President Trump's News Conference about the North Korea Summit - "Word Salads" and the Art of the Vague Deal

Trump's News Conference, June 12, 2018

President Donald Trump held a news conference yesterday to make a statement and answer questions about the Singapore Summit meeting between him and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Although his meeting with the North Korean dictator has caused controversy, with both sides giving heated opinions, the news conference took a civil, positive tone and laid out the United States government's position about negotiations with North Korea. Yet Mr. Trump cleverly avoided the tough issues, leaving himself plenty of room to wiggle in the future.

All politicians get vague sometimes, especially during sensitive international negotiations.

Trump-Kim Summit

Here's the underlying issue: the brief joint statement that Kim and Trump issued really didn't promise much. The statement promised to "denuclearize" the Korean Peninsula. What that means is not entirely clear. Will all nuclear weapons be removed? What about the missiles? What kind of inspection program will verify that the weapons have been removed? What about building additional nuclear weapons in the future? What about American nuclear weapons offshore, but near North Korea? Both sides promised to engage in talks, but no timetable was released. Again, these kinds of questions commonly arise during international negotiations. Still, North Korea and the United States are long-time adversaries, and they may not share enough values and goals to reach a meaningful agreement. Time will tell. 

Now, none of this is intended to criticize the agreement, which seems like a positive first step. Let's take a look at what Mr. Trump said during his news conference, and see how little he promised, while giving the impression that he was pr0mising a lot.

Trump's Opening Statement
In his opening speech, Mr. Trump glowed about the summit: "We’re getting ready to go back.  We had a tremendous 24 hours.  We’ve had a tremendous three months, actually, because this has been going on for quite a while." He called the signed document "very comprehensive. It's going to happen." More reasonably, he continued: "I stand before you as an emissary of the American people to deliver a message of hope and vision, and a message of peace." It was reasonable to call the brief statement a message of hope, and less reasonable to call it comprehensive. He noted the historic event, that this was the first meeting between an American president and a North Korean leader. This was of course true, largely because previous American presidents were worried that such a meeting would legitimize North Korea's oppressive dictatorship.

Mr. Trump stated that "My meeting with Chairman Kim was honest, direct, and productive.  We got to know each other well in a very confined period of time, under very strong, strong circumstances.  We’re prepared to start a new history and we’re ready to write a new chapter between our nations." He expressed hope that the Korean War would soon be officially ended. He assured that "history has proven over and over again, adversaries can indeed become friends." Mr. Trump also said that Chairman Kim had promised to destroy "a major missile engine testing site," a promise that was not included in the written agreement. He did assure that the current sanctions against North Korea would remain in effect. He announced an end to joint American-South Korean military exercises, which sounds like a significant concession.

Trump's "Word Salad" Answers to Reporters' Questions

Needless to say, however, reporters wanted to know more details. The first question, which came from NBC News, addressed North Korea's appalling human rights record: "First, the man you met today, Kim Jong Un, as you know, has killed family members, has starved his own people, is responsible for the death of Otto Warmbier.  Why are you so comfortable calling him 'very talented'?" Mr. Trump pointed out that Kim had taken over his country at the age of 26, "and is able to run it, and run it tough." He expressed sympathy for Otto Warmbier, an American who died in North Korean custody. But he avoided the issue of North Korea's oppressive human rights record against its own citizens. (If you can't say something nice, apparently you don't say anything at all!)

Another question asked whether the denuclearization would be verified: "Was that a concession on the part of the United States?" Mr. Trump assured that "It will be verified." Discussing how it would be verified, Mr. Trump spoke in what conservative writer Jennifer Rubin calls "word salads." She has called Mr. Trump's word salads "babbling" and evidence that he is incompetent. I can't agree with her. The word salads are a kind of creative genius, a brilliant way to avoid answering tough questions, a way to take both sides of an issue at the same time, a way to sound intelligent while saying nothing. In a word salad, Mr. Trump dumps out of a jumble of words that seem to answer the question, but which give no information, like this:


"Well, it’s going to be achieved by having a lot of people there, and as we develop a certain trust.  And we think we have done that.  Secretary Pompeo has been really doing a fantastic job — his staff, everybody.  As we do that, we’re going to have a lot of people there, and we’re going to be working with them on a lot of other things.  But this is complete denuclearization of North Korea, and it will be verified."

The word salads represent a very clever, although ethically questionable, speech technique. Mr. Trump sounds as if he is talking about an important subject, and gives the impression that he answering thoughtfully, while actually conveying no meaning. "A lot of people there?" What does that mean? Which people, where is "there," and what will the "lot 0f people" be doing? On what basis will there be "a certain trust?" Trump's answer was actually brilliant, albeit extremely useless, because not only did he evade the question, but his rambling answer was so confusing that a good follow-up question became very difficult. 

Similarly, when asked whether he trusted Kim, a man who seems quite untrustworthy, Mr. Trump responded with another word salad:

"I do.  I do.  I can only say that I know him for — really well, it’s been very rhetorical, as you know.  I think, without the rhetoric, it wouldn’t have happened.  I think without other things going along — I think the establishment of a new team was very important.  We have a great team.  But I do, I think he wants to get it done.  I really feel that very strongly." 

What rhetoric? What is it that was "very rhetorical?" Why does he think Kim will keep his word this time, perhaps for the first time ever? What specific things did his "new team" do? Mr. Trump's answer was complex and full of big words, but empty of content.

When asked again about Kim's human rights record against his own people, Mr. Trump responded with yet another, even more incomprehensible word salad:

"Right.  It was discussed.  It was discussed relatively briefly compared to denuclearization.  Well, obviously, that’s where we started and where we ended.  But they will be doing things, and I think he wants to do things.  I think he wants to — you’d be very surprised.  Very smart.  Very good negotiator.  Wants to do the right thing."

"I think he wants to — you’d be very surprised" isn't even a sentence.  And so forth. 

I have noticed over the years that most presidents are very good at not answering the questions that are asked of them. Most often, the president gives a very clear answer to some question other than the one that was asked. In contrast, Mr. Trump's complex, evasive responses create the impression that he is answering questions directly, while, actually, he's avoiding the question just as skillfully – maybe more skillfully, than previous presidents.

When speakers have good answers, they give the answers. When speakers don't have good answers, they might punt, they might change the subject, they might stomp out of the room. They might, on rare occasions, honestly admit that they don't know the answer. Mr. Trump doesn't do any of those things. Instead, Mr. Trump sows confusion. I can't say that this is any different in principle from the ways that, for example, Lyndon B. Johnson or Richard Nixon avoided questions, but Mr. Trump's skill at mystification probably deserves awe and admiration just as much as it deserves condemnation for its fundamental emptiness.

In the meantime, Mr. Trump made it sound as if he were making big promises while preserving deniability. Sneaky? Brilliant? Dishonest? Let the listener decide. 


Images: White House YouTube channel; official White House photo via Wikimedia Commons

If you would like to post a comment, log on to your Google account.