The negotiations intended to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear arms have all but collapsed and the finger-pointing to affix blame is under way.
At the same time, the conventional wisdom says the issue has been passed to US president-elect Barack Obama to resolve after he takes office on Jan. 20. Nowhere is it carved in stone, however, that he need do so. Walking away is a realistic option.
Cutting through the diplomatic verbiage enveloping what is known as the Six Party Talks, there’s enough fault to go around:
• North Korea has no intention of giving up its nuclear program, has tested a weapon, and has indicated that it plans to test again. Pyongyang’s purpose has been to string out the negotiations to see what it could get in oil and other economic bribes.
• China, praised for hosting the talks, has done little to press North Korea. Rather, Beijing has allowed the talks to muddle along while claiming that China has little influence over North Korea. That contention from a rising power is increasingly hard to believe.
• The US has negotiated as if North Korea were governed by rational people susceptible to Western logic. Instead, the North Koreans have scorned US pledges of diplomatic recognition, economic benefits and a peace treaty to replace the truce that ended the Korean War of 1950 to 1953.
• South Korea, no matter what government is in power, has been lukewarm toward the talks because (a) a large majority believes that their North Korean cousins will not use nuclear weapons against them and (b) reunification would mean the South would inherit the North’s weapons.
• Japan, although anxious about North Korean belligerence, nuclear weapons and missiles, has been hampered by weak governments and an obsession with North Korean abductions of Japanese snatched from their homeland.
• Russia, a patron of North Korea in the days of the Soviet Union, has been trying to reestablish itself as an Asian power by cleaning up its rusting navy, promoting arms sales and fostering trade and economic aid. So far, however, that has not translated into political influence.
US President George W. Bush held out hope last week that the Six Party Talks could be revived. While flying from Iraq to Afghanistan, he told reporters: “A success of this administration is to put a framework in place that has China, the United States, and South Korea and Russia and Japan all at the table, all saying the same thing.”
The president asserted that the process of the negotiations had been reversed.
“It used to be, we will give you what you ask for and hope that you respond,” he said. “Now it is, here’s what you must do if you want our help,” adding that North Korea leader Kim Jong-il “is trying to test the process.”
Bush acknowledged, however, that the Six Party Talks are over for his administration and would be passed to Obama.
“The key,” the president said, “is to be firm and patient with a structure that will enable the next President or the next President after that to be able to solve the problem diplomatically.”
Obama has been cagey about North Korea’s nuclear weapons, perhaps to avoid responsibility before he moves into the White House. He says on his Web site, www.change.gov, that “the gravest danger to the American people is the threat of a terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon and the spread of nuclear weapons to dangerous regimes.”
Obama says his administration “will pursue tough, direct diplomacy without preconditions with all nations, friend and foe.” He pledges he “will forge a more effective framework in Asia that goes beyond bilateral agreements, occasional summits, and ad hoc arrangements, such as the six-party talks on North Korea.” No direct mention of resuming the talks.
Considering everything with which the new president must cope, such as the economy, energy, immigration, the environment, Iraq, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan, Russia, relations with the European Community and NATO, Israel and the Middle East, Canada and Mexico, and finding a new dog for his daughters, setting aside the North Korean issue might be tempting.
He could tell the North Koreans quietly that they appear not to be interested in negotiating in good faith. If they change their minds, let him know. Meantime, a threat to US forces, allies, and friends would be met with a forceful response in time, place, and method of American choosing.
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
Taiwan’s victory in the World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier12 championship is an historic achievement. Yet once again this achievement is marred by the indignity of the imposed moniker “Chinese Taipei.” The absurdity is compounded by the fact that none of the players are even from Taipei, and some, such as Paiwan catcher Giljegiljaw Kungkuan, are not even ethnically Chinese. The issue garnered attention around the Paris Olympics, yet fell off the agenda as Olympic memories retreated. “Chinese Taipei” persists, and the baseball championship serves as a reminder that fighting “Chinese Taipei” must be a continuous campaign, not merely resurfacing around international
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hypersonic missile carried a simple message to the West over Ukraine: Back off, and if you do not, Russia reserves the right to hit US and British military facilities. Russia fired a new intermediate-range hypersonic ballistic missile known as “Oreshnik,” or Hazel Tree, at Ukraine on Thursday in what Putin said was a direct response to strikes on Russia by Ukrainian forces with US and British missiles. In a special statement from the Kremlin just after 8pm in Moscow that day, the Russian president said the war was escalating toward a global conflict, although he avoided any nuclear
Would China attack Taiwan during the American lame duck period? For months, there have been worries that Beijing would seek to take advantage of an American president slowed by age and a potentially chaotic transition to make a move on Taiwan. In the wake of an American election that ended without drama, that far-fetched scenario will likely prove purely hypothetical. But there is a crisis brewing elsewhere in Asia — one with which US president-elect Donald Trump may have to deal during his first days in office. Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been at
US President-elect Donald Trump has been declaring his personnel picks for his incoming Cabinet. Many are staunchly opposed to China. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, Trump’s nomination to be his next secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security, said that since 2000, China has had a long-term plan to destroy the US. US Representative Mike Waltz, nominated by Trump to be national security adviser, has stated that the US is engaged in a cold war with China, and has criticized Canada as being weak on Beijing. Even more vocal and unequivocal than these two Cabinet picks is Trump’s nomination for
RSS