Trump's Korea Peace Stunt: Legal Or Not?

On June 30, 2019, former US President Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. Trump's meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un at the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) was highly publicized, with the former crossing the border line and stepping into North Korea before crossing back into South Korea with Kim. While the meeting was historic, it did not result in any significant agreements or progress on the North Korean nuclear issue. Trump's decision to meet with Kim was criticized by some US politicians and foreign policy analysts, who argued that it granted legitimacy to the North Korean regime without any substantive concessions.

Was Trump accompanied by security when he entered North Korea?

On June 30, 2019, Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. He was accompanied by Special Agent in Charge Anthony Ornato, as well as his top advisor Ivanka Trump, senior advisor Jared Kushner, Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin, and the United States ambassador to South Korea Harry B. Harris, Jr.

Trump spent three hours in the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), including an 80-minute meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Secret Service agents guarded the president during his time in the DMZ. Some of the agents pushed aside Kim's guards to allow the US press to pass into the meeting.

Did Trump's entry into North Korea violate any existing sanctions?

On June 30, 2019, then-US President Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. Trump's visit was part of a one-day summit at the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) between North Korean chairman Kim Jong Un, Trump, and South Korean president Moon Jae-in.

Trump's entry into North Korea did not violate any existing sanctions. In fact, his administration had imposed sanctions on North Korea in the past. However, Trump's decision to meet with Kim was criticised by some, who accused him of legitimising the North Korean dictator and playing into his domestic propaganda.

On March 21, 2019, the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions on two China-based shipping companies that had helped North Korea evade sanctions. The next day, Trump tweeted that he had ordered the withdrawal of "additional large-scale sanctions" on North Korea. This caused confusion, as there were no new US sanctions announced on that day. However, a US administration official later clarified that Trump's tweet referred to a decision to not impose additional large-scale sanctions on North Korea at that time.

Did Trump's actions legitimise the North Korean regime?

On June 30, 2019, former US President Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. Trump's actions have been interpreted differently by various analysts, commentators, and political figures.

Arguments that Trump's actions legitimised the North Korean regime

Some analysts and political figures criticised Trump's decision to meet with Kim Jong-un, arguing that it legitimised the North Korean regime. Jean H. Lee, the director of the Center for Korean History and Public Policy, wrote, "There's a reason why past presidents chose not to go to North Korea while in office: Such visits grant enormous legitimacy to the Kims." Samantha Vinograd, a member of the National Security Council during the Obama administration, shared a similar view, stating that by meeting Kim at the DMZ without preconditions, Trump was signalling that North Korea was "a normalized, nuclear power." Elizabeth Warren, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020, tweeted, "Our president shouldn't be squandering American influence on photo ops and exchanging love letters with a ruthless dictator."

Arguments against the claim that Trump's actions legitimised the North Korean regime

On the other hand, some commentators viewed the meeting between Trump and Kim as a positive trust-building event. S. Nathan Park, for example, considered the meeting a necessary step to get the working-level talks back on track. Park acknowledged that while tangible results were yet to be seen, patience could lead to more concrete outcomes.

Trump's actions in context

It is worth noting that Trump's actions took place within a broader context of diplomatic efforts and negotiations with North Korea. Prior to the meeting at the DMZ, Trump and Kim had exchanged letters, and there had been discussions about potential negotiations on the nuclear issue. Trump had offered economic aid to North Korea in exchange for denuclearisation, although these talks eventually collapsed.

Overall assessment

While opinions vary, it is clear that Trump's actions were significant and had an impact on the perception of the North Korean regime. However, it is difficult to definitively conclude whether his actions solely legitimised the regime, as there were other factors and events at play that also shaped the perception of North Korea.

Did Trump's actions signal that North Korea was a normalised, nuclear power?

On June 30, 2019, former US President Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. Trump met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un at the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) between North and South Korea. This meeting came after several rounds of negotiations between the two countries regarding North Korea's nuclear program.

Trump's decision to meet with Kim was controversial and sparked debates about the signalling of normalisation and acceptance of North Korea as a nuclear power. Samantha Vinograd, a member of the National Security Council during the Obama administration, stated that Trump's meeting with Kim at the DMZ without preconditions signalled that North Korea was "a normalised, nuclear power". Analyst and columnist Max Boot argued that the DMZ meeting was "symbolism utterly devoid of substance" and that Kim had taken advantage of Trump to improve his legitimacy.

On the other hand, commentator S. Nathan Park viewed the meeting positively as a trust-building event necessary for progressing working-level talks. Myong-hyun Go of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, one of South Korea's top think tanks, also analysed the DMZ summit as a step in a positive direction. Go emphasised the crucial role of South Korean President Moon Jae-in as a negotiator between Trump and Kim.

In the lead-up to the meeting, Trump administration officials internally considered the possibility that negotiations could lead to the US accepting a nuclear freeze, which would essentially enshrine the status quo and tacitly accept North Korea as a nuclear power. However, US Special Envoy to North Korea, Stephen Biegun, stated that commentary about possible outcomes was speculative, and there were no new proposals being prepared at the time.

While the meeting was broadly welcomed in South Korean political circles, it also drew criticism from some Democratic members of the US Congress and candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. They criticised Trump for "coddling" dictators and making "concessions for negligible gain".

Did Trump's actions violate any US foreign policy?

On June 30, 2019, Donald Trump became the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. Trump's actions did not violate US foreign policy, but they were controversial.

US foreign policy analysts were critical of the meeting. Jean H. Lee, the director of the Center for Korean History and Public Policy, wrote:

> "There's a reason why past presidents chose not to go to North Korea while in office: Such visits grant enormous legitimacy to the Kims."

Samantha Vinograd, a member of the National Security Council during the Obama administration, said that by meeting Kim at the DMZ without preconditions attached, Trump was signaling that North Korea was "a normalized, nuclear power." Analyst, columnist, and frequent Trump critic Max Boot wrote that the DMZ meeting was "symbolism utterly devoid of substance" and argued that Kim had taken advantage of a "gullible" Trump to improve his own legitimacy.

However, others saw the meeting as a positive step. Cheong Seong-chang of the Sejong Institute, a South Korean think tank, said that in meetings between Kim and Xi in North Korea, "Xi pledged economic cooperation and a security guarantee to North Korea in exchange for Pyongyang's continued effort on denuclearization negotiations." Koh Yu-hwan, a North Korean studies professor at Dongguk University in Seoul, agreed that Xi had facilitated the Trump-Kim meeting.

In the lead-up to the meeting, Trump administration officials had been considering the prospect that a new round of US-North Korea negotiations could lead to the US accepting "a nuclear freeze, one that essentially enshrines the status quo, and tacitly accepts the North as a nuclear power."

Trump's actions did not violate US foreign policy, but they were a departure from the approach taken by previous presidents, who had chosen not to visit North Korea while in office due to concerns about legitimizing the country's leadership.

Frequently asked questions