While getting rid of Park Geun-Hye certainly made this easier - I think this has more to do with Kim Jong Un and also the warm reception N. Korea got at the recent winter Olympics in South Korea.
That said I would be cautious how far this would go. I suspect a lot of N. Koreas militaristic acts and statements over the years is not because of any actual desire but war, but just posturing to help in negotiations over tariffs and aid.
I am also going to take the unpopular opinion and say that Trump does deserve some credit. Under many past Presidents, the N. Korean government knew America would never use military force and acted accordingly. Under Trump, they have good reason to be concerned about the possibility of military force and are taking a more cautious and reconciliatory approach. I think the North Koreans are well aware that militaristic posturing won't get them very far with Trump the way it did with past presidents.
For the US's part, they agreed to not re apply new sanctions on the North as long as the North continued to operate within the parameters of their Sunshine Policy negotiated with the South. That was what was happening, but then Bush came into office and this policy changed. New sanctions were put upon DPRK and they would eventually be included in the Bush Admin's "Axis of Evil" (Iran, Iraq, and North Korea).
This caused the North to go back on its agreements and the Sunshine Policy as a whole, and did also align with more conservative governments in South Korea.
All that said, I was smiling so big last night seeing the two leaders shaking hands, smiling themselves. A reunification of the 2 Koreas would be an absolute blessing upon the world. Many people in the North and South long to be reunited. Not to mention the ease of so many tensions in SE Asia that would come from 1 Korea.
If they did fear Trump, why did they launch rocket after rocket while he threatened them with hell's fury? Trump role in the story appears more to be as an easily antagonalizable president against whom it is easy to show how "strong" you are. It's easier to negotiate from a position of strength than in one which you are thought of as to be inferior.
2002-2008 was, if you recall, was the era of the Axis of Evil rhetoric.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/214...
With no viable test site, North Korea's nuclear program is kaput, as are their ambitions of becoming a major nuclear power. Moreover, there is now a massive environmental disaster that will affect people all over the Korean peninsula plus northern China. They have no choice to come to the negotiating table, and South Korea has a strong incentive to reach a peace deal so they can get their geologists, engineers, and inspectors in and mitigate the damage before a massive fall-out plume blows over Seoul.
Park Geun-hye in her presidental term had repeatedly stressed that the Korean reunification will be a bonanza ("통일은 대박이다"), but this unusual and ultimately information-free slogan turned out to be coined by Choi Soon-sil, a cult leader behind Park Geun-hye. Choi wanted to, literally, make NK collapse in two years after the sudden closure of the Kaesong Industrial Region in 2016 in order to pave a way to Park's reelection---while the current Constitution of South Korea does not allow for the presidental reelection, critical events like the collapse of NK can force amendments or even allow excuse to the Constitution. Choi even tried to leverage those future events into huge returns by buying land near the 38th parallel.
After Park's impeachment, it was revealed that there were multiple attempts from NK (yes, you read right) during the Park's term to make contact to SK, only to be ignored. For example, top officials from NK visited SK during the 2014 Asian Games in Incheon and (unsuccessfully) asked to arrange a meeting with Park. This breakdown was for a long time attributed to NK, but in reality Park (and in turn, Choi) had just ignored the request.
[1] The primary source is an interview of Jang Shiho from Lee Gyu-yeon's Spotlight (a JTBC programme), but individual points were also independently confirmed via multiple sources. Jang was a niece of Choi Soon-sil and eventually sentenced to 2 1/2 year imprisonment in 2017 after giving much clues to investigators (for plea bargaining).
Only one major change has taken place, and it's not a change of presidency in SK.
Whether we like him or not, President Trump did this, and we should rejoice. SK's President says Trump made this possible -- shall we ignore that?
I initially misread your comment. To anybody who wants more info on how this all went down:
SK wanted to meet with NK specifically because the US was taking increasingly aggressive stances towards NK, and they wanted to avoid conflict. The rest of the peace talks are a direct result of Trump agreeing to meet with KJU.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/peace-korea-what-you-need-know...
Look folks, no one has to like DJT, but we mustn't deny his successes -- we mustn't twist ourselves into pretzels to deny that he caused NK to sue for peace.
This is so wildly inaccurate. First off, a colossal scandal and changing of power from one party to another party in one of the countries involved in the treaty certainly counts as a major change, especially when it's a transition from an anti-reconciliation government to a pro-reconciliation one. In fact, this is the first time that the president of SK has held that position during the reign of Kim Jong-Un.
In addition to that, NK has finally actually demonstrated nuclear capability, turning that into a FAR more credible threat than ever before.
Lastly, China's position on NK has been shifting over time (definitely started during the Obama presidency) and they have become increasingly impatient and intolerant of NK. That has accelerated during (and likely because of) Trump, but he 100% didn't start it.
I am sure that Trump played a role in this, but to suggest that he is the only major change is pure American exceptionalist nonsense.
Giving up their nuclear capability means they can never do this again, and they'll have no way to ensure that we keep giving them whatever it is that we'll agree to give them. Which is why I fully expected them to insist on a continuation of the status quo, with them retaining their nukes.
That they are willing to [verifiably, presumably] give up their nukes is a very big deal. It means that the DPRK was faced with something very bad for them. That can only have been Trump's twisting of the screws on the DPRK. My impression is that Trump would starve them to the point that Kim would end up hanging from a lamp post, and that he has the leverage on China needed to make that happen.
The change in the American approach to the DPRK nuclear weapons issue is the biggest change, and it is the direct cause of Kim suing for peace.
Trump taking office? You don't think this has anything to do with the fact that the DPRK now has a working ICBM and thermonuclear warhead, giving them much more leverage in negotiations?
EDIT: They never needed nukes. Vietnam has no nukes and we've all left them alone. Iraq would have been left alone had Hussein not invaded Kuwait. Afghanistan would have been left alone had 9/11 not happened or had the Taliban turned over bin Laden. And so on.
We don't yet know what the DPRK will get out of this. So far it seems like "security guarantees". Probably also money and such, but in any verifiable nuclear disarmament by the DPRK all of such concessions are one-time. I'm shocked they're even offering anything given that once they give up the nukes they give up all leverage, but it goes to show that we (Trump!) have something even stronger leverage: we can starve the DPRK into submission because we can hurt China in the pocket book, and everyone believes that Trump means to do these things.
Singing “Trump made this happen with his childish Twitter diplomacy” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.
There is a blurry line between making something happen through direct action, and allowing it to happen through incompetence.
You don't have to like the guy, but the US absolutely had a hand in this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-sa...