Talks with nemeses don’t match hype
In two seemingly unrelated foreign-policy developments last week, spy photos established that North Korea is still building intercontinental ballistic missiles despite President Donald Trump’s assurances that it was “no longer a nuclear threat” after his summit with leader Kim Jong Un in June; and Trump has offered to talk with another of America’s nemeses, Iran, “whenever they want” and without conditions.
These events aren’t as unrelated as they look, though. Both underscore one of Trump’s better traits — his inclination to sit down even with hostile foreign leaders — and one of his more serious shortcomings: his apparent belief that he can solve America’s toughest geopolitical problems with just the force of his personality.
The North Korean missile activity suggests that its threat to deliver nuclearcapable weaponry to U. S. shores remains alive. Trump should avoid repeating the mistake of placing too much trust in an untrustworthy adversary, especially if talks with Iran come to fruition.
Trump took heat from policy hawks for meeting with Kim, which they said constituted an undeserved concession. We don’t agree with Trump on much, but we do believe that talking, even with enemies, is better than not talking. Dialogue isn’t in itself a concession; it’s merely recognition of reality.
With Kim, as with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump’s failing wasn’t in the decision to talk but in what he said when he got there. Despite his earlier bluster, Trump ultimately gave Kim the genuine concession of discontinuing U. S.-South Korea military exercises. Kim promised to denuclearize the entire Korean peninsula yet, eight weeks later, is moving in the other direction.
Trump’s problem in foreign relations, as in so much else, is his dangerous mix of ego combined with a dearth of expertise. The man who said at the Republican National Convention in 2016, “I alone can fix it,” really believes that — pretty much about everything. It prevents him from seeking and heeding the advice of the myriad experts at his disposal.
It’s why Kim walked away with concessions in Singapore and Trump walked away with nothing. Did Trump do the same thing with Putin at their Helsinki summit last month? Americans still don’t know.
It’s far from certain that a U. S.-Iran meeting will happen. Tehran’s initial reaction was dismissive, steeped in lingering animus over Trump’s unilateral decision to pull out of the multinational Iran nuclear agreement. Trump’s pledge to meet without conditions also was almost immediately contradicted when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued his list of requirements for Iran to meet.
If the meeting does happen, it will be testament to one of Trump’s better instincts — to sit down and talk — and a test of whether he can finally learn to control his worst instinct and let the experts do their work.