We're about to see a second summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-un.

Does that make you feel better about the future in the region?

It does.

It's good that it's coming, and we look forward to that occurring and being successful.

Dialogue is better than not having it, as we saw throughout 2017.

Did it feel like we were getting close to war before the first summit?

I'd say yes. There was certainly a boundary between falling into war and deliberately driving

into war. And the big concern was what happens when we don't have communication with one another?

The potential of miscalculating one's actions as observed by the other was very high.

And that kind of thing can trigger war when you don't even want it. I don't think any of the parties wanted war at that point in time. But it required us to be in a very heightened posture, as you saw when you came over to visit, that we had to always be ready. So it felt like a misunderstanding would be all it would take to bring it to blows. Yes, I don't think it would have been a conscious decision to go to war at that point in time,

because that's not what was desired.

We certainly wanted from the U.S. and South Korean alliance perspective

to create the right kind of pressure that would bring about traction

for the diplomatic efforts that were underway at that point in time.

And indeed that happened.

But you don't know how far you have to go before that's going to occur or how North Korea

particularly would react to that as well as others in the region.

So there is diplomacy going forward at the same time even the U.S. intelligence apparatus

acknowledges that North Korea has not given up anything and retains a capability and retains a desire

to go forward with its weapons program. How do you reconcile the two? There is going to always be

debate about what the intentions of any human being will be if they have not expressly

disclosed it and demonstrated that they're going to pursue that.

...