The Kim-Trump summit should not be interpreted through the lens of Northeast Asia alone. In important ways, it was a test case for President Trump’s approach to international relations more generally: ad hoc, highly personalized and transactional.
And as the reviews accumulate, it is clear that the summit is getting pretty critical treatment at home.
Nicholas Kristoff at the New York Times was early out of the blocks, but the sentiment extended to the right of the political spectrum as well (for example, Bruce Klingner on NPR). Outside the administration’s supporters, assessments range
The Kim-Trump summit should not be interpreted through the lens of Northeast Asia alone. In important ways, it was a test case for President Trump’s approach to international relations more generally: ad hoc, highly personalized and transactional.
And as the reviews accumulate, it is clear that the summit is getting pretty critical treatment at home.
Stephan Haggard is the Lawrence and Sallye Krause Professor of Korea-Pacific Studies, director of the Korea-Pacific Program, and distinguished professor of political science at UC San Diego. With Marcus Noland, he is the author of "Hard Target: Sanctions, Inducements and the Case of North Korea" (Stanford University Press, 2017).