberg's Michael C. Bender that the meeting has still been accepted, whatever that means.

Consider this the latest piece of evidence that the first summit between a sitting U.S. president and the leader of North Korea is another example of Trump acting first and his staff sorting it out later.

On Thursday night, it was pretty evident this came out of nowhere. Trump had not even been scheduled to meet with the South Korean officials, but soon there was an agreement reached to talk with Kim. The White House did not immediately confirm the news, though, and diplomats were left scrambling to respond to the unplanned announcement.

subscribe
The story must be told.
Your subscription supports journalism that matters.

The news also seemed to contradict what Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had said earlier in the day. “In terms of direct talks with the United States — and you asked negotiations, and we’re a long ways from negotiations,” he said, adding: “I don’t know yet, until we are able to meet ourselves face to face with representatives of North Korea, whether the conditions are right to even begin thinking about negotiations.”

It's possible Sanders on Friday was simply trying to fight back against critics' arguments that this was a giveaway to the North Korean regime — that it was a foolhardy granting of the Kim regime's decades-long wish to secure an audience with a U.S. president, with little in return.

But the comments also give the White House an option they did not seem to reserve Thursday. The “concrete steps and concrete actions” are so undefined right now — and Sanders declined to detail them — that they could serve as a ready-made excuse to pull out off the whole thing.


Comment +0


로라 비커 영국 비비씨 한국담당 기자가 본 김정은, 문재인, 트럼프 

김정은과 트럼프 대화는 21세기 정치 도박이다. 

Trump and North Korea talks: The political gamble of the 21st Century

By Laura Bicker -9 March 2018


(1) 김정은 

문재인, 트럼프, 김정은의 정치 도박이 시작되었다. 이번 장편 영웅담에서 가장 중요한 역할을 맡은 배우는 김정은이다. 김정은이 신년사에서 한국으로  올리브 나무 가지치기를 한다고 발표하고 평창 겨울 올림픽에 특사를 파견했다. 김정은의 기묘한 선전선동술이다. 김정은은 프로파간다의 대가다(maestro)


(2) 김정은과 트럼프의 중재자, 문재인의 역할   


 트럼프와 김정은은 노골적인 증오를 서로 쏟아부었다. 트럼프와 김정은은 말로써 개싸움을 벌이다가 협상 테이블에 앉게 되었다. 왜 이것이 가능했는가? 


트럼프와 문재인 역시 이번 회담에서 위험요소를 안고 있다. 왜냐하면 북한의 ‘비핵화’의 출구전략이 아직도 불투명하기 때문이다. 

그럼에도 문재인의 업적은 김정은이 비핵화를 하겠다는 발언을 이끌어냈다는 점이다. 


또한 트럼프에 대한 문재인의 전략 역시 뛰어났다. 트럼프에 대해서는 신중한 접근과 돌고래 칭찬이라는 두 가지 전술을 들고 나왔다.

트럼프를 김정은과 대화하도록 문재인은 애를 많이 썼고, 트럼프를 대화의 장으로 이끌어내기 위해서 과도하게 보이기까지하는 ‘칭찬’을 트럼프에게 쏟아부었다. 그 칭찬 효력이 나기 시작했다. 


(3) 트럼프와  문재인이 북한 김정은에 놀아난다고? Manipulated by North Korea


트럼프가 이번 김정은과의 회담에 적극적인 이유는, 대통령 취임 이후, 미국인들에게 내세울 눈에 띄이는 치적이 없기 때문에, 북한 카드를 집어들었다. 


비정통적 (기존 대통령과는 다른) 비정통적이고 불안정한 리더십 때문에 김정은과 문재인이 트럼프가 전쟁을 일으킬까봐 걱정했다.

“김정은이 미국에 한반도 비핵화, 핵무기와 미사일 실험의 일시중단 (모라토리엄)을 약속해주고, 그 반대급부로 미국으로부터 얻고자 하는 것은 북한에 대한 경제제재 약화, 미국의 선제공격을 미리 차단하고, 국제 사회에서 북한을 핵보유국으로 인정받는 것이다.” 이것은 국제 사회에 공히 다 알려진 북한의 핵무기 개발 목표와 전략이다. 


트럼프가 만약 북한의 비핵화를 실현시킨다면, 지난 클린턴 조지 부시, 오바마 대통령이 해결하지 못한 북한 문제를 깔끔하게 처리하면서 자신의 위상을 높일 수 있다.


트럼프가 바라보는 현 상황, 트럼프 행정부의 북한에 대한 최대 압박 전략, 미중 협력을 통한 북한 경제 압박이 김정은을 대화의 장으로 불러내게 만들었다.


트럼프 역시 위험부담을 떠안았다. 코뮤니스트 국가 대표인 김정은을  트럼프와 동등한 외교 수반으로 대우해야 하는 것 역시 위험요소다.  


몇 달 전까지만 해도 “조그마한 로켓맨”이라고 비하했던 김정은을 2개월 앞두고 만나서 어떤 외교적 성과를 낼 수 있을까도 트럼프의 과제다.


부산대 로버트 켈리 Kelly 교수 지적대로,  트럼프는 공부도 하지 않고 책도 잘 읽지 않는다. 북한은 미국과의 외교 게임을 수십년 동안 해왔고, 트럼프는 신참내기다. 트럼프의 저서 “협상의 기술 the Art of the Deal”은 이번 김정은 회담에서 안내서로 쓰기에는 적합하지 않을 것이다.



(4) 다시 문재인, 성공하면 노벨 평화상 수상 가능성도 있다. 실패하면 다시 북한과 미국은 긴장관계로 되돌아갈 것이다.


문재인 역시 이번 회담이 실패로 돌아가면 치명타를 입을 것이다. 문재인 개인사 입장에서도 비극이다. 북한 실향민인 문재인 어머니 (90세)도 마지막 소원이 고향 방문이기 때문이다.


정치적으로 실패하면, 북한과 미국 사이 군사적인 긴장은 과거 ‘벼랑끝 전술’로 회귀할 것이다.

그러나 이번 북미 회담이 성공하면, 문재인도 노벨 평화상을 수상할 수 있다.  


(문재인, 바보인가 아니면 천재인가?) 










Trump and North Korea talks: The political gamble of the 21st Century

S Korean President Moon Jae-inImage copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionSouth Korean President Moon Jae-in - dupe or genius?



South Korean leader Moon Jae-in is either a diplomatic genius or a communist set on destroying his country and US President Donald Trump is either a master of brinkmanship or a pawn in a more devious game - depending on who you speak to.


But it is the other actor in this saga, Kim Jong-un, the only one who has yet to make a direct statement, who may just be the most significant player in this most extraordinary of political gambles.


From the moment he extended an apparent olive branch to the South in his new year message to the cordial delegations to Pyeongchang for the Winter Olympics, it became clear that Kim Jong-un had mastered the most sophisticated crafts of propaganda.


Some will view his personal invitation to Mr Trump to hold talks with him - as well as the commitment to freeze further nuclear tests - as the real diplomatic masterstroke after a year that was unprecedented for the level of naked hostility the US and the North bared toward one another.


But the risk here belongs to both Moon Jae-in and Donald Trump. In a situation where neither can claim sole mastery of the narrative, without a clear exit strategy, and when there are so many definitions for both success and failure, a lot is at stake.


Whose charm offensive?


Mr Moon is viewed by his supporters as the negotiator-in-chief who has now skilfully managed to get Mr Kim to at least talk about getting rid of nuclear weapons.


He is the one who spotted the opportunity during the North Korean leader's speech in January - which offered a glimmer of hope that the reclusive state was willing to engage with the South - and grabbed it with both hands.


Media captionThe unlikely triangle: Trump, Rodman and Kim Jong-un



The dizzying level of diplomacy and a frenzy of visits between North and South has now delivered - it seems.


"People are calling this the North Korean charm offensive, I actually think this is a South Korean charm offensive. This is something President Moon Jae-in clearly wanted," John Delury from Yonsei University said to me even before the talks were announced.


Mr Moon knew his envoys would have to extract the word "denuclearisation" from Mr Kim when they visited Pyongyang. He also knew having two of his top level government ministers looking cosy with the North Korean leader would not go down well in Washington or Tokyo.


But it was worth the risk. The US would not have considered talking to the communist state without that meeting. His chosen delegates got what they needed.


The South Korean leader is also attempting the role of honest broker, handling Mr Trump and Mr Kim at the same time. He is choosing his words carefully and keeping his cards close to his chest while flattering those who respond to the spotlight.


In his New Year's address he said Mr Trump deserved "huge credit" for talks between the two Koreas, knowing it would please him. He is also using language that will reassure a concerned Republican administration. The language of the South Korean statement announcing the talks was also fulsome in its admiration for Trump's handling of the situation leading up to this moment.


Sanctions will stay in place, Mr Moon had said earlier, and Mr Trump has now confirmed that.


Manipulated by North Korea?


But everybody knows it wasn't always like that. Just six months ago Mr Trump was promising to rain down "fire and fury like the world has never seen" on North Korea if it dare threaten the US. Prof Haksoon Paik, lead researcher at the Sejong Institute, said that threat level felt "totally unprecedented".


"President Moon was very much concerned about nuclear threat of war. Kim Jong-un was in the same situation. We were hearing from the likes of the US Senator Lindsay Graham that lives will be lost over here. Donald Trump's unorthodox and unstable leadership had both Korean leaders worried about the potential of military options."


The US has always maintained that the permanent denuclearisation of North Korea is the endgame. Even with all the surprises up to this point, few believe Mr Kim would agree to that so if they don't achieve that what options does Trump have?


Kim Jong-un shakes hand with Chung Eui-yong head of South Korea's presidential National Security Office in Pyongyang (5 March 2018)Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionSouth Korean officials held a landmark meeting with Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang this week


So is Moon Jae-in - and indeed Donald Trump - being manipulated by a North Korea which has fooled the world before?


"By dangling before the US once again 'denuclearization of the Korean peninsula' and 'moratorium on nuclear and missile tests', Kim seeks to weaken sanctions, pre-empt US military pre-emption, and condition the world into accepting North Korea as a legitimate nuclear state," says Prof Lee Sung-yoon from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University.


For Mr Trump this could be about one of the boldest and most historic moves a US leader has made in foreign relations.


If this gamble works out, Mr Trump could credit himself as the president who sorted out North Korea. His administration has had very few victories, despite promising his voters there would "so much winning."


He believes his "maximum pressure" strategy and his work to get China on side and help squeeze Pyongyang economically is working.



Demonstrators dressed as North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un (R) and US President Donald Trump (L) embrace during a peace rally in Seoul on November 5, 2017Image copyrightED JONES/GETTY
Image captionProtesters in Seoul called for peace talks between the US and North Korea in November


Reporters say he casually mentioned in the White House briefing room that he hoped they would give him credit for Kim Jong-un's offer. His voters certainly will.


But meeting Mr Kim risks treating the communist leader as an equal. It could be a PR disaster. The date set is also only a few months away - a short time frame to achieve diplomatic goals with a leader he mocked as "little rocket man" just a few months ago.


Prof Robert E Kelly at Busan University in South Korea tweeted: "Trump doesn't study or even read. He tends to fly wildly off script. And May means there's almost no time for all the staff prep necessary."


Pyongyang has been playing this game for decades. Mr Trump is new to it. He may see a big win on the horizon, but his Art of the Deal book will not be the guide he needs to deal with Kim Jong-un.


Politics is personal


For Mr Moon this is about history and it is also personal.


He played a part in previous attempts to negotiate with North Korea as chief of staff to President Roh Moo-hyun when he met Mr Kim's father, Kim Jong-il, in 2007. That was the last time the leaders of the two Koreas held a summit. A satellite launch by Pyongyang ended the talks.


By then around $4.5bn of aid had been sent North during the policy of engagement. Critics believe that money helped to accelerate the weapons programme.


Having failed once before, Mr Moon is trying to complete the work he started, says Duyeon Kim, a senior fellow at the Korean Peninsula Forum.


"He's basically following the same playbook as his two liberal predecessors. It's exactly the kind of thing he would want to pick up and continue."


South Korean soldiers stand guard at the border village of Panmunjom in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) between South and North Korea on February 7, 2018 in PanmunjomImage copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionThe border between the North and South is demarcated at the truce village of Panmunjom


As a son of refugees from the North, Mr Moon is also aware of the effects of conflict on the peninsula. His parents fled North Korea aboard a UN supply ship in 1950 at the start of the Korean War alongside thousands of other refugees.


He told reporters during his election campaign: "My father fled from the North, hating communism. I myself hate the communist North Korean system. That doesn't mean I should let the people in the North suffer under an oppressive regime."


President Moon has acknowledged there are obstacles ahead. He is managing expectations and so much can go wrong.


Duyeon Kim believes there is a high probability that at the end of this negotiating process, all parties will fail, and North Korea will decide it wants to keep its nuclear weapons. And yet...


"You just don't know. I don't think it's ever a lost cause, in spite of all the doubts and scepticism all parties should go in with clear eyes, but negotiate hard."


Image copyrightREUTERS
Image captionNorth Korea says its long-range missiles protect all of Korea from "US aggressors"


President Moon's approval ratings took a hit during the Winter Olympics after he integrated the women's hockey team with players from the North and met a general from Pyongyang who had been accused of masterminding deadly attacks on South Koreans, though they have since rebounded.


He may suffer politically if this fails but maybe for him, this is not about scoring political points. This is what he told Time magazine last year when he was presidential candidate: "My mother is the only one [of her family] who fled to the South. [She] is 90 years old. Her younger sister is still in the North alive. My mother's last wish is to see her again."


These talks are a huge gamble with a communist state which is hard to read.


But if, just if, he helps pull it off it may reduce the threat of nuclear war and he could win himself a Nobel peace prize.

If all fails, it is back to brinkmanship.


Comment +0