第二次特朗普-金正恩峰会必须解决重大问题 [美国媒体]

The Second Trump-KimSummit Must Settle the Big Questions

第二次特朗普-金正恩峰会必须解决重大问题



There is no detailed definition or shared agreement ofwhat denuclearization entails....” These words were not from critics ofambivalence in the Trump administration’s nuclear negotiations with NorthKorea. Rather surprisingly, they were the words of the U.S. SpecialRepresentative for North Korea, Stephen Biegun, during his speech atStanford Universitylast month. He had been asked whether theUnited States and North Korea had consensus on the technicality of the term“denuclearization.” Yet, this is only one of the many problematic ambiguitiessurrounding North Korean denuclearization.

“对于无核化所需要达成的内容，还没有明确的细节或共识……” 这些话并非来自批评特朗普政府与朝鲜核谈判中存在矛盾心理的人士。令人惊讶的是，这是美国朝鲜问题特别代表Stephen Biegun上个月在斯坦福大学演讲时所说的话。有人问他，美国和朝鲜是否就“无核化”一词的技术细节达成了共识。然而，这只是围绕朝鲜无核化的诸多问题中的一个。

Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un will be shaking hands againin Hanoi, Vietnam on February 27-28. In the past year, the two adversarialcountries have striven—probably the most in the history of their relations—tomove away from the brink of war toward intensive communications and diplomaticendeavors. Still, amidst widespread skepticism, Trump’s diplomatic efforts withNorth Korea are often criticized in Washington and elsewhere for failing toproduce adequate tangible deliverables on North Korean denuclearization.

唐纳德·特朗普和金正恩将于2月27日至28日在越南河内再次握手。在过去的一年里，这两个敌对国家努力——可能是两国关系史上最努力的——从战争的边缘走向密集的沟通和外交努力。尽管如此，在广泛的质疑声中，特朗普对朝鲜的外交努力经常受到华盛顿和其他地方的批评，称其未能在朝鲜无核化问题上产生足够切实的成果。



As Biegun openly acknowledged, the United States andNorth Korea still need to work toward “a shared understanding of what theoutcome of denuclearization is going to be” and the “steps necessary to achievea mutually accepted outcome.” The ambiguity and obscurity of the termdenuclearization only exacerbates the skepticism about both the U.S. and NorthKorean commitments to denuclearization.

正如Biegun公开承认的那样，美国和朝鲜仍然需要努力“就无核化的结果达成共识”，并“采取必要步骤实现双方都能接受的结果”。 无核化一词的含糊不清只会加剧人们对美国和朝鲜承诺无核化的怀疑。



A U.S. withdrawal from South Koreacould eventually happen as a natural consequence of both the completion ofNorth Korean denuclearization and the establishment of peace on the peninsula.However, it should not be a tradeoff for North Korean efforts atdenuclearization, as the risks of such a premature decision could only bedetrimental. The Vietnam meeting should leave no ambiguity in its affirmationthat the U.S.-ROK alliance is not to be jeopardized in the context of U.S.-DPRKrapprochement; nor is it to be used as a reward for North Korea’sdenuclearization.

美国从韩国撤军最终可能是朝鲜无核化完成和半岛和平建立的自然结果。然而，这不应成为朝鲜无核化努力的一种折衷，因为这种过早决定的风险只可能是有害的。越南会议不应模糊美韩同盟关系，因为这不会对美朝关系造成损害，另外撤军也不应被用作朝鲜无核化的奖励。



In addition,the Trump administration is also left with the difficult task of addressingNorth Korean concerns over whether any agreement reached with the Trumpadministration will survive the post-Trump era. North Korea could well be indoubt about whether any agreement signed with Trump could withstand theDemocrat–controlled House. After all, North Koreans hold a vivid memory of anumber of meaningful developments between the two countries at the turn of thetwenty-first century, which failed in large part due to the George W. Bushadministration’s Anything But Clinton policy. Given the less-than-clean trackrecords of trust on both sides, the United States and North Korea shouldcontinue the process of trust-building by acknowledging and addressing eachother’s concerns, fears, and doubts.

此外，特朗普政府还面临一项艰巨的任务，那就是解决朝鲜的担忧，即与特朗普政府达成的任何协议能否在特朗普之后的时代继续存在。朝鲜很可能对与特朗普签署的任何协议能否抵挡民主党控制的众议院表示怀疑。毕竟，朝鲜人民对两国在21世纪之交的许多有意义的发展有着生动的记忆，这些发展的失败在很大程度上是由于乔治·w·布什政府的政策，而不是克林顿政府的政策。鉴于双方的信任记录都不那么清白，美国和北韩应该继续建立信任的进程，承认并解决彼此的关切、恐惧和疑虑。



Both Trump and Kim are under immense pressure to make progress on the nuclearfront (a strategic gain for Trump) and the economic front (that is essential toKim). And since the two leaders have made a drastic change of direction fromconfrontation to negotiation, they both need enduring domestic support morethan ever to advance a diplomatic campaign. Only bold and meaningful moves thatfollow through on their previously shared commitments will enable a timely,historic breakthrough on the Korean peninsula and will add much-needed momentumto the diplomatic endeavors of all countries involved. Only then can Americaset the process toward the moment when “the last nuclear weapon leaves NorthKorea, the sanctions are lifted, the flag goes up in the embassy, and thetreaty is signed in the same hour,” to borrow Biegun’s admittedly hopeful words.

MaskOfZero
I think this is a rather breathless analysis which ignores thesignificant progress already achieved, and demands unrealistic further progressbe made, despite the possibility of peace being contingent, thus far, uponCommunist China's blessings.

我认为这是一种相当令人窒息的分析，它忽视了已经取得的重大进展，并要求取得不切实际的进一步进展，尽管迄今为止和平有可能取决于GC主义中国的祝福。



I think Trump is relatively sanguine at this prospect, sincetariffs will bring in revenues, and encourage local businesses to compete. Ifthere is no agreement, and tariffs are imposed, the globalists will take a fit,and the stock market might temporarily tank, but most savvy traders alreadyknew China was a house of cards anyway, with a command economy building emptycities and roads to nowhere, overcapacity in every government subsidizedproduct while municipal debt skyrockets in the shadow banking world, andgovernment statistics conceal the truth, so capital has been fleeing from Chinafor years now.

我认为特朗普对这一前景相对乐观，因为关税将带来收入，并鼓励当地企业参与竞争。如果没有达成协议，征收关税，全球主义者就会大发雷霆，股市可能会暂时暴跌, 但大多数精明的交易员已经知道，中国无论如何都是一个“纸牌屋”:计划经济建设的城市空空洞洞，道路不通;政府补贴产品产能过剩,和政府统计数据掩盖了真相，因此多年来资本一直在逃离中国。

Kim has not engaged in nuclear testing or the firing of missilesover Japan since he last met with Trump. If the US and China cannot reach anagreement, and tariffs are reimposed, Kim might feel like he is being squeezedin a superpower sandwich, and be forced to decide between the US and China.

​自从上次会见特朗普以来，金正恩没有进行过核试验，也没有在日本上空发射过导弹。如果美国和中国不能达成协议，重新征收关税，金正恩可能会觉得自己被夹在超级大国的三明治里，被迫在美国和中国之间做出选择。

I just don't see Trump being willing to go back to his base witha bad or weak trade agreement, and I just don't see China changing their ways,or even admitting that they engage in wholesale IP theft. They literally have entirebuildings filled with legions of hackers, row upon row, vacuuming up everytrade secret or blueprint they can, and funneling that to state run industrieswhich compete directly with the US. This is not just about trade, there is awhole heap of national security ramifications at many levels if China cheatsits way to the top in technology.

我只是不认为特朗普愿意带着一份糟糕或脆弱的贸易协议回到他的基地，我只是不认为中国会改变他们的方式，甚至承认他们大规模窃取知识产权。实际上，他们让整栋大楼里都是成群结队的黑客，一排一排地，尽可能地收集每一个商业秘密或商业蓝图，然后把它们汇集到与美国直接竞争的国有企业中。这不仅仅是贸易问题，如果中国通过欺骗手段登上科技行业的顶峰，还会对国家安全产生多方面的影响。



That is not a behavior which changes over night, or with apaper agreement.

这不是一夜之间就能改变的行为，也不是一纸协议就能改变的。
​