North Korea has never been potentially more dangerous than it is today, except for perhaps in 1951 on the eve of the Korean War. While mainstream media and cultural sources of expression (e.g. the movie Team America) have focused on this peril, no progress has been achieved since the first news of North Korea's renewed nuclear program in 2001. While Bush boasted about his diplomatic success with the 6-party talks (honoring the idea of multilateralism) in the 2004 Presidential campaign, his administration is reaching out with one hand, and giving the finger with the other; by issuing and uttering statements, which insult the North Korean leadership--a faux pas in diplomacy no matter how cruel or 'evil' the opponent might appear. Is it not a waste of energy to cooperate with your worst foe, if simultaneously offending it through intermediary channels?
It is therefore time to readjust the US policy and approach to this problem, as the current course seems to be steering us directly into a wall, or worse, to the edge of a gigantic waterfall. President Bush - your North Korea strategy is failing.
I have a theory behind this. It can be assumed that the current Bush administration (and his republican cohorts) sees little purpose in solving the situation, as it simply could lead to a bigger mess. The regional order, strategically, is de facto controlled by the United States. For the US to assume any changes in its posture vis-à-vis the North Korean regime, it could potentially backlash and lead to a domino effect in its position in East Asia. If the North Korean problem is optimally solved (from a Korean perspective) it would lead to the complete departure of US troops from South Korea and possibly even Japan. That would not fall well with the hawks in the pentagon/Foggy Bottom. The Bush administration would see a complete reshaping in the East Asian "hub and spokes" system in East Asia, if the Korean peninsula would become a "peaceful place" and with China as another unsolved strategic problem, the Bush administration would benefit from keeping the status quo, and not give China or Japan the upper hand in terms of power projections. That is why Bush has been to reluctant from engaging Kim Jong Il in a manner similar to Bill Clinton. Not only are Bush, Cheney and Rummy guided by strong moral codes (which ironically includes his alliance with countries like Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan), but they also like to see a US supremacy in the East Asian region.
Imagine if North Korea seizes to exists-would China not feel threatened by the powerful US military presence in East Asia? ...You see what I mean????
Now it's your turn::
2 comments:
Yoshi, I think you have a good point on this one. there is a gap between China/South Korea and Japan/USA. But one must understand South Korea's natural affection towards their sisters and brothers to the north. For Bush to hope that everyone is to follow him is absurd. Another one of those "either you're with or against us" phases from the popular president that we can only entertain ourselves with (or cry about).
In a nutshell, the US is not leading a coherent and consistant policy towards North Korea - that is what I want to emphasize. North Korea is a pain in the neck. Granted. But the US is not genuinely involved. The Chinese Ren Min Bi seems to be more important to the cowboy in the "Bai Gong."
Of course the Koreans should (and are) showing disgust with the North Korean human rights violations. but dont forget that within the last generation, South Korea has experienced its own violations against humanity with the Gwangju massacre and political imprisonment prior to the democratization reforms in the latter 80s. South Korea is thus emphasizing with the North Korean people who are caught in the crossfire between a horrendous leadership and the very aggressive American leadership.
South Korea feels threatened by the US policy towards north korea - don't forget that by the drop of a hat, North Korea can turn Seoul into a "Sea of fire".
Don Oberdorfer, a North Korean expert, now at SAIS in Washington DC, wrote an interesting article in Nautilus yesterday. He argues that the US didn't like China nor the USSR, but engaging them were still the way to go -- and in retrospect, some of the best decisions made in US Foreign Policy.
Post a Comment