1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Pyongyang Possesses Many Threats

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by Sierra Mike, Dec 29, 2002.

  1. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Read all about the numbers, stats, and experience a healthy glow of security at Pyongyang's Threats

    SM
     
  2. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Threats?

    Let's be clear about this: The reason KJ Il is trying his hand again at what the IAEA calls "nuclear brinkmanship" is because his previous threats were met with appeasement.

    When North Korea adopted a similar strategy in 1994, the Clinton Administration caved and didn't insist on Pyongyang relinquishing the stockpile of spent fuel rods that are now poised for reprocessing. Worse still, the Clintonites set a precedent of rewarding Pyongyang by striking the Agreed Framework, which offered two new nuclear reactors and free fuel oil in return for a freeze on activities at Yongbyon.

    Further asinine behavior earned North Korea more goodies. When evidence emerged that Pyongyang was cheating on its nuclear freeze, the Clinton Administration simply offered another bribe -- 600,000 tons in food aid -- to inspect one suspect site in 1999. But delays in following through allowed North Korea to clear the site before the inspectors arrived. Even during their final days in office, the Clintonites were trying to cut another deal to transfer space-launch vehicle technology in return for a freeze on missile launches.

    What remains a mystery is why anyone believed a brutal regime that systematically starves its population, diverting desperately needed food aid into sustaining the world's fifth-largest army, would keep its promises. The N K's have behaved entirely true to form, starting a secret uranium-enrichment program even while Wendy Sherman and the other architects of Clinton policy were contemplating more payoffs.

    You might have thought that those who got us into this mess would be contrite by now. But not a bit of it. Few days ago, Clinton-era officials have been popping up on television talk shows to blame the present crisis on the Bush Administration taking such a hard line on Pyongyang's nuclear cheating and to advocate a return to their failed policy. Former State Department official Joel Wit, a key coordinator of the Agreed Framework, even said on CNN that nuclear blackmail "may be a fact of life" and the best way forward is "to reach some sort of deal with North Korea."

    $#$#@! pathetic!
     
  3. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    There's no way to handle the DPRK with any degree of consistency. But I agree, bribing them into peace is a pretty ridiculous measure, and the Clinton Administration should have been more focused on it.

    Let's not forget, though, the possible participation in the decisionmaking process by the ROK and Japan. Both governments are extremely dovish, even Japan's back then when everyone feared their then-PM was actually one of the big bad ultranationalists.

    Shame on the former members of the Clinton Administration who criticize Bush for being too hard on the DPRK. I think they could be a lot harder if they wanted to; right now, all the Bush Administration has essentially said is, "This isn't a crisis; we're handling it diplomatically; if it can't be handled diplomatically, then we'll handle it another way."

    So far, the Bushies haven't used a lot of bellicose language which I can see. they're just not in a hurry to reward bad behavior.

    SM
     

Share This Page