| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2003 9:57 am Post subject: "North Korea's gamble with the United States pays off&q |
| "North Korea's gamble with the United States pays off"
Yellow Times
Printed on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 @ 00:18:57 EST
http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=992
(PINR) -- Carefully playing its cards, North Korea may have successfully
brought the United States to the negotiating table. Angry over being
labeled as part of the "axis of evil," along with the failure of the
U.S. to live up to its energy commitments agreed to in 1994, Pyongyang
took advantage of the looming war in Iraq to complicate U.S. strategic
goals and to thrust North Korea's political and economic concerns on to
the global stage.
In 1994, in what is known as the Agreed Framework, the United States
offered to lower trade and economic barriers along with guaranteeing
that two 1,000 megawatt light water reactors (LWR) would be built in
North Korea by 2003. In exchange for the promise of the reactors, the
D.P.R.K. ended construction of its plutonium graphite-moderated nuclear
reactors. Like enriched uranium, plutonium waste can be used to make
nuclear weapons (it is much more difficult to convert LWR waste into
weapons-grade material).
But contrary to the agreement, construction of the LWRs remained far
behind schedule. In fact, before the current crisis, the first LWR was
not expected to reach completion until at least 2008, even though the
1994 agreement specified that both reactors would be built by 2003.
While North Korea's test fire of a Taepo-Dong-1 missile in 1998 delayed
construction of the reactors, it did not violate the agreement;
Secretary of State Colin Powell stated in February of 2002 that North
Korea has so far "stay[ed] within the agreement."
These delays have long upset North Korea, who worries that Washington
may be using it as a threat in order to construct a missile defense
shield. These worries turned to fear when the incoming Bush
administration labeled North Korea as being part of the "axis of evil."
In addition to the label, the Bush administration warned in its National
Security Strategy of the United States of America, released in September
of 2002, that it would "act preemptively" against "rogue states" such as
North Korea who the Bush administration accused of "developing its own
WMD arsenal."
Incidentally, after angering Pyongyang, the Bush administration -- with
its antagonistic rhetoric directed towards the North -- helped to
enflame anti-American attitudes in South Korea, where much of the
populace showed their distaste for Washington's threats by voting Roh
Moo-hyun in as president, a candidate known for his tepid views of the
United States. In fact, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center
provides more evidence for this trend: only 24 percent of South Koreans
support President Bush's "war on terrorism." Out of all the Asian
countries polled, South Korea had the largest number of people, standing
at 73 percent, who do not believe that the United States considers the
interests of other countries when engaging in foreign policy. Also,
considering that North Korea's military is in position to level Seoul in
case of any serious military conflict, the South has tried to choose
diplomacy over confrontation, setting it apart from its strategic
American ally.
This new political rift in South Korea has helped to tie the United
States' hands when dealing with North Korea. Eager to keep the focus on
Iraq, and unable to gain the support of its vital ally South Korea, the
Bush administration was coaxed to lessen their negative rhetoric toward
Pyongyang.
This was most dramatically seen in U.S. Assistant Secretary of State
James A. Kelly's meeting with South Korean officials on January 13,
2003. Kelly, in response to a reporter's question at a news conference
in Seoul, stated, "We know there are energy problems in North Korea.
Once we get beyond the nuclear problems, there may be an opportunity
with the United States, with private investors, or with other countries
to help North Korea in the energy area." Kelly's statements mark a
change in policy as previously, the Bush administration said they would
not negotiate with North Korea, who they accused of blackmailing the
United States.
Kelly's remarks should please Pyongyang, which now has the public
assurance that if they shut down their recently started reactors, the
United States will help North Korea with its energy needs. It also props
up the image of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, who will look even more
heroic to his people by standing up to the United States. But Pyongyang
cannot expect to achieve much more from their unconventional negotiating
methods.
China, arguably North Korea's largest aid donor, does not stand to gain
from North Korea's tough attempts to bring the United States back to the
negotiating table. Beijing, eager to join the world community and
increase financial investment, does not want to become a fait accomplice
in Pyongyang's orchestrated nuclear threats. This could ally both South
Korea and Japan even more closely with the United States, isolating
China.
More importantly, North Korea's tactics give justification for the Bush
administration's plans to build a missile defense shield. While the Bush
administration claims the missile defense shield will be used to counter
the North Korean threat, Beijing fears that the United States is
attempting to cage the growing Asian dragon. Along with establishing new
military bases on China's western borders, the United States already has
bases to the south and east of China, forming a half-circle around the
country. With a successful missile defense shield, much of China's
military in the Pacific would be rendered technologically useless.
Beijing's fear is fast becoming a reality, as Japan's military
establishment seems to have gained more clout in Tokyo after Pyongyang's
recent moves. The Koizumi government has already dispatched the
controversial state-of-the-art Japanese Aegis destroyer to set sail to
the Indian Ocean to assist the U.S.-led "war on terrorism." The U.S. is
discussing the implementation of the Navy Theater Wide Defense (NTWD)
system that could be installed on Aegis warships; these mobile missile
defense systems could severely weaken China's military threat and reduce
Beijing's political clout. Many of China's ballistic missiles could
become ineffective by a NTWD system.
Even more worrisome to China is the emergence of a small group in Japan
calling for the creation of nuclear weapons to protect the island
nation. Despite Japan's strong anti-war stance, embedded into the
constitution after World War II, the nuclear debate has finally entered
the political arena. In April of 2002, Japan's Liberal Party president
Ichiro Ozawa boasted that Japan could create "thousands of nuclear
warheads" very quickly should it become necessary. A nuclear Japan would
greatly minimize China's political and military power in all of Asia.
For these reasons, Beijing will be informing Pyongyang that they should
accept the recent U.S. offer for negotiations. North Korea will most
likely accept Kelly's overture. So far, Pyongyang has been careful to
reassure the world that they have "no intentions of building nuclear
weapons." But Pyongyang may become overly zealous and create a situation
from which it will have difficulty backing down. Such a situation could
redirect South Korean negative sentiment away from the United States and
toward Pyongyang. That result will not be in the best interests of Kim
Jong-il's North Korea.
Erich Marquardt drafted this report; Matthew Riemer contributed.
--
Peter Myers, 21 Blair St, Watson ACT 2602, Australia
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers ph +61 2 62475187
for removal, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line | |  | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
