Throughout Donald Trump’s tenure as President, North Korea seems to have been a prominent focal point, with his response to the situation ultimately important in potentially cementing his position. Having originally utilised a stance which supported his non-interventionalist ideology, he seemed to alter this to support his allies. Whilst this may naturally highlight his flexibility, a key trait required for success at the pinnacle, it may also show his ability to react to the current climate in order to best serve his country. As such, he seemed to play a key role in altering North Korea’s stance on their nuclear capabilities, and with Kim Jong-un recently outlining his intentions to host a meeting with Trump, the groundwork may be being laid for peace to occur.
With both influencers possessing a high status and leading established nations, their decision to use negotiations as opposed to the alternative may reach a wide array of people. This may, in turn, motivate the masses to act similarly to resolve any complex predicaments. Jong-un’s announcement may elevate Trump’s credentials as a leader, as his actions may have been a prime contributor in the former’s decision to alter his stance on his nuclear programme. With the US President seeking to cement his position in the aftermath of the situation in Florida, and the continuing repercussions, achieving perceived success with North Korea may solely serve to contribute to retaining his position in 2020.
He may have also showcased the wide range of his skill set with his response, both being adaptable to achieve compromise whilst simultaneously adhering to his morals. In accepting his counterpart’s offer of negotiations, he may be showcasing his desire for a resolution to occur. Yet, this offer may solely have occurred as a result of his adamancy, and thus he may be reaping the rewards of a trait he showcased throughout his electoral campaign. Whilst Trump may therefore naturally claim a wide array of plaudits for his handling of the situation, Jong-un may also be showcasing his leadership capabilities. In striving to meet the US President, he may be able to showcase the benefits of trading and utilising North Korea as an ally, whilst similarly bringing his nation along with its counterparts on the global stage.
With the potential for Kim to take these talks in different directions, he may be well equipped to play a key role in leading his nation along a fresh pathway, and his population might prosper. As such, this period may be increasingly important, with Trump possessing the potential to be referred to as the leader who resolved the Korea debate, and Kim potentially possessing the capabilities to alter American, and perhaps global, stances. Protesters may also be able to achieve the resolve for which they have campaigned for, and with the talks the first of its kind in history, the potential for success may be there. Several nations may also be impacted, including South Korea, and thus influencers may be required to draw upon their experiences to find a resolution which benefits all. As such, a number of countries may be aiming to productively impact their public, perhaps a challenge the influencers relish. Ultimately, these talks may signal a more fruitful future for the globe, as whilst Kim may be able to take these talks in various directions, the potential for stability may be prominent.
Ultimately, Both the US and North Korea might be superiorly impacted by the debate. The former may highlight their negotiating power, whilst the latter might also reap the benefits of increased conversational options around the globe. Yet, this may result in other nations being impacted, and thus the debate may bypass geographical boundaries. Politicians, including in Britain, may be able to use it to their advantage, potentially advocating their particular stances or party manifestos, including with Trident. Yet, with the recent Winter Olympics highlighting the benefits of unity, it seems these talks may solely serve to achieve this goal, and ensure these debates may be left in memory rather than replicated.
How might these talks influence other world leaders to alter their stances to appease the masses?