Connect with us

Latest

News

Russia

Trump’s anger over Kim-Lavrov meeting shows his lack of sincerity

Either he doesn’t know what he’s doing or he’s outright trying to he hostile to the rest of the world

Published

on

3,662 Views

Trump’s lack of consistency relative to the nuclear disarmament of the North Korean regime and peace in the region seems to betray that he isn’t particularly interested in achieving a resolution of the issues that have plagued US-DPRK relations for over six decades. By looking at the threats he has been making of unleashing nuclear annihilation on the northeastern Asian country, one can gather, rather, that he may actually be hostile to North Korea personally. This, due to the fact that any legitimate push for peace and disarmament would be something to consistently and cautiously and incrementally move towards in a deliberate fashion. Trump, on the other hand, does anything but.

Following the meeting between the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, and Kim Jong Un, Trump’s response initially was that of frustration with it, as though it should not have happened. Then, he performs an about face on the issue by stating that it could be a very positive thing, before returning to his conclusion that it might have been a bad thing, all based on whatever an outcome that hasn’t manifested itself yet yields.

RT reports:

US President Donald Trump could not make up his mind about the meeting between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, first saying he disapproved and then that it might be “very positive.”
The US leader was speaking to journalists following his own meeting with a North Korean senior official in the White House on Friday.

“I did not like it,” the US president told reporters, referring to the Kim-Lavrov meeting. He then immediately went on to say that “it could be very positive too.”

“I did not like the Russian meeting yesterday as what’s the purpose of this meeting? But it could be a positive meeting. If it is a positive meeting, I love it. If it is a negative meeting, I am not happy. And it could be very well a positive meeting,” Trump said, apparently unaware of how incoherent that sounded.

During the meeting with the Russian top diplomat, Kim Jong-un once again reaffirmed Pyongyang’s commitment to a complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. In turn, Lavrov said that Russia is ready to support any “concrete agreements” that might result from Korean peace talks if they would take into account interests of all relevant parties, including North Korea itself. He also passed a “personal letter” from the Russian President Vladimir Putin to the North Korean leader.

On Friday, Trump himself received a letter from Kim Jong-un. He did not reveal any details concerning the content of the message, while describing it as “very nice” and “interesting.”

The US president also said he might make the content of the letter public at some point in the future.

Trump has confirmed he will be meeting Kim in Singapore on June 12, a summit that was in limbo over the last weeks. After proposing the summit, Pyongyang said it may reconsider the meeting due to US military exercises and statements from US officials. Then Trump canceled it, accusing North Korea of displaying “open hostility.” It appeared to be a negotiating tactic, as talks about organizing the meetup went ahead.

Moscow has consistently advocated a political and diplomatic solution to the crisis on the Korean peninsula. It has also repeatedly called for a dialog that would take into account the interests of all relevant parties, including North Korea.

In September 2017, when the situation on the peninsula escalated dramatically, Russia and China presented a “double freeze” initiative, which envisaged North Korea suspending its nuclear and missile program in exchange for the US and South Korea abandoning their military exercises in the region.

Moscow at the time also repeatedly called on Washington and Pyongyang to tone down their belligerent rhetoric. Russia has not stopped its dialogue even “for a minute,” which was a “responsible” and “accurate” decision that finally worked out, top Russian senator Konstantin Kosachev said in April, commenting on Moscow’s approach to the issue.

Trump himself, however, was much less consistent in his approach to North Korea. He traded insults with Kim on numerous occasions, at one point calling him ‘little rocket man.’ He also sharply criticized the former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for his attempts to hammer out an agreement over the Korean crisis by saying that he was simply “wasting time.”

Following a March summit between Kim and his South Korean counterpart Moon Jae-in, however, Trump suddenly changed his rhetoric and started praising the North Korean leader. In late April, he called Kim Jong-un “very honorable,” adding that he wanted a meeting with him “as soon as possible.”

Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear accord was a smack at other non proliferation attempts, with threats subsequently coming out of Saudi Arabia that they would pursue development of the nuke if Iran develops one, which was/is a likely outcome if the agreement does not survive Trump’s attempts to kill it. He was exercising a similar back and forth about the Iran deal, whether or not he would continue renewing it, before he finally decided to pull out and reimpose economic nuclear related sanctions on Iran, with baseless accusations asserting that Iran was violating the agreement and sponsoring terror in the region, which were outright lies.

Trump is presently engaging in a trade war with America’s trade partners, after providing the same level of suspense over whether he would do it or not, and they are also based on the lie that America’s security is not assured without violating WTO rules and implementing tariffs. Trump has been engaging in activities that are blatantly destructive of the present world order and which destabilize diplomatic relationships and organizations, and he does so based on a regime of lies and misinformation.

 

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

The Myth of Western Democracy

British prime minister May has turned Brexit into subservience to the EU.

Paul Craig Roberts

Published

on

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts:


How does the West get away with its pretense of being an alliance of great democracies in which government is the servant of the people?

Nowhere in the West, except possibly Hungary and Austria, does government serve the people.

Who do the Western governments serve? Washington serves Israel, the military/security complex, Wall Street, the big banks, and the fossil fuel corporations.

The entirety of the rest of the West serves Washington.

Nowhere in the West do the people count. The American working class, betrayed by the Democrats who sent their jobs to Asia, elected Donald Trump and the American people were promptly dismissed by the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton as “the Trump deplorables.”

The Democrats, like the Republicans, serve power, not the people.

In Europe we see the squashing of democracy everywhere.

British prime minister May has turned Brexit into subservience to the EU. She has betrayed the British people and has not yet been hung off of a lamp post, which shows how acceptance the British people are of betrayal. The British people have learned that they do not count. They are as a nothing.

The Greeks voted for a leftwing government that promised to protect them from the EU, IMF, and big banks, but promptly sold them out with austerity agreements that destroyed what remained of Greek sovereignty and Greek living standards. Today the EU has reduced Greece to a Third World country.

The French have been in the streets in revolt for weeks against the French president who serves everyone except the French people.

There are currently massive protests in Brussels, Belgium, with half the government also resigning in protest against the government signing a pact that will replace the Belgian people with migrants from Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. The corrupt and despicable governments who signed this pact represent foreigners and George Soros’ money, not their own citizens.

Why are citizens so powerless that their governments can elevate the interest of foreigners far above the interests of citizens?

There are a number of reasons. The main one is that the people are disarmed and are propagandized to accept violence from the state against them, but not to deliver violence in return against the governments’ illegal use of force against citizens.

In short, until the conquered peoples of Europe kill the police, who serve the ruling elite and delight in inflicting brutality against those whose taxes pay their salaries, take the weapons from the police, and kill the corrupt politicians who have sold them out, the peoples of Europe will remain a conquered and oppressed peoples.

Some time past Chris Hedges, one of the remaining real journalists, made it clear that without violent revolution to excise the tumor of government superiority over the people, freedom throughout the West is dead as a doornail.

The question before us is whether the Western peoples are too brainwashed, too firmly locked in The Matrix, to exhausted to stand up and defend their freedom. Resistance is happening in France and Belgium, but the government that sold out Greece hasn’t been hung off of lamp posts. Americans are so brainwashed that they think Russia, China, Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Venezuela are their enemies when it is perfectly clear that their Enemy is “their” government in Washington.

Except for my American readers, Americans are locked in The Matrix. And they will kill in order to stay in The Matrix, where the controlled explanations are reassuring. Anyone who looks to Washington for leadership is an idiot.

Washington is a master of propaganda. Washington’s propaganda has even infected the Russian government, which from all reports stupidly believes that accommodation to Washington is the secret that will make Russia successful.

It is a foolish government that relies on agreements with Washington.

What it comes down to is this: If acceptance of provocations avoids war, that is the correct policy, but if acceptance of provocations encourages more provocations until war is unavoidable, then a more robust response to provocations is the correct policy. A more robust response introduces caution into the process, whereas acceptance of provocations encourages the aggressor.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Why The Senate Vote To End Yemen War Is So Important

Stopping US participation in this brutal war is by itself a wise and correct move, even if it comes years too late.

Ron Paul

Published

on

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute:


Last week something historic happened in the US Senate. For the first time in 45 years, a chamber of the US Congress voted to pull US forces from a military conflict under the 1973 War Powers Act.

While there is plenty to criticize in the War Powers Act, in this situation it was an important tool used by a broad Senate coalition to require President Trump to end US participation in the Saudi war against Yemen. And while the resolution was not perfect – there were huge loopholes – it has finally drawn wider attention to the US Administration’s dirty war in Yemen.

The four year Saudi war on neighboring Yemen has left some 50,000 dead, including many women and children. We’ve all seen the horrible photos of school buses blown up by the Saudis – using US-supplied bombs loaded into US-supplied aircraft. Millions more face starvation as the infrastructure is decimated and the ports have been blocked to keep out humanitarian aid.

Stopping US participation in this brutal war is by itself a wise and correct move, even if it comes years too late.

The Senate vote is also about much more than just Yemen. It is about the decades of Presidential assaults on the Constitution in matters of war. President Trump is only the latest to ignore Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution, which grants war power exclusively to Congress. Yes, it was President Obama who initially dragged the US illegally into the Yemen war, but President Trump has only escalated it. And to this point Congress has been totally asleep.

Fortunately that all changed last week with the Senate vote. Unfortunately, Members of the House will not be allowed to vote on their own version of the Senate resolution.

Republican Leadership snuck language into a rule vote on the Farm Bill prohibiting any debate on the Yemen war for the rest of this Congressional session. As Rep. Thomas Massie correctly pointed out, the move was both unconstitutional and illegal.

However as is often the case in bipartisan Washington, there is plenty of blame to go around. The Republicans were able to carry the vote on the rule – and thus deny any debate on Yemen – only because of a group of Democrats crossed over and voted with Republicans. Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer is being blamed by progressives for his apparent lack of interest in holding his party together.

Why would Democrats help a Republican president keep his war going? Because, especially when you look at Congressional leadership, both parties are pro-war and pro-Executive branch over-reach. They prefer it to be their president who is doing the over-reaching, but they understand that sooner or later they’ll be back in charge. As I have often said, there is too much bipartisanship in Washington, not too much partisanship.

Americans should be ashamed and outraged that their government is so beholden to a foreign power – in this case Saudi Arabia – that it would actively participate in a brutal war of aggression. Participating in this war against one of the world’s poorest countries is far from upholding “American values.” We should applaud and support the coalition in the Senate that voted to end the war. They should know how much we appreciate their efforts.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

EU’s ‘toothless’ response to creation of Kosovo army risks worsening the crisis – Moscow

Russia’s ambassador to the UN said that the EU could have and should have done more to stop the breakaway region from creating its own army.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


The creation of Kosovo’s own 5,000-strong army is a threat to peace and security in a turbulent region and may lead to a new escalation, Russia’s UN envoy has warned, calling the EU’s lackluster response irresponsible.

Speaking at the UN Security Council emergency meeting on Kosovo, Russia’s ambassador to the UN Vassily Nebenzya said that the EU could have and should have done more to stop the breakaway region from creating its own army to replace its lightly armed emergency response force.

“The EU reaction to the decision by Pristina cannot be described as other than toothless. This irresponsible policy has crossed the line,” Nebenzya said, after the UNSC meeting on Monday.

The diplomat said the lack of decisive action on the part of the 28-member bloc was a “great disappointment,” adding that the EU seems to “have turned a blind eye on the illegal creation of Kosovo’s ‘army.’”

The law, approved by Kosovo lawmakers on Friday, paves the way for doubling the size of the current Kosovo Security Force and for turning it into a de facto army, with 5,000 soldiers and 3,000 reservists.

The move did not go down well even with Kosovo’s usual backers, with both NATO and the EU voicing their indignation. NATO’s General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg called the decision “ill-timed” and lamented that Kosovo’s authorities had ignored “the concerns expressed by NATO.”

The EU’s top diplomat, Federica Mogherini, has echoed those concerns, saying in a statement that the mandate of Kosovo’s forces “should only be changed through an inclusive and gradual process” in accordance with the state’s constitution.

The only nation to openly applaud the controversial move was the US, with its ambassador to Kosovo, Phillip Kosnett, saying that Washington “reaffirms its support” for the upgrade as it is “only natural for Kosovo as a sovereign, independent country” to have a full-fledged army.

The Kosovo MPs’ decision has drawn anger in the Serbian capital Belgrade and provoked a strong response from Moscow, which calledon the UN mission in Kosovo to demilitarize the area in accordance with UNSC resolution 1244, and to disband any armed units.

Nebenzya pointed out that the UN resolution does not allow any Kosovo Albanian military units to be present in the region’s territory. He accused Western countries, including members of the NATO-led international peacekeeping force (KFOR), of “condoning and supporting” the violation by Pristina of the resolution.

It is feared that the army, though a relatively small force, might inflame tensions in the region and impede attempts at reconciliation between Pristina and Belgrade. Serbia has warned that it might consider an armed intervention if the army becomes a threat to the 120,000-strong Serb minority in Kosovo.

“The advance of Kosovo’s army presents a threat to the peace and security in the region, which may lead to the recurrence of the armed conflict,” Nebenzya stated.

In addition to creating its own army, Kosovo in November hit Serbia with a 100 percent import tariff on goods, defying calls by the US and the EU to roll the measure back.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending