Normale Version: Nordkorea 2019-2020
Sie sehen gerade eine vereinfachte Darstellung unserer Inhalte. Normale Ansicht mit richtiger Formatierung.
Seiten: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
[Korea Broadcasting System]
Moon begrüßt US-Nordkorea-Gipfel als historischen Meilenstein für den Frieden
Moon sagte, dass er Trump und Kim für ihren Mut und ihre Weisheit dankbar sei. Sie hätten schwierige Beschlüsse gefasst.

Er betonte, die Führungsstärke von Trump, der Kims Einladung gerne angenommen habe, werde sowohl von den Menschen in Süd- und Nordkorea als auch von Menschen in der Welt, die den Weltfrieden wünschen, gelobt. Die Regierung wolle die Gelegenheit, die sich wie ein Wunder ergeben habe, sorgfältig nutzen.

Er bedankte sich auch bei den Bürgern und Staats- und Regierungschefs anderer Länder für deren Aufmerksamkeit und Anteilnahme.
[Fox News]
Trump's meeting with North Korea's Kim will be historic...and logistically complicated
No U.S. leader has ever visited North Korea while serving in the Oval Office. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton traveled to the country on what amounted to peacekeeping missions, but both Democrats had been out of the White House for years before making their trip...

[Luzerner Zeitung]

An diesen Orten könnte das Treffen zwischen Trump und Kim stattfinden
Aus sicherheitspolitischen Erwägungen scheiden wohl die Hauptstädte Washington und Pjöngjang aus. Seoul wäre nicht neutral genug, der Waffenstillstandsort Panmunjom zu negativ symbolbehaftet. Für Peking könnten sich wohl beide Seiten erwärmen. Vorstellbar wäre auch ein Treffen auf Hawaii. Dieser Ort läge nicht nur auf halber ­Strecke, er hätte auch eine politische Bedeutung, jedenfalls für Nordkorea. Kim Jong Un könnte mit einem Kranz die Opfer des ­japanischen Angriffs auf Pearl Harbour vom 7. Dezember 1941 ehren und damit demonstrieren, wie sehr Korea noch heute von der japanischen Okkupation traumatisiert ist....
Die seit einigen Wochen zu beobachtende Annäherungen zwischen Nord- und Südkorea sind spannend, vor allem die Reaktion des "Imperiums".

Vor allem, wenn jetzt Südkorea eine Gaspipeline aus Russland über Nordkorea bauen will.

Erfahrungsgemäß kommt das dort nicht so gut an. Big Grin
April 27, 2018

A Most Hopeful Korean Summit With Little Chance Of Final Success

At widely observed meeting today the leaders of North and South Korea took a step towards a peace agreement and maybe even a reunion of the partitioned country.

[Bild: kimmoon-s.jpg]

We have been here before:

Leaders of North and South Korea signed a treaty of reconciliation and nonaggression this morning, renouncing armed force against each other and saying that they would formally bring the Korean War to an end ... 
Officials on both sides described the accord as the first step toward what they term the inevitable reunification of the Korean peninsula, but they conceded that it failed to deal with some of the most potentially dangerous issues dividing North and South, including Pyongyang's race to develop an arsenal of nuclear weapons. 
With surprising speed and warmth, the presidents of North and South Korea reached a broad agreement on Wednesday to work for peace and unity on their bitterly divided peninsula, the biggest step by either side to ease tensions in 50 years.
The general points agreed on included the need for reconciliation and unification; the establishment of peace; the commencement in August of exchange visits by members of divided families; and more cultural exchanges. 
Expectations for what could be achieved at the first summit meeting between the Koreas in seven years had been low. Worries that South Korea’s president  [...] would give away too much had been high.
But a declaration signed Thursday [...] contained a number of specific projects that could build closer economic and security ties between the Koreas, experts said. The North, in turn, appeared to have made some modest, though important, concessions to the South. 
Korean Summit Results Exceed Low Expectations
At a historic summit meeting, the first time a North Korean leader had ever set foot in the South, the leaders vowed to negotiate a peace treaty to replace a truce that has kept an uneasy peace on the divided Korean Peninsula for more than six decades, while ridding it of nuclear weapons. A peace treaty has been one of the incentives North Korea has demanded in return for bargaining away its nuclear weapons. 
Mr. Moon also offered some capitalistic carrots during the talks, reminding Mr. Kim that South Korea had in years past promised huge investments to help improve the North’s road and train systems. Those agreements eventually collapsed as the North persisted in developing nuclear weapons. 
North and South Korea Set Bold Goals: A Final Peace and No Nuclear Arms
The pieces above were published in the New York Times on December 13 1991,  June 15 2000, October 5 2007 and  April 27 2018 respectively.
It is obvious from the above quotes that the enthusiasm over such a summit is not new. What makes this one special ?
Cont. reading: A Most Hopeful Korean Summit With Little Chance Of Final Success
Panmunjom Declaration on Peace, Prosperity and Reunification of Korean Peninsula
Auf die englische Übersetzung aus dem Norden. (Ich kann leider keinen direkten Link setzen.)

(Ergänzung) Hier ein funktionierender Link:

Hier die Übersetzung aus dem Süden:

Ein paar Unterschiede gibt es da schon. So steht etwa in der Nordfassung:

"The north and the south confirmed the principle of national independence which specifies that the destiny of our nation is set by ourselves and agreed to open up a drastic phase in the improvement and development of the ties by thoroughly implementing the north-south declarations and all the agreements that had already been adopted. "

In der Südfassung:

" South and North Korea affirmed the principle of determining the destiny of the Korean nation on their own accord and agreed to bring forth the watershed moment for the improvement of inter-Korean relations by fully implementing all existing agreements and declarations adopted between the two sides thus far."

Der wichtige Begriff "national independence" fehlt in letzterer.

In der Nordfassung steht:

"The north and the south agreed to turn the area of the "northern limit line" in the West Sea into peace waters and take substantial measures to prevent accidental military conflicts and ensure safe fishing operations there."

In der Südfassung :

"South and North Korea agreed to devise a practical scheme to turn the areas around the Northern Limit Line in the West Sea into a maritime peace zone in order to prevent accidental military clashes and guarantee safe fishing activities."

Mittel und Zweck sind in den beiden Übersetzungen gerade vertauscht.

Ich habe noch nicht alle Absätze verglichen.
(29.04.2018, 13:14)BSB schrieb: [ -> ]Ich habe noch nicht alle Absätze verglichen.

Nur mal ein Gedanke:
Das Dokument wurde wohl auf Koreanisch verfasst, und hinterher von zwei unterschiedlichen Personen ins Englische übersetzt. Wenn die zwei unterschiedlich "gut" Englisch können, kann sowas schon mal dabei herauskommen...
(29.04.2018, 19:11)Rantanplan schrieb: [ -> ]
(29.04.2018, 13:14)BSB schrieb: [ -> ]Ich habe noch nicht alle Absätze verglichen.

Nur mal ein Gedanke:
Das Dokument wurde wohl auf Koreanisch verfasst, und hinterher von zwei unterschiedlichen Personen ins Englische übersetzt. Wenn die zwei unterschiedlich "gut" Englisch können, kann sowas schon mal dabei herauskommen...
Ich denke nicht, daß so ein Dokument von Menschen übersetzt wird, die schlecht Englisch können. Das nordkoreanische Englisch hat die Verlotterung der letzten Jahrzehnte nicht mitgemacht, weshalb es oft als verstaubt und hölzern kritisiert wird, dafür ist es sehr präzise im Ausdruck. Es ist klar, daß eine gute Übersetzung immer eine gewisse Freiheit verlangt, weshalb zwei gute Übersetzer nie einen identischen Text produzieren werden. Aber die aufgezeigten Unterschiede lassen sich weder durch verschiedene Fähigkeiten noch Stile erklären. Der Begriff "Nationale Unabhängigkeit" steht entweder drin oder nicht. Ich will nicht verhehlen, daß ich die nordkoreanische Übersetzung für die verläßlichere halte.
Lesenswert :

Pyongyang, May 16 (KCNA) -- Kim Kye Gwan, first vice-minister of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK, made public the following press statement on Wednesday:

Kim Jong Un, chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, made a strategic decision to put an end to the unpleasant history of the DPRK-U.S. relations and met Pompeo, U.S. secretary of state, for two times during his visit to our country and took very important and broad-minded steps for peace and stability in the Korean peninsula and the world.

In response to the noble intention of Chairman Kim Jong Un, President Trump stated his position for terminating the historically deep-rooted hostility and improving the relations between the DPRK and the U.S.

I appreciated the position positively with an expectation that upcoming DPRK-U.S. summit would be a big step forward for catalyzing détente on the Korean peninsula and building a great future.

But now prior to the DPRK-U.S. summit, unbridled remarks provoking the other side of dialogue are recklessly made in the U.S. and I am totally disappointed as these constitute extremely unjust behavior.

High-ranking officials of the White House and the Department of State including Bolton, White House national security adviser, are letting loose the assertions of so-called Libya mode of nuclear abandonment, "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization", "total decommissioning of nuclear weapons, missiles, biochemical weapons". etc, while talking about formula of "abandoning nuclear weapons first, compensating afterwards".

This is not an expression of intention to address the issue through dialogue. It is essentially a manifestation of awfully sinister move to impose on our dignified state the destiny of Libya or Iraq which had been collapsed due to yielding the whole of their countries to big powers.

I cannot suppress indignation at such moves of the U.S., and harbor doubt about the U.S. sincerity for improved DPRK-U.S. relations through sound dialogue and negotiations.

World knows too well that our country is neither Libya nor Iraq which have met miserable fate.

It is absolutely absurd to dare compare the DPRK, a nuclear weapon state, to Libya which had been at the initial stage of nuclear development.

We shed light on the quality of Bolton already in the past, and we do not hide our feeling of repugnance towards him.

If the Trump administration fails to recall the lessons learned from the past when the DPRK-U.S. talks had to undergo twists and setbacks owing to the likes of Bolton and turns its ear to the advice of quasi-"patriots" who insist on Libya mode and the like, prospects of upcoming DPRK-U.S. summit and overall DPRK-U.S. relations will be crystal clear.

We have already stated our intention for denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and made clear on several occasions that precondition for denuclearization is to put an end to anti-DPRK hostile policy and nuclear threats and blackmail of the United States.

But now, the U.S. is miscalculating the magnanimity and broad-minded initiatives of the DPRK as signs of weakness and trying to embellish and advertise as if these are the product of its sanctions and pressure.

The U.S. is trumpeting as if it would offer economic compensation and benefit in case we abandon nuke. But we have never had any expectation of U.S. support in carrying out our economic construction and will not at all make such a deal in future, either.

It is a ridiculous comedy to see that the Trump administration, claiming to take a different road from the previous administrations, still clings to the outdated policy on the DPRK - a policy pursued by previous administrations at the time when the DPRK was at the stage of nuclear development.

If President Trump follows in the footsteps of his predecessors, he will be recorded as more tragic and unsuccessful president than his predecessors, far from his initial ambition to make unprecedented success.

If the Trump administration takes an approach to the DPRK-U.S. summit with sincerity for improved DPRK-U.S. relations, it will receive a deserved response from us. However, if the U.S. is trying to drive us into a corner to force our unilateral nuclear abandonment, we will no longer be interested in such dialogue and cannot but reconsider our proceeding to the DPRK-U.S. summit. -0-
May 24, 2018

How John Bolton Sabotaged The North Korea Talks
U.S. President Trump just canceled the planned summit with North Korea's chairman Kim Jong-Un. The two were supposed to meet on June 12 in Singapore. In a letter to Kim Jong-un, released to the media, Trump accused North Korea of hostile statements which, according to him, make the summit impossible:
Sadly, based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I fell it is inappropriate, at this time, to have this long planned meeting.
Since the very first summit talk National Security Advisor John Bolton set impossibly high expectations for the results. Trump fell for it.
The various 'hostile statements' go back to remarks by Bolton who has for some time compared disarmament of North Korea to Libya. On April 29 Bolton again asserted that the 'complete de-nuclearization' of North Korea would follow the 'Libya model'. North Korea never really offered to 'de-nuclearize'. It rejects the 'Libya model' for two reasons:
  • When Libya made peace with the U.S. it was not a nuclear capable state which North Korea is. North Korea demands to be seen as equal to other nuclear armed states.
  • Libya's transfer of the little nuclear production equipment it had was followed a few years later by a full fledged war waged by France, the U.K. and the U.S. against Libya and its government under Muhammad Ghaddafi. The war destroyed the country. North Korea has no intent to allow a repeat of such treason.
North Korea pushed back against the Bolton statement. On May 16 the White House made amends by not endorsing what Bolton said:
Referring to the Libya comparison, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Wednesday that she hadn't "seen that as part of any discussions so I'm not aware that that's a model that we're using.
"I haven't seen that that's a specific thing. I know that that comment was made. There's not a cookie cutter model on how this would work."
But a day later Donald Trump was asked about the Libya comparison and he seemed to agree with it:

Cont. reading: How John Bolton Sabotaged The North Korea Talks
[Bild: MM00267825.jpg]
(Auch nochmal als Anhang, weil KCNA oft nicht erreichbar.)

Pyongyang, May 27 (KCNA) -- The historic fourth north-south summit meeting and talks took place at the Thongil House in the north side area of Panmunjom on May 26, Juche 107 (2018) all of a sudden.

Kim Jong Un, chairman of the Workers' Party of Korea, chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the DPRK and supreme commander of the Korean People's Army, came to the Thongil House to meet and hold talks with President Moon Jae In of south Korea.

Panmunjom, the historical land which had once come under global spotlights as a symbol of peace for making a new start of the north-south relations and opening up a new era of reconciliation and unity, witnessed the significant meeting between the top leaders of the north and the south once again after 29 days.

Honor guards of the Korean People's Army lined up at the Thongil House, the venue of the talks, to receive President Moon Jae In.

The respected Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un warmly greeted President Moon Jae In and exchanged greetings with him who arrived at the Thongil House after crossing the demarcation line at Panmunjom.

The two top leaders were so pleased to have a historic meeting once again at the historic place after the lapse of one month, and warmly shook their hands with each other.

Prior to the talks, President Moon Jae In made an entry in the visitors' book of the Thongil House in memory of his visit to the north side area, which reads: "Peace and Prosperity of the Korean Peninsula, together with Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. 2018. 5. 26 President of the Republic of Korea Moon Jae In."

Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae In, with their hands firmly held with each other, had a souvenir photo taken to commemorate the historic fourth north-south summit.

Kim Jong Un shook hands one by one with the personages of the south side accompanying Mun Jae In, sharing pleasure of meeting with them.

Then, there were talks between Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae In.

Attending there from the north side was Kim Yong Chol, vice-chairman of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea, and from the south side was So Hun, director of the National Intelligence Service.

At the talks there were in-depth exchanges of opinions to tackle the matters which should be resolved to quickly carry out the Panmunjom Declaration agreed upon at the third north-south summit and to realize the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and achieve regional peace, stability and prosperity, and the matters the north and the south are now faced with, and the one of successfully holding the DPRK-U.S. summit.

Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae In shared the view that the two sides should trust and take care of with each other and exert joint efforts to make sure that the Panmunjom declaration reflecting the unanimous desire of all Koreans is implemented at an early date.

The top leaders of the north and the south agreed to hold the north-south high-level talks on coming June 1 and further accelerate the talks of various fields including the ones of military authorities and Red Cross.

They shared the opinion that they would meet frequently in the future to make dialogue brisk and pool wisdom and efforts, expressing their stand to make joint efforts for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

Kim Jong Un thanked Moon Jae In for much effort made by him for the DPRK-U.S. summit scheduled for June 12, and expressed his fixed will on the historic DPRK-U.S. summit talks.

Kim Jong Un told Moon Jae In to positively cooperate with each other as ever to improve the DPRK-U.S. relations and establish mechanism for permanent and durable peace.

They reached a satisfactory consensus in the matters discussed at the talks.

Kim Jong Un warmly embraced with Moon Jae In and exchanged good-byes, promising to meet again one day.

The top leaders of the north and the south open-heartedly listened to each other's opinions on the crucial pending matters without formality, and had a candid dialogue. The meeting offers another historic occasion in opening up a new chapter in the development of the north-south relations.

The fourth north-south summit held at Panmunjom, recorded in history as a symbol of national reconciliation and unity, peace and prosperity, will provide all Koreans with a new hope and vitality. -0-
Seiten: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10