Although the two sides left the Hanoi Summit emptyhanded, it nonetheless set a positive tone for a possible future deal — especially if both sides give their diplomats a chance to conduct working-level negotiations, rather than expecting meetings between top leaders to resolve a host of complex issues.

It seems that North Korea and the United States both harbor misjudgments about the other’s views on denuclearization, and neither has fully prepared for the responsibilities that come with denuclearizing. All the while, the window of time for fruitful negotiations in the future is narrowing.

The Trump-Kim negotiations were cut short last week before a breakthrough agreement could be made. The United States and North Korea are not the only party with an interest in the proceedings— South Korea, China, and Russia also have stakes in peace on the Korean Peninsula.

A comparison of the U.S.’s strategic positioning before the Singapore summit and today.

It is time to adopt a broader, more comprehensive framework for assessing the results of US-North Korean diplomacy.

Why was Hanoi, Vietnam, chosen as the venue for the second Trump-Kim summit? Maybe because Trump and his advisers want to show Kim that Vietnam, a country that once fought a war with the U.S., transformed itself into a prospering economy by embracing capitalism and friendly relations with the U.S. But a clever choice of venue won’t be enough to seal the deal.

Rapidly growing and still authoritarian, Vietnam is an obviously attractive model for North Korea.

Trump’s foolish naiveté on North Korea will reverse years of American efforts.

Trump said he is in no rush to force North Korea to end its nuclear program.

What can we expect?