North Korean nuclear blackmail
UNITED NATIONS Ñ ThereÕs nothing like nuclear weapons to focus your audienceÕs attention so when North Korea Foreign Minister Choe Su Hon addressed the near somnolent late morning session of the UN General Assembly, few delegates were expecting his rhetorical admissions.
ÒThe nuclear issue is the product of the deep rooted hostile policy on the DPRK pursued by the U.S. for more than half a century, Ò Minister Choe told delegates, ÒIn other words the DPRK is left with no other option but to possess a nuclear deterrent in the face of the situation in which the present U.S. Administration, being accustomed to rejecting our system, has been attempting to eliminate the DPRK by force which designating it part of an axis of evil and a target of preemptive nuclear strikes.Ó
Choe added, ÒThe nuclear deterrent of the DPRK constitutes a legitimate self-defensive means to counter ever-growing US nuclear threats and aggression against the DPRK.Ó
Naturally North Korea made a poisoned chalice offer, ÒIf the United States renounces practically its hostile policy on the DPRK including the cessation of nuclear threats, the DPRK is willing to scrap its nuclear deterrent accordinglyÉword for word, action for action.Ó Such offers have been made in the six party multilateral talks aimed at resolving this brewing East Asian crisis.
Naturally North Korea wants Washington to offer a clear quid pro quo as a Òreward for (nuclear) freeze will be one of the confidence building measures between the DRRK and the U.S. and this is possible only when the U.S. itself rewards (us) for our freeze.Ó Blackmail would be a better word.
The Foreign Minister added menacingly, ÒIn order to further clarify our will to dismantle the nuclear deterrent, we had intended to include in our freeze no more manufacturing of nuclear weapons, and no test and transfer of them.Ó
Curiously Choe made only one mention of the Òrespected General Kim Jong IlÓ; usually such speeches methodically mention both the current leader Kim Jong-il and the late dictator Kim Il-sung with droning regularity.
While the atomic ayatollahs in Teheran claim that their suspicious nuclear programs are for peaceful purposes, not for military proliferation, Kim Jong Il-s regime in Pyongyang speaks quite clearly about a Ònuclear deterrent.Ó While one may ponder the merits of the incredibly energy rich Islamic Republic of Iran needing nuclear energy for electric power production the North Koreans remain unequivocal about their nuclear proliferation.
Only recently North Korea again threatened to turn neighboring Japan into a Òsea of fireÓ should Tokyo continue its close politico/military ties with the United States.
A little context. Just a decade ago in the wishful spirit of stopping North KoreaÕs nascent nuclear program, the Clinton Administration went ahead with an ill-advised Framework Agreement which in essence provided North Korea with its fuel requirements in exchange for Pyongyang not engaging in further proliferation. The 1994 diplomatic deal with the DPRK placed a reckless degree of trust in a rogue regime. The accord proved classic style over substance diplomacy which continues to haunt us.
Clearly the MinisterÕs words show why North KoreaÕs charter membership in the Axis of Evil is richly merited Ñ the wider issue remains how many nuclear bombs do the North Koreas really have, do they possess an effective missile delivery capability, and to what degree is this a also financial shakedown?
A decade ago the DPRK was believed to have two bombs; today they may have more. What is known is that the North Koreans deploy an increasingly capable missile capability to deliver warheads to targets Ñ most likely Japan or American bases in Japan or South Korea. Though PyongyangÕs political blackmail motive as an element to insure regime survival should not be downplayed, nor should security planners presume that the North Koreans are simply overplaying a weak military hand through rhetoric.
Washington has wisely stressed multilateral diplomacy Ñ the six party talks including South and North Korea, Japan, PeopleÕs China and Russia Ñ as a way to both engage regional states and to defuse the DPRKÕs ticking bomb. Pressures on Pyongyang from its neighbors, including PeopleÕs China are more likely to prove effective than the risky zero sum game of U.S./ North Korean negotiations.
John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense
issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.  |
