to denuclearize eventually, so 10 to 15 years out, this is okay. it is a bump in the road. but the u.s. got itself in a bit of a pickle by calling for a head of state summit, which then raised the stakes and then raised the expectations for some sort of deliverable. because you have to remember in diplomacy there s not always a deliverable out of every meeting in a series of meetings. but when you have a head of state one, people want to see one. and that s not what we re seeing here. somebody who knows that is ambassador sherman again who joins me here in new york. and talk about deliverables, a huge issue here was definitional. we talk about denuclearization like it s just every day but this was a huge issue going into this, the fact there was no unified definition, tat the u.s. had, that president trump had, that chairman kim had. absolutely. for chairman kim it meant the united states should denuclearize, for us it was that
that exactly, but he has a certain vision and it s not exactly our vision but it s a lot closer than it was a year ago. and i think, you know, eventually we ll get there. but for this particular visit we decided that we had to walk, and we ll see what happens. okay? look, we have a gentleman nobody s ever heard. shawn hannity, what are you doing here shawn hannity? should we let him do a question? john, go ahead. so if he wants the sanctions completely off and you want more on denuclearization, how can you bridge that gap? with time i think it ll be bridged at a certain point, but there is a gap. we have to have sanctions and he wants to denuke, but he wants to just do areas that are less important than the areas that we want. we know the country very well, believe it or not. we know every inch of that
a takeaway of something big on their side, something big on our side. that s a takeaway. first steps to continuing dialogue, perhaps a visit of kim jong-un to the white house as it was discussed earlier and there s more to come and see has to be grand gestures out of this initial meeting, maybe not, you know, ultimately this won t ultimately result in denu denuclearization the first step. one thing i heard from trump skeptics, simone sanders, president trump might talk a big game with how good of a deal maker he is but the evidence is not there and a lot of skeptics point to the president in the public negotiations he s invited cameras into with lawmakers back in january. sat down with lawmakers to talk about immigration reform. he seemed to agree to a clean bill for the dreamers. take a look. what about a clean daca bill now? i think that s basically what
be about today for the first time he said it is really just a get-to-know-you meeting. that is not abnormal. keep in mind the iranian nuclearizations cook two years. so that is typical. but this president given the strong impression that there would be more, more crucially is a re-defining of the white house s own expectations prior to the meeting. white house officials said that the u.s. wanted some grand gesture to demonstrate how serious north korea is about this. we don t know what that gesture is. and on the issue of denuclearization, he said today he thinks they want to denu denuclearization. that is not a commitment before you go into these talks.
what do they want in response? they have understood over the years what we mean. we mean complete and irreversible. what they ve not agreed to is any kind of verity cafication r. this should not be a game of trust me where the north koreans say we ll get rid of this but then don t allow us to verify it. i think what we have at this point from kim jong-un and it s significant for the first time he s used the term denu denuclearization is he s prepared to put it on the table. what does he mean by that? what does he expect us to do in response? really hard to say. right now i think in the early score of this is that north korea has gotten something, that is a meeting with president trump. kim jong-un, who s in a kind of odd competition with his father and grandfather, both deceased,