Asked by a reporter Friday morning how he can speak “so passionately about the circumstances that led to Otto Warmbier’s death,” but also “[defend] Kim Jong-Un’s human rights record,” President Trump replied, “You know why? Because I don’t want to see a nuclear weapon destroy you or your family.”
This is revealing. Trump’s embarrassment of praise for the North Korean dictator has rightfully attracted strong and sustained criticism. But the president’s response this morning confirms that his flattery has been more strategic than sincere.
To be sure, many of Trump’s detractors knew that before Friday. The argument he made plain Friday morning is that it’s a negotiation technique better interpreted as the determination of a cost-benefit analysis than sincere praise. The costs of the flattery are outweighed by the benefits of quelling the nuclear threat, or so Trump argued.
Many will still find that conclusion highly objectionable, and they may well be correct. As Eli Lake noted on “Special Report” this week, “Ronald Reagan managed to negotiate arms control agreements, and have a relationship with Soviet premiers, and still keep a laser-like focus on the dissidents who were rotting in their gulags.”
But, either way, the conversation will be more productive if Trump’s detractors argue against what he’s actually doing.
