N. Korean Nukes

[onthebottom]

The US approach to North Korea has been to engage multilaterally with Japan, China, Russia and South Korea. The North Korean's desperately want unilateral contact with the US, which Bush has wisely avoided.

The path this will go down is negotiation (which will lead nowhere) and then UNSC sanctions. The US will not respond militarily unless attacked - we will view China as being responsible for North Korea as they are supporting their economy at the moment. During the last little spat with the short portly dictator China turned off their electricity for a few days (citing a flaw in the system) to warn North Korea to negotiate.

This is an opportunity for China to take a lead role in an important issue on the world stage - we will find out if China is a responsible state or not, in some small way, on how they act on this issue. If China protects North Korea from UNSC sanctions with its veto (or threat of it's veto) it will be on the wrong side of history.

I say we pull our troops out of South Korea and let China deal with this idiot - but that won't happen.

OTB

 

[Peeping Tom]

Indeed. This is the acid test for China, time to show they have grown up (or at least started down that road). It has been sixteen years since the end of the Evil Empire, which China correctly understood as failing long before the actual collapse. Thus, one wonders what benefit they derive from propping this throwback, especially in light of their desire to participate in the modern economy.

This is an opportunity for China to take a lead role in an important issue on the world stage - we will find out if China is a responsible state or not, in some small way, on how they act on this issue. If China protects North Korea from UNSC sanctions with its veto (or threat of it's veto) it will be on the wrong side of history.

It's not that simple. I have several SK colleagues and unfortunately in politics they are dumb as doorknobs, even more unfortunately they seem representative of the overall SK political landscape. On their own SK would fall to dear nutcase in short order, more appropriately had SK a basic understanding of the situation and the political resolve to proceed they would have found they had the wherewithall to make short work of it and would have done so by the mid 90's. It is afterall their problem in their own backyard.

I do agree, dear nutcase is China's idiot on life support, it is up to them to turn off the spigot.

I say we pull our troops out of South Korea and let China deal with this idiot - but that won't happen.

OTB

 

[langeweile]

The resolutions talked about inspections for WDMs and not abut having WDMs. Thus, I don't think there is any evidence to support your claim that the entire world thought he had WMDS.

If supposedly everybody knew there was no WMD's why have inspections??

 

[langeweile]

Myopia: Lack of discernment or long-range perspective in thinking or planning: “For Lorca, New York is a symbol of spiritual myopia” (Edwin Honig)



I agree. All countries are guilty of this at some point or another.



Oh come on. When it comes to natural disasters the entire world comes together for the cause. It's not about WHO get's there first. It's about helping those IN NEED.



Langeweile, I'm going to explain this to you as nicely as I possibly can. I don't have a problem with Americans (and by this I mean my issues are not with American people but their government policies) spreading freedom, democracy and safety for that matter throughout the world. I have a problem when the means you use to decide this is through national interests. Unfortunately, that is the nature of politics and governments. They are driven by self-interest. You have to realize that by doing this you alienate those who would support you and lend credence to those that hate you.

You want to be fair? Then be fair to all. You (the American Government) pulled up a “chair” at the table of World Politics. Now I'm challenging you to actually “sit in it.” You are more than entitled to walk away from it. That’s your choice and the choice of your entire nation. But I sincerely doubt that would ever happen because I understand that the U.S. has something to offer the world. They just haven’t found it yet.

Maybe I was overreacting a bit, but this anti-americanism is a touchy issue for me, sorry.

 

[someone]

If supposedly everybody knew there was no WMD's why have inspections??

Both to confirm and as a matter of principle.

 

[langeweile]

Both to confirm and as a matter of principle.

What a waste of money if everybody "knew" there wasn't any.

I believe that everybody had the same suspicion on WMD's. Those that didn't act on it, did so for selfish reasons i.e. France, Germany and China.

Now that there isn't any (or not anymore) everybody is slapping their own chest saying "see I told you so".........

 

[someone]

What a waste of money if everybody "knew" there wasn't any.

I believe that everybody had the same suspicion on WMD's. Those that didn't act on it, did so for selfish reasons i.e. France, Germany and China.

Now that there isn't any (or not anymore) everybody is slapping their own chest saying "see I told you so".........

Right after the first Gulf war there were good reasons to have inspections. Prior to the invasion, I think that the concern over inspections were more to appease the U.S. in the hope of avoiding a war. If they had been successful in this, I would say that they would have been very worth the cost. Moreover, if sanctions had been lifted, it is POSSIBLE that the Iraq economy could have improved enough to start a weapons program. Thus, I think that inspections were likely a necessary condition for removing sanctions. However, this all started when you said everyone believed that Iraq had WMDs. Although no one knew for sure, there was no real evidence that they had any. Certainly not enough to justify a war and all the damage that has done and is doing.

 

[onthebottom]

To prove my point:

OTB

N.Korea Demands Two-Way Talks, U.S. Refuses


1 hour, 39 minutes ago

By Jon Herskovitz and Steve Holland
SEOUL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – North Korea (news - web sites) demanded bilateral talks with the United States over its nuclear weapons program but Washington quickly rejected the idea on Friday and insisted Pyongyang return to six-party negotiations.

There's plenty of opportunities for North Korea to speak directly with us in the context of the six-party talks," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
North Korea said on Thursday it had acquired nuclear weapons to boost its defenses in the face of U.S. hostility and the policy of the White House to seek "regime change," and said it would not return to the multilateral talks.
A North Korean diplomat at the United Nations (news - web sites) said in an interview published on Friday: "If the United States wants to talk to us directly, it can be seen as a sign of a change in the U.S. hostile policy toward North Korea."

McClellan insisted President Bush (news - web sites) will stick to the negotiating format in which the United States, China, South Korea (news - web sites), Japan and Russia negotiate with North Korea.
The six parties have held three rounds of talks since August 2003 and the process has stalled. Countries around the globe had urged North Korea to return to talks on ending its nuclear program after it said it had nuclear weapons and pulled out of the disarmament discussions.
"All of North Korea's neighbors in the region recognize that this is a regional problem and it requires a multilateral approach for resolving it," McClellan said. "We believe the six-party talks, like North Korea's neighbors, are the way to resolve the situation."

CHALLENGE TO BUSH

The move by the North presents a major challenge to Bush, who also faces a growing crisis over Iran's nuclear ambitions, and some analysts said was a dangerous negotiating tactic.

"The assessment is that North Korea may be trying to raise its negotiating stakes," South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Lee Tae-shik was quoted as saying. "But it could turn into a very serious problem if the North takes additional steps."

McClellan said that, as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) said on Thursday, "North Korea should have no reason to believe that any nation wants to attack them, that there's a proposal on table that provides the way forward for North Korea to eliminate its nuclear weapons program and to realize better relations with the international community when they make that commitment."

While North Korea pulled out of the six-way talks, comments by the deputy chief of North Korea's mission at the United Nations appeared to leave the door open a crack to a possible resumption of negotiations.

"We'll return to the six-party talks if conditions are ripe and such a decision can be justified," South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper quoted Han Song-ryol as saying in its Internet edition on Friday. He added that direct talks would be a change in U.S. "hostile policy" toward the North.

Bush has backed a diplomatic solution to the crisis but now faces two nations he once named as part of an "axis of evil" being defiant about their nuclear programs -- North Korea and Iran. He went to war with Iraq (news - web sites), the third "axis" nation.

PYONGYANG SOLIDARITY WITH IRAN

China, South Korea and Germany joined calls from the United States and elsewhere for Pyongyang to return to the table.
In the firing line is South Korea, under constant threat from a neighbor that keeps 70 percent of its 1.2-million-strong army along a border that passes just 40 miles north of the capital, Seoul.

South Korean officials swiftly joined their U.S. counterparts in saying talks were the only solution to end the North's isolation. They said the news only confirmed what was already known about the North's nuclear ambitions.
South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon, in Washington on Thursday, said the South could not tolerate the North possessing nuclear weapons.
North Korea sent a message of solidarity to Iran late on Thursday on the 26th anniversary of the Islamic Republic to praise its success in working to defend its sovereignty, a move almost certainly intended to further enrage the United States.

Nuclear proliferation experts said North Korea had probably produced enough plutonium for as many as eight weapons but no one could say for certain if it could assemble and deliver one.

The crisis over the North's nuclear ambitions erupted in October 2002 when the United States said North Korea had acknowledged it had a secret program based on highly enriched uranium as well as a plutonium scheme that it had put on hold.

Pyongyang later denied having a uranium project. (Additional reporting by Jack Kim in Seoul)

 

[Don]

Does dear nutcase understand that now, any attempted missile test may result in NK's nuclear obliteration? What is Japan to think?

North Korea is frightened. After the collapse of the USSR, their only real powerful ally is China and they China slipping away from them as China becomes more of an economic power and wishes to strengthen it's ties w/the US, EU and Japan for trade purposes. They are alone and isolated.

North Korea is desperate. They need aid in every form and know they have very few thing to bargin with.

North Korea also feels they have no choice. Dear Leader is considered a god. When N. Korea falls (as it eventually will), he will, at best, become a common man if he's lucky. He doesn't want to lose his god-like status. He will do anything to hang on to power. And when he's going to lose it, he will have no problems going out in a blaze of glory and take his country and as much of his enemies as he can. He will not be able to deal with not being a god.

No glasnost as with the USSR here. This is not Gorby. This is very different. I have never wavered on my belief that Dear Leader and crew should have been forcibily removed long ago. As far as I could remember when I first started studying the region I saw disaster in the future unless the regime was kicked out. After '89 the only reason they are still around is because of China not wanting a US ally on it's doorstep. Damn them.

Dubya blew it big time. He was right to label them with the axis of evil. But he should have realized that they are evil #1 (if not the only evil). Going after Iraq instead of N.K. showed the Dubya and co. had other agendas (personal, economical, etc..) than what they have claimed (WMD threat). I still like Dubya and co. for playing hardball and not giving an inch to the North Koreans but IMHO he blew it.

What does Japan think? Same thing as they did when North Korea flew a missile over Japan to show that have missile that can reach Japan in 1998. That the North Koreans still plan on payback some day. Japan began development on a missile defense shield similar to the one the US is trying to do and [the which the US] being ridiculed for by everyone except Japan.

 

[Peeping Tom]

I agree with much of your post but the quoted part begs a question: just how could the US have proceeded to do so?

You must understand that removing the sultan was American policy since 1998, when Clinton signed legislation making it so. Barring a full war elsewhere, Iraq was the agenda and was treated accordingly, priority 1. Also, don't imagine that the left would support removing dear leader for as much as one second. He is one of two remaining Stalinist darlings. This point is of the utmost importance should you decide to reply to my question.

I doubt very much that the US could have fielded such a broad coalition against NK several years ago. But, now things have changed to the degree where broad coalitions aren't the answer we need.

Dubya blew it big time. He was right to label them with the axis of evil. But he should have realized that they are evil #1 (if not the only evil). Going after Iraq instead of N.K. showed the Dubya and co. had other agendas (personal, economical, etc..) than what they have claimed (WMD threat). I still like Dubya and co. for playing hardball and not giving an inch to the North Koreans but IMHO he blew it.

 

[onthebottom]

I think Bush has done exactly the right thing with NK - push the other interested parties to the table (SK, Russia, Japan and especially China) and play the heavy (like with the EU and Iran).

At the end of the day there will be crippeling sanctions unless NK gives in or China wimps out. If the latter China will come under extream preasure from the US.

Nice that Canada gets to sit another one out - can we get you girls some pom poms?

OTB

 

[danmand]

I think Bush has done exactly the right thing ...

We kind of expected you would think that.

 

[Don]

I agree with much of your post but the quoted part begs a question: just how could the US have proceeded to do so?

You're right, there was not much they could really do... esp. not with risking open hostilities w/China who, in addition to being a major military force, was becoming too valuable a trade parter.

I guess I'm just a little frustrated ...as you can tell I've have been follwing what has been going on in that region for some time.

If Bush didn't go into Iraq and go on rambling about pre-emptive strikes and ridding the world of WMD's in hostile countries and blah blah blah then I won't feel so badly about the US not doing anything since they'd be following suit with the rest of the world.

But Iraq was an easier target. But all the accusations thrown at Iraq actually really applies to North Korea. But they let them alone.

I dunno. I don't know what could have been done. I don't really blame the US administration that much. Just frustrated is all.

 

[Don]

Another reason why I'm upset at the Iraq fiasco is that the US was correct in labeling N.Korea as a dangerous regime but now that their credibility is shot it will be harder to rally people against N.Korea if they ever tried to raise the stakes.

 

[ThePunkPanther]

ha ha told yah so...

I seem to remember posting something about how the yanks should consider North Korea's little tinpot dicktator "lil kim" being more dangerous than saddam a long time ago...

it comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever that North Korea has announced officially that it has nukes. [5 years after building a few]

what do people need next? a live demonstration??

 

[Peeping Tom]

What fiasco? Iraq was a total success and on schedule.

How is US credibility "shot"? Those opposing never will give the US any credibility for any imaginable reason. Not that it matters much, since those crowds aren't much for helping in the kitchen, they prefer to sit at the table. Fortunately, the current administration's policy is to dismiss them right off the bat.

Another reason why I'm upset at the Iraq fiasco is that the US was correct in labeling N.Korea as a dangerous regime but now that their credibility is shot it will be harder to rally people against N.Korea if they ever tried to raise the stakes.

 

[Peeping Tom]

The objective danger of dear leader isn't much different now compared to say five years ago, more correctly the dangers of this brand of insanity have waned much since the fall of the evil empire. He isn't about to move a foot without being annihilated and his brand of insanity isn't about to spread throughout his region - little change since the 1950's. This is in stark contrast with the sultan, who was thwarted several times in his wars, itched to get another chance, his ideology a virulent contagion, managing to even mesmerize the greater part of old europe. For these reasons the sultan went first.

I seem to remember posting something about how the yanks should consider North Korea's little tinpot dicktator "lil kim" being more dangerous than saddam a long time ago...

The history of the Korean conflict suggests this is the only way something happens. Alternately, suggest a path whereby the US might have intervened with full support including Europe.

what do people need next? a live demonstration??

 

[onthebottom]

I'd be interested in a suggested course of action, other than the one being pursued by the Bush administration, from the disarmed Monday morning Canuks.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

I'd be interested in a suggested course of action, other than the one being pursued by the Bush administration, from the disarmed Monday morning Canuks.

OTB

What! No slivers of brilliance from all those global Canadians? LOL

OTB

 

[sizematters]

Nice that Canada gets to sit another one out - can we get you girls some pom poms?

OTB

I will applaud the next terrorist attack on US soil.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.