“There are technical issues that we ought to explore so we know what we’re talking about when we say we want the North Koreans to take steps quickly to show that they are serious about dismantling their WMD. And if they do that, we should be prepared to do X, Y, Z,” said Manning.
“I was very much looking forward to being there with you. Sadly, based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it is inappropriate, at this time, to have this long-planned meeting,” Trump wrote to Kim. “Therefore, please let this letter serve to represent that the Singapore summit, for the good of both parties, but to the detriment of the world, will not take place.”
Moïse Katumbi, who is tipped to win the election—if one is held and if he is allowed to participate—and Félix Tshisekedi, the president of the Union for Democracy and Social Progress, the DRC’s oldest and largest opposition party, said opposition parties are discussing the possibility of fielding a single unity candidate in elections scheduled for December 23.
In this way, Trump’s May 22 meeting with Moon will serve as an important prelude to the US-North Korea summit, scheduled for June 12.
Why I’ve grown more optimistic that we have the chance to repair history’s bloodiest remaining divide.Jet lag can play tricks on the mind.
Lying wide awake at just past three in the morning, some thirteen hours ahead of DC time in South Korea, I grow convinced we are within reach of the chance of the century to repair history’s bloodiest remaining divide. At the end of a week’s fact-gathering in Seoul, it’s hard to know whether this is rational thinking or nocturnal delusion.
Whichever it turns out to be, a Hollywood script writer could not have framed the plot nor provided its protagonists more inventively.
I have the greatest of respect for this distinguished group of people, and we have more often been on the same side when it comes to campaigning on Russia, its aggressive foreign policy, abuse of human rights, and corruption. Still, I am a bit bemused by the views they express in this statement.
They are clearly critics of Fridman and Aven and they provide the reasons for their criticism. We are happy to provide them with the means to express their views.