South Korean Leader Boxed In as Trump Threatens North Korea
November 4, 2017 by admin
Filed under Choosing Lingerie
Comments Off
Mr. Trump leaves Washington on Friday for a five-nation, 12-day trip across Asia during which he intends to intensify pressure on North Korea while also pushing for better trade deals for the United States. After a stop in Hawaii, he travels to Japan, then South Korea and China before ending the tour with regional summits in Vietnam and the Philippines.
Credit
Pete Marovich for The New York Times
“What South Koreans fear the most is, what if Trump says something provocative, like a military option against North Korea,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a professor of North Korean studies at Dongguk University in Seoul. “Trump is unpredictable.”
Mira Rapp-Hooper, a scholar of Asian security issues at Yale Law School, said Mr. Moon has struggled to balance his agenda with “a Trump strategy that simultaneously aggravates North Korea and threatens the alliance relationship with South Korea.”
“Usually when you are in a heightened security situation, you would expect to see an alliance pull closer,” she said. “But it is very difficult to do in a world where Trump is threatening South Korea itself.”
There have been some signs of pushback by Mr. Moon. He reached a deal with China on Tuesday to end their dispute over the deployment of an American missile defense system, agreeing not to accept additional launchers from the United States. He later said he wanted to pursue “balanced diplomacy” with Washington and Beijing, which favors talks with North Korea.
And in a speech Wednesday, Mr. Moon repeated his position that military action against the North “shall not be taken” without South Korea’s consent, undermining the credibility of Mr. Trump’s threats.
During a visit by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis last week, South Korea also sought to take back operational control of its military forces in the event of a conflict, which would undo an agreement in place since the 1950s that puts its troops under United States command if fighting resumes.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Still, Mr. Moon appears to have concluded that South Korea has little choice but to stand by Mr. Trump and accept its status as the junior partner in the alliance — even though it would have the most to lose in a war.
Credit
Korean Central News Agency, via Reuters
“What we must realize, painfully, is that although this is a Korean Peninsula issue of greatest urgency for us, in reality, we have no power to resolve it,” Mr. Moon said on July 11 of the nuclear standoff. “We have no power to elicit an agreement.”
Scott Snyder, director of the program on United States-Korea policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Mr. Moon has proved to be a pragmatist.
“And any South Korean pragmatist is going to look at options for achieving South Korea’s security needs, and immediately recognize that the U.S. security guarantee is central,” he said.
Some of Mr. Moon’s supporters have accused him of betraying his principles by deferring to Mr. Trump and what they consider a reckless approach to the North. The conservative opposition, meanwhile, has seized on any deviation to accuse Mr. Moon of endangering the alliance with the United States.
But Mr. Moon’s approval ratings remain high, with many South Koreans instead faulting Mr. Trump. The administration’s hints of a preventive strike on North Korea have unnerved them as much as, if not more than, the North’s weapons tests.
Many were shocked and furious in August when Senator Lindsey Graham quoted Mr. Trump minimizing the potential for casualties in a war by saying they would occur in South Korea, not the United States.
Small groups of anti-American activists have since taken to the streets in Seoul, shouting “No Trump, No War!” and calling him a “dotard,” a derogatory word for an old person that North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, used to condemn Mr. Trump after he threatened to “totally destroy” the North in September.
Credit
South Korean Marine Corps/Yonhap, via Reuters
“South Koreans are frustrated that the United States has not allowed their country any wriggling room,” said Cho Han-bum, an analyst at the Korea Institute for National Unification. “Trump is helping spawn anti-American sentiment here.”
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Mr. Moon is also juggling concerns about the security of the coming Winter Olympics, which South Korea will host three months from now in Pyeongchang, a town about 60 miles from the border with the North.
When the South last hosted the Olympics, in 1988, North Korea attempted to disrupt the event, most notably by detonating a bomb on a Korean Air passenger jet, killing 115 people, less than a year earlier. And in 2002, as South Korea hosted the World Cup soccer tournament, the North provoked a naval skirmish that left six South Korean sailors dead and an unknown number of North Korean casualties.
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
There is additional anxiety because joint military exercises conducted by South Korea and the United States are scheduled to begin during the Olympics. The North has condemned the annual drills as rehearsals for invasion, and often makes a point of responding with missile tests.
China has proposed suspending the exercises in exchange for a freeze in testing by North Korea, a proposal that both Mr. Moon’s government and the Trump administration have rejected.
When he meets with Mr. Trump, Mr. Moon is expected to discuss ways to ease tensions ahead of the Olympics. But South Korean officials said the exercises were unlikely to be scaled back or delayed, especially if North Korea continued its weapons tests.
Mr. Moon continues to argue that pressure alone will not persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear arms, and that the world must offer it carrots, including negotiations and, eventually, economic exchanges.
Credit
Ahn Young-Joon/Associated Press
But he also has other political battles to fight, with youth unemployment over 9 percent and voters expecting action to end the culture of collusion between government and big business that was exposed by the impeachment of his predecessor, Park Geun-hye.
“There is so much weighing on him that I don’t think he has the political capital or ability to muster a strong coalition for sustained engagement” with North Korea, said Celeste Arrington, professor of international affairs at George Washington University. “That is currently kind of a pipe dream because the constraints are so great.”
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
By contrast, China’s president, Xi Jinping, and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan will host Mr. Trump next week after political victories at home. Mr. Abe recently won a commanding majority in parliamentary elections, while a Communist Party congress in Beijing elevated Mr. Xi to the same exalted status as Mao Zedong.
Mr. Abe has unequivocally supported Mr. Trump’s approach toward North Korea and argued that “dialogue will not work.”
North Korea has not conducted a missile test since Sept. 15, when it sailed an intermediate-range ballistic missile over Japan. It is unclear what is behind the lull, but South Korean officials hope to use it to reduce tensions — and build momentum for diplomacy during Mr. Trump’s marathon tour across Asia.
Mr. Trump plans to address South Korea’s legislature, the National Assembly — he would be the first American president to do so in nearly a quartercentury — and visit Pyeongtaek, south of Seoul and the host of Camp Humphreys, one of the largest American military bases.
The visit is intended in part to address Mr. Trump’s complaint that South Korea is not paying enough to support the American military presence.
“South Koreans hope that Mr. Trump’s visit will be an occasion to reconfirm the alliance and agree to a peaceful solution to the North Korean crisis,” said Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul. “The last thing they want is for him to come here and add instability.”
Continue reading the main story
Share and Enjoy
Bowe Bergdahl Avoids Prison for Desertion; Trump Calls Sentence a ‘Disgrace’
November 4, 2017 by admin
Filed under Choosing Lingerie
Comments Off
Last year, Mr. Trump made denunciations of Sergeant Bergdahl a staple of his campaign speeches, repeatedly calling for him to be executed.
Ironically, Mr. Trump’s comments may have contributed to the decision not to sentence him to prison. After Mr. Trump seemed last month to endorse his harsh criticism from the campaign trail, Colonel Nance ruled that he would consider the comments as mitigating evidence at sentencing.
With the sentence still facing review by General Abrams and military appellate judges, Mr. Trump’s post-verdict comments on Twitter seemed to bolster efforts by the defense to have the sentence thrown out on appeal, some military law experts said, on the grounds that the president had unlawfully influenced the case.
“Trump just exponentially increased Bergdahl’s chances of getting this whole case tossed on appeal,” said Rachel VanLandingham, a professor at Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles and a retired Air Force lawyer.
The tweet could be interpreted as an effort to pressure officers who still have some control over the sergeant’s fate not to reconsider his sentence, military law experts said.
Sergeant Bergdahl’s chief defense lawyer, Eugene R. Fidell, called the sentence “a tremendous relief” and said his client was still absorbing it.
Standing outside the military courthouse here, Mr. Fidell, who teaches military justice at Yale Law School, then took sharp aim at the commander in chief.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
“President Trump’s unprincipled effort to stoke a lynch-mob atmosphere while seeking our nation’s highest office has cast a dark cloud over the case,” he said. “Every American should be offended by his assault on the fair administration of justice and disdain for basic constitutional rights.”
Even though the defense had told the judge that a dishonorable discharge would be appropriate, Mr. Fidell said he hoped that it would be overturned. He noted that such a discharge would deprive his client of health care services and other “benefits he badly needs” from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Sergeant Bergdahl is expected to return to an Army base as the case winds through the appeals process.
Sergeant Bergdahl was 23 and a private first class when he left his base in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009. Army investigators would later characterize his departure as a delusional effort to hike to a larger base and cause enough of a stir that he would get an audience with a senior officer to report what he felt were problems in his unit.
But the soldier, who is now 31, was captured by the Taliban within hours and spent five years as a prisoner, his treatment worsening after every attempt to escape. He was beaten with copper cables and held in isolation in a metal cage less than seven feet square. He suffered dysentery for most of his captivity, and cleaned feces off his hands with his own urine so that he could eat enough bread to survive.
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
The military searched for him, and several troops were wounded during those missions. One of them, Sgt. First Class Mark Allen, was shot through the head and lost the ability to walk, talk or take care of himself, and now has minimal consciousness. His wife, Shannon, testified that he is not even able to hold hands with her anymore. On a separate rescue mission, Senior Chief Petty Officer Jimmy Hatch, a Navy SEAL, suffered a leg wound that required 18 surgical procedures and ended his long career in special operations.
Army investigators quickly dismissed claims that troops had died searching for Sergeant Bergdahl — who was promoted during captivity — or that he had intended to defect to the Taliban. They suggested that he could be prosecuted for desertion and for some lesser crimes. But in March 2015, the Army raised the stakes, accusing him not only of desertion but also of misbehavior before the enemy, an ancient but rarely charged crime punishable by up to life in prison. In this case, the misbehavior was endangering the troops sent to search for him.
Even so, the sergeant’s defense seemed to have some momentum. The Army’s chief investigator on the case testified at Sergeant Bergdahl’s preliminary hearing that he did not believe any jail time was warranted, and the preliminary hearing officer suggested the whole episode might have been avoided “had concerns about Sergeant Bergdahl’s mental health been properly followed up.”
But at Fort Bragg, General Abrams ordered that Sergeant Bergdahl face a general court-martial on both charges.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Once Mr. Trump was inaugurated, Sergeant Bergdahl’s defense team demanded that the case be dismissed. There was no way the sergeant could receive a fair trial, his lawyers said, since everyone in the military justice system now reported to President Trump as commander in chief.
Colonel Nance labeled Mr. Trump’s comments about Sergeant Bergdahl “disturbing,” but declined to throw out the case. Then, last month, Mr. Trump seemed to endorse his earlier sentiments about Sergeant Bergdahl, saying, “I think people have heard my comments in the past.”
After another protest by the defense, Colonel Nance ruled that he would consider the president’s comments as mitigation evidence.
During the sentencing hearing, Sergeant Bergdahl apologized for his misconduct, saying he never intended for anyone to get hurt, and that he grieved “for those who have suffered and their families.”
He added, “I’m admitting I made a horrible mistake.”
The lead Army prosecutor, Maj. Justin Oshana, drew a comparison between Sergeant Bergdahl and those who were hurt through his actions.
“It wasn’t a mistake,” Major Oshana said of the sergeant’s decision to walk off his base. “It was a crime.”
Responding to testimony about how captivity had left Sergeant Bergdahl with physical pain, Major Oshana noted that at least the sergeant was able to talk about it. Sergeant Allen was constantly in pain, too, he said, but no longer possessed the ability to describe it.
“Sergeant Bergdahl does not have a monopoly on suffering as a result of his choices,” Major Oshana added.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The defense argued that Sergeant Bergdahl had already suffered a severe penalty for his crimes by being tortured during five years in captivity.
“It is undisputed that Sergeant Bergdahl paid a bitter price for the decision he made,” one of his lawyers, Capt. Nina Banks, told Colonel Nance. She said that a dishonorable discharge was appropriate, but asked that he be spared prison.
The defense argued that Sergeant Bergdahl’s decision to walk away was influenced by a then-undiagnosed severe personality disorder.
Captain Banks also told the judge that the harsh comments by Mr. Trump meant that the sergeant’s persecution did not stop when he was freed.
“Sergeant Bergdahl has been punished enough,” she said.
Correction: November 3, 2017
Because of a production error, an earlier headline with this article misstated Bowe Bergdahl’s sentence. It was a dishonorable, not an honorable, discharge.
Continue reading the main story