Washington Post: U.S., N. Korea Drifting Toward War, Perry Warns

[DemBones DemBones]

Former Defense Secretary Says Standoff Increases Risk of Terrorists Obtaining Nuclear Device

This article was discussed on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" this morning.

"Former defense secretary William Perry warned that the United States and North Korea are drifting toward war, perhaps as early as this year, in an increasingly dangerous standoff that also could result in terrorists being able to purchase a North Korean nuclear device and plant it in a U.S. city.

"I think we are losing control" of the situation, said Perry, who believes North Korea soon will have enough nuclear warheads to begin exploding them in tests and exporting them to terrorists and other U.S. adversaries. "The nuclear program now underway in North Korea poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in American cities," he said in an interview."

<snip>

"Perry is the most prominent member of a growing number of national security experts and Korea specialists who are expressing deep concern about the direction of U.S. policy toward Pyongyang. As President Bill Clinton's defense secretary, he oversaw preparation for airstrikes on North Korean nuclear facilities in 1994, an attack that was never carried out. He has remained deeply involved in Korean policy issues and is widely respected in national security circles, especially among senior military officers. They credit him with playing a key role in developing the U.S. high-tech arsenal of cruise missiles and stealth aircraft and also with righting the Pentagon after the short, turbulent term of Les Aspin, Clinton's first defense chief."

<snip>

MUCH MORE TO THE ARTICLE, including opinions from other experts on North Korea, at

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56019-2003Jul14.html?nav=hptoc_w


THIS PARAGRAPH CONCERNED ME GREATLY:

"From his discussions, Perry has concluded the president simply won't enter into genuine talks with Pyongyang's Stalinist government. "My theory is the reason we don't have a policy on this, and we aren't negotiating, is the president himself," Perry said. "I think he has come to the conclusion that Kim Jong Il is evil and loathsome and it is immoral to negotiate with him."

[MaineDem]

1. Is this the diversion?

I'm sure there'll be one.

On the other hand I'm really really frightened by what the dim son can do.

[DemBones DemBones]

2. No, I think this is a real crisis that the Bush* administration has

mismanaged. I don't think they want to divert our attention to their failures, though of course they will continue trying to paint this as a failure of Clinton's policies. We need to remind them that they've had two and a half years to "correct" Clinton's "mistaken" policies -- two and a half years that they've squandered on angering most of the world at us and committing troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Art_from_Ark]

4. Before 2001, no one here in Japan

gave a rat's patootie about North Korea. Every bit of military hardware they have is second or third rate. Their military incursions into Japanese and South Korean territory were a joke. I have a hard time believing that such a society could make the technological leap and develop its own nuclear technology. If they are close to getting nuclear capability, it is because they are receiving assistance from outsiders.

[psychopomp]

17. A taepedong in 1998 was the wake-up call for Japan

At a time when Japan couldn't get its H2 rocket off of the ground w/o having to destroy $230 mil. in mid-flight, NK launched a taepedong missile right over Jnese airspace. NK later claimed it was a satellite launch.

This display was cold water in the face of the Japanese, that and repeated naval incursions by NK vessels.

NK nuke chronology:
1962: North Korea sets up an atomic energy research center with Soviet help.

1964: Chinese help prospect for uranium.

1967: North Korea starts up small Soviet-supplied reactor.

1969-70: Soviet Union sends FROG-5 and FROG-7A missiles to North Korea.

1974: North Korea joins IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency).

1975: North Korea produces first plutonium -- a few grams.

1976: In return for military aid during the 1973 Middle East war, Egypt sends Soviet Scud-B missiles to North Korea.

1977: North Korea agrees to international inspection of Soviet-supplied equipment.

1977: Kang Song-San, a high party official, visits China's Lop Nur nuclear test site.

1979: Starts to build 30-megawatt thermal reactor that can produce enough plutonium for one bomb a year.

1983: A terrorist bomb linked to North Korea kills four South Korean cabinet members in Rangoon.

1984: North Korea successfully tests its first reverse-engineered Scud-B missile.

1984: An Iranian businessman and a Soviet emigre are indicted in New York for conspiring to smuggle U.S. missile guidance components to North Korea.

1985: Iran agrees to finance the development of North Korean Scud missiles in exchange for Scud-B technology and an option to buy the missiles when they become available.

1985: Signs the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), promising not to produce a bomb and to open all nuclear sites to inspection. In return, Soviets promise North Korea several large power reactors.

1985: Starts to build a 200-Mwt. reactor that can produce enough plutonium for 7 to 10 bombs a year.

1985: Also starts to build large plant to process plutonium into weapon-ready form.

1986: Begins to produce plutonium in 30-Mwt. reactor.

1987: Misses the first 18-month deadline for the beginning of international inspections. Inspectors grant 18-month extension.

1987: North Korean agents bomb a South Korean airliner with 115 passengers to retaliate for being barred from Seoul Olympics.

1987: Iran and North Korea sign a $500 million arms deal that includes the purchase of 90 to 100 Scud-Bs by Tehran.

1987-88: North Korea delivers approximately 100 Scud-B missiles to Iran.

1988: U.S. puts North Korea on its list of nations supporting terrorism.

1988: Misses second deadline for beginning international inspections, and demands "legal assurances" that U.S. won't threaten it with nuclear weapons.

1989: Continues to refuse nuclear inspections.

1989: Secretly unloads, according to CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), enough plutonium-bearing fuel to make one or two nuclear bombs.

1989: Begins to process plutonium into nuclear-ready form.

1989: Starts to build 800-Mwt. reactor that can produce plutonium for 30 to 40 bombs a year.

1989: Proposes talks with South Korea on denuclearizing the peninsula.

1989: Two Japanese companies reportedly ship spectrum analyzers to North Korea, which can be used to improve missile accuracy.

1990: Threatens to drop out of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty unless U.S. removes all nuclear weapons from the peninsula.

1990: U.S. fines German firm Degussa for illegally supplying U.S.-origin reactor material to North Korea.

1990: Breaks off talks with inspectors. Continues to refuse inspection.

1990: Tries to buy electronic components for bomb triggers from U.S. company.

1990: 70 to 80 high-explosive tests in North Korea of bomb components are reported by South Korean press.

1990: Tests large plutonium processing plant, showing it is operational.

1990: Starts up new plant to process uranium for reactor fuel.

1990: Continues to produce plutonium and process it into weapon-ready form.

1990: Successfully tests a Scud-C missile, hitting targets off North Korea's eastern coast from a base in the Kangwon Province; Iran reportedly tests what U.S. intelligence identifies as a North Korean version of the Scud-C.

1991: Refuses Japan's offer of aid and recognition in exchange for inspections.

more here

[Hegemony Cricket]

3. If you want to see the US military cowed...

...look no further than North Korea.

There's nothing we can do without China's support on this one.

[MaineDem]

5. Ever since he was "installed"

Wasn't one of the first things * did was to back off on the talks Clinton had set up with North Korea? I haven't looked it up but I seem to remember that happening. I felt then it was a big mistake.

This is really serious and scary when Perry says * thinks it's "immoral" to negotiate. *'s arrogance is unbelievable.

[Art_from_Ark]

8. Yes, that's right

He did not show much interest in the matter when South Korean president Kim Dae Jung came to visit in March 2001

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,102313,00.html

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Wrong

There is a lot they can and will do. Since North Korea is not playing ball, not just with the U.S., but with the world community, that same community can interdict their transit and cut off all aid.

Yes, that might push North Korea to war, but so might almost anything. But if North Korea attacks, no U.S. president would allow 37,000 Americans to be massacred and would use ANY weapons to prevent it.

[Eloriel]

12. Huh! You talk about a failure of diplomacy

Sounds like you'd be in favor of the militarization of our "diplomacy" with NKorea. How sad.

Clinton had it going in the direction of peace. Bush blew it. Now, some people are encouraging us and the world to just get meaner, bully harder, make them suffer more, push them further into that corner.

Excellent, just fuckin' excellent.

Eloriel

[Muddleoftheroad]

19. How long

How long have those nice peaceable North Koreans been working on nukes? How long have THEY violated past agreements?

If you want me to defend *, it won't happen. But don't expect me to side with psycho boy in North Korea either. He runs a criminal nation that already exports drugs as an economic maneuver and would likely do the same with nukes. He has to be stopped.

[aneerkoinos]

23. It's not about how bad NK is

It's about what should be and what can be done to controll the situation.

US must be ready to loose face and stand back nicely and help NK economically, do what Clinton did.

War is a not a possibility, NK is China's pet, get it? And China not only has more than enough nukes, China also owns enough US debt to practically bankrupt US if it so chooses.

The real plot, methinks, is that China is using NK as a pawn to force US to admit it is not the only superpower on the Earth (by loosing face in NK) and give up the foolish dreams of Empire of global domination. And methinks that is what US must do, other options are unthinkable...

Whether US can keep Taiwan independent is the real question, with wise diplomacy US can stil avoid total surrender.

[Muddleoftheroad]

25. LOL

Why does the U.S. have to give anything in this situation? Sorry, they don't. Basically, North Korea either gives or has ALL aid cut off. And it can't attack because the U.S. has a ton of nukes and WOULD use them.

[aneerkoinos]

26. The choise is:

1. Allow NK to become nuclear power and more over let them rub the fact in US face very vocally. People in the east think keeping face is actually the most improtant thing, and US loosing face this way is truly the biggest give in and fatal for US hegemony. If boss looses face totally he can't be boss anymore.

2. Bribe NK to give up nukes and allow IAEA back. There's a crack in US face but some of the facade preserved. How big crack depends on diplomatic skill, Bush is doing very badly compared to Clinton.

There is no third choice, military aggression against NK is impossible, even Bushistas are not that insane.

What is laughable is to thing cutting US aid to NK would be a threat, since it receives none. US can't controll even SK, what makes you think US could make other cut their aid to NK? US has unsuccesfully tried to internationalize the problem but NK (read: China) chooses to keep it bilateral. Even Japan's support for US is half-hearted.

Remember when NK became a problem? In the middle of the build-up for Iraq. Coincidence? No way Jose. The whole purpose of the thing is to humiliate US and sofar it's been extremely succesfull, China is grabbing US by to balls and slowly squeezing...

How do I know this is what China is doing, you may ask? Why, that's what I would do if I was the leader of China!

[Muddleoftheroad]

29. More than two

The third is let North Korea roast over a slow fire, cutting off all aid and trade and not allowing the thug empire to sell illegal drugs as a means of gaining hard currency.

Yes, they might get nukes or they might not. No one knows even if they have them now. I don't think that puts the U.S. in a position of losing face. It makes North Korea seem more and more rogue and dangerous and makes all of the nations of the area more likely to hem them in.

And no, the U.S. should not and will not bribe them to behave.

Yes, the U.S. sends no aid, you are right there. But other nations have and that includes South Korea and Japan. When I say cut off aid, I mean all of it except China which sends damn little.

[NickB79]

31. Slow roast a country with ballistic missiles? Smart, real smart

So, they have NOTHING to lose because their country is crumbling around them by being blockaded, but you don't think they'd retaliate with the nukes they probably have? Do you think the leaders of NK would even care that a few million would be incinerated? Hell no, they've already watched their citizens starve to death while diverting supplies to the NK military. We blockade them, they call it an act of war (which they've publicly declared they would if we do so), they nuke Seoul and a US battle group in the region that's enforcing the blockade, and then what? We would launch nukes of our own at NK, but we'd have already suffered massive casualties. Hell, it's even possible they could hit Japan, Hawaii, Alaska or the West Coast. Look at the economic tailspin 9/11 did to the US. How about seeing Honolulu obliterated and hundreds of thousands killed? A nuke to the North Slope oil supply would be even worse for the US, destroying our main domestic source of oil. Our economy would be in tatters.

And, there is no reason NK couldn't just declare war if we blockade, invade S. Korea with conventional forces, and only use their nuclear weapons for deterence later. The NK military, even without using nuclear warheads, is more than a match for the SK military and the US divisions there right now. As a friend of mine who shipped out to SK this spring stated: "We don't have enough bullets to shoot them all if they invade." They could overrun the peninsula with conventional forces before we'd be able to get any kind of counterforce into the region. Our air force, the best in the world, would still take a beating as NK has a much more advanced anti-aircraft defense than Iraq did. By the time we'd mobilized a landing force large enough to attempt a retake of the peninsula (months after the initial invasion), they'd be able to fortify positions along the coast and threaten to use nukes against any US Navy forces moving into the area. There would be no way the US could launch a pre-emptive NUCLEAR assault and save any face in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Slow roast them, they roast us. Even if we turn that country into a glowing crater, the damage would already be done to us and no amount of nukes would fix that.

[burythehatchet]

28. Yes sir

The Chinese would certainly welcome the honorable chimp launching nukes in their back yard. Most certainly

[psychopomp]

22. More than 37,000 troops at risk

More than ten million people in Seoul and four million in Pusan, plus the entire Japanese archipegalo (now on the wrong end of 200 intermediate-range missiles all capable of carrying a small nuclear payload).

People in the region do not want Dumbya to kick this hornets' nest.

[PsN2Wind]

6. Dim son

isn't really specific enough to determine who you mean in this discussion. We have two, less than brilliant individuals, that have been installed as leaders of countries with powerful militarys. So please repost with Dimson US or Dimson NK.

[MaineDem]

7. Oops, sorry

You're very correct. I meant the US version.

[ze_dscherman]

10. Even more similarities

The streets of the capital are broad and the buildings monumental. Inside the grand state offices, a power struggle rages among the political elite, and the side that seems to have the upper hand is insulated, single-minded, and shamelessly belligerent. This clique supports a military-first policy that doesn't shrink from the first use of nuclear weapons, a stance that strikes fear into allies and adversaries alike. Nor are these fears soothed by the actions or rhetoric of the leader, a former playboy who owes his position to an irregular political process and the legacy of a more statesmanlike father.

Choose your capital: Pyongyang or Washington?



Credit: Fearful symmetry: Washington and Pyongyang By John Feffer
Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/EG15Dg01.html

[John_H]

15. I doubt anyone except maybe KKKarl wants this one.

And, believe me, this one ain't gonna fly w/ the generals, Rummy or no Rummy. This is not to say that Chimpy and Co.'s ineptitude will not cause a war anyway. But by design, no way.

[dArKeR]

30. Of course it is! I just wonder how much tax dollars it cost us

to get N. Korea to start this?
http://www.geocities.com/darkerxdarker

[mmm]

11. Looks like Bush will wait until Kim Jong sets off a nuclear test...

and then the US will respond with 'surgical strikes.'
And then Kim Jong will nuke the US - by that time he should
have ten or twelve warheads already in place
in downtown Chicago, Boston, NY, Miami, Los Angeles, Dallas,
Minneapolis and so on. Perhaps twelve targets in all - eight in the US, four International. After he issues a list of demands and posits a ten minute warning he will detonate one device and promise to detonate an additional device every five minutes until his demands are met. He will take the blueprint for
his actions from "McGyver" Episode 23.

Kim himself will be huddled up nice and toasty like in a plush mountain hide away with Osama and Saddam.

[malachi]

13. Kim Jong Il is evil and loathsome and it is immoral to negotiate with him

This is what you get when you have a complete idiot is charge,*, who gets all his inspiration and decision making capabilities from some twisted interpretation of religious dogma.

[chenGOD]

14. Sadly this is what Bush really thinks though...

He has on a few occasions let it be known that he "loathes" Kim Jeong Il.

[JoFerret]

16. Over emotional

These boys who are in "charge" are just way too emotional. It is all about petty feelings and personal likes and loathes. AWOL "feels" things are the right thing to do; he hates Saddam; he "loathes" KJI; he loves Crawford and hates this and that and the other. Time for some professionals to save us from this hyper emotionality which is heading us to disaster. Grown-ups talk things through if they can. They don't just have temper tanties.

[Muddleoftheroad]

18. They did

They DID negotiate with him, just nothing came from it.

[malachi]

20. DEFINE their negotiations

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. Met with China

And NK. Hell, even China has gotten annoyed with the stupidity of the North Korean actions.

[aneerkoinos]

24. Remember

how helpfull to US China was in those negotiations?

Look at my post above, this is not about NK, it's about the Big Game where Taiwan is the ultimate prize.

[DemBones DemBones]

27. Speaking of China. . . I suppose we all recall the suggestions that

China wanted the US to go into Iraq, to mousetrap us, so that they could take over Taiwan. China presumably doesn't want a nuclear war on its borders but do they want North Korea as a second distraction for us, i.e., are they still trying to set up a mousetrap? Or is all of that just paranoia?

[farmboxer]

32. Bush Is A Damned Idiot!

A war with North Korea will be a difficult one, but Bush will be watching TV in his new fancy bunker while the rest of us die from fallout!