Right now North Korea is rapidly accelerating its production of plutonium to fuel nuclear weapons, creating a direct threat to our nearly 40,000 troops there as well as destabilizing the entire Pacific Rim. In short, the Bush administration has bullied its way to the opposite result from what it presumably wanted -- a non-nuclear North Korea.
Indeed, one of our most vital security interests is to keep North Korea from developing into a nuclear power. This was the impetus behind the Agreed Framework, negotiated in 1994 by the Clinton administration in close partnership with our Asian allies, which closed off the most likely and dangerous road to a nuclear North Korea: the development of weapons-grade plutonium. And in fact, the North Koreans kept that central part of the 1994 agreement. The framework, in turn, opened the doors to improved relations between the Koreas and even between the North and the United States.
He asks, “Did anyone in the administration really believe that Kim's reaction to that act [withholding oil shipments in retaliation for North Korea’s violation of past agreements] would be to roll over?”
Apparently, the senator believes we should roll over at the first threat from the deranged Pillsbury Dough Boy. And why shouldn’t Senator Lieberman think that? Or North Korea for that matter? Every time the North has rattled nuclear or chemical sabers, the United States has handed out the goodies. And the senator should keep in mind that North Korea actually does have nuclear weapons now (or maybe just one nuclear weapon). That, and the ability to surge produce weapons once he gets the raw materials. Such is the glorious result of our past wiser policy of negotiating and giving.
Do we have a tougher option? Don’t know. We certainly don’t have a military option that avoids the likelihood of tremendous civilian casualties and the loss of many American soldiers. But then, we didn’t even before Pyongyang got nukes.
But certainly, it is foolish to blame the current standoff on the current administration. Many presidents and Congresses from both parties have let us get to this point. We may disagree on tactics, but let’s really absorb Lieberman’s caveat that the crisis is North Korea’s fault instead of reciting it rote prior to moving on and blaming the current administration for refusing to look away from what has been going on for decades.
Oh, and a cheap shot here—isn’t the good senator “inconsistent” for supporting harsh action against Iraq but not North Korea? I believe that is the standard charge from the anti-Iraq war side when noting we do not threaten to invade North Korea [No, he is not being inconsistent, for those who have not read this all along. I consider that charge to be ridiculous]
