As I indicated, Taiwan already HAD a nuclear program and China didn't nuke them. Once they had an active nuclear force China wouldn't have to much choice, as Taiwan has a delivery platform already and could flatten China's biggest cities.
North Korea is probably the worst regime in the world. Recently with North Koreans who've escaped from there to China, they have done some studies. People are starving. A whole generation has been stunted. The average height for a N. Korean male teen is 5'0 - 5'4(I can't remember the exact measurement.) The average height for a S. Korean male teen is 5'8". A whole generation is so malnurished there growth has been stunted. One girl who escaped said that she only got to eat a few veggies for most meals, and that she had a tiny portion of rice only about once a month. She never had tasted meat in her life. One group of people who escaped N. Korea were in their 20's but looked like they were 13. Little kids roam the streets with plastic bags filling them up with water from street puddles(these are especially gross streets) and drinking it. Prison camps are all over the place, and according to at least one former prisoner they conduct scientific experiments on people, they execute people frequently. Farmers have been ordered to abandon their food crops and plant poppies to use for drug trade. Factories have been gutted and the equipment in them sold for money. All of the money goes to equip and feed the army. They need a lot of money and euipment for that army because it numbers over 1,000,000. Of course news is all propoganda all the time. But the sad thing is that nobody knows exactly how bad it is, because they are so secretive. There is no regime more secretive.
Depends. A US acting more through multilateral organizations and less through bilateral agreements is what many governments have been clamoring for. We can do a gradual pullout starting with SK. Sign a non agreesion pact with NK. Let SK proliferate to protect themselves. This can all be done through several of the multilateral security organizations in the area with the major parties at the table. We couldn't just pack our stuff up and leave SK and Japan, but have a gradual withdrawl. Personally I think even bringing it to the table would scare the crap out of China and get them more involved pressuring NK to shut up and/or open up. The ONE thing they DON'T want is a rearmed Japan, but they're not going to nuke them either. Japan could go nuclear immediately if they chose. And they also have delivery platforms capable of striking China. Not to mention that both Taiwan and Japan have billions they could pull out of China severely hurting the PRCs growth - probably crushing their economy. Not sure why India and Pakistan would get involved (or HOW they'd get involved) in a conflict in NORTHEAST Asia.
By Ted Galen Carpenter Pyongyang Preemption Dealing with North Korea. North Korea's decision to reactivate its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon and expel International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors has created a major international crisis. Pyongyang's moves are a blatant violation of the agreement it signed in 1994 to freeze its nuclear program. They are also a violation of North Korea's commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the 1991 de-nuclearization agreement concluded with South Korea. The U.S. foreign-policy community has split into two camps about how to deal with this emerging crisis. Unfortunately, the options favored by both camps are fallacious. One faction emphasizes dialogue with Pyongyang. Former officials of the Clinton administration and most other liberals believe that Washington's highest priority should be to try to salvage the 1994 framework agreement. They recommend pursuing the same strategy embodied in the 1994 agreement: Bribe North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. But one ought to be skeptical about that approach. Given the failure of bribery in the past, there is little reason to assume that sweetening the bribe would induce Pyongyang to abide by its commitments. North Korea would likely pocket any new concessions and soon engage in a new round of cheating. The Bush administration and most of its conservative allies reject the Clintonian enthusiasm for dialogue. Administration officials state that no formal negotiations will take place until Pyongyang ends its cheating. Meanwhile, the United States is seeking help from its allies in the region to tighten economic sanctions against North Korea as a way of pressuring the communist regime to capitulate on the nuclear issue. Unfortunately, diplomatic and economic pressure probably won't work much better than bribery. Since North Korea is already one of the most economically isolated countries in the world, sanctions are unlikely to have a decisive impact on regime behavior. Moreover, the competing strategies of dialogue and economic pressure are based on the assumption that North Korea is merely using the threat of a nuclear program as a diplomatic bargaining chip. American hawks and doves both assume that the right U.S. policy will cause the North to give up its nuclear ambitions. But what if that pervasive assumption is wrong? Pyongyang's long-standing pattern of making agreements to remain non-nuclear and then systematically violating those agreements raises a disturbing possibility: Perhaps North Korea is determined to become a nuclear power and has engaged in diplomatic obfuscation to confuse or lull its adversaries. If that is the case, the United States and the countries of East Asia may have to deal with the reality of a nuclear-armed North Korea. If bribes or sanctions can't prevent that result, some extreme hawks recommend another course: Launching preemptive military strikes against North Korea's nuclear installations. It is not a new idea. Hawkish elements in the United States suggested that course prior to the 1994 agreement — and, surprisingly, the Clinton administration developed contingency plans for such attacks. But the military option would be more dangerous today than it was in 1994. There is no guarantee that the United States could identify, much less eliminate, all of the North's installations. Worse, military coercion could easily trigger a general war on the Korean Peninsula. Indeed, if U.S. and Chinese intelligence sources are correct, North Korea may already possess a small number of nuclear weapons, making a U.S. preemptive strike especially risky. Washington should consider another approach. It should inform North Korea that unless it abandons its nuclear program the United States would encourage South Korea and Japan to make their own decisions about also going nuclear. That prospect might well cause the North to reconsider. Indeed, if Pyongyang faced the likelihood of confronting nuclear adversaries in the region — and more prosperous adversaries that could easily build larger and more sophisticated arsenals — it might conclude that ending the cheating strategy and keeping the region non-nuclear would be a more productive approach. Even if it did not reach that conclusion, a nuclear balance of power in northeast Asia would likely emerge instead of a North Korean nuclear monopoly. If the United States does not pursue this strategy, it may end up with a default policy of shielding non-nuclear allies from a volatile and dangerous North Korea armed with nuclear weapons. That would be the worst of all possible outcomes.
This stuff hits home... My wife was watching some late night talk show and the host (it may have been Jimmy Kimmel) basically lumped all Koreans together and said how crazy they were. My wife (who was born in SK) got really pissed off and said that if this escalates she can see ALL Koreans getting a bad rap. She is afraid of backlash from ignorant people that don't know that South Koreans have been dealing with the North for 55+ years now.
wow what a one sided point of view.... dude India has neighborhoods like these too .... North Korea is actually doing all right for itself. i think anyone should be able to develop WMD ... who has the right to have them and who does'nt?? the u.s has the most advanced types of nuclear weapons and this technology improvement did not happen over night.... what countries believe overseas now is that by having them you will protect yourself from the U.S ... look at the latest statements out of NK.... the situation is a mess.
I know what you mean. That is the type of lumping that Muslims experience at the hands of many today.
It isn't neighborhoods in N. Korea, it's an entire gnereation. The Indians do not have this current generation stunted in their growth because of mal nurishment. Except for those in the army, or the party of the dear leader they are starving. It isn't the case that in India the average teen is about a half a foot in height shorter than the average teen in Pakistan because of mal-nutrition. N. Korea aside from those in the party, or military is most definitely not doing alright for itself. It is one reason why S. Korea and China aren't as worried about N.Korea attacking as they are the govt. collapsing. They don't a flood of starving, uneducated refugees streaming across their borders placing that kind of strain on their ecnomy. N. Korea, S. Korea, and China, all want the U.S. to give it food and fuel first, before it starts working on dismantling it's nuke program. I've mentioned S. Korea, and China's rationale for this. N. Korea wouldn't be asking for that if they were doing alright for itself. N. Korea's country is so mountainous that it can't now, nor probably will it ever be able to produce enough food to sustain itself. It needs help from the outside. International food agencies used to make deliveries to N. Korea(again they don't do this if the country is doing alright for itself) but they stopped because the govt. was taking all the food shipments for itself and the military. It isn't getting to the starving people. You are wrong when you say that a nation who has an entire generation of its people malnurished and stunted in growth is doing alright for itself. And despite the class seperation and horrific conditions for some in India, they aren't being sent to prison camps, executed daily, or being used as human guinea pigs in scientific experiments. Comparing N. Korea to India isn't even close. India does, however, have many problems, but they aren't on the same scale as N. Korea. As for countries developing WMD, I kind of agree that the only sure way for a nation to protect itself against American aggression is by having nukes. That isn't the problem here. The N. Korean govt. itself has a stated goal of reunification with S. Korea, and has stated that the main obstacle to that reunification is the U.S. forces there. They have as a goal taking over S. Korea. However, the problems with N. Korea go far beyond it having nukes. It is the most authoritarian govt. in the world. They are also amongst the largest sellers of missle systems and they do business with nations like Iran etc. While I agree that nations need a nuke to insure that the U.S. won't invade it, that is a seperate issue to me. To me the issue is the horrid conditions tyranny and dictatorship that rules N. Korea. It is unbelievable that anyone would try and claim that N. Korea is doing alright for itself.
N Korea really really really sucks. I am sure glad China isn't just feeding that entire country like it used to do in the 70's, total waste of good food and money.
Its very chic to say everyone wants nukes to protect itself from the US, but the drive for nukes far predates the current US administration.
Well that may be true Hayes. But I don't recall any other president threatening other countires with war if they don't "get in line." "Either with us, or against us." "Bring em on!"
You are so right on this one. It's funny that some posters here think they know so much about Southeast Asia's political climate. It would totally crumble the stablility in that region if Japan had nukes. If anyone thinks China would be the only one getting a bit uncomfortable with that, go ask South Korea, go ask Phillippines. They hate Japan more than China does to some extent because of what happened in WWII. Back in WWII, Japan was the only country in the world that had guts to attack US pre-emptively. Japan is quite a nationalistic country. Currently, their extreme right wing groups are gaining momentum. Like you said, USA's gotta be able to keep Japan under control. I cant' imagine what would happen if a bunch of crazy Japanese nationalists got their hands on nukes. NK is, ummm. a pain in the ass. Could we somehow get Kim Jong ILL asssassinated.
Why would want to help a population that has been brainwashed by an evil dictator? It's totally their fault, right? A population that is so desperate for food for their families that they will risk public execution (that is of course mandatory viewing for school children) to try and steal discarded potato skins? Your comment is the definition of ignorance. Ever been to North Korea? I doubt it. I know people that have. You know what the wierdest part for them was? Walking in the open country and not only not seeing any wild animals, but not hearing anything either. No birds chirping or singing or flying around. No squirrels, no rabbits, not even frogs or crickets. DEAD SILENCE. Why? Because all the animals had either been eaten or had died out because of a fundamental breakdown in the food chain. While it is true that the government steals nearly all food aid to feed the military first, it doesn't mean that aid should just stop. Try practicing a little compassion.
Granted. I'm just saying that the theory that countries are driving for nukes because they are scared of us is so simplistic as to be useless.
The funny part is the Korea and Japan are in NORTHEAST Asia, not Southeast Asia. In fact, even China is generally not considered part of Southeast Asia. And your post seems to be quite at odds with Dr Q's. He says China won't care about a nuclear Japan. You say it will crumble regional stability.
You're pinning it on one giant bluff that China could call. At the first sign of Taiwan and Japan pulling out economically, China would seize material assets. It would devastate Taiwan and Japan as well if they followed through on their threats. Would China allow Japan to declare nuclear capacity? I'd probably see them going to the world body in the same fashion as the US with Iran. They'd emphasize immediate preemption. Their aims wouldn't be much against disarming Japan, Japan might already have a hidden cache, but rather to weaken world consensus when they start nuking Japan. China won't nuke Taiwan initially, but they'd be in the process of a gearing up full scale conflict. I'm not sure if you're calling for the US military to pull out of the South China Sea as well. Ultimately, you're giving up the keys to the NPT and creating ad hoc containment standards. China would probably accelerate its military support with nations like Iran and Venezuela. They would desperately find the next Cuba. Just a worst case scenario. They would be involved in their own conflict should the first one happens. China's influence on Pakistan, American alliance with Pakistan, the bargaining chip of nuclear deployment, and the increased economic growth of India would be affected if NE Asian war happens. It'd be like the Santa Ana winds drying out vegetation, needing only a spark to cause a wild fire.
So does U.S. aggression. It goes back to at least Ronnie's administration. It has just been stepped up to unprecedented proportions under this administration.
