Letters to the Editor
-
What is the real goal of the Bush Regime on the Korean Peninsula?
Could it be the same as the goal in Iran and the Mideast as a whole? That is, a US-induced instability in the region as a pretext for keeping the US military and US 'diplomacy' most directly involved? After all, if the 'Sunshine Policy' that was scuttled by the Bush Administration the day they took office succeeded in easing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, it might benefit China and Japan at the 'expense' of the US, relagating the US to a smaller role in the region vis-a-vis its 'strategic competitors.' Hmm, ditto with Iran and the Mideast, for that matter.
Better to keep tensions just below the breaking point in order to better position the US strategically and economically and at the expense of our competitors - ally and foe alike. Such would seem to the common thread in Bushonian diplomatic policy, nevermind the dangers and the risks.
Nukes are of minimal concern to the Bush cabal, but nevertheless, their favorite pretext for exercising the military option and their bullying diplomatic tactics.
So far, this unstated and underhanded strategy has proven remarkably successful. But it is an inherently dangerous game and the stakes are very high. Of course, that has never stopped them.
The Clintons' grovelling to the right never pays off. One would think that they would have figured that out by now. Nevertheless, the Clintons remain at the Bush Regime's and far right wing's service by their failure to expose their 'strategery' on the Korean Peninsula for what it is - yet another attempt at imposing US global hegemony in strategic areas of the globe through the barrel of a gun.
-
Kim...
would have developed a nuke regardless of who he was talking to. Clinton's tactics and Bush's were doomed to failure because Kim is a coniving liar.
China is backing away from sanctions? People are surprised?
Stop turing this into a Bush/Clinton fight. This is a USA Kim fight.
-
"The Land of Lousy Options"
Given the nature of the North Korean government, just about any policy designed to keep it from going nuclear was likely to fail. As I heard someone describe it, North Korea is the "Land of Lousy Options."
Clinton's Agreed Framework was never strong enough to prevent North Korea from cheating. It did however put us in a better position than we would have been without it.
In the absence of the Agreed Framework, North Korea would have had the bomb a long time ago. Indeed, the abrogation of the Agreed Framework is the only reason why North Korea has the bomb now.
The Agreed Framework froze North Korea's stockpiles of Plutonium and placed them under the control of inspectors. Plutonium is the quickest and easiest path to a nuclear weapon. Without access to his plutonium, if Kim Jong Il wanted to acquire a nuclear weapon (and he did), the only available option was through the production of enriched uranium. The production of enriched uranium is a massive and expensive industrial undertaking -- a path to a bomb that is difficult, expensive, and hard to conceal. Clinton's Agreed Framework was successful insofar as it moved North Korea off of the fast track to a nuclear weapon and onto the slow track.
If the Agreed Framework were still in place, North Korea would still be a long way from having a bomb. Indeed, when the Agreed Framework broke down (with a shove from the Bush Administration), Kim Jong Il immediately kicked out the inspectors and moved his plutonium stockpile to a place where we could never find it and went back to the production of a plutonium-based nuclear weapon. It only took him three years.
Clinton's Agreed Framework was successful in that it bought us time and the possibility that events over which we have no control would stop North Korea's march towards a nuclear state. Time isn't much but, in the Land of Lousy Options it was the best option available.
-
Re: Kim
Kim is a two-bit, isolated dictator of an impoverished regime on the brink of collapse who is desperately seeking an accomodation and normalization with the US. But The issue for the Bush regime is not really so much about the 'threat' of North Korea and its few primitive nukes or reducing tensions as it is maintaining direct US influence in the region at the expense its competitors, mainly China. Regime change in North Korea would, it is perceived by the maniacs in the White House, serve these interests. Then again, China could also try to impose their version of regime change in persuit of their own interests on the Korean peninsula, making matters more difficult for US hegemony if successful
Kim himself is a mere pawn, imminently expendable to both major players - the US and China alike. Ditto for those caught in the middle - the hapless inhabitants of North Korean and the Korean Peninsula as a whole.
-
siraluce
so Kim has no responsibilities in this mess? Do "progressives" ever think that there are bad people in the world absent some cloak and dagger scenario of the USA in the background?
Seems to me I heard a couple of prominent dems from Clinton's admin advocating bombing NK when they were doing missle tests a few months ago.
Are they secret members of the right wing conspiracy?
-
Say it ain't so Joe
I like Joe Conason and generally I agree with just about everything he writes. But what does he mean by saying Iran is well on its way to having the bomb. Factually speaking Iran is a long way from having a Nuclear weapon and claims it doesn't want one. This goes to show how spurious NeoCon claims have the ability to worm into the minds of even smart people like Joe. They want to bomb Iran and if even people like Joe buys their nutty claims they may get what they want.
-
What does this guy know
He states "the GOP has reverted to blaming...". The proper useage is "reverted back to blaming".
Poco
-
Plenty of blame
Accommodating the DPRK in the 90's was little more than a hope that they would behave rationally. It's no more to blame than any other ignorant approach. Like today where the administration believes that threats of force are the solution to everything. Neither approach ever bothered to examine the Koreans themselves and what they might or might not do. The fact is you really can't buy off or chastise states that don't have any intention of being rational actors. If anything Korea is playing its bad hand very well. The only mistake they've made is to make noise about a nuclear test before they were sure it would or did work correctly.