 |
COMMENTARY Kim Jong Il easing off? Fat chance By Richard Halloran |
Let's face it, everyone: North Korea's Dear Leader, Kim Jong Il, is not going to give up his nuclear weapons, either for President Bush or Senators John McCain, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, one of whom will almost certainly be the next president of the United States.
The latest twist in wishful thinking holds that Kim has decided that he will not get what he wants from Bush, so he has instructed his negotiators to stall until the new American president takes office on Jan. 20, 2009. This notion says that the new president, challenged by Iraq, a depressed economy, and a myriad of other demanding problems, would be willing to take a softer stance on North Korea.
Consider, however, the evidence of the past week or so. The North Korean propaganda machine has "blasted" (the North Korean verb) the U.S., South Korea, Japan, the United Nations and the European Union for a wide range of perceived transgressions.
Taken together, those are not exactly words that come from a rational government willing to sit down to a serious negotiation, no matter who is president. To the contrary, they are the words of a bully who is frustrated because he does not understand who he is dealing with and cannot figure out why he cannot have his own way.
What to do? Three possibilities: Continue to muddle along, go to war or walk away.
Right now, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, who does most of the negotiating with the North Koreans, seem content to muddle along. They appear to be hoping against hope that Hill will hit on a magic formula that will persuade the North Koreans, perhaps pushed by the Chinese, to bargain realistically.
In a war with North Korea, the U.S. and South Korea would surely prevail; Operation Plan 5027 calls for driving speedily to capture Pyongyang. That would be possible because North Korea's forces have been weakened by prolonged shortages, South Korean ground forces are well-trained and armed, and the U.S. has sufficient air and sea power to dominate those aspects of the battle.
Trouble is, tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of people would die, including many South Koreans caught in the line of fire, before South Korea and the U.S. had cracked the heavily armed border (technically a demilitarized zone) that divides the peninsula and had defeated the North Koreans.
That leaves walking away, telling North Korea that there will be no peace treaty formally ending the Korean War of 1950-53, no diplomatic relations with the U.S., no lifting of economic sanctions and no trade. And any military move made against South Korean or U.S. forces would be met with overwhelming retaliation.
One last point: If and when you are ready to negotiate in good faith, here's a telephone number to call.
Richard Halloran is a Honolulu-based journalist and former New York Times correspondent in Asia. His column appears weekly in Sunday's Focus section.
