Now you know a politician would never do that. It would make to much sense and it would make media stories way to short.
Update: North Korea is now allegedly placing machine guns along the DMZ, a violation of the 1953 accords. More info
A further Update: North Korea has expelled all nuclear inspectors from the country. This means we can no longer verify the location of their plutonium and spent fuel rods, which opens the door to their smuggling the stuff out to other nations.
This is getting very ugly, very fast.
Anyone up for a round of ‘We’ll meet again’?
Cool. This is a stunning demonstration of the correctness of our policy of scowling grimly at these evil ones. Let us increase the pressure now by placing our hands on our hips and scowling ever more grimly. Surely that will bend the dastards to our will !
Or if not, it’ll certainly drive a big-ole wedge between the U.S. and any South Koreans who happen to realize on who’s territory a second Korean war is likely to be fought.
Bribery.
I’m well aware of how craven that sounds, and don’t much care. NK’s belligerance in this situation seems out of whack, if they are under some kind of a threat, its most likely internal. Offer them food and fuel, as a humanitarian gestue. Would likely work better if it is posed by a third party, say, Sweden or Albania.
Flattery. Take them seriously in a diplomatic sense. Suggest that perhaps they have a point in the way they have interpreted the treaty, the subject is ambiguous, blah blah blah surely sane and reasonable countries can reach a blah blah etc. Again, perhaps a third country can offer arbitatration, say, China. Not Japan. Most definitely not Japan.
As a gesture of good will, and as a recognition of the soveriegnty of South Korea, being moving out our troops. Toot sweet, hustle buns, get them the hell out of harms way. Thier presence just compounds a dangerous and delicate situation. If they are attacked, all hell will break loose. (If only that were an exageration.)
If this costs money and dignity, fine. Its cheaper than blood.
D, none of the above.
An enourmous gamble the S. Koreans would probably resent us for, as well as giving N. Korea more incentive for invasion.
I can see why you may think so but:
Recent elections in SK are indicative of a certain restlessness amongst the people of SK as regards the US presence. Also, from what I read, there is considerable sense that many in SK think they could, and should, form a rapprochment with NK based on thier common “Koreaness”. So thier “resentment” is in doubt.
No reason not to take our cue from them. Begin moving out troops, under the cover of “They’re not needed, SK is a strong and sovereign blah blah blah” while affirming our “eternal bond of friendship with the people blah blah blah”. Boil that down into: we’re removing a possible irritant and won’t make any sudden moves on our own. If SK wants our help, they will have it.
It might work. Its worth a try. As a Lennonist, I say, “Give peace a chance.”
Lets consider some options:
If we resort to bribery, the North Koreans will win because they’ve gotten what they want.
If we don’t resort to bribery, and the North Koreans eventually back down anyway, they will win because they’ve demonstrated to the South Koreans that America has little concern for their security.
If we don’t resort to bribery, and end up with a new war, we have to fight the thing, plus every nation in the world gets to wonder what sort of lunatic superpower would prefer having the bad guys turn Seoul into a sea of radioactive fire than face the shame of taking a pragmatic approach to dealing with one’s enemies. The North Korean government wouldn’t win, but neither would we.
Perhaps someone else can come up with a scenario where the U.S. comes out ahead on this ?
Squink, you reminded me of this article that I recently read.
Well one scenario might be where the US gives the N. Koreans a better aid package but only if it acceps a much tougher verification regime and makes upfront gestures like handing over some of the plutonium rods. The North Koreans win because they get a better economic deal which they badly need. The US wins because it gets a more reliable agreement with less opportunity for the North Koreans to cheat.
We did this. It certainly didn’t stop them from proceeding with developing nukes.
And since they have expelled UN inspectors, we couldn’t ever be sure that they were taking the bribes, but giving nothing in return.
What would this pragmatic approach consist of? Anything besides handing over goodies and hoping they aren’t doing what we know for a fact that they are?
Anything else we should be doing? No offense, but the bribe thing has already failed.
Regards,
Shodan
So what do you propose? The Bush line seems to be to not to talk unless the N. Koreans give up their nuclear weapons upfront. What if the N. Koreans ignore the US and continue to build more bombs? What then?
Essentially, NK seems to be doing exactly what CyberPundit describes - ignoring the US (and the rest of the world) and building nukes. Pyongyang seems perfectly willing to ignore practically everything - famines, diplomatic isolation, anything they have sworn to - and go ahead with what they want.
I suspect Iraq might be made an object lesson for North Korea. If Saddam can be dealt with without a lot more international dithering about, and quick regime change or permanent disability of his ability to violate his treaty obligations, it is possible that the North Korean despot could be made somewhat more cautious.
China, as I have said before, might be persuaded that a nuclear-armed nutcase neighbor might not be the best thing in the world for them. I am not sure how much influence Beijing has with North Korea, but I can’t imagine they are stupid enough to trust that North Korean nukes will never be aimed in their direction.
If the KCIA has information, it would be best for everyone if they were willing to coordinate data-gathering with the US and the West. We need to identify all the locations where nukes are stored and held, in case Bad Things need to be made to happen in North Korea.
South Korea is, obviously, the nation with the most to lose. Japan runs second. I have no idea where the notion of re-unification stands, but if there is any scenario in which South Korea could take over, as West Germany did with East Germany, under the guise of a reunion of friends, this might be worth exploring.
What else is there? Covert assassination of the leaders? I can’t imagine the rest of North Korea is eager to die in a nuclear holocaust just because Kim is.
I imagine the best historical analogy is that of the US vs. the USSR while Stalin was still alive. You are dealing with a person with no interest in being civilized, and who might even be borderline insane. It took eighty years or more to win the Cold War. It would be naive to assume this is going to be over with no harm done in a few months.
As has been said, this is a tough situation.
Regards,
Shodan
At this point, I think the possibility is growing that the U.S. is going to wind up bombing their nuke plants.
The people advocating bribing the North Koreans seem to have missed the fact that they clearly are not trustworthy negotiators, since they violated Clinton’s agreement almost overnight.
I also think it’s amazing that people can look at George Bush, and an insane genocidal dictator like Kim Jong il, and decide that the current crisis must be Bush’s fault, because he just wasn’t nice enough to this thug. The fact is, the Bush administration has been trying to open up dialog with North Korea for a while now, and heartily supported Japan’s work with them to improve the economy.
The thing is, unstable dictators are unpredictable. This whole thing could be ‘payback’ by a madman who was enraged by having his ship stopped on the high seas with missiles in the cargo.
Kim and Saddam share a common trait - both of them seek more power, and both of them think that having their own nukes is the way to get it. North Korea doesn’t want nukes because they are afraid the U.S. will invade. They want nukes because nukes are POWER, and Kim Jong il craves power. He wants to sit at the table with the big boys. He wants to be able to demand things of South Korea instead of having to negotiate for them. He wants to be admired and feared.
But if you are going to bribe him, I recommend a pair of Elvis’s studded glasses. Kim Jong-il is an Elvis nut.
“I suspect Iraq might be made an object lesson for North Korea”
Or they might conclude that the best way to prevent a US invasion is to speed up their nuclear weapons production and have as many bombs as possible to deter the US.
You don’t offer any real solutions at all aside from working together with the other regional powers something that everyone knows is useful but that the Bush administration seems to have a remarkable problem actually achieving (it’s amazing how they have managed to alienate even the South Koreans).
So ultimately you don’t have an alternative to talks with the North Koreans and making a deal. The only issue is how to structure a deal so that North Korea doesn’t have the incentive and opportunity to break it in the future.
(free registration needed)
An interesting article in the NY Times about the administration’s latest plan of “tailored containment” of reducing economic ties to pressure the North Koreans to give up their nuclear weapons. The problem ,as some of the experts quoted in the article mention , is that countries like South Korea aren’t going to be very enthusiastic about a strategy which threatens the complete economic collapse of North Korea (which will impose a big burden on them).
I don’t know about that bombing stuff, Sam. If the plant is of the “breeder” type, that is, producing plutonium. you very very much don’t want that shit gettting loose. Depending on wind, etc. there is no way of knowing who would be at risk, including our own troops. Might not be the best path to thier hearts and minds.
I seriously doubt there is any serious plan to bomb the plants though there may be some thoughts of making threats to that effect. The stumbling block is the same it’s always been: those 11,000 artillery tubes aimed at Seoul and the hundreds of thousands of Korean civilians who could be killed by them. And if the N. Koreans really have the bomb you could be talking about a nuclear attack on Tokyo if they get sufficiently desperate.
Does NK even have an economy to collapse?