Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Michael O Hanlon  CSPAN  June 12, 2018 1:40pm-1:59pm EDT

1:40 pm
done and this is only the first step. for steadybe looking progress on concrete measures l towds the ultimate goaf a piece regime on the peninsula. host: i hope you can come back and talk to us about it down the road. thankvery you, much. host: it is good to be joined by michael o'hanlon, the research and foreign policy director at brookings institution. what is your take away from this summit as it comes to a close? guest: it is ok. it is obviously not a specific plan. not even the outlines. at the high level of oratory and vision. that is ok because there is a near-term follow-up. couldms of things that
1:41 pm
have gone wrong, you could have had acrimony, different expectations, where president trump gave away too much. we have heard him say he is not that committed to the alliance and wants to bring troops home. he said that again but did not make plans to bring them home precipitously. the biggest exercises are the least important for our military. the most important happens in smaller units. what he gave away was modest. what he got was modest. there is a near-term plan to resume serious negotiations. we can't let this high level glad handling no one indefinitely while the north koreans keep building bombs quietly in their basements. that is the one worry i would have. host: what did he get? guest: nothing yet. we got the promise of a next
1:42 pm
step. we don't know if that will be viable for either side. three weeks ago when the summit temporarily blew up before it was put act together, the united states was insisting publicly north korea give up all its weapons in one fell swoop. anyone who follows north korea knows they spent decades to build up that program. he would be risking the fate of saddam hussein and gaddafi. the realistic path forward would be step-by-step. the question is, can we get to a process where our concessions are modest enough we don't give soon, but bigtoo enough that north korea once to play ball? host: whaaryo worried about giving away as we move forward? guest: for the u.s.-south korea a partialor
1:43 pm
denuclearization deal would be bad. complete lifting of the un sanctions in return for north korean steps that could be reversed. saying that we will let you inspect the shutdown of our centrifuges and we have to lift the un sanctions, if they start treating, we have -- if they start cheating, and we have a hard time convincing the world those sanctions. you --ow comfortable are how confident are you kim jong-un will keep his word? guest: i'm not confident at all. all he said is that he wanted a denuclearization. he meant the nuclear element has to and. denuclearization is a broader concept for them.
1:44 pm
it is not the physical presence obama's on the peninsula, it is the whole association. they are not going to give up butr bombs, ever perhaps, not until they get theig change that inoo sanctions, warming of ties, maybe an ending of the nuclear a alliance. what came out of the summit was not back. the next step is credible. host: the next step is expected to be led by mike pompeo and irrelevant high-level north korean official. what are your thoughts between the differences of president trump's style and what mike pompeo will have to deal with? guest: i'm not a big supporter of this administration, but i like the pairing of trump and pompeo. trumptracted to historic
1:45 pm
imagery and secretary pompeo an old-fashioned hardliner and strategist. and formally number one in his class at west point and a bright guy anulprably get into the nitty-gritty. i like the combination. we will have to see if mr. pompeo can bexie. keep using the terms complete verifiable, non-reversible, denuclearization. that will not be the near-term accomplishment. the question is, are we prepared to get down to work? canh specific concessions we offer along the way? the process has to begin with a verifiable database on north korean production sites for nuclear terial and long-range missiles. we have to have inspectors verify that the north koreans have what they say they have.
1:46 pm
-- the database on what is there now. host: are those inspectors ready to go? we don't know who they would be. there are moniting for the korean peninsula, but they have not been involved in the bottom inspections. the inrnational atomic energy agency that used to verify -- we don't even know if that would be the group that would be given access. it might be a different group. host: president trump and leader can meeting for the first time. the rest of the two teams at the table, how many knew each other from previous
1:47 pm
negotiations? aret: these relationships building in 20. john bolton had previous contact with north korea 15 years ago. mr. bolton is a hardliner. it is not like he wanted to develop any warmer poor with the north koreans then. in any event, it was a long time ago. we are basically starting from a badh, which may not be thing. there have been important discussions of north korea's horrible human rights record. we have to keep that on the table, and we have to be prepared to see if we can start with a fresh page. frankly, you want to sometimes suspend your memory and see if we can start a new. young leader who wants to be in positions of power for decades to come,
1:48 pm
presumably wants to see a better life cell for himself, his cronies, and maybe his people. he has an interest in turning over a new leaf. he doesn't want to do it too fast because he doesn't want to lose control or start a revolution. be a bitforward will difficult and unprecedented. host: michael o'hanlon with us half hour.t republican, good morning. caller: i have a comment. can we agree this is history in the making? the people on the left, in my honest opinion, no matter what trump or his administration does, they are not going to give him a break. they're going to fight him, they are going to badmouth him, they are going to obstruct everything he tries to do. my father served in korea.
1:49 pm
anm thinking maybe this is open door to a very good situation that cld comout of this, you know? i don't get why these people are not going -- like i said, no matter what this man does they are not going to back him. that is all i've got to say. too.: i am hopeful, i'm not going to get into a discussion of president trump critics.s political i tend to be a critic myself. i agree with you, there is reason to be hopeful here. that we haveredent trump going for the lofty vision, and the hard knuckled secretary of state mike pompeo next to him, i think this combination suggests we are going to, be serious about doing this the right way or at least atteming to do with the right way. there is no guarantee we could
1:50 pm
get to a good deal. i would not trot out the word historic yet, but i agree with your hopefulness. host: line for democrats. good morning. negotiated on the treaty with the soviets when i was a democrat and served on the savanna river nuclear board. one thing we have to go with is some of the side effects we have in america. one of the things we've got to also have is expertise, people who know what they are talking about. not just rhetoric. we have to consider the racial issue. my brother served in korea and is now a veteran of the korean war. that was during segregation. we have to have a new page, new players. if president trump wanted to be honest about what he is saying,
1:51 pm
me as a person, i can understand and support. until that time, i have to think about it. fair point.er there are questions about what comes next. we know this was a first step. there is a lg ways to go. i would have been worried if we tried to achieve too much in one summit. the only way to do that would be to take huge gambles on making a bad deal with insufficient preparation. we are nowhere near the finish line. to celebrate too soon would be a mistake. , and i think the trump administration has taken this process fairly seriously. i know a few people that are , some of the people in washington, they are good hard-working people.
1:52 pm
there is some expertise, but that is no guarantee of success. host: president trump committed to provide security guarantees to the dprk? guest: we don't know what it means. it could mean a peace treaty, ending the formal state of war that is suspended by armistice. that has been the case since 1953. wouldr the north koreans find a peace treaty enough for would be debated. -- a major reason why we wouldn't want to because a lot of our friends would be in any cheacekeeping force. maybe that could be involved. the idea of reducing further our troops or suspending these military exercises could be part of it. it is more than amorphous
1:53 pm
concept. how can you guarantee a nuclear superpower that you could never country?her small we have the capacity to do that militarily. we are not going to give up that capacity. is going to be an ongoing treaties, signing giving international promises, maybe deploying a peacekeeping force. all these things together will not add up to a literal guarantee. over time they could begin a process. where we are now with vietnam, in the 1990's we normalized andtions with vietnam ended up in a friendly place 20 years after the vietnam war. we need to create the sense of a meaningful security commitment. maybe less, but that is the way
1:54 pm
i think of the process. host: michael o'hanlon of brookings institution. looking for your tweets. @cspanwj is the handle. nobel peace prize on the way, congratulations president trump. a different take, trump was played. he ran on being a great negotiator, but gave away the optics of the summit meeting and conducting military exercise for they promises and no timeline for north korea action. sandy, a republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling because my father was in world war ii and my father was in the korean war. thank god for president trump --i can't say it
1:55 pm
right. there was a caller earlier that said president trump did not give him no money. president trump is much smarter than obama. obama gave iran all of our billions of dollars. that is a known fact. god bless president trump. i will vote for him again. i don't care who knows i won't. prize. need the nobel he deserves it if he gets it through. anybody that has ever got one, he deserves it. i love him, and i will vote for him. thank you, and i love c-span. host: can you compare what happened in the last 11 hours to the early stages of the ira nuclear deal? guest: more when we mentioned president trump and president obama, more of the way president obama came into office for stop
1:56 pm
his first inaugural speech he said we will reach out our hand to anyone that willleeir fist. he was looking for the detente trumpresident delivered. in a funny way obama and trump working together, if you take a big enough historical sweep. obama laid out the vision. he wasn't able to find a formula. kim jong-un wasn't the leader of north korea when obama began his presidency. it was his father. by as already weakened stroke. the process didn't get momentum earinhe obama years. ere we were in history. trump has found a moment to test this proposition that obama reached, that we should out a hand to a country that might unclench its fist.
1:57 pm
we are a long way from any firm peace prize, any troop reduction in the north korean threat. let's not do too many celebrations in the end zone yet, though i support the process underway. host: go ahead. caller: i would like to say, thumbs-up for donald trump. no otherne something sitting u.s. president has been willing to do. but he very busy man, was willing to travel to the other side of the world to accomplish peace with north korea. , nowre at war with japan we are friends with japan and have military bases there. we were at war with germany, same thing. we have military bases there. i'm calling on the democrat line, but i voted for donald trump and will vote for him again.
1:58 pm
a friend of mine that is deceased now, we talked about this 18 years ago. if donald trump ever got elected, he would earn things around. there is no way he can't. host: why are you still legit regret? -- why are you still a democrat? caller: i am more towards the independent side. pretty democrat, but much obama changed me about that. i wouldn't call him a democrat, i would call him -- i won't say that on the air. he was not on our side. i don't know how he got in there, but he was a fox in the hen house. host: republican, go ahead. caller: yes, sir. thank you for taking my call. it seems our guest is fair. with 18rump started off
1:59 pm
opponents in the primary for republicans. 18.ent through all everything he has done up to today, they have doubted, they they haven'town, given him any cred >>it the house is coming in momentarily. remind you canhi all our "washington journal" program and coverage from north korea and the summit online at c-span.org. the hoe is coming in next. they are going to spend the week focusing on anti-opioid abuse legislation. two dozen bills on the calendar for today. also a note that vice president mike pence tweeting about an hour ago that he'll be at the capitol briefing republican members, house and

5 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on