-
The Biggest Fool of All
June 17, 2013 | 121 comments
-
Intervention Temptation
June 13, 2013 | 45 comments
-
Korean Déjà Vu
June 11, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Turkey Is Different
June 10, 2013 | 18 comments
-
Religion Living Dangerously
June 6, 2013 | 22 comments
Special Report
Surprise: North Korea Is Enriching Uranium!
The DPRK may have greater nuclear capabilities than previously thought.
(Page 2 of 2)
As if the international benefits weren’t obvious enough, the internal political dynamic runs strongly against genuine negotiations. With Kim Jong-il following the same “military first” policy as his father, he is an unlikely candidate for nuclear disarmament under the best of circumstances.
And the circumstances are not best, with his uncertain health and the looming leadership transition. Kim Hyun-wook, of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, recently opined: “Now that the succession is almost completed, there is a definite mood shift toward resuming the Six-Party Talks.” However, the succession is far from complete.
Kim Jong-il has anointed his youngest son as his successor, but his father spent nearly two decades preparing Kim to rule. The new dauphin will have far less time. And there are numerous potential claimants for power in Pyongyang. Kim has two other sons, a sister and brother-in-law, a half-brother, a wife, and several (it is thought) illegitimate children. There also are numerous Korean Workers Party officials and military officers who have been waiting a long time to take charge.
Given the potentially decisive role of the military in determining who will rule after Kim’s death, he is unlikely to sacrifice the armed services’ most important program with his son so far from authority. Nor are his successors likely to face down the generals, especially if the regime ends up, at least at first, with some sort of collective leadership. Appeasement of the West is not likely to be the best path to victory in any internal power struggle.
While Washington and Seoul engaging in new negotiations isn’t likely to hurt, it isn’t likely to help either. It’s hard to imagine what Presidents Obama and Lee could say to convince Kim Jong-il to toss his roughly dozen nuclear weapons, whether potential or in being, in the global trash-bin. Please show seriousness and respect and we can talk, the allies chirp. That sort of language isn’t likely to persuade Kim.
A better strategy, still with minimal likelihood of success, would be for the U.S., South Korea, and Japan to develop a full package of benefits — security, economic, diplomatic — in return for complete denuclearization backed by intrusive inspections. The three also should consider what they would offer for eliminating the North’s capability of nuclear expansion, without eliminating any existing weapons. Imperfect as this option might be, it would be a vast improvement over the status quo and has a far better (though still small) chance of acceptance than full denuclearization.
Then the allies should present the plan to the China and request Beijing’s full support. That would mean more than hortatory statements. It would mean diplomatic pressure along with the threat of supporting Western sanctions and cutting off food and energy assistance. And following through, if the DPRK resisted.
In return, the allies would promise financial assistance to the PRC in the event of a North Korean collapse, with refugees flooding across the Yalu. The U.S. and South Korea also would indicate no opposition to Chinese military activities in the North in the event of a crisis in Pyongyang. And Washington and Seoul would pledge that American military forces would leave the peninsula after any reunification: there would be no U.S. troops bordering China.
If Beijing was supportive, the table would be set for potentially useful Six-Party Talks. At least there would be no more question as to whether a better or more nuanced Western approach might win results. The North would have its offer to “join the international community,” as U.S. officials like to say. If Pyongyang said no, there would be no more excuses.
But if the Chinese government refused to support the allied effort, another form of clarity also would be achieved. Beijing would have sacrificed an important opportunity to play a positive leadership role in East Asia in order to profit from instability on the Korean peninsula. It would be a valuable lesson for all of the PRC’s neighbors.
Moreover, in the face of Chinese recalcitrance, the Obama administration should indicate that if the North continues on its present course, that the U.S. would rethink its opposition to South Korea and Japan responding accordingly. The further spread of nuclear weapons would be a bad option, but perhaps not as bad as leaving America in the position of being expected to defend its allies against an unpredictable and reckless North Korea.
And should America’s friends choose to develop arsenals also capable of hitting Beijing, well, that would not be seen as a problem in Washington. There may be worse things than Japan having nuclear weapons, such as only China possessing them, with America expected to risk Los Angeles for Tokyo.
There is no easy answer to the tragedy of North Korea. Military action risks setting off a war which would destroy Seoul, even though the allies would ultimately prevail. Economic sanctions have achieved little without Chinese support. Another round of negotiations without changed circumstances ensures more futile U.S. huffing and puffing.
Any new talks should be directed as much at Beijing as Pyongyang. It is time to share the nightmare with Chinese officials who apparently believe they can permanently benefit from the current standoff. Only when they realize that a nuclear North Korea will make them losers too is there any realistic chance of stopping the North’s nuclear program.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (25) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/22/surprise-north-korea-is-enrich
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Revenge of the Fruitcakes
- A World Turned Right Side Up
- Gerry Ford at 100
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Eric Cartman| 11.22.10 @ 6:43AM
I'm waiting. Have you come to any conclusions about my post being spam or not? Ahem. Is your moderator moonlighting as a TSA agent?
Eric Cartman| 11.22.10 @ 9:55AM
AHEM! I'm waiting for my non-spam comment to be published by your TSA Agent/Moderator. Hello! McFly!
Eric Cartman| 11.22.10 @ 12:37PM
There have always been subtle hints:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie......m_hair.jpg
coal carrier| 11.22.10 @ 7:05AM
How can this be? Obama, Biden, Clinton, Albright, Holbrooke and the rest of the progressive left assured us that talking would bring North Korea to their senses. Now they are all shocked at the latest news.
Ladies and gentlemen if we do not rid ourselves of these lightweights, our nation is doomed.
Louis Jenkins| 11.22.10 @ 8:10AM
I have previously posted about N. Korea's modernization of war waging capabilities. This is another example of the Dog Eater's underhandedness seen as justification in his own eyes. Make no mistake, N. Korea is on the track to be reckoned with, one way or another. Yes, their economy is a farce, and the peasants eat dirt to be full, but when it comes to making war the Dog Eater will not be denied. And Obama feints surprise?
Chuck| 11.22.10 @ 8:43AM
Truman should have used uranium on Pyongyang 60 years ago now Pyongyang will most certainly use it on us.
Old Soldier| 11.22.10 @ 9:44AM
This is one of those tests that Biden talked about during the 2008 election. The tests that we knew Obama will fail miserably.
Excuse my English, but Obama does not have the balls for this job.
Eric Cartman| 11.22.10 @ 12:52PM
Maybe that's what the TSA is looking for:-)
Loshooligan| 11.22.10 @ 10:04AM
Send another carrier group to the South Pacific along with anything else our Allies can help send. Then watch the Chinese get real sweaty over their personal space being invaded. China will want the US and friends out of the South Pacific as soon as possible. Force the Chinese’s hand and make them deal with North Korea. We can dangle the carrot of leaving the area once the North Korean government has been removed and North and South united.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.22.10 @ 10:09AM
My concern,
is that North Korea is so isolated that for foreign exchange it will SELL nukes to every whacko terrorist group on earth.
Those nukes can be bought with drug money or oil money.
Whew!
Loshooligan| 11.22.10 @ 10:36AM
How long will it be before Obama starts buying up the North Korean nukes like some kind of TARP program?
Neo| 11.22.10 @ 10:10AM
It will be interesting to see how Obama lays the blame for an enrichment factory, that wasn't there in April 2009, on George W. Bush, considering it was built long after Bush had retired to his ranch.
Mind you, I'm not saying he won't try.
Stan redmond| 11.22.10 @ 10:43AM
This sounds like a job for Madeline Albright [sp?] with a great big 동. 고쳐놓다; 다시 설정하다; 계량기를 영으로 돌려놓다 button (HEY, I copied and pasted this from an online translator just like Hillary Clinton use to translate "RESET" in to Russian).
Madeline should also be wearing a teddy for seducing the dear leader.
John Navratil| 11.22.10 @ 11:12AM
The vision is too horrible!
Charles Martel| 11.22.10 @ 10:11PM
Hillary's "reset" button was not only an embarrassing mistranslation: it wasn't even written in the Cyrillic alphabet. She might as well have taken a page from the Carter administration and handed her Russian counterpart something printed in Polish.
+++
ADM| 11.22.10 @ 1:05PM
Sooner or later we're going to have to disabuse wannabe nuclear states of their belief that possessing nuclear weapons offers immunity from an attack. Unfortunately, the only way to do this is to make example of a small nuclear state (e.g. North Korea) despite all the local collateral damage that will occur. We can't continue to give the impression that we'll only fight with weaker adversaries. Otherwise, the incentives for proliferation will continue to increase and states like North Korea, who need foreign capital, will simply spread the technology. Whether proliferation limits our options against these small nuclear states or not, sooner or later some of these powers are going to use nukes on one another. And, any ambiguous first-use situation has the potential to create an even bigger tragedy. In this context, we should remember that during the Cold War, despite massive intelligence operations and heavy surveillance, there was much that we didn't see in or understand about the USSR. Our intelligence services have a spotty record at best. The idea that we'd be able to manage a global environment with lots more nuclear powers is questionable at best. Better to take action now, even if it means using our nukes, than to wait for this to explode when we least want or expect it.
SpiralArchitect| 11.22.10 @ 4:06PM
The notion of USA not taking on nations with nuclear arms is not entirely true.
The stated reason for going into Iraq was WMD's
- and not just the ones used against the kurds...
Obviously, no nukes were located. Yet, the fact remains that we went into a nation that we believed ( publicly at least) possesed WMD's.
The idea of promting China to push a little bit is a nice one, if not a little risky. That is, I would hate to lose a carrier group to substanciate the claims of N. Korea's possesion of nukes.
Something must be done and, in all likely hood, the wrong thing ( including nothing) will be done - B.O's specialty. >:(
LeoInTheWoods| 11.22.10 @ 4:23PM
"Millions for defense, sir, but not one cent for tribute!"
Why should we buy off these belligerents?
Thom| 11.22.10 @ 5:05PM
The only thing surprising here is that we continued to be surprised. North Korea has been an economic basket case for about 60 years and is going to collapse any day now……
North Korea serves a useful function as a proxy for the Communist Chinese. A unified Korea with a western government and weapons systems is not on China’s wish list. Look at a map. It is not going to happen short of a change of management in China. The key to Korea is and has always been China not the puppet King in North Korea.
The North has gotten away with an act of war. Next time it will be a little more involved. These people have spent 60 years preparing for the next war and the nuclear option is primarily meant to preserve the kingdom at this point should a conventional thrust south not accomplish its goals.
We knew a lot more about Iraq in 2003 than we’ll ever know about North Korea. They’ve been burying stuff since the end of the war in 1952. We assume China and Russia haven’t been modernizing them by covert means. The Israelis got caught by vastly improved Arab forces in 1973 vs. what they had to deal with in 1967. Much about what we know about the North is what they allow us to see. Their chances of success in a convention attack are about the same as Japan had before 8:30 AM December 7th, 1941.
Nothing to worry about, they are going to collapse any day now…..
laptop_repairs_manchester | 12.3.10 @ 4:12AM
China will step in before this goes to far