I believe we do have dr. John Pfeffer who is director of foreign policy in
focus at the Institute for Policy Studies he's joining us by Skype there
you are professor thank you for joining us this morning or whatever time it is
in your part of the world now the two leaders had a one-on-one talk before
their dinner on Wednesday evening we've been discussing it here it's hard to
quantify anything said so far of course all the pleasantries notwithstanding how
do you think last night went and how do you assess the mood thus far well I
think it's gone reasonably well I mean that the major problem of course for
Donald Trump is the kind of controversy that is unfolding here in Washington DC
around his former lawyer testifying in front of Congress and kind of spilling
the beans or rather kind of telling the truth of how what his relationship with
the President had been like so those revelations have leaked into the
compressed pool over there in Vietnam the reporters have asked some country
some embarrassing questions of the president but more importantly I think
the President President Trump and Kim jong-un North Korean leader you know
they managed to meet I - I and to reaffirm their friendship which is kind
of a key element of this whole deal whether we're talking about either your
big deal or your small deal it's going to require basically the trust between
these two leaders yes who would have thought that Michael Cohen of all people
would be overshadowing such an important meeting for for the world but that's the
world we live in these days I guess now it's quite unusual for two leaders to
have dinner together before the official summit takes place how much significance
you put into that as we touched upon before it all seemed rather
chummy-chummy does it suggest to you that something big could potentially be
in the works in the coming hours not necessarily I mean I think that the most
important part of summit from Donald Trump's point of view and
probably from Kim Jong Un's point of view as well is the spectacle of it and
it's important for them to demonstrate that they first of all are the ones in
charge this is not a negotiating team this is not you know a group of people
it's one-on-one it's important for them to demonstrate
that they have a good relationship it's important for Kim jong-un to show back
home that he is negotiating with the leader of the most powerful country in
the world it's also important for Donald Trump to demonstrate that he is
negotiating negotiating with anybody I mean that's the major plank of Donald
Trump's presidency is his ability to negotiate so far he hasn't really been
able to succeed in that realm in many places around the world and certainly
not at home so it's extremely important for him to demonstrate as well that he
can negotiate successfully and the optics of a one-on-one dinner for both
of them is very important well yes he's gonna have to sell this deal to the
American audience back home a great many skeptical people out there including the
Democrats that could potentially block any kind of deal he reaches with Kim
jong-un now moving on there are a number of reports suggesting the two sides will
agree on the closing of key North Korean nuclear facilities and the lifting of
sanctions against the regime particularly if there's verification of
the dismantlement and even a possible piece of treatment peace agreement do
you think these are realistic expectations in Hanoi I would like to
believe that they're realistic of course they also go against at least a decade
of US strategy which has been to demand that North Korea basically give up its
nukes before it sees any kind of lessening of sanctions or any other
incentives in other words c/v ideas you've put it in the big deal complete
verifiable irreversible disarmament dismantlement
so if we do see some intermediate step well that is in fact what North Korea
has been demanding all along that there would be incremental steps forward
personally I think that is a better idea because cbid and the insistence on CVID
has been a non-starter negotiating wise so if we do see something like the
closure of Young Gun and even if symbolic reduction of sanctions I think
it's an important first step and it can be built upon and president Trump has
described North Korea as a country with huge economic potential he's been laying
it on pretty thick likening the country to Viet Nam's a development the United
States and Vietnam sharing a relatively close relationship these days after many
years at war with each other do you share the president Trump's sentiment in
regards to this and what things do you think North Korea could learn from the
host country well I would like to believe that North Korea can be a very
effective economic power at some point in the future it does have a very
educated population it has some natural resources which are important it has a
large number of Engineers for instance so it could turn around rather quickly
the challenge of course is that it's a relatively small country 25 million
people or so so we're not talking about a China of more than a billion people in
other words not a huge market that American businesses are interested in
nevertheless the Vietnam model perhaps is more applicable here since Vietnam is
a smaller country and I think it is important that they're meeting in
Vietnam for two reasons one to demonstrate that the United States can
bury the hatchet with a former enemy and and move forward
and two that that can take place and I think both sides are kind of sending
this signal that can take place in a situation in which China is no longer
the kind of sole partner in fact may not even be
key ally for North Korea we must remember that Vietnam and China despite
being both communist countries do not get along very well so this is a signal
by the Trump administration hey you don't have to depend on China there are
other paths out there for you geopolitically I'm sure president Trump
would love to drive at least a bit of a wedge between the North Koreans and
Chinese government dr. John Pfeiffer director of foreign policy in focus at
the Institute for Policy Studies thank you ever so much for your insights thank
you very much