| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| It's Time to Disengage with Kim Jong Il (Time magazine) |
| 2005-02-14 |
| We should be grateful that Kim Jong Il wants to spare us more rounds of the pointless six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program. They might otherwise have dragged on for years as Kim doggedly extracted all the aid and guarantees he wanted in exchange for more empty promises. The latest crisis raises hopes that the case for engagement with North Korea has finally run its course. If so, we should be glad, even though that case was initially strong. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its East European satellites were followed by the death of Kim Il Sung in 1994 and a disastrous famine in the North. Together, these factors made change seem inevitable. Pyongyang, it was hoped, would open its economy, abandon its ambitions to conquer the South, and seek a rapprochement with Seoul. U.S. President Bill Clinton tried hard to encourage such moves. But Kim realizes that if he were ever to really reform, both he and his kingdom would quickly disappear—as did similar regimes in the Soviet bloc. So Kim wants guarantees that if he takes the risks asked of him, Washington will keep the dynasty in power. In other words, while some in Washington seek regime change, Kim wants regime preservation. Especially in South Korea, there are those who think that such a deal would be the best way to reduce tensions and to wean Pyongyang off the habits of a rogue state. But the analysis is flawed. Whether or not Pyongyang really has a small or large nuclear arsenal—or is simply bluffing, like Saddam Hussein—the military calculations on the Korean peninsula will not change. With large stocks of chemical and biological weapons, together with special forces to release them in South Korea, and missiles with which to terrorize Japan or threaten U.S. bases in Asia, Kim already has all the deterrence any country could want. But the dynasty has lost whatever popular support it ever enjoyed, and the ruling family is riven by murderous internal feuds. To keep Kim in power would hence mean going against the wishes of his own people, while entrusting him with large sums of foreign aid—this despite his long record of corruption and economic incompetence. WoW! Rantburg is becoming mainstream. This could be a summary of our comments minus the ridicule, sarcasm and nukemem comments. We certainly do live in interesting times. |
| Posted by:phil_b |
| #4 -- To keep Kim in power would hence mean going against the wishes of his own people,-- Since when did Time every give a crap as to what the people want? |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2005-02-14 11:31:35 AM |
| #3 This could be a summary of our comments minus the ridicule, sarcasm and nukemem comments. Well, yes, but that's like apple pie without the ice cream. |
| Posted by: BH 2005-02-14 10:43:32 AM |
| #2 4 years late in figuring it out, duh, and they still get some key shit wrong, doh! Yep, that's Time (or [insert any MSM outfit you like here]). |
| Posted by: .com 2005-02-14 10:35:14 AM |
| #1 and a disastrous famine in the North. If it was Dubya's fault they'd have metioned it. U.S. President Bill Clinton tried hard to encourage such moves. White |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-02-14 10:30:43 AM |