Feb 10th 2005 01:16 pm North Korea: Thrive and proliferate
OMFG NORTH KOREA HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS RUNWHILEYOUSTILLCAN. Because, come on? Who knew? Can I get a show of hands?
Let us break this shocking news, and a couple of pertinent newspaper articles, down for critical review, shall we? We begin with the New York Times (free reg. req.).
In a surprising admission, North Korea’s hard-line Communist government declared publicly…that it has nuclear weapons.
Who did this surprise? Anyone? Bueller? And yes, I understand that what is surprising is not the having of nuclear weapons, per se, but the admission that they have them, but, frankly, no it’s not. Even if we hadn’t suspected the presence of nuclear weapons already, and even if they hadn’t claimed to be restarting their nuclear arms program after withdrawing from non-proliferation accords in 2002, isn’t this kind of aggressive bluffing standard fare for North Korea’s political bargaining process?
“The absence of progress in six-party talks means they are making further progress toward their increased capability.” [John R. Bolton]
“The North Koreans should reassess this and try to end their own isolation.” [Condoleeza Rice]
Do people really believe these things? I mean, really? Let me spell out for you what is actually happening here. The absence of progress in six-party talks means that North Korea only entered into them in the first place to see what they could get out of them. Since the announcement that North Korea was nuclear-capable a couple years ago, the cycle has run roughly thus:
- [You think we have nuclear weapons? | We have nuclear weapons] (select one).
- What will you give us to not have nuclear weapons?
- Okay give thanks.
- We want more and oh by the way we still have nuclear weapons.
- Repeat.
Not a very difficult pattern to recognize or understand. But I don’t know how to deal with it, either: that is why I am not (and never will be) in policy. I do know that making patently absurd public statements to placate the American public is not really going to alter the course of current events in any significant way. Unfortunately, this seems to be our standard modus operandi in terms of complicated domestic and international affairs. Partial disclosure replaces full disclosure (if we ever had it to begin with), and is in its turn replaced by nondisclosure. It is important and good, I believe, that the world community as a whole continued (and will continue) trying to negotiate with North Korea despite setbacks and spectacular failure. It is not good to remain unaware of, or not be transparent about, the reasons for failure. Failure, by the way, is almost never a unilateral process. Blame and accusation are simplistic and irrelevant in the absence of critical self-analysis. Which, sadly, we have never had.
Regarding Rice’s gem, it is important to realize that our lackluster president did in fact refer to North Korea as part of the infamous "axis of evil." Furthermore:
…in today’s statement, Pyongyang zeroed in on Dr. Rice’s testimony last month in her Senate confirmation hearings, where she lumped North Korea with five other dictatorships, calling them “outposts of tyranny.”
Oh, come on, now you’re not even trying. So tell me, O Secretary of State: what does it mean that they should "end their own isolation," exactly? Is it any wonder people don’t want to deal with such a heavy-handed, rhetoric-obsessed, tactless administration? One of the fundamental principles of politics is that finesse and subtlety are imperative in getting What You Want from those who would rather not give it up. No one has ever shamed a belligerent government into making concessions (one need look no further than our own), yet we continue to try and, upon failing, substitute "finesse and subtlety" with "Really Big Guns." I have no reason to believe the administration’s obviously uncoordinated, capricious, and ill-advised attacks on North Korea’s reputation will accomplish anything in the large scale, except perhaps solidifying the support of its Uninformed American voter base with Shameless Propoganda in the event when we decide need to invade. Because that’s never happened before.
"…the Bush administration’s undisguised policy to isolate and stifle…"
"…brazen-faced, double-dealing tactics" of dialogue and "regime change."
Well…yeah. That’s pretty much a good summary of what we do. In fact, take out "regime change" and you have a decent description of domestic policy as well.
One addition from The Globe and Mail:
The communist state’s pronouncement dramatically raised the stakes in the two-year-old nuclear confrontation and posed a grave challenge to U.S. President George W. Bush, who started his second term with a vow to end North Korea’s nuclear program through six-nation talks.
Is this for real? I would like to raise two points here: first, how have stakes been raised if the whole world already knew? Second, no one expects Bush to actually fulfill his campaign promises anyway. Liberals know better, the international community knows a lot better, and I honestly don’t believe most conservatives care very much. He is Republican, and therefore Better. He knew about this two years ago, and only began to deal with it when it became a full-blown Issue. Once again the administration decides in favor of attacking the symptom over the root.
On the plus side, at least we disarmed Iraq. We’ll always have that to fall back on.
Posted by Kyle / politics