In the Arena

How to Deal with North Korea

We’ve seen this act before. North Korea feels dissed, or neglected, or badly in need of more oil or food, and it stages a massive diplomatic hissy fit. In the past, the rest of the world either (a) responded with empty anger or (b) capitulated, granting new concessions to the NoKos. In most cases, the response was sequential (a) then (b). The temptation now is to simply ignore the latest fit–but there is a real North Korean threat: if we don’t feed and heat them, they’ll start selling their nuclear bomb material to the highest bidder. (Of course, there’s the possibility that they’ll do that anyway–selling nuclear plans, to Syria, for example, and military hardware to Iran has been North Korea’s most valuable export.)

So what to do? Nothing dramatic in public, I would say. Work through the Chinese, for starters. It would be nice if the Chinese would quietly threaten economic pressure on the Koreans, but they are–justifiably–afraid that if you squeeze North Korea too tightly, it will collapse, sending a tidal wave of refugees across the border into China. There may be a few quiet carrots and sticks the Chinese can proffer, but the real prize would be the quiet assurance that if the NoKos rejoin the six party talks, face-to-face meetings with the US would ensue almost immediately. Obama can’t reward the hissy fit by offering the talks front-up, but if it is the Administration policy that we talk to our adversaries–and if we were talking directly to the North Koreans unofficially, via Christopher Hill, in the last Administration–it certainly stands to reason that we should start talking with them soon.

Update: This promise of an offer from Iran is interesting for the absence of the usual Great-Satan-Gonna-Getya tone, but it still  should be taken with a pinch of salt. For one thing, Ahmadinejad is running for reelection and may want to appear more reasonable to educated Iranians. For another, he still doesn’t have any control over Iran’s nuclear program or foreign policy, and we need to be sure that he’s acting with the approval of the Supreme Leader. And third, the promise of an offer isn’t an offer. I wouldn’t take this too seriously until something real is put on the table…and even then, we should assume that Iran’s purpose is to drag out the process as much as possible as their nuclear fuel is being milled. It is one thing to favor talks with Iran, as I do, it is quite another to assume the mere act of talking is going to change things much–that will only happen over time, and if the Obama Administration can get the Russians and Chinese, among others, to convince the Iranians that there’s no profit in continuing as an outlaw state.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Morning Must Reads: Haunted

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    In both this post and the one before it, the name of the country you were discussing wasn’t immediately followed by a loud BOO!!!!. For some this will be perceived as pandering and capitulation. For certain people, there is simply no escape from the demon factory.
    .
    Needless to say, I’m glad that you choose a different path.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    OR we could just hit them with lasers like Newt Gingrich wants to do. I long for the day when the MSM will call him out for the ignorant fraud that he is. For all of his supposed “ideas” I would like at least one MSM type to tell me which idea of his was ever implemented and had a good result. Seriously.

  • rustyreturns

    sgwhiteinfla Says:
    Wednesday, April 15, 2009 at 10:54 am
    …I would like at least one MSM type to tell me which idea of his was ever implemented and had a good result.
    .
    Here is a quote by then President Clinton; “President Clinton was more conciliatory: “Newt Gingrich has been a worthy adversary, leading the Republican Party to a majority in the House and joining me in a great national debate over how best to prepare America for the 21st century,” Clinton said in a statement.

    “Despite our profound differences, I appreciate those times we were able to work together in the national interest, especially Speaker Gingrich’s strong support for America’s continuing leadership for freedom, peace and prosperity in the world.”
    .
    Enjoy!!

  • somepeoplelikeit

    Joe, given “Lil Kim’s” age and obvious health issues, who or what would the principals be in a conversation about who takes over after he is dead or unable to continue?
    .
    I don’t hear that talked about much, do we know enough of the power structure there to even speculate with some credibility?

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    SG I did in fact hear last Sunday one of the MSM types do exactly that. The exact words were “Gingrich has ideas maybe not good ones but he has ideas. I was shocked by the commentary I can’t remember who said it but it was a woman.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Dee
    .
    The problem is they always say he has “ideas” without ever quantifying them. His idea for the North Korea launch was using lasers. Thats not an idea, thats the plot of a Saturday morning cartoon. Its time people started assessing them as such.

  • stuartzechman

    Joe Klein:
    .
    How reasonable.
    .
    How is it even possible for this to be controversial in any way?
    .
    Would you have said this sort of thing five or six years ago?
    .
    Wait! This is the internet…the answer is: yes, you would have.

    Why Not Kill Dictators with Kindness?
    .
    By Joe Klein Monday, Mar. 03, 2003
    .
    A wicked thought occurred to me at the time, and recurred last week, as the Bush Administration continued its foolish refusal to meet with the North Koreans: Why not do the one thing that would most discomfort, and perhaps even destabilize, the precarious regimes of the Ayatollah Khamenei, Kim Jong Il and — for that matter — Fidel Castro and Muammar Gaddafi? Why not just say, “We hereby grant you diplomatic recognition, whether you like it or not. We’re naming an ambassador. We’re lifting the embargo. We’re going to let our companies sell you all sorts of cool American things like Big Macs and Hummers. This doesn’t mean we approve of the way you run your country, but it’s silly for us to deny that you’re in charge … for now”?
    .
    The arguments against Fatal Huggery are obvious. Why encourage and legitimize evildoers? Why allow Kim Jong Il — the Michael Jackson of world leaders — to succeed with nuclear blackmail? Why reward the Iranians for their support of Hizballah? Fair points, all. But there is a problem: the current American policy of nonrecognition isn’t working, and it may well be counterproductive. “What’s the hardest job for a tin-pot dictator in the information age?” asks Joseph Nye, dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. “Keeping his people isolated from the world. Why should we be making life easier for Fidel Castro or Kim Jong Il?”
    .
    Talking to evildoers is the essence of realpolitik, and realpolitik seems in bad odor these days. Last week George W. Bush announced himself as the most exuberantly idealistic foreign policy President since Woodrow Wilson. Bush’s vision of a sudden flowering of post-Saddam Middle Eastern democracy has no historical precedent. If issued from the mouth of, say, Ted Kennedy, it would have been denounced by conservatives as fantasy. Is Fatal Hug diplomacy any more improbable than what the President has already proposed?

    After the thoroughly disastrous foreign policy blunders of the past eight years, how can it possibly be controversial in any way to suggest what you are suggesting, Joe Klein?
    .
    Does the fact that your centrist brand of politics demands that there still be an enormous media platform every Sunday morning provided for those discredited ideologues to the right of you –whom you rightly imply are “fantasy conservatives”– trouble you, Joe Klein?
    .
    As the Republican party descends ever more rightward into fantasy, shouldn’t the goal of “bi-partisanship” be second or third or hundredth behind the goal of a working foreign policy?
    .
    Doesn’t being right about North Korea for so many years –as you clearly have been– count for something, Joe Klein?

  • Cliff

    I was going to ask about the “tidal wave of refugees” thing, but then I looked it up and North Korea has 24 million people in it. So even one or two million of those could put a strain on China.

  • Cliff

    And sg – I feel that Newt’s “fire our lasers” moment should have been the point where we all agreed to stop paying any attention to him.

  • cfukara

    JK:
    ” .. hey’ll start selling their nuclear bomb material to the highest bidder. ..”

    Now, I wonder, ..
    How did Apartheid South Africa acquire its nuclear capability? [Well, we know that Israel (whose mainstream leaders and citizens hated native Palestinians) had a intimate working relationship with South Africa's Boers (who hated native Africans).]

    Now, I wonder about proliferation ..

    Does Israel have a nuclear capability? If it does, then how did Israel, essentially a pauper state, acquire a nuclear capability – a large project that calls for considerable amount of scarce resources? [Hint: Start here: Consider spies in USA and the original atomic scientists.]

    Now, I wonder about the dangers posed to the civilized world …

    If there is a mere suspicion that belligerent Israel has the nuclear bomb(s) then can the civilized world really afford to be in doubt whether a country – any country – has the nuclear bomb or not?
    What are we waiting for – the ‘suspicion’ to become a ‘mushroom cloud’?

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Joe, this part of the article on Iran seems to be a mirror of N Korea
    .

    The comments came a day after Mr. Ahmadinejad said that Iran was planning to fire a new rocket into space despite concerns in the West over Iran’s missile program.
    .
    Mr. Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that a rocket with a range of 450 to 950 miles would carry a satellite to a higher altitude in space than a previous one, the official news media reported. He did not specify when the launching would take place. Iran has also argued that it is developing rocket technology for peaceful purposes.

    .
    Not encouraging at all. I wonder if they think that because N Korea got so much attention for their “rocket test” that the same thing will happen to them. Somehow I don’t think there will just be a call for diplomatic sanctions should Iran test a “rocket”.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Off topic: Joe, I wish in your article on drug legalization last week, you’d been able to be as direct as Clive Crook is: “The country’s implacable blend of prohibition and punitive criminal justice is wrong-headed in every way: immoral in principle, since it prosecutes victimless crimes, and in practice a disaster of remarkable proportions. Yet for a US politician to suggest wholesale reform of this brainless regime is still seen as an act of reckless self-harm.”

  • pneogy

    “The temptation now is to simply ignore the latest fit–but there is a real North Korean threat: if we don’t feed and heat them, they’ll start selling their nuclear bomb material to the highest bidder.”
    .
    Our problem is not how to deal with North Korea, or Pakistan for that matter. The real problem is that we have persisted with a non-proliferation regime that hasn’t worked for decades. Until we can fix that, we will be hostages to the tantrums of every hostile power that aspires to acquire nuclear weapons.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    SG I’m with you on the laser thing but it was the first time I heard a villager say that his ideas were not good ones and the table laughed in agreement. Of course it was kind of an inside joke and it would help if they challenged his ideas more seriously.

  • strips76

    What was the point of this gibbrish of an article???
    No wonder newspapers and magazines are going belly up.

    This is the best foreign policy expert TIME can come up with??
    For everything, this guy has only one solution..Go and bend over in front of china and russia.Why would china even want to resolve this crisis after all the nonsense over taiwan..or russia with your ideas on expansion of defunct NATO..or india with your nonsense armament policy of pakistan for 60-70-80 years..

    It’s fun to see US wilt under an rookie president,honestly.And in long run it will actually be a nice thing if US just becomes another irrelevent country like canada or france and stopped poking it’s nose everywhere.

  • somepeoplelikeit

    strips: It’s fun to see US wilt under an rookie president
    .
    Yes, we should have voted for one of those “veteran” presidents that were running. Great point.
    .
    And FYI “gibbrish” is not a word. But it’s close to “gibberish” which is a word and ironically an apt description of your post.
    .
    Keep trying.

  • strips76

    Wow..looks like somebody got offended in the neverland..
    typical of ‘Don’t like the msg so attack the messenger’

    I really pity you and your fav author, since sane discussion is beyond you guys..

  • exile500

    Great, Joe, but America is now facing the most grave threat it’s ever seen, worse than Stalin, Hitler, Osama bin Laden, and Nickelback all rolled into one: pirates. By refusing to nuke Somalia, Obama is playing right into these evil-doers’ hands. Remember: they want to kill us all because they hate freedom.

  • somepeoplelikeit

    strips, I’m not offended at all. Feel free to post as you wish. But this statement: Why would china even want to resolve this crisis after all the nonsense over taiwan
    .
    The refugee issue was mentioned above, that seems like enough of a reason to participate in helping alleviate this crisis. Disagree?

  • cfukara

    exile500 Says:
    ” ..Remember: they want to kill us all because they hate freedom. ..”

    Ha.
    Lets try a ‘justification’ even tighter:
    Remember: they want to kill us all because they hate themselves.

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    JIHAD JOE SAYS…

    “…a massive diplomatic hissy fit…”

    That’s what Tehran hopes Obama will call their next ICBM too.

    What a TOOL.

    ……..

    http://ow.ly/30iC

  • spob

    “So what to do? Nothing dramatic in public, I would say. Work through the Chinese, for starters. It would be nice if the Chinese would quietly threaten economic pressure on the Koreans, but they are–justifiably–afraid that if you squeeze North Korea too tightly, it will collapse, sending a tidal wave of refugees across the border into China.”
    .
    So instead, the Chinese simply return refugees, oops, illegal economic migrants, to North Korea where they will be tortured and killed. Nice. It is simply amazing. Since when did a Time Magazine columnist become a mouthpiece for the appalling Chinese government. China created the NoKo mess, yet does nothing to do with it. And Klein thinks that the Chinese are “justifiably” scared of a refugee tidal wave. Well, maybe if the Chinese government didn’t support a government that imposes hell on earth to its citizens, then there wouldn’t be a tidal wave of refugees . . . .
    .
    What we ought to do with China is to put pressure on them to let NoKo refugees go to South Korea. We ought to emphasize China’s responsibility for creating this mess. (Remember, the Koreas would be unified if they had not attacked us in 1950.) We ought to push other nations to raise this appalling human rights issue constantly. Eventually, China will conclude that Kim Jong-il isn’t worth the aggravation.
    .
    Expecting, as Joe does, the Chinese to act with some sense of decency is a pipe dream. It is their policy to send thousands of people to be tortured (and this is real torture not f’in waterboarding) and killed. Get that right Klein.

blog comments powered by Disqus