Over Winter Break, I watched two little kids squabble in a park. They each had a toy car, though one was bigger than the other, and the kid with the big car seemed to take particular glee in ramming his toy against the smaller object. Whack, whack, whack went the big car, the harassing kid cackling as his victim reddened with chagrin. How was my mind not to drift to Donald J. Trump P ’00, and his personal battering ram known as Twitter?
A few days earlier, on January 2, Mr. Trump had used social-media platform to respond to Kim Jong Un’s New Year’s Day speech. “Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!” our president wrote.
While forcing Mr. Trump to be concise, Twitter’s 280 character limit could not restrain the problems in how this thought was communicated. Mr. Trump started by describing Mr. Kim’s regime as “depleted and food starved” not to highlight the moral and humanitarian problems inherent in a corrupt authoritarian rule, but because they are qualities that make North Korea inferior to the United States. He proceeded to compare the sizes and functionality of the countries’ nuclear “Buttons,” as if he were assessing toys (or, some say, more intimate belongings) and not devices that could obliterate the world. Trump concluded by pointing out that his button, in fact, works, insinuating that Mr. Kim’s does not — in effect, challenging the North Korean leader to nuclear warfare. In one brash and loaded tweet Mr. Trump managed to incite dangerous acrimony in the name of his fragile ego.
While the absurdity of his tweets and mocking nicknames such as “Little Rocket Man” might evoke hilarity, every one of his taunts are an intentional political move. It is not clear whether Mr. Trump fully understands that pressing a button on Twitter could lead to Mr. Kim using his own “button.” However, it is evident that behind Trump’s inflated and dramatic rhetoric stands a small and diminished man who must rethink the consequences that his actions have on both American society and the standing of America in international politics.
Granted, Trump’s constant barrage of threats may have had an initially shocking effect. Some scholars have even said that this new political “tactic,” more overtly assertive than past diplomatic approaches to reducing nuclear armament in North Korea, may be effective in discouraging North Korea from pursuing any action. However, as the unprecedented effect of his rhetoric wears off, it will be even more important for him to abandon emotionally-charged threats and rely on more sustainable means of communication with North Korea to deter nuclear warfare.
Despite tense relations between the U.S. and North Korea, North Korea and U.S. ally South Korea, seem to have an improving relationship. The two nations announced on January 17 that they will present a joint flag in the opening ceremony of the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, and will compete as one nation for several sports. Some analysts have judged this as an opportunity for North Korea to buy time as it continues to improve its nuclear technology. Others applauded this as progress. The true intent of North Korea in reopening discussions will not materialize immediately, but it is important to seize the opportunity to diffuse the political and personal tensions between Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim.
