The Dictatorship
South Korean diplomat says nation asked Trump to play ‘peacemaker’ with North Korea
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — South Korea’s president has asked President Donald Trump to become “a peacemaker” and use his leadership to get North Korea to talks to reduce military tensions on the Korean Peninsula, the South’s top diplomat said Friday.
Trump “welcomed” the request from President Lee Jae Myung and “he expressed his willingness to be engaged with North Korea again,” Foreign Minister Cho Hyun said in an interview with The Associated Press. There was no immediate word from the White House.
Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met three times as North Korea was building a nuclear weapons stockpile, which Kim views as key to the country’s security and his continued rule of the northeast Asian nation.
There were two summits in Singapore in June 2018, and in Vietnam in February 2019, where Trump and Kim disagreed about U.S.-led sanctions against the North. A third meeting that year at the border between the two Koreas failed to salvage their nuclear talks and Kim has since shunned any diplomacy with the U.S. and South Korea.
“It would be fantastic if they met with each other in the near future,” Cho said. “And President Lee Jae Myung made it clear to President Trump that he will not be sitting in the driver’s seat. He asked president Trump to become a peacemaker, and he relegated himself to become a pacemaker,” the foreign minister said. “We don’t mind. On the contrary, we want president Trump (to) exercise his leadership to pull North Korea to dialogue table.”
Can a meeting happen?
Since Trump returned to power in January, he has repeatedly expressed hope of restarting talks with Kim. The North Korean leader said Monday he still has “good memories” of Trump but urged the United States to drop its demand that the North surrender its nuclear arms as a precondition for resuming long-stalled diplomacy.
Trump is expected to visit South Korea next month to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, which has prompted media speculation that he might meet Kim again at the border. Trump is also expected to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping during that meeting.
The foreign minister said Lee asked Trump to take the lead because the world has changed and become “much more precarious” since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.
“Accordingly, we are equally worried about any possible military skirmish on the Korean Peninsula,” Cho said. “So we are compelled to explore dialogues with North Korea to reduce the military tension, and at least we want to have a hotline.”
He stressed that denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula “is the imperative – we cannot let it go.”
Tensions between the Koreas continue apace
Early Friday, South Korea’s military said it fired warning shots to drive away a North Korean merchant ship that briefly crossed the disputed western sea boundary between the two countries, amid continuing high tensions.
“I’m not surprised at all,” Cho said, “but this incident justifies the policy of the new government that we need to have a hotline between the militaries, reduce the military tension and build confidence between the two parties.”
Lee, who headed the left-leaning Democratic Party, won a snap election in June following the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk Yeol after his short-lived imposition of martial law in December. Cho, a career diplomat and former U.N. ambassador, took office as foreign minister on July 19.
In Lee’s speech to the annual meeting of world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, he said South Korea has come back to the international community as a normal state after the domestic turmoil and has demonstrated its commitment to democracy.
Cho said he felt “a bit uncomfortable” talking about the previous government compared to the current government, since Yoon was elected. But Cho recalled that when Yoon, who had been a prosecutor, was elected, he was convinced “he would become an aberration.”
Peace is the priority, the diplomat says
Since becoming foreign minister, Cho said he has been explaining to neighboring countries, including during visits to Japan and China, that the new government “is determined to seek peace on the Korean Peninsula and also in northeast Asia.”
He said the government wants to engage China and he had a “very good constructive meeting” with Foreign Minister Wang Yi, “but I made it clear that there are certain things we cannot accept.”
Cho referred to China’s installation of “something” in the Yellow Sea that infringes on South Korea’s sovereignty. “So we made it clear that it be removed. Otherwise, we would think about taking proper measures,” he said.
Cho flew to Washington immediately after a massive raid by U.S. immigration officers at a Hyundai plant in southeast Georgia detained 475 people, the majority of them South Koreans. It became a major diplomatic issue between the two countries.
The minister said Trump intervened and wanted them to remain, but they were chained and handcuffed and his primary objective was to get them back home.
Cho said his talks with Secretary of State Marco Rubio ended up having “a silver lining” because obtaining visas for South Korean workers has been a longstanding problem and “we were able to address this issue squarely and we will be able to sort out the problem.”
___
Edith M. Lederer has covered international affairs for The Associated Press for more than a half century.
The Dictatorship
Alaska Supreme Court says man with same name as Sen. Dan Sullivan can be on primary ballot
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — The Alaska Supreme Court ruled Monday that a man with the same nameand party affiliation as Alaska Republican U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan is qualified to run for the seat and ordered elections officials to place him on the August primary ballot.
The ruling came hours after the court heard arguments and just days after state court Judge Thomas Matthews found the Division of Elections had “abused its discretion”in booting the challenger Sullivan from the ballot. The Supreme Court, in a brief ruling, affirmed Matthews’ decision to include the challenger on the ballot but sent back to the division the issue of how he should be listed as a candidate “within the confines of existing Alaska ballot design law.”
The court said a full opinion explaining its decision would be released later.
Jeffrey Robinson, an attorney for the challenger Sullivan, expressed gratitude for the ruling and said he expected the division “will act in full compliance” with ballot design law in preparing the ballots. Sam Curtis, a spokesperson for the state Department of Law, said the state appreciated the quick ruling “and will work to implement the order.”
Nate Adams, a spokesperson for Sen. Sullivan’s campaign, said while disappointed by the ruling, the campaign is encouraged that Beecher “will be able to use her expertise to differentiate between the Petersburg fraud and the incumbent — Senator Dan Sullivan — to the benefit of Alaska voters.”
Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher issued a decision June 15 finding the challenger’s candidacy was not filed in good faith and instead was done with an intent to confuse voters. But Matthews said Beecher’s decision was not based on the requirements set out by the U.S. Constitution to serve in the Senate — which address age, citizenship and residency — or on state laws or regulations.
Alaska’s US Senate race could help determine control of chamber
The dust-up over the two Dan Sullivans began with the challenger filing his candidacy about a month ago and has roiled one of the most closely watched Senate races in the country. Alaska’s race is one of about a half dozen Senate contests that are considered competitive and could determine control of the chamber for President Donald Trump’s final two years in office.
The candidate filing prompted accusations by the senator and his alliesincluding the National Republican Senatorial Committee, that the challenger is a sham candidate intent on sowing chaos. Republican Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, who oversees elections, responded by announcing an investigation into the challenger’s candidacy.
Two complaints raising questions about his party affiliation and motives were filed by the Alaska Republican Party chair.
The senator also accused the challenger Sullivan of working with Democrats and the campaign of Democratic former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola to cause confusion. Peltola’s campaign and state Democrats have denied the allegation, as has the challenger, who said the decision to run was “my choice.”
Peltola is seen as the senator’s main rival in the race, which features more than a dozen candidates.
The top four vote-getters in the primary, regardless of party affiliation, advance to a ranked choice general election in November.
The challenger Sullivan, 69, a retired teacher from the small fishing community of Petersburg, told The Associated Press on Monday he had grown frustrated with the incumbent and thought the timing for a run was right. “I just decided it was something I needed to do,” he said. “I will find out if it was the right thing or not, but I’m going to give it a shot.”
He said he aims to pull votes from the senator, as any challenger would. “But no, I’m not trying to trick people,” he told the AP.
Arguments before the state Supreme Court
Attorneys for the challenger Sullivanin filings before the state Supreme Court, said the elections division disqualified their client “because of what it thought were his reasons for running.” They called the good-faith standard applied by Beecher “legally unsupportable.”
Matthews agreed in his decision Friday to allow Sullivan on the ballot, saying, the elections division determination “was based upon a new, previously unstated, ‘good-faith’ criteria.”
Beecher, in disqualifying the challenger Sullivan, said he had registered to vote as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. and in conjunction with his candidacy changed his party affiliation to Republican, an affiliation he did not previously had. She cited similarities between his campaign website and the senator’s, and his work with a consultant whose clients have included some Democrats. She did not mention finding any evidence of coordination.
Attorneys general from 14 Republican-led states submitted a brief supporting the division and asking the state Supreme Court to keep the challenger Sullivan off the ballot.
The division initially certified both Sullivans as candidates, identifying the challenger as Dan J. Sullivan and the incumbent as Dan S. Sullivan.
Debate over ballot design
Attorneys representing the state, in their filings, said using a middle initial on the ballot would not be enough to help voters distinguish between the two Sullivans. They asked the court to uphold Beecher’s finding.
But if the court ordered the challenger Sullivan on the ballot, they proposed he be listed as Daniel James Sullivan Jr. with a nonpartisan party affiliation — arguing the division believed it could deny him being labeled a Republican since he had no prior affiliation with that party before running. The attorneys, led by outside counsel Christopher Murray, proposed in their brief that the senator be listed as Dan Sullivan, registered Republican and incumbent.
Attorneys for the challenger said any proposal to list their client as “nonpartisan” would be unlawful because Alaska law allows him to be listed according to his party preference. It proposed he be listed on the ballot as Dan J. Sullivan, a Republican.
They said the senator could ensure his supporters are aware of his middle initial and that the state’s candidate information pamphlet, which is sent to voters, also could help address any confusion.
At least one outside group supporting the senator has been running ads and sending political mailers referring to him as Sen. Dan S. Sullivan.
A week after a trio of progressive House candidates backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani swept their races over establishment favoritesColorado’s primaries on Tuesday will test whether the left’s momentum can travel west.
The Democratic Socialists of America are backing an insurgent against one of the state’s most established Democratic House incumbents. More broadly, a wider field of progressive challengers is pressing the establishment in races the DSA has stayed out of, a sign of how much leftward energy is coursing through the primary even beyond the group’s own slate.
“As an American, I don’t like the DSA. As a Democrat, I don’t like the DSA,” said Adam Frisch, a former Colorado congressional candidate now working to help the centrist wing of the party.
The question Tuesday is whether reliably blue Colorado feels the same way. Re-electing or elevating the relatively moderate incumbents could suggest that New York’s results owed more to Mamdani’s singular appeal than to any broad hunger among rank-and-file Democrats for a leftward turn. Ousting them would land as a warning shot to the party establishment.
The DSA has been explicit about its ambitions. “Today, the East Coast,” the group wrote on X last week“next week the Mountain West.”
Here are the races to watch.
Curse vs. DeGette
In the state’s 1st Congressional District, 29-year-old Melat Kiros — backed by both the DSA and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. — is attempting an uphill bid to unseat Rep. Diana DeGette, 68, who has held the reliably blue Denver-based seat since the 1990s. (A third candidate, Wanda James, a member of the University of Colorado board of regents, is also running, though she has struggled to break through in a race that has focused largely on the matchup between Kiros and DeGette.)
Kiros, an Ethiopian-born Ph.D. student and former lawyer, has campaigned heavily on her opposition to funding military aid to Israel while also calling to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and backing universal healthcare. She cast herself as an agent of generational change. The race, she told MS NOW, is “about addressing the corruption and actually fighting for the policies that are going to help working families.” Establishment Democrats who “have been in their seats for decades at a time,” she added, “aren’t up to that task.”
DeGette, meanwhile, has leaned on her experience on Capitol Hill while also touting her own progressive bona fides, including her record fighting the Trump administration, her seniority on the Energy and Commerce Committee and her leadership of the Reproductive Freedom Caucus in the House.
Kiros’ stance on Israel has played a key role in the race, underscoring its growing salience for Democratic primary voters. Her biography on the website of the Justice Democrats, which also endorsed her, suggests that she lost her job as a lawyer in New York City after writing an essay defending college students protesting Israel’s war in Gaza. She has also castigated establishment Democrats for being too willing, in her view, to take money from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, writing on X in September: “We cannot wait for them to find the courage to stand for what’s right, it’s time to clean house on all of them.”
Kiros recently faced criticism from progressive leaders for declining to characterize last year’s deadly Boulder firebombing at a pro-Israel demonstration — which led to the death of an 82-year-old woman — as antisemitic in a local news interview. (In an interview with MS NOW’s Jacob Soboroff this weekend, Kiros called the firebombing “a horrific attack on a group of Jewish people that were peacefully protesting,” and called to distinguish antisemitism from anti-Zionism.)
DeGette has rarely faced a serious electoral challenge during her decades in Congress.
Gonzales vs. Hickenlooper
State Sen. Julie Gonzales, a former DSA memberis running to unseat Sen. John Hickenlooper, a 74-year-old Democrat who formerly served as Denver’s mayor and Colorado’s governor. Hickenlooper was first elected to the Senate in 2020 after a short-lived campaign for president he launched — and ended — the year before.
Gonzales, who has served in the state Senate since 2019, has centered her campaign on affordability, but has also taken a vocal stance on Israel, including by backing an arms embargo to the country. She has also taken Hickenlooper to task for voting to confirm President Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees for the departments of Agriculture and Energy and the Treasury. But Hickenlooper has cash on his side, having raised $9.8 million in the race to her approximately $870,000, per Federal Election Commission filings.
State Sen. Mark Baisley is running unopposed for the GOP nomination in the race.
A heated primary in a battleground seat
Colorado’s 8th District is widely considered one of the most competitive races in the country, as Republican Rep. Gabe Evans seeks re-election in a cycle likely to favor Democrats. On the left, a three-way race for the Democratic nomination is widely expected to come down to former state Rep. Shannon Bird and current state Rep. Manny Rutinel.
Rutinel has positioned himself as the more progressive choice of the two, though the Denver chapter of the DSA has declined to endorse his candidacy after he allegedly changed his stance on several issues, including funding for Israel, in a recent interview with the Colorado Sun. Bird — who raised about half as much as Rutinel did, per FEC filings — has a reputation as a moderate dating to her days in the statehouse. The candidates’ positions on ICE have emerged as a flash point in the race — the district they are competing to represent is 40% Latino — with both leading candidates touting their support for reforming the agency.
Other races
In the governor’s race, Sen. Michael Bennet was widely considered a shoo-in when he launched his candidacy last year. But state Attorney General Phil Weiser has run hard to Bennet’s left, touting himself as a change candidate who can carry the state in a more progressive direction than Bennet, who has a reputation as a moderate. The race has been an expensive one, with Weiser taking in roughly $6.7 million to Bennet’s $5.8 million. Four Republicans are running for the GOP nomination in the race, but Colorado has not elected a Republican governor since 1998.
In the 5th Congressional District, Democrats are hoping either Jessica Killin or Joe Reagan — both Army veterans — can knock off Republican Rep. Jeff Crank. Killin, a former chief of staff to onetime second gentleman Doug Emhoff, has vastly outraised Reaganwho narrowly lost the 2024 Democratic primary for the seat. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has backed Killin; the DSA has stayed out.
Hunter Woodall contributed to this article.
Julianne McShane is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW who also covers the politics of abortion and reproductive rights. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at jmcshane.19 or follow her on X or Bluesky.
Over the weekend, less than two weeks after Iran and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding to end hostilities, the countries exchanged multiple attacks. Iran fired at a ship crossing the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. shot at Iranian missile and drone sites, then both sides launched more strikes while claiming retaliation for the other violating the ceasefire. A meeting between the two countries was called offthough the White House now says there will be new meetings in Qatar.
This isn’t a return to full-scale war, but it isn’t peace either. It is a new phase in the conflict: the fight to control Hormuz. The United States already lost the fight Trump started; it failed to achieve his declared goal of the Iranian regime’s unconditional surrender, or, barring that, Tehran’s acceptance of stringent nuclear restrictions. Now the conflict is over whether Iran controls Hormuz and can charge fees, or if the U.S. can restore the pre-war status quo, with ships transiting freely.
The U.S.-accepted language doesn’t officially acknowledge Iranian control of Hormuz, but, if anything, it favors Tehran’s interpretation.
The two sides are making incompatible claims about the MOU’s contents. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that under the agreement, Iran has sole responsibility for the strait. Meanwhile, the Trump administration asserts that the U.S. will not allow Iran to “illegally control an international waterway.”
The MOU itself is ambiguous enough to allow for either interpretation. But that’s the problem: this core issue was never worked out. The MOU was essentially a negotiated agreement to negotiate an agreement, punting all major points of contention to future talks.
Article 5 of the MOU says “the traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start” and “Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage” but doesn’t say if those arrangements can include tolls. Beyond that, all the MOU does is require Iran to talk with Oman “to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz” while recognizing “the sovereign rights of coastal states.”
The U.S.-accepted language doesn’t officially acknowledge Iranian control of Hormuz, but, if anything, it favors Tehran’s interpretation. Professional diplomats would have demanded more specifics, including on the limits of coastal sovereignty over what has long been treated as an international waterway. But the U.S. negotiating team was led by an inexperienced vice president (JD Vance), the president’s son-in-law (Jared Kushner), and a real estate investor (Steve Witkoff). Perhaps they thought they could use the ambiguity to their advantage, or that any language was worth getting something they could call a deal. Whatever their logic, agreeing to this text set up the fight for Hormuz.
Iran is treating control of Hormuz as a spoil of a successful defensive war. After surviving the initial U.S.-Israeli assault and demonstrating that its military can block Hormuz despite U.S. efforts to prevent it, the Iranian government has consistently asserted that it will control the strait. Last month, Iran set up something called the Persian Gulf Strait Authority and told ships they’ll have to register and sign up for a mandatory insurance policy (which sounds like a euphemism for tolls).
Neither side looks interested in reigniting the high-intensity warfare that ended with a provisional ceasefire on April 8. But they’re still asserting incompatible claims over the strait.
Meanwhile, the United States is acting as if it’s still the predominant military force in the Persian Gulf, as if the war didn’t alter the regional power structure. Trump has been declaring Hormuz totally open and freeand lying that Iran agreed to it. Gulf Arab states are saying they won’t pay tolls. After the signing of the MOU, a stream of ships began exiting the Gulf via a route hugging Omanknown to be clear of Iranian mines. But the vessels are still within easy range for Iranian missiles and drones, as shown by the Iranian attack on a merchant vessel Thursday that kicked off the weekend’s exchanges of fire.
If ships can use this route without registering with the Iranian government, it will establish a corridor through Hormuz outside Iran’s control. That would effectively surrender Iran’s claims to sovereignty over the strait and erase most of Iran’s longer-term geopolitical and economic gains from the war, making this a put-up-or-shut-up moment for the Iranian regime and especially its Revolutionary Guard. That points towards further escalation.
Neither side looks interested in reigniting the high-intensity warfare that ended with a provisional ceasefire on April 8. But they’re still asserting incompatible claims over the strait, so there will likely be further military exchanges.
Maybe Iran re-establishes enough of a threat, including over the Oman corridor, that ships won’t risk transit. But that would undo the MOU, which in practical terms means economic benefits for Iran in exchange for allowing ships in and out of Hormuz. Iran is already enjoying the removal of the naval blockade the U.S. imposed in April and waivers for U.S. sanctions, thereby facilitating the sale of Iranian oil. They want other economic benefits the MOU promises, but they likely want the strategic and economic benefits of controlling Hormuz more.
And time is on Iran’s side. Disrupted shipping in the Gulf harms the global economy, and the bigger the economic damage, the more that the U.S. attacking Iran becomes a cautionary tale. For now, countries and companies are covering the oil shortfall by drawing down reserves, but reserves are running out.
Fear of a big energy market disruption, when daily oil demand increasingly exceeds available supply, was a main reason Trump surrendered to Iran in the first place. At the G7 summit on June 17, Trump said“We run out of reserves at about four weeks.” That would put the deadline in mid-July.
Maybe it’s more like August or September, but whatever the deadline, big economic problems will come if oil reserves run out and ships from the Gulf aren’t on the way bringing more. The markets did react positively when shipping began to pick up after the MOU, with oil futures dropping to around pre-war levels. But that won’t last if conditions stagnate or worsen.
Either way, Trump messed up this war so badly that the U.S. aim now is just to get back to something like the pre-war status quo. And at this point, even that looks unachievable.
Nicholas Grossman is a political science professor at the University of Illinois, editor of Arc Digital and the author of “Drones and Terrorism.”
- Alaska Supreme Court says man with same name as Sen. Dan Sullivan can be on primary ballot
- Colorado Democrats face a test of how far left the party will go
- The U.S.-Iran war just entered a new phase. Here’s what’s at stake.
- The Supreme Court defended mail-in voting. That won’t stop Trump.
- Supreme Court to rule on birthright citizenship, campaign finance and transgender athletes
- Alaska Supreme Court says man with same name as Sen. Dan Sullivan can be on primary ballot
- Capitol agenda: SAVE America swallows Washington
- RFK Jr. says Cassidy accusing him of breaking promises ‘not true’
- Key panel advances Johnson’s plan to merge SAVE America Act with NDAA
- Ramaswamy, Husted trail Democrats in Ohio poll by AARP
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words