I have to respectfully disagree with the Honorable Ms. Harman and Mr Person. Excerpt:
As convoluted as this may seem, North Korea's missile launch last week might just be a signal toPresident Obama — who will have more flexibility in his second term — to restart diplomacy. After all, when Obama was first campaigning for the presidency, engaging enemies was a central element of his foreign policy platform.
If this missile test was a cry for attention, then attention must be paid. Rallying the region, which has equal or greater cause for concern, is important, but bilateral diplomacy could achieve a breakthrough. The six-party framework has not been successful for one important reason: North Korea has historical grievances with each of the other five members. From the North Korean perspective, therefore, it is akin to five schoolyard bullies meeting with a former victim to persuade him to give up his one deterrent.
While it is better to jaw jaw than war war as Churchill says, we should be under no illusion that it is the north that has brought on all of these historical grievances. Sure we five can be considered the school yard bullies but the north has been very effective at dividing (but not quite conquering) in order to achieve its political goals. I know it seems silly to say that "he started it" in 1945 48 and 50 and in more than 200 assaults on the Republic of Korea since then but the fact is that there have been numerous offers of reconciliation over the years just as an example starting with the 1992 "Agreement on reconciliation, non agression and exchanges and cooperation between South and North" (entire agreement is pasted below). If we return to the diplomatic path (which I do think we should, but with realistic expectations that we can at best manage the situation and not necessarily change it because of the recalcitrance of the Kim Family Regime) then the point of departure should be an offer to the north to resume with the 1992 Agreement and move from there. My bet would be that the north would not agree to go there again.
These cries for attention supposedly made to the US are not cries for diplomacy to resolve tensions or to allow the north to become a responsible member of the international community. These cries for attention are deliberate actions to manipulate the situation as part of the regime's very real strategy of blackmail diplomacy to use provocations to gain political and economic concessions and also to use provocations (but blaming them on the ROK or US) as excuses to break agreements. The bottom-line is that we do need to deal with north Korea but we have to deal with it as it really is and not as we would wish it to be (to borrow from the Perry policy review of 1999). If we are unwilling to help the north Korean people change their regime then the best we can hope for is to manage the situation (deterring attack and preparing for collapse) until the Kim Family Regime goes away (which is of course what stands in the way of resolving the "Korea Question (para 60 of the Armistice) and implementing the 2009 ROK-US Joint Vision Statement of peaceful unification of the Korean Peninsula).
One last point as another reminder on a peace agreement and US responsibilities for establishing one which I will cut and paste from a previous message:
We should recall that the north attacked the South on June 25, 1950. The UN Security Council voted on resolutions to come to the aid of the Republic of Korea to defend it and established the UN Command with US leadership (making the US the executive agent for the UN Command). We should also recall that the signatories to the 1953 Armistice were north Korea (acting for the nKPA and the Chinese People's Volunteers) and the United Nations (represented by LTG Harrison).
|
NAM IL
|
WILLIAM K. HARRISON, JR.
|
|
___________________________________
General, Korea People's Army Senior Delegate, Delegation of the Korean People's Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers |
___________________________________
Lieutenant General, United States Army Senior Delegate, United Nations Command Delegation |
If there is to be a peace agreement we might want to begin with the recommendations of paragraph 60 in the Armistice. The countries concerned on both sides have to start with two sides that have fought this civil war – the Republic of Korea and the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea. A US –DPRK peace agreement does not solve the "Korea question."
Recommendations to the Governments Concerned on Both Sides
60. In order to insure the peaceful settlement of the Korean question, the military Commanders of both sides hereby recommend to the governments of the countries concerned on both sides that, within three (3) months after the Armistice Agreement is signed and becomes effective, a political conference of a higher level of both sides be held by representatives appointed respectively to settle through negotiation the questions of the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Korea, the peaceful settlement of the Korean question, etc.
V/R
Dave
North Korea's dangerous ambition
A nuclear-tipped missile capable of striking the West Coast of the United States may be available to it in the near future.
By Jane Harman and James Person
December 18, 2012
North Korea's first successful rocket launch is a truly dangerous development. Although the North Koreans have previously detonated two nuclear devices, until now they have not demonstrated any ability to deliver them. Weaponizing a missile is hard, but Pyongyang's close ally Iran has made great advances in miniaturizing warheads. With the combination of North Korea's nuclear bombs and Iran's technology, a nuclear-tipped missile could be capable of striking the West Coast of the United States in the near future. We can no longer afford to ignore North Korea.
It is important to ask why North Korea launched the rocket now. A look at three target audiences provides clues: the North Korean people, the South Korean people and the U.S. government.
The North Korean leadership had been promising its citizens for years that the country would become "strong and prosperous" by 2012, the 100th anniversary of founding leader Kim Il Sung's birth. This was more crucial after the very public failed missile test in April became a source of national shame. Last week's successful launch produced euphoria and intense pride and fortified the authority of Kim Jong Un one year into his reign.
The second audience is the South Korean people. From across the heavily fortified demilitarized zone between the two Koreas, the North's missile test was a ham-handed effort to interfere in the South's presidential election Wednesday. But this attempted meddling will most likely backfire. Although the two candidates have expressed their commitment to improving inter-Korean relations, North Korea has criticized Park Geun-hye, candidate of the ruling conservative New Frontier Party and daughter of former President Park Chung-hee. Pyongyang seems to be sending the message that inter-Korean relations will remain as tumultuous as they have been over the last five years if another conservative candidate is elected.
The third audience is Washington. For more than 40 years, Pyongyang has been using military adventurism to try to get our attention. This began with the seizure of the Pueblo, a U.S. naval intelligence ship, in international waters in 1968. The U.S. response was to negotiate to recover the 81 surviving crew members and, in the process, sign an apology for committing espionage. The lesson the North took from that episode was that provocative action gets attention — a message reinforced when the U.S. ignored North Korea's repeated efforts in the 1970s to replace the Korean Wararmistice with a permanent peace treaty.
As convoluted as this may seem, North Korea's missile launch last week might just be a signal toPresident Obama — who will have more flexibility in his second term — to restart diplomacy. After all, when Obama was first campaigning for the presidency, engaging enemies was a central element of his foreign policy platform.
(Continued at the link below)
No comments:
Post a Comment