Trump Wants to Charm Kim Jong Un Into Disarming. John Bolton Says That Will “Never” Happen.

“Under current circumstances, he will never give up the nuclear weapons voluntarily.”

Win McNamee/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Twenty days after his firing as President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton re-emerged onto the public stage, delivering remarks about North Korea that directly contradict his former boss’s pursuit of a grand bargain under which the Hermit Kingdom would give up its nuclear weapons. “The strategic decision Kim Jong Un is operating through is that he will do whatever he can to keep a deliverable nuclear weapons capability and to develop and enhance it further,” Bolton said.

This assessment contrasts markedly with Trump’s stated belief that Kim’s “great and beautiful vision for his country” will lead to a promising deal in which the North dismantles its nuclear weapons in exchange for relief from economic sanctions and closer diplomatic ties to the United States. Bolton, who once advocated preemptively bombing the rogue state, has viewed negotiations between the longtime adversaries skeptically.

The disparity between Bolton’s views and Trump’s was on sharp display during Bolton’s appearance Monday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. At the event, co-hosted by a South Korean newspaper, he spoke at length about the Korean Peninsula conflict, alluding at times to his reputation for holding views that are far more hawkish than those of the president. “I am delighted to be here today,” he said. “I’m also sure the leadership of North Korea is delighted that I’m here today in a private capacity.”

Bolton has long been a popular punching bag in the North Korean state press, which once referred to him as a “human defect.” Trump, too, ultimately grew tired of Bolton’s approach— specifically Bolton’s suggestion last year that US policy toward North Korea mirror the so-called “Libyan model,” a reference to dictator Moammar Qaddafi’s decision to relinquish Libya’s nuclear weapons program nearly two decades ago. In Bolton’s view, the credible threat of regime change following the 2003 US invasion of Iraq convinced Qaddafi to disarm. (Bolton helped craft the case for the invasion while working in the Bush State Department and still supports the Iraq war.) Kim did not appreciate that comparison—Qaddafi, of course, was later overthrown and killed during an Arab Spring revolution supported by the US—and the comment nearly sunk Trump’s early diplomacy with the North last year.

After joining Trump’s negotiating team for two summits with Kim last year, Bolton was banished to Mongolia on diplomatic business when Trump convened with Kim for a third meeting in late June. Two months later, Bolton was fired by tweet

After his exit, Bolton assured reporters that he would “have my say in due course.” Monday’s event did not provide the Trump-specific details that Washington national security watchers might have been hoping for, but Bolton’s displeasure with his former boss was clear. When moderator Victor Cha, a former George W. Bush administration official, asked Bolton if “romance diplomacy” was the best way to get the North to denuclearize—a clear dig at Trump’s eyebrow-raising claim that he and Kim “fell in love,” Bolton didn’t take the bait. “I’m not going to comment on that,” he said. “Nice try.” 

If his policy differences with Trump were not already apparent, Bolton left no doubt at other points in the discussion that he did not think Trump would ever be able to convince Kim to dismantle his nuclear program, which is now far more developed than Libya’s was when Qaddafi gave it up. Kim “may make some concessions, but under current circumstances, he will never give up the nuclear weapons voluntarily,” Bolton said.

Instead, Bolton argued, the Libya model—which Trump called a “disaster” after firing Bolton—could still bear fruit if the US produced the same variables that led to Qaddafi giving up his weapons: mainly, the threat of military action. “At that period, we saw Moammar Qaddafi make an unambiguous decision that he and Libya would be better off without developing nuclear weapons,” Bolton said, noting that the Libyan dictator arrived at that decision after seeing the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime and his capture by US forces. “Not only have we seen nothing like that from North Korea, we’ve seen the opposite.” 

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with The Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with The Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate