What the columnists said

Trump-Kim summit plans muddle forward

Trump’s hot-cold approach to negotiations with North Korea is “shocking even by his standards,” said John Cassidy in New Yorker.com. The president initially pulled out of the meeting without first notifying South Korea and Japan, our two closest allies in the region. Trump no doubt thinks he’s driving a hard bargain with his unpredictable behavior. But to everyone else, he’s “behaving erratically on a matter of existential importance.”

The ill-advised summit with North Korea should have stayed canceled, said Harry Kazianis in FoxNews.com. Trump clearly hungers for a deal to secure his legacy. But Pyongyang has a long history of using negotiations to stall for time and win concessions while continuing to build up its nuclear program. Trump should refuse to meet with Kim unless he offers “a firm pledge to abandon” his weapons. “We need more than a photo op.”

There’s reason for optimism here, said Fred Kaplan in Slate.com. Getting Kim to abandon his nuclear arsenal, his only source of leverage, is a pipe dream. But the meetings between Pompeo and high-level North Korean officials suggest a new level of seriousness that didn’t exist before. Short-term steps such as minor sanctions relief and “the destruction of a warhead or two” could go a long way toward laying the groundwork for productive talks in the future. “If President Trump can give up his Nobellaced daydreams of instant peace and, instead, live with a modest reduction of tension, then the summit might end in success.”