We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
ONE DAY AFTER abruptly pulling the plug on a high-stakes summit with North Korea, US President Donald Trump said the meeting with Kim Jong Un could go ahead after all — and would “likely” happen on the originally scheduled date of 12 June.
The summit would be an unprecedented meeting between a sitting US president and a North Korean leader, which Washington hopes will result in the full denuclearisation of the reclusive state.
Trump said in a tweet that “very productive talks” were ongoing with North Korea about reinstating the summit.
“If it does happen, will likely remain in Singapore on the same date, June 12th,” he wrote, adding the meeting could be extended further if necessary.
On Thursday, Trump cancelled the summit that was due to take place in Singapore, blaming “tremendous anger and open hostility” from Pyongyang in recent days.
But North Korea responded Friday by saying it was willing to talk to the United States “at any time” — a reaction Trump welcomed as “warm and productive”.
“We’re talking to them now,” Trump said of the North Koreans. “They very much want to do it. We’d like to do it.”
US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said there was “possibly some good news” on the summit, while White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters: “If the meeting takes place on 12 June, we will be ready.”
South Korea, which had brokered the remarkable detente between Washington and Pyongyang, cautiously welcomed Trump’s latest comments.
“We find it fortunate that the embers of the North Korea-US talks are reignited. We are watching developments carefully,” Presidential Blue House spokesman Kim Eui-gyeom said.
Trump’s initial cancellation of the summit blindsided treaty ally Seoul, with President Moon Jae-in calling the move “shocking and very regrettable”.
‘Twists and turns’
State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert cast the fast-moving developments as simply “twists and turns” in the process.
“We never expected it to be easy,” Nauert told reporters.
But the whiplash from the White House was unusual even for the chaos-loving president. In March, apparently acting on impulse, Trump agreed to the talks with Kim after only limited input from aides.
In a letter to Kim, Trump blamed Pyongyang for his decision to call off the summit, and warned North Korea against committing any “foolish or reckless acts” while also highlighting America’s “massive and powerful” nuclear capabilities.
North Korea’s First Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan called Trump’s decision “unexpected” and “regrettable” but sounded a conciliatory tone, saying officials were willing “to sit face-to-face at any time.”
Just before Trump announced the cancellation of the meeting, North Korea declared it had completely dismantled its nuclear test site in the country’s far northeast, in a carefully choreographed goodwill gesture.
- © AFP 2018.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Good man Hugh. Can I suggest that you circulate this to some of your younger colleagues who have posted articles over the past few days which have suggested that the fans were responsible for this tragedy.
Hi Eamonn, can you give me any specific examples here?
@ Hugh. Sure, check out an article posted 22 hours ago in the Score section. The original wording was amended after I pointed out the facts of the Taylor Report but in the discussion below the article the writer repeats the assertion that " fan irresponsibility" was the cause of the tragedy. This is totally untrue. The Taylor Report clearly states poor crowd management and Stadium design as the key factors. Thanks Hugh.
@Eamonn: I understand this is a highly emotive subject, and I accept your point re:the ambiguity of the original wording, but your claim that I blamed the actions of fans for the tragedy is grossly inaccurate. I think if you re-read my comment, you’ll see that’s the case.
The significance of the Commons debate lay in its attempt to dispel the myth of fan irresponsibility once and for all, bringing the official, government narrative in line with the experience of supporters and victims. The PM is contemplating a public apology because that never really happened, even in the wake of the Taylor Report.
@ Conor. My concern is that comments like “The question of official blame, however, has historically been reduced to one of fan irresponsibility” is just simply untrue and unfortunately, only helps perpetuate the myth. I’m not sure how else I’m supposed to read this. This is totally at odds with the only official inquiry into the events leading up to the tragedy. That’s my point, nothing personal. Over and out. Thanks Conor.
Another of Thatcher’s legacies.
have your say