DPRK Forum

The news has been pretty slow the last few days, Kim does not look like he is slowing down his wheeling and dealing to keep his regime intact. As we all know, regime survival is the main thing Kim wants, and while not all deals have been set in stone yet it seems to me he is well on is way to getting what he wants; for a while anyway.

Before we begin on that, Bush is warning Kim on disengagement a key tactic in his survival arsenal. If you have not read Ricahardson’s theory of disengagement, I suggest you go and read it on DPRK Studies.

North Korea agreed Oct. 3 with the U.S., South Korea, China, Japan and Russia to fully disclose all of its nuclear operations and disable its Yongbyon complex under U.S. supervision by Dec. 31, in return for economic assistance, security guarantees and normalized ties with the U.S.

That much is known, and the engagement is the goal for the talks, and while that is under heavy debate, so far, the talks seem to be working. Unfortunately, since the DPRK is so secret, there is really no way to know for certain what is going on behind closed doors. That’s what bothers me about the whole thing. North Korea is not called an intelligence black hole for nothing, and top that with an unpredictable leader, this is a very dangerous and complex game. In my mind, Kim has the upper hand because others have to rely on a “trust me” story as I said many times before. So what can one do to make Kim keep good on his promises? The agreements made the first time around made both parties wary of each other because the deals fell apart, both sides are wanting results before conceding to further action. The only thing is, North Korea can claim to be keeping the end of the bargain, but the only problem is, there is really no way to know if Kim is keeping those promises. Thus, Bush issued a warning:

“If they don’t fulfill that which they’ve said, we are now in a position to make sure that they understand that there will be consequences,” Bush told reporters in Washington yesterday.

What are the consequences? We already sent all that aid (and plan to send more). I do not think there is any way for a repo agency to go into North Korea and take it all back. So what are the alternatives? I can only think of two, and that is either going back to sanctions or if serious enough the military option (The latter is unlikely). Maybe there are other options, but what those options could be, I have no idea. Whatever the case, this is a waiting game, and the disclosure issue is really bothering me. I personally think Kim is going to keep an ace up his sleeve.

My biggest complaint is not the possible ace up Kim’s sleeve, but the very dicey terror list removal. One that is done, if it is done, in my opinion will be taking a huge risk. From what I am seeing, this is te one thing Kim is lusting for because this means the cloud will be lifted from his head. Granted, his acts of terror have not happened for many years, what scares me is what he can do after that cloud is lifted. Again, we have to rely on the trust me story once again, all the while the acts of terror against his own people continue.

As part of the six-nation agreement, North Korea will receive security guarantees and work toward establishing normal relations with the U.S. that would include its removal from the State Department’s list of sponsors of terrorism.

Designation as a state sponsor of terrorism results in U.S. sanctions, including curbs on economic aid and a ban on arms- related sales. North Korea was put on the list in 1988 after its agents were implicated a year earlier in the bombing of a South Korean passenger jet, an attack that killed 155 people.

1988 is almost 20 years ago, but I doubt those that lost loved ones are not very happy about the idea. I guess all things cannot last forever, but in my mind, once a terrorist always a terrorist. The whole thing does not sit right with me, but I suppose to keep the peace, deals with the devil have to be made. All the same, I have to agree with this statement:

Bush’s statement is probably designed to appease critics within his party and administration who oppose the agreement, said Bruce Cummings, professor of history at the University of Chicago.

“He wants to perhaps appear tough vis-? -vis North Korea with a statement like this,” Cummings, author of “North Korea: Another Country” and “The Two Koreas,” said in Seoul today.

There is not much else he or others can do, and Kim must know this very well. As I said before, the deals are not set in stone yet, and until that time, all we can do is wait.