US to Kim Jong Un: Comply or Face Same Fate as Libya’s Gaddafi

(MEMO— US President Donald Trump yesterday warned North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un that his security must come to a deal with the West of suffer the fate of Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya.

In rambling remarks in the White House’s Oval Office, Trump said that as far as he knew the meeting with Kim was still on track, but that the North Korean leader was possibly being influenced by China after two recent visits he made there.

“North Korea is actually talking to us about times and everything else as though nothing happened,” Trump told reporters at the start of a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.

Trump said he was not pursuing the “Libya model” in getting North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons programme. Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton has repeatedly suggested the Libya model of unilateral disarmament for North Korea, most recently on Sunday.

Gaddafi was deposed and killed after Libyans joined the 2011 Arab Spring protests, aided by NATO allies who had encouraged him to give up his banned weapons of mass destruction under a 2003 deal.

In a statement on Wednesday that threatened withdrawal from the summit, North Korea’s first vice minister of foreign affairs, Kim Kye Gwan, derided as “absurd” Bolton’s suggestion of a deal similar to that under which components of Libya’s nuclear programme were shipped to the United States.

“[The] world knows too well that our country is neither Libya nor Iraq which have met miserable fate,” he said in apparent reference to the demises of Gaddafi and Iraq’s former president Saddam Hussein.

Trump said the deal he was looking at would give Kim “protections that will be very strong.”

“The Libya model was a much different model. We decimated that country,” he said, adding that it would only come into play “most likely” if a deal could not be reached with North Korea.

Creative Commons / Middle East Monitor / Report a typo

 This article was chosen for republication based on the interest of our readers. Anti-Media republishes stories from a number of other independent news sources. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect Anti-Media editorial policy.
Since you’re here…

…We have a small favor to ask. Fewer and fewer people are seeing Anti-Media articles as social media sites crack down on us, and advertising revenues across the board are quickly declining. However, unlike many news organizations, we haven’t put up a paywall because we value open and accessible journalism over profit — but at this point, we’re barely even breaking even. Hopefully, you can see why we need to ask for your help. Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too.

If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us

    7

COMMENTS

2

You must be logged in to post a comment.