Here is an admission that you probably won't hear from many television-news talking-heads and newspaper columnists these days: I don't know and I'm not sure about a lot of things, especially those that are happening in North Korea.
I don't know, for example, what illness North Korea's "Dear Leader" (or is it "Supreme Leader") Kim Jong-il is suffering from and when exactly he is going to join his dad, "Great Leader" Kim il-Sung in heaven (or hell). And I certainly don't know how old is the ailing leader's son, Kim Jong-un (it has been reported that he is the youngest among three legitimate and a few illegitimate children), although I have no reason to doubt the speculations by respected Korea Watchers that Kim il-Sung is Kim Jong-il's apparent heir.
I also admit that I'm not sure why the North Koreans launched an artillery attack on a South Korean island of Yeonpyeong on Tuesday, leaving two South Korean marines and two civilians dead, and more than a dozen wounded, or for that matter, why they decided to publicize their new uranium enrichment plant in Yongbyon which could produce fuel for making nuclear bombs.
In fact, these two most recent aggressive moves by Pyongyang seem to be just two more dramatic scenes in a North Korea Groundhog Day-like production. In March, North Koreans torpedo sank a South Korean warship the Cheonan, (according to the conclusions of international investigators, killing 46 sailors, igniting an international crisis, recalling the responses to North Korea's nuclear test in May last year which followed an earlier ballistic missile tests in April.
One thing is sure. The North Koreans know how to draw a lot of attention. But why are they doing it? Again, those who (pretend to) know speculate that some members of the political-military clique that rules the North, including members of the Kim Dynasty are apprehensive about, if not opposed to, the choice of the young and inexperienced Kim il-Sung as a successor. So perhaps Kim Jong-il is trying to secure the loyalty of the military by demonstrating that his son is not a wimp who will try to appease the Americans by giving-up the country's cherished nuclear military program?
That makes some sense; although I doubt that a military dictator like Kim Jong-il has kept alive any potential challenger to his rule in the military. More likely, the North Koreans have been misbehaving and making sure that everyone takes notice because they want, to make sure that everyone -- the South Koreans, Japan, the U.S. -- takes notice and responds to their pressure for financial assistance and food (the country's population of twenty-five million is starving) and diplomatic recognition (renewing talks with the U.S. and the rest of the international community).
In a way, if that is what the North Koreans are doing, they are acting in a somewhat rational way. Former U.S. President Richard Nixon described such behavior as the Madman Theory, explaining to his aides in 1968 that he would have to demonstrate to then North Vietnam that he had reached the point where he might "do anything" to stop the war in Vietnam. "We'll just slip the word to them that, 'For God's sake, you know Nixon is obsessed about communism," Nixon explained. "We can't restrain him when he's angry -- and he has his hand on the nuclear button.'"
But again, I'm not sure if that is what the North Koreans are trying to prove to the world -- that they are "crazy" and that unless they get what they want, they would return the Korean Peninsula back to the stone age.
What I do know is that U.S. was drawn into the Korean Peninsula during the Cold War and as part of an effort to contain the threat of Communist military aggression -- in the form of Communist China -- in Northeast Asia. Despite the fact that the Cold War ended a while ago (that I also know) U.S. military commitment that was formalized through a security agreement with South Korea and is demonstrated by the continuing presence of 37,000 U.S. troops in that country is still in place.
The main threat that is being raised as a way of justifying this U.S. military commitment and presence is that of North Korea. In particular, Pyongyang's drive to develop nuclear military capability has become the main rationale for U.S. military intervention in the Korean Peninsula. Ironically, one of the reasons that North Korea has taken the nuclear military direction has to do with legitimate concerns -- considering U.S. policies in Iraq and elsewhere -- over a possible U.S. attempt to do a "regime change" in Pyongyang.
In any case, the main threat that North Korea is posing today is to its neighbors in northeast Asia. There is the long-term concern over the economic problems, including the flow of refugees into South Korea and China that could follow the collapse of North Korean. And there is no reason why Japan and South Korea should not be worried over the rise of a nuclear North Korea.
Indeed, these worst-case-scenarios reflect what should be seen as direct threat to the core national interests of South Korea, Japan -- and China -- and not to that of the U.S. It is not difficult to imagine the U.S. response if the central government in Mexico disintegrates and/or if Chavez's Venezuela goes nuclear. But Korea is not in America's strategic backyard but in China's. A China that is trying to project itself as a responsible regional power in East Asia should be concerned that Japan and South Korea would have no other choice but to develop their nuclear military capability -- an idea that has been opposed by Washington -- in order to deter a nuclear North Korea ruled by the Kim Dynasty.
So in a way, the most effective way for the U.S. to help achieve a stable balance of power in the Korean Peninsula is not by sending more war ships to South Korea but by providing incentives to the Chinese to stop making excuses for the North Koreans -- not to mention honoring Dear Leader during his visit to Beijing -- and to start "doing something" about North Korea. Washington could help by working with Seoul and Tokyo -- and Beijing -- in drawing an outline for a timeline for a nuclear military disarmament of North Korea as part of a package deal involving economic assistance to the North as well as process of diplomatic détente with that government, including ties with Washington (and perhaps eventually the peaceful reunification of the peninsula).
There is no doubt that it is China, as Pyongyang's only regional (and global) patron, that would have to play the main role in forcing North Korea to accept such a deal. The alternative should not be an all-out war in the Korean Peninsula involving U.S. troops, but an American "green light" to Seoul and Tokyo to take all the necessary steps to protect their security -- including the nuclear military option. And while I don't know many things, I am quite sure that the prospect of Japan and South Korea going nuclear will make it more likely than not that China will finally start acting like the responsible regional power that it claims to be.
Follow Leon T. Hadar on Twitter: www.twitter.com/leonhadar
Personally I think China only cares if Taiwan would attain nukes. This is because we all know that nukes won't be used unless as the absolute last resort. I don't think China will invade South Korea or Japan anytime soon, in a military sense anyway.
The US being a hegemon does care about other country having nukes simply because it would affect the US troop presence in a region. For example, if Japan/Korea build nukes then there is less incentive for these countries to allow the US military bases. There is little need to have the US to protect these countries if nukes will protection them. Hence you see the US going out of its way not only to prevent countries like NK/Iran from getting nukes, but also stop its own allies (Japan/Taiwan, etc) from getting them.
China is yet a global hegemon, but it's strategy for dominance is also quite different than the US'. China does not station its troops all over but it uses economic incentives to attain influence. So I would think that other countries getting nukes is a smaller concern for China.
Please tell us also why the USA citizens approve of their government in the high 20's% today.
And please tell us why the USA has the highest per capita incarcertion rate in the world.... must be all those human rights we have over here.
And trying to quote the Falun Gong who failed in their attempted coup...
The reason why USA citizens disapprove of their government isn't because the government is doing a bad job, but because the poll shows that there are a diversity of viewpoints that the President can't satisfy all at once.
Yah the US has no human rights, hey you should check out the latest Human Development Index (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index#2010_report)
YOU TRY TO RULE OVER 1/4 OF THE GLOBE.
China has fragented into 5 United States or 10 Russia's or 30 United Kingdoms is a testatment that China is at least treating her gargantuan population RIGHT.
In any case, China's leaders are gutless and morally bankrupt in light of their reactions to the recent crisis. The sooner the North collapses and is folded back into the South, the better.
regards
webgurutweet
http://www.webguru-india.com/
1. Russian Probe Sees No N Korea Hand In Cheonan Sinking
http://www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?id=1328583
2. China has different view on Cheonan
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/07/116_69702.html
3. Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship sinking
""I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion," said Shin Sang-chul, a former shipbuilding executive-turned-investigative journalist. "The sailors drowned to death. Their bodies were clean. We didn't even find dead fish in the sea."
Shin, who was appointed to the joint investigative panel by the opposition Democratic Party, inspected the damaged ship with other experts April 30. He was removed from the panel shortly afterward, he says, because he had voiced a contrary opinion: that the Cheonan hit ground in the shallow water off the Korean peninsula and then damaged its hull trying to get off a reef."
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/23/world/la-fg-korea-torpedo-20100724
US created 2 Koreas, it should deal with North Korea.
South Korea's troops are on high alert as their government trades threats with North Korea following an exchange of artillery fire that raised tensions on the peninsula http://www.newslook.com/videos/268966-us-joins-south-korean-military-exercises-amid-calls-for-calm?autoplay=true
The north claims these rounds hit their territory and the retaliated.
The USA sending an Carrier battle group to the region will only incite the North Koreans more.
South Korea was conducting war games in disputed territory right on North Korea's doorstep. The US was also supposed to play those games too, but somehow, miraculously, pulled out before the bombs were flying and so was not seemingly drawn into a direct conflict. These war games, incidentally, are practice for a real war... with North Korea.
The South began firing into disputed territory. Take careful note of that point. The South fired first. The North demanded they cease. They did not. And that, Leon, is why.
These facts, curiously, were absent from initial reports. They are now known although they certainly don't make headlines like "Dear Leader Goes Completely Wacko." So they're overlooked. Especially by Obama and the White House and South Korea's President Lee.
In the end, the US doesn't want peace on the Korean Peninsula. It wants war. Both North and South are pawns in a much bigger game -- an indirect conflict with China. With the US broke while China holds all the cards bar one, the bombs, then that's the only card to play. For this the US is willing to sacrifice the South Koreans and several US troops. A small price to pay for breaking the bank that holds the debt that can't be repaid.
Enter stage left -- the USS George Washington.
The real solution? Pack up and leave the Korean Peninsula.
Too bad you will not see much of the truth coming from the western media outlets that will do everything they can to vilify North Korea and try to pull China into this provocation by South Korea.
But what would a Korean unification mean for the US?
In all likelihood it would point to the irrelevancy of a US military presence there. So what's wrong with the US leaving Korea altogether? The US has officially around 800-900 military bases all over the planet and probably several others that are not even on the radar. In a world where the annual US military budget eclipses all other nation's annual military expenses it would be fair to say that the military is supremely paramount to the US. Just as the United Kingdom was reluctant to give up its colonies, the US will not give up its bases and will do whatever is required to maintain its global military dominance.
Korea, just like Japan, Guam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Singapore, and now India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the rest of the Stans of Central Asia, the purpose of US bases in the region has been for the encirclement and containment of China. The same China to which a debt is owed that is so immensely huge it cannot be repaid.
A direct war is out of the question, China would immediately strike back. Indirect wars, however, are a US forté - Korea(pt 1) and Vietnam for example - even though they both were lost.
a) in heavy need of $$$ investment, because of impoverished North and tragedies of war.
b) irrelevance of stationing US military forces after Northern threat is eliminated (probably heavily insisted upon by China, and also agreed upon by South Korea).
c) reunified Korea is going to ask China to use some of her $2.7 trillion dollars to invest in rebuilding Korea, and give commercial incentives (aka. lucrative deals to China) which means China is going to be a massive creditor to Korea.
Either way, reunified Korea is going to pay a big sum, China is going to have Korea in her sphere of influence via literally owning the Korean economy, and US is going to retreat back to Japan, because US military presence is irrelevant after reunification.
Lee myung bak's approval numbers have been falling steadily, HE NEEDS A WAR with North korea to have any chance of winning the next election.
If US seriously about peace in the peninsula then sign a peace treaty with NK and China will do its part by building its economy.
I doubt US wants peace because if there is peace what will US do in Asia.
You have more insight into the situation than the author Leon who claims to be a foreign affairs analyst.