‘Goofy': declassified 1994 files show how world powers doubted North Korea's Kim Jong-il
North Korean leader Kim Il-sung's succession plan after his sudden death in 1994, with one US diplomat calling his heir Kim Jong-il 'goofy' and a Russian expert predicting he would lose control of the country within two years.
Advertisement
The documents, released by
South Korea 's Foreign Ministry on Friday, detail how officials worldwide rushed to interpret Kim Il-sung's demise and assess his son's ability to govern.
Walter Mondale, a former US vice-president who was serving as ambassador to Japan at the time, was quoted in the files as saying: '[Kim Jong-il] seems a bit goofy and childish, and not very good as a leader.'
The files show that experts from Russia, which was distancing itself from Pyongyang at the time as it navigated post-Communist reforms, also expressed doubts over the younger Kim's ability to rule North Korea.
North Korea's then-leader Kim Il-sung (L) and his son Kim Jong-il (R) inspecting a soccer ground in Pyongyang in 1992. Photo: AFP
'After about six months of Kim Jong-il's regime, the military will begin to intervene in politics in earnest,' a Russian scholar with experience of working in Pyongyang was quoted as saying.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTHK
2 hours ago
- RTHK
Trump signals tariffs for pharma, chips
Trump signals tariffs for pharma, chips Donald Trump said tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals could ultimately reach 250 percent. Photo: Reuters US President Donald Trump has signalled that fresh tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals and semiconductors could be unveiled within the coming week, amid a cascade of incoming duties. Governments around the world are bracing as new waves of US tariffs are due to take effect this week, first on many Brazilian products on Wednesday and then on dozens of other economies a day later. Trump's sweeping plans have sparked a flurry of activity as leaders seek to avert the worst of his threats, with Swiss officials heading to Washington on Tuesday in a last-minute push to avoid punitive duties. But the US president appears set to widen his trade wars. Trump told CNBC that upcoming tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals could reach 250 percent, while adding that he plans for new duties on foreign semiconductors soon. "We'll be putting (an) initially small tariff on pharmaceuticals, but in one year, one-and-a-half years, maximum, it's going to go to 150 percent," Trump said. "And then it's going to go to 250 percent because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country." Trump also said that Washington will be announcing tariffs "within the next week or so." He added: "We're going to be announcing on semiconductors and chips." Trump has set out varying tariff rates for dozens of economies after imposing a 10-percent levy on almost all trading partners in April. But these broad duties taking effect Thursday exclude products like pharmaceuticals, steel, aluminium and lumber, which are being separately targeted by sector. This means that although the 39-percent tariff Swiss leaders seek to avoid come Thursday excludes pharmaceuticals, Trump's plans for a steep levy on such imports will likely remain a point of contention in any talks. Pharmaceuticals represented 60 percent of Swiss goods exports to the United States last year. Outside of Switzerland, most products from the European Union face a 15 percent tariff starting on Thursday, after Washington and Brussels struck a deal to avoid higher levies. But Trump warned Tuesday that the EU could see its tariff level surge again if it did not fulfil obligations under their recent pact. Some imports from Canada are also targeted by tariffs, although Prime Minister Mark Carney stressed Tuesday that more than 85 percent of trade between the North American neighbours remains tariff-free under existing exemptions. Besides probing pharmaceuticals and chips imports, Trump has already imposed steep duties of 50 percent on steel and aluminium, alongside lower levies on autos and parts. In the same CNBC interview Tuesday, Trump said he expects to raise the US tariff on Indian imports "very substantially over the next 24 hours" due to the country's purchases of Russian oil. His pressure on India comes after signaling fresh sanctions on Moscow if it did not make progress by Friday towards a peace deal with Kyiv. US envoy Steve Witkoff will meet on Wednesday with Russian leadership in Moscow. (AFP)
AllAfrica
21 hours ago
- AllAfrica
JPMorgan's Ukraine war base case scenario coming into view
JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in the United States, has a global trends advisory organization called the Center for Geopolitics. One of its recent studies believes the Ukraine war's likely outcome is a mixed deal between Russia and Ukraine without foreign troops or security guarantees. We may be seeing that outcome develop as Steven Witkoff, President Donald Trump's special envoy, heads to Moscow. In May, the JPMorgan Chase Center published a brief study titled 'The Russia-Ukraine Endgame and the Future of Europe.' The authors, Derek Chollet, managing director and head of the Center, and Lisa Sawyer, executive director for geopolitics, served under Joe Biden at the Defense Department and, in Chollet's case, also at the State Department. Both are confirmed Atlanticists and liberal in outlook. While not explicitly stated, both served during a period when the US was providing tens of billions in aid to Ukraine – funding military assistance, government salaries, soldiers' pensions and reconstruction efforts. While the Endgame study received little attention or interest in the United States, it was reportedly taken very seriously by Ukraine's leadership. The 'scenarios' outlined in the study were discussed in a recent interview with Kiril Budanov, head of Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) under the Ministry of Defense. Budanov is regarded as one of the toughest and smartest operators in Ukraine, and his organization has reputedly carried out assassinations and bombings in Russia and elsewhere. The study 'predicted' that some sort of deal between Ukraine and Russia would be done by the end of Q2 (end of June 2025). That prediction was, of course, wrong. Even so, the study offered four 'possible outcomes' for the endgame and suggested the likelihood, expressed in percentage terms, for each of the outcomes. The four outcomes include a best case called the 'South Korea' model, which the authors gave a 15% probability for adoption. The second scenario is called 'Israel', for which the authors assign a 20% chance of success. The third outcome is called 'Georgia,' which the authors say has a 50% chance of acceptance. Finally, there is the fourth outcome, 'the worst case', which the authors called 'Belarus.' The South Korea outcome does not see Ukraine getting back any of its territory now under Russian control. However, the South Korea model anticipates the presence of a European tripwire military force 'backstopped by an American security guarantee.' In this 'best case,' Ukraine keeps 80% of its territory, leading to a stable outcome for Ukraine. One version of the South Korea outcome is that the US$300 billion in Russian frozen assets would be used for reconstruction in Ukraine. The deal resembles South Korea because the US and others serve as a tripwire for North Korea and because the South Korean economy is booming. The South Korea outcome is unlikely to be acceptable to Russia because it would keep NATO-like forces in Ukraine. It would also take Russian assets and use them to compensate Ukraine, something Russia will not accept. It also leaves the actual territorial issue unsettled and unsolved, meaning that Ukraine would not be compelled to accept the loss of territory to Russia. The scenario says nothing about Western sanctions. Finally, the war could restart on any day and would quickly become a war in Europe, not just Ukraine. The South Korea option, therefore, would be a problem not only for Russia but also for Europe and the United States, and in fact would even be worse for NATO, which requires consensus to activate Article 5 of the NATO collective defense treaty. The second outcome, dubbed 'Israel', would not include the tripwire troop presence on Ukrainian soil and is given a 20% chance of adoption by the warring parties. This option, which the authors say is 'still OK', offers nothing to Russia and acknowledges 'war would always be on [Ukraine's] doorstep.' The authors suggest that Russian President Vladimir Putin would perhaps agree to the scenario if it included sanctions relief. The second outcome, therefore, won't benefit Ukraine unless it has real assurances, including on arms supplies, cash for the government and some integration into Europe's economy. It is impossible for the US to give financial guarantees without either a treaty with Ukraine and congressional approval, which would attempt to bind future congressional decisions. A treaty needs a two-thirds vote in the US Senate. While a treaty might be drafted, it is likely to face amendments and delays in execution. In this connection, it is worth noting that Israel has no written American guarantees, and aid to Israel requires annual Congressional approval. The third outcome is labeled 'Georgia', which the report's authors say has a 50% chance of adoption. This scenario rules out foreign troops and other security and financial guarantees. It would potentially include a package of reconstruction assistance, but not using frozen Russian assets for the purpose. Under the scenario, Ukraine would not be integrated into either the European Union or NATO. The authors think that if the Georgia outcome wins out, Ukraine will drift inexorably into the Russian orbit for trade and other reasons. The authors argue that 'Restrictions on military size and capacity – if part of a negotiated settlement – could prematurely stifle Ukraine's dynamic defense and tech sectors, erasing a potential engine of postwar growth.' Before the war, Ukraine had an energetic and relatively low-cost tech sector, particularly in software development. European and Israeli companies subcontracted with Ukraine's tech sector. Some of this sector has been working on military projects because of the war. However, there is no reason why the military sector is the only possible route for high-tech employment for Ukraine. Indeed, the commercial sector generally pays better and is often more dynamic than military projects. Moreover, some of the skills developed on military projects, including in regard to artificial intelligence, are highly prized these days and sought after in global markets. For the Georgia outcome to work, it would need hard agreements on territories, borders, trade and related issues, along with sanctions relief and other confidence-building measures for both sides. It would also have to include a step back by NATO, something that will be hard to swallow for the ideologically committed Europeans. The final outcome is dubbed 'Belarus', which is the report's 'worst case.' Its two main features are that the US abandons Ukraine and that Europe can't fill in on its own. The authors say that Russia would seek Ukraine's 'total capitulation' and would 'turn the country into a vassal state of Moscow.' US Special Envoy Steven Witkoff met with Vladimir Putin earlier in Kristina Kormilitsyna / TASS While Russia has a list of demands, 'total capitulation' is not one of them. Like the first 'South Korea' outcome, the report's authors assign the 'Belarus' scenario a 15% chance. As Ukraine's intelligence chief Budanov commented in his interview, there are many other scenarios than the four posited by the JPMorgan report. Yet the most interesting part of the report is its hard focus on the 'Georgia' outcome, so much so that if there is a deal struck, the deal will likely resemble that model. It is another way of saying, without saying so, that the Russians are winning and this is probably the best that can be hoped for under the circumstances. This week, Russia is expecting Witkoff's arrival. According to Trump, the Russians asked for the meeting. Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said negotiations between Russia and the US are 'yielding results.' Trump wants a ceasefire, something Russia has resisted. Will the Georgia option be on the table or something else? Stephen Bryen is a special correspondent to Asia Times and former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. This article, which originally appeared in his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.
RTHK
a day ago
- RTHK
US to require US$15,000 bond for some visitors
US to require US$15,000 bond for some visitors The 12-month pilot scheme only targets foreign nationals from countries considered to have high visa overstay rates. Photo: Reuters The US State Department said Monday some visa applicants will soon be required to pay bonds of up to US$15,000 to discourage visa overstays as part of President Donald Trump's crackdown on migration. Starting later this month, the pilot programme will require applicants from certain countries to pay a sum of "no less than US$5,000" as collateral for the issuance of their visa. The funds will be returned if the applicant complies with all visa terms. If the applicant remains in the United States past the deadline, the funds will be forfeited. "Consular officers may require covered non-immigrant visa applicants to post a bond of up to $15,000 as a condition of visa issuance," the agency said in a notice to be published Tuesday in the US Federal Register. The 12-month programme would only affect foreign nationals from countries considered to have "high visa overstay rates" based on a 2023 Department of Homeland Security report, the notice said. Bond payments will also be required by applicants from countries "where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient," the notice added, as well as those who were granted citizenship without a residency requirement. "The pilot reinforces the Trump Administration's commitment to enforcing US immigration laws and safeguarding US national security," a State Department spokesperson said in response to an AFP inquiry. Neither the notice nor the spokesperson specified which countries would be impacted by the new rule. The programme, which will begin on August 20, will apply to B-1 or B-2 non-immigrant visas, and those asked to pay bonds will have to enter and depart from the United States from a list of pre-selected airports. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump and his administration have cracked down on migration to the United States. The State Department justified the launch of the pilot programme by calling it "a key pillar of the Trump Administration's foreign policy to protect the United States from the clear national security threat posed by visa overstays". (AFP)
