David, what Al neglected to post was the rebuttal to that editorial. Can't blame him, since he probably only got USA Today's position on Yahoo. Anyway, here's the rebuttal:
usatoday.com
Don't blame tension on Bush
By Peter Brookes
We've botched the North Korea situation? How?
Supposedly, we blew it because President Bush named North Korea a member of the "axis of evil" in last year's State of the Union speech. As if North Korea doesn't starve and repress its people to maintain its million-man army. As if it hasn't breached four international arms-control pacts and threatened to resume producing nuclear weapons. As if it hasn't proliferated ballistic missiles to some of the world's most volatile regions, like South Asia and the Middle East. As if it doesn't run drugs and counterfeit currency.
Did any of this begin after the president's speech? Clearly not.
For that matter, what harm has come from President Bush calling it as he sees it? Has it harmed relations with South Korea? Rumors of a rift between Seoul and Washington are just that — rumors. The alliance is strong and will celebrate a half century of deterring aggression on the Korean peninsula this year. The U.S. and South Korea remain in lock step on the core issues of ensuring peace and stability on the Korean peninsula, and, despite some up-ticks in nationalism on both sides, the relationship — based on shared values of freedom, democracy and open markets — is rock solid.
And why shouldn't the United States publicly demand that North Korea honor its agreements and retrench on its nuclear program in a verifiable manner before direct negotiations? The fact that Kim Jong Il's government is violating four weapons agreements should make us wary of jumping into another one with it. Why should we assume Pyongyang can be trusted now?
No one's saying we shouldn't allow diplomacy and international pressure to run their courses before we consider a more muscular policy. We can, and we should. But we must not reward bad behavior and encourage other rogues to use blackmail and extortion to force the U.S. to negotiate. Appeasement and weakness invite provocation.
Besides, North Korea likely will pursue a nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missile program regardless of any agreement. Pyongyang seemingly wants to achieve nuclear-power status and all the prestige, notoriety and clout that go along with it. The president's decision to move ahead on missile defense is a practical part of dealing with the likes of North Korea.
And why exactly should President Bush's approach to North Korea be the same as his approach to Iraq? Yes, they are both led by regional despots who brutalize their people as they pursue weapons of mass destruction. But Saddam Hussein is an expansionist megalomaniac who wants to unite the Arab peoples of the Gulf region under his rule, while Kim Jong Il for the moment seems obsessed with regime survival.
There is no cookie-cutter approach to foreign policy. In the axis of evil, one size does not fit all — nor should it.
Peter Brookes is director of the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based public policy research institute. |
