Maybe food or international trade sanctions lifted. No one really wants to be Cuba. Their hope is probably that they can get something in exchange for UN inspections and monitoring.

Analysis accompanying the NYT news article suggests that there's internal politics going on in North Korea among the various military, political, and security forces. One ought to be cautious about ascribing motives to what North Korea does-- most of what's going on there is invisible to us, so we end up concentrating on the few things we do see.

Do Americans really have the room to criticize others of having a childish foriegn policy? We let Israel do whatever we want, cuz they is R BFF. We attack other countries cuz they have toys we want (oil). We kill innocent people cuz they stand too close to peeps we hate.

That's fucking childish.

In my mind, any foreign leader who has ever been menaced by the United states is in dereliction of their duty when they fail to pursue nuclear weapons.

Sanctions are more or less off the table now. How the fuck can we put sanctions on a starving country willing to sell it's nuclear info? We can't. IF we did, we'd be the stupidest mother fuckers on the planet. Don't play chicken with crazy people, you won't win.

soullite nails it.

Sad to see Benen continuing to promulgate the wingnut frame on NK.

Is this what WM has been reduced to, simply regurgitating wingnut talking pts?

I wonder how hard China will now be willing to yank on Kim's leash. It seems to me that their actions are the key to any real effective response to that crazy little demi-god.

How the fuck can we put sanctions on a starving country

The sanctions have been in place for years. That's one of the reasons there is so much starvation. Clinton gave food in exchange for shutting down their nuclear program. NK cheated according to GAO. Bush decided to just give them nothing, so not surprisingly, NK accellerated their program.

so basically Kim is a republican? We're not really sure what they want except attention and 'respect' and they're willing to burn the house down to get it. Great.

I think soullite is incorrect, and is letting his aggrieved sense of injustice run away with him. There may not be many countries we are "fit" to accuse of immaturity, but North Korea is certainly one.

I'm placing 50:50 odds on Benen posting a third racist neocon post before the day is over about how the NKns are a bunch of childish wogs seeking attention.

I think soullite is incorrect, and is letting his aggrieved sense of injustice run away with him.

Ah, yes... those of us who object to Benen dumbing-down a complicated geopolitical situation into counterproductive and counterfactual ridiculous schoolyard name-calling are being irrational children just like the NKns.... Perhaps we're also being unpatriotic? And we want the terrorists to win?

The president added that North Korea's actions are "a blatant violation of international law" and a contradiction of the country's "own prior commitments." Obama concluded, "North Korea will not find security and respect through threats and illegal weapons."

"a blatant violation of international law"?!
a contradiction of the country's "own prior commitments."?!!
Is it me, or do we look like two-faced posers here? It seem as if ANY country could just as easily say this about the U.S., given our unwillingness to prosecute war criminals and torturers. A very slight alteration, and we have, "America will not find security and respect through threats and illegal actions" (e.g. unprovoked, pre-emptive wars, torture, extraordinary rendition, etc). We have no credibility, I am sorry to say, thanks to the shrub and his Dick sidekick. And Obama is not helping any. His words will mean little to the world or to NK, as we now look like nothing but tyrannical hypocrites to a large part of the world. No one is above the law, remember? Atrocities at Abu ghraib, gitmo, and Bagram didn't 'just happen'. Depleted Uranium wasn't accidentally dropped all over the people of Iraq. It wasn't a few 'bad apples' who committed the torture and humiliation... just ask General Janice Karspinski. Investigate and Prosecute! THEN you can call out other countries for their bad behavior. But till then, C'mon Obama, Get Real!

Just because one is a hypocrite doesn't mean one is wrong.

Danp,

"Clinton gave food in exchange for shutting down their nuclear program."

Yes, as a result of the 1994 'Agreed Framework', the Yongbyon nuclear reactor was shut down, the two larger nuclear reactors under construction were abandoned, all of the prior spent fuel that could have been reprocessed into weapons grade plutonium had been safely sealed and placed under 24/7 video surveillance by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspectors, all of the graphite reactors were on schedule to be dismantled as soon as the construction of the two light water reactors were completed, and NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS HAD YET BEEN CREATED.

"NK cheated according to GAO."

It was the Bushies that violated the 1994 'Agreed Framework' (which the North Koreans had abided by) when they reneged on the delivery of the heavy fuel oil that had been contractually promised to compensate North Korea for the loss of energy production from the shutdown of their nuclear powered electric generating plant.

That North Korea would go against the international community just to get attention doesn't make sense to me. If they're doing it for economic reasons that makes more sense. They wouldn't even have to point nukes at anyone, just threaten to sell to Iran while they negotiate more favorable trade agreements.

so disputo, soullite and to a lesser extent get real are out to actually give credence to the Wingnut talking point about progressives being the 'blame America first' crowd?

that has to be one of the most over-the-top displays of false equivalence i've seen in a long, long time. because the US - mainly under an entirely different administration -- failed to live up to its ideals or the ideals of international law we should now cheer NK on for violating its commitments to the UN and the multinational negotiating group? you honestly think it is a positive thing for NK to be testing nukes?

Kim is one of the truly psychologically impaired rulers on the planet. His people starve not just because of sanctions but as a form of social control - and so Kim can be the leading purchaser (and presumably consumer) of Remy Martin cognac in the world. His nuclear appetite will ultimately force SK and Japan to increase their militaries, putting the pacific rim on more of a hair trigger. And you think this is helpful how, exactly?

If the US (and presumably the entire west - and surely Russia as well) are all too corrupted to have standing to call NK out or take other steps, what exactly do you propose? Do we just let NK do whatever it wants - the ultimate penalty for those in a position of world power for their failures? Seriously - who has the simplistic, childish approach? The kind of moral clarity and purity you seem to suggest is necessary to try and maintain any sense of security in the world does not exist now, and likely wont in our lifetimes, but it is hardly a reason for anyone with the power to meaningfully act to go into ultraisolationist mode and let a few rouges destabilize the world.

It may well be that the correct answer today was simply to ignore NK and not give them the attention they seek. But that was not what the three of you argued. In the long run, inheriting the cards Obama was dealt, how does President Disputo address the NK situation? Maybe you dont think it a problem at all? (which means we probably have little to discuss as that would pretty well shoot your credibility.) And get real, i agree Obama should prosecute the Bushies, but even if he kept that on the table it would not have happened, or even likely begun by now. How far along do those have to be before we can take a role on the world stage again, and in the meantime, who does? (and who among them has made an effort to confront the Bush wrongdoing? does only Spain get to show leadership on the world stage now? you really think they can meaningfully do so?)

>you honestly think it is a positive thing for NK to be testing nukes?

I don't. But I think Western governments and Western media routinely exaggerate the danger that this poses.

The nuclear genie is out of the bottle. Isolated states with abysmal human-rights records have, and will continue to have, nuclear weapons.

It's worthwhile for us to apply carrots and sticks to slow proliferation as much as possible. But how many times can we go into crisis mode over *testing?* And has it really helped in the past?

First, take into consideration that NK has no functional economy, because everything goes into its military machine, and that machine can only function if it has a captive domestic labor force that can be exploited on a wholesale basis.

Second, realize that NK cannot protect every inch of its expansive shorelines and international borders with an army that obviously spends all its time polishing its boots and uniform buttons for mass parades at the whimsical whims of KJI. They don't have the bodies; they don't have the equipment. Period.

Third, consider that humanitarian aid on the level needed to interrupt KJI's enforced degradations upon his own civilian population, just so he can have a seat at the nuclear table, isn't all that much less in cost than to simply allow for a mass exodus from NK.

Fourth, considering that China is critically dependent upon its export capabilities, it's rather safe to say that Beijing wouldn't exactly appreciate a really big bunch of countries with domestic economic problems of their own deciding to rebuild their own industrial infrastructures to produce the myriad myriads of $tuff that they currently buy from China---thus leaving China with a couple of thousand shiny new coal-fired power plants, and no one to use the electricity.

So---Push China to get their military freak on as regards NK, and then rip NK's borders wide open. Allow as much of NK's population to leave NK that wants to, knowing that it won't really be that much more expensive to "feed and clothe and house them everywhere else, so we don't have to feed and clothe and house them in NK.

Pull enough of NK's population out of NK, and KJI won't be able to properly provide for his military. With their borders and shorelines indefensible, their soldiers and sailors and pilots will begin to defect, leaving only the rabid base behind---and that won't be enough to scrub the toilets, let alone function as a militant nuclear bully.

No one has to militarily enter NK; all that's needed is to keep KJI's army from keeping everyone else In NK.

S. Waybright, that makes a lot of sense. The big lynchpin, however, is the "push China to get its military freak on." i have to think we've encouraged this before - "we know you dont want the West in there, so why dont you go ahead and, uh, take care of it (wink wink)." for whatever reason, China seems unwilling.

The other problem in doing this without having a way to either eliminate or secure the nukes is that i dont for a second trust Kim, even if all his soldiers, sailors and pilots are defecting (and perhaps especially if that is happening) to try and go out in a blaze of glory by sending a nuke-tipped short-range missile into the DMZ or SK as a final, fatal FU.

We have a hypocritical foreign policy: nuclear, okay, for India and Israel, even though they produced their weapons sub rosa. I think no one should have these weapons. Until we give it up, as we were on the path to do before Bush wreaked the process in his administration, we cannot be so sanctimonious.

Chris S, I agree with you. I think the world would have been best served for everyone to have largely ignored his alleged orbital satellite launch that by most accounts went into the ocean. While I am not quite as certain, I suspect that would have been the best approach today as well (although at some point a large scale underground test starts to get to the line where ignoring it doesn't work). But if you talk softly through all the testing and he still keeps ratcheting it up trying to force attention, at some point it seems you have to be ready to deliver the big stick.

I prefer the carrot approach, but Kim unfortunately makes that hard: you trade a carrot for good behavior, and predictably a short while later he pops off again just to get the next carrot. there aren't many sticks that work - what is left to take away? overtime he's managed to make anyone who touches the process look weak: he collects the goodies - financial, food and energy aid; undisturbed time to develop new plans - without giving up much of substance. He still has his nuke program and everything he needs to turn it on and off at will, unilaterally.

Bush tried scorn and isolation to no avail.

Clinton tried carrots for inspections - to more stability (and visibility into what Kim was doing) than the Bush method, but the long term results were not appreciably better.

UN resolutions and sanctions, multi-national negotiations - all tried, all ultimately failed.

About the only thing that really hasn't been tried is a big stick or, as SW suggests, China taking the laboring oar on this one), and I think there is a preemptive war problem (and a legit question of whether NK is worth the stick in any event).

This is not an easy one, but failing to figure it out quickly gives less whacked out regimes a roadmap for how to use the asymmetry to a similarly frustrating result for the west (and developed east, for that matter).

Give the current N. Korean leadership diplomatic passports and a stipend, and ask them to leave. Their army will be paid by the U.N., with a joint China/S. Korea (Russian and US?) leadership. "Nation building" and eventual incorporation into S. Korea mainly funded by S. Korea with help from China and Japan. The US will fund and help clean up the current no-man's land between the two countries.

Not actually and new idea, but maybe it's time has come (sorry, to lazy to look up all the details)

To fixate on North Korea is to miss the forest for the trees. The real problem is a discriminatory and inequitable NPT (made worse since its formulation by the nuclear powers shirking their own obligations) which is bound to become increasingly ineffective as its flaws become more obvious.

Scary to see faux progressives carrying water for one of the worst criminal thugs on the planet.

So, for the crime of criticizing Benen, I get put on this blog's "do not fly" list?

Are you folks fricking serious?

so disputo, soullite and to a lesser extent get real are out to actually give credence to the Wingnut talking point about progressives being the 'blame America first' crowd?

*yawn*

Forgive me if I don't bother taking the opinion of a bloodthirsty neocon yahoo like zeitgeist who earlier argued that the US should have killed a million Koreans instead of a million Iraqis with anything but utter and complete disdain.

That Benen is attracting people who view those who argue for level-headed dispassionate peaceful solutions to conflicts as "blaming America first" is no surprise, and goes along way toward explaining why all the real progs appear to have left this blog during my yr absence.

The only thing that keeps me here is the knowledge that if the celeb bloggers masquerading as thoughtful progs don't get some push-back, they'll follow Obama off a cliff even more enthusiastically than they followed GWB off the cliff.

[Links that point towards serious discussions of the NKor situation removed due to this blog's filter.]

zeitgeist,

"Clinton tried carrots for inspections - to more stability (and visibility into what Kim was doing) than the Bush method, but the long term results were not appreciably better."

Actually, they were substantially better, by a wide margin.

As I mentioned upthread, the Yongbyon nuclear reactor was shut down, the two larger nuclear reactors under construction were abandoned, all of the prior spent fuel that could have been reprocessed into weapons grade plutonium had been safely sealed and placed under 24/7 video surveillance by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspectors, all of the graphite reactors were on schedule to be dismantled as soon as the construction of the two light water reactors were completed, and NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS HAD YET BEEN CREATED.

North Korea abided by that 1994 'Agreed Framework' signed with President Clinton for NINE YEARS, until the Bushies violated the agreement in 2003.

This comment:

[dday put it, "The North Koreans historically have sought headlines rather than peace or stability. They are the screaming baby in the corner demanding attention. It's unclear what they want after that attention is paid."]

Is way too facile. Despite being a murderous tyrant, Kim Jong Il is real smart: about 10x smarter than President Bush was in my opinion. From North Korea's (somewhat twisted) logic they have a lot to gain and little to lose from the last test. Of course, we all think they would gain more by abandoning their nukes in turn for financial and diplomatic support. However, the North Koreans probably don't agree for the following reasons:

1. They don't trust us (fair enough)
2. They want to maintain the Kim dynasty, which means maintaining a fascist dictatorship into the forseeable future, something the West would probably not accept
3. They want to use the nukes as a bargaining chip. If the North goes on a full scale nuclear expansion program we will have to deal with them eventually, and they know it
4. They don't want to be invaded. Sure, no ones has any plans to do so, but they are a paranoid bunch. They learned from our beloved ex-Pres. what happens to enemies of the U.S. who do not possess nukes
5. They want to isolate Japan. North Korea wants Japan to stop pestering them over the abductees issue, and they know that the U.S. is far more worried about nuclear proliferation.

So, is Kim Jong Il a class A jerk? No doubt. But is he a foolish cry baby? No way!

Zeitgeist,You ask How far along do those have to be before we can take a role on the world stage again, and in the meantime, who does?
Steve gives you the answer, if you would take the time to read.

China's Foreign Ministry issued a statement explaining that it was "resolutely opposed" to the test. Russia's reaction was similar, noting that North Korea's actions "seriously destabilize the situation in Northeast Asia.

Then you claim that I want to 'blame America first"!??? You are insane. Stop dropping so much acid in between posts. My God, all during the last 8 years, Bush/Cheney told us that if we disagreed with a government sponsored position or action, that we were 'blaming America'! And now YOU are on the Bush/Cheney bandwagon. Way to go Zeitgeist. What have you become, another partisan hack that screams 'unAmerican', 'Traitor!', everytime someone doesn't agree with your position, or that of the administration? . You are not the mind that I thought you were. I happen to love Obama. He is disappointing me here. But he is NOT AMERICA, HE IS A POLITICIAN. C'mon. Get Real.

There are a certain number of progressives who are so serious they will never be taken seriously.

If you can't distinguish between N. Korea and the U.S., you are just as absurd as conservatives say you are. And it's pretty pathetic, to be the object of a correct conservative critique in this day and age.

All Kim Jong-Il wants is a bailout. Geithner gave hundreds of billions to evil, crazy bankers. He can afford to give N. Korea a few tens of billions of dollars in exchange for a majority stake in N. Korea. The Fed and the US Treasury will also buy N. Korea's "toxic assets", er, "legacy assets" for a princely sum of a billion dollars per pound (of nuclear fuel). At the end of the day, of all the toxic crap acquired by the Fed, the only toxic crap they will have eager buyers is the crap they bought from N. Korea.

It's a good deal Mr. Geithner. Give the N. Koreans a few tens of billions. It is not your money anyway, is it?