Trump threatens to hold up South Korea trade agreement until North Korea talks

From CBS News



RICHFIELD, Ohio (AP) — President Trump on Thursday threatened to "hold up" the trade agreement his administration finalized with South Korea this week in an effort to gain more leverage in potential talks with North Korea.


Speaking on infrastructure in Ohio, Mr. Trump highlighted the recently completed renegotiation of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement, but he warned, "I may hold it up until after a deal is made with North Korea." The announcement comes as the two Koreas have announced plans to hold bilateral meetings next month in advance of a possible meeting between Mr. Trump and North Korea's Kim Jong Un by the end of May.


Mr. Trump noted the "rhetoric has calmed down" with North Korea, but added he may hold up the first trade agreement concluded by his administration, "because it's a very strong card and I want to make sure everyone is treated fairly."

[COMMENT]

Is it any wonder that some countries are starting to incline towards "What's the point of entering into an agreement with the US government? The US government will simply abandon it whenever it feels like doing so."?

PS - It seems to me that Mr. Trump's definition of "everyone is treated fairly" is "everyone does what I tell them to do".

TU Curmudgeon said:

From CBS News

Trump threatens to hold up South Korea trade agreement until North Korea talks
​

RICHFIELD, Ohio (AP) — President Trump on Thursday threatened to "hold up" the trade agreement his administration finalized with South Korea this week in an effort to gain more leverage in potential talks with North Korea.


Speaking on infrastructure in Ohio, Mr. Trump highlighted the recently completed renegotiation of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement, but he warned, "I may hold it up until after a deal is made with North Korea." The announcement comes as the two Koreas have announced plans to hold bilateral meetings next month in advance of a possible meeting between Mr. Trump and North Korea's Kim Jong Un by the end of May.


Mr. Trump noted the "rhetoric has calmed down" with North Korea, but added he may hold up the first trade agreement concluded by his administration, "because it's a very strong card and I want to make sure everyone is treated fairly."

[COMMENT]

Is it any wonder that some countries are starting to incline towards "What's the point of entering into an agreement with the US government? The US government will simply abandon it whenever it feels like doing so."?

PS - It seems to me that Mr. Trump's definition of "everyone is treated fairly" is "everyone does what I tell them to do".

Click to expand...

The Fart of a Deal, Trump has been outplayed yet again. Since before the Olympics Kim has been playing Trump like a fine guitar. Kim has successfully marginalized Trump in South Korea and now China. No one knows where Kim is going but so far he has taken control and moved Trump offstage.

Trump threatens to hold up the trade agreement in an effort to gain control as the deal maker. It's standard Trump.

1. Who in the world hasn't seen Trump threaten to pull back a deal unless he gets what he wants? Again and again. Trump waits until an agreement is reached after months of work and deliberation only to threaten the agreement if he doesn't get something else. It's all Trump knows.

2. Trump's credibility is shot. His word is pure horse ****. Who trusts him? Nothing Trump says holds weight.

3. Add 1 and 2 and you get increasing ineffectiveness and failure.

And yet some people are wondering why some countries are inclining towards "What's the point of entering into an agreement with the US government? The US government will simply abandon it whenever it feels like doing so.".

An "interesting" development would be a four way agreement between the RF, the PRC, the DPRK, and the ROK, whereby each recognizes the borders of and guarantees to protect the territorial integrity of all of the others. All four of those would have a great deal to gain by complying with such an agreement (each gaining something different from the others that they want but none actually losing anything [which is the essence of a successful "deal"]) and such an agreement would render American military presence (or even membership in the deal) irrelevant - thereby causing the US to "lose face" (which at least three of the parties wouldn't object to in the least).

[NOTE - I am not saying that such an agreement has been reached, or even that it is in the works, only that it would be "interesting" if one were to be reached (and there is 'some' {an "unquantified amount"} possibility that that might happen).]

It's pretty hard to get much political mileage out of "Well, they never asked me to participate in the negotiations, and I never even knew that the negotiations were happening, and no one is asking us to participate in the agreement, and the agreement doesn't give us one damn thing, BUT I was the one who got the whole thing done." - in fact its more likely to raise great gales of raucous laughter than anything else.

Which, of course, doesn't mean that Mr. Trump wouldn't send out a "Tweet" to that effect, and doesn't mean that around 39(+/-3.5)% of the American people wouldn't believe him.

Add to the mix that as world power is perceived the United States has lost ground and continues to do so under a Trump regime that has chosen to de-empathize diplomacy while taking steps to increase military power.

It could be argued that the Office of the President of the United States isn't the world leader it has been for the last 50 years or more. In short, President Trump's America doesn't have the negotiating strength nor the respect it once had. And you could easily attribute that to the Trump Administration's drastic changes in foreign and domestic policy.

Risky Thicket said:

It could be argued that the Office of the President of the United States isn't the world leader it has been for the last 50 years or more. In short, President Trump's America doesn't have the negotiating strength nor the respect it once had. And you could easily attribute that to the Trump Administration's drastic changes in foreign and domestic policy.

Click to expand...

You could, but I wouldn't attribute ALL of it to Mr. Trump.

The simple fact of the matter is that it is only the RELATIVE strength/importance of the US that has changed. It isn't so much that the US has come DOWN in
"power" as it is that the rest of the world has come UP in "power".

It isn't so much that the US has become "less great" as it is that the rest of the world has become "more great".

Allegorically, "The Roman Empire tripped and fell flat on its face, the British Empire stumbled and skinned its knees, and the American Empire walked slowly forward while everyone else ran and eventually caught up with it.".