Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Democrats abroad as bad as at home.

Thanks to Gregory for providing some kind of adult supervision!

The Mighty Belgravian,Gregory Djerejian, Suzanne Nossel takes to task on the least promising idea of the new century: repeating the Clinton Administration’s diplomatic style disarmament efforts with South Korea.

« All the more so because it isn't obvious what would work better than the Administration's steadfast refusal to deal bilaterally with the North Koreans, its attempt to outsource leadership over the negotiations to China, and its position that the North Koreans need to commit to dismantling their program before any incentives are put on the table.

But when a policy on something as vital as North Korea is clearly, it is incumbent on an Administration to pursue other options.

In this case, one of the few routes conceivably open is to try to build an international consensus, probably in the form of a UN Security Council resolution, that North Korean proliferation is intolerable. That would allow us to mount an internationally credible effort to verify exactly what the North Koreans are up to.»

International consensus? Without China? Isn’t that OUTSOURCING?

Djerejian quotes Anthony Cordesman to help make his point:
«Said Cordesman: "What's the U.N. going to do? Pass a Security Council resolution saying that it's a bad idea for North Korea to proliferate? I don't want to say, 'So what?' but it's pretty close."

Indeed. Put differently, why would Kim Jong II listen to the policy pronunciamentos emiting from Turtle Bay if he's, all this long time, been giving short shrift to major regional players like Russia and China? There are other problems with Suzanne's post (aside from her use of Kerryesque soundbites about 'outsourcing' NoKo policy to Afghan warlords..wait, sorry, to China...). Suzanne, rather conveniently, doesn't deign to mention how the Clinton Administration was bamboozled by the North Koreans with the '94 Framework Agreement. Kim was only too happy to pretend to play ball, and many naifs in Democrat national security circles got all excited that progress and compliance was in the air. Diplomacy works!»
Precisely – like the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, just what is it that the PA has to offer in exchange for land? A hearty handshake and a tin of Ma’amoul for New Years’?

But it also leaves one not very hopeful about our fate if the left comes to power again - especially in the area of international relations. If it's de rigeur to be a shallow political hack who repeats shallow truisms that barely make sense at home, what is a Democrat party led state department to do abroad?

Do tell...

No comments: