The Yomiuri Shimbun (and brought to you in English by the Korea Times and Chosun Ilbo), quoting unnamed U.S. officials, reported Tuesday that the Bush administration has set its “red line” that North Korea should avoid crossing:
The United States has set a “red line” the nuclear-ambitious North Korea should not cross and has decided to consider more coercive options in case it transfers nuclear materials to a third party, a Japanese daily reported Tuesday.
Quoting an unnamed U.S. official, the Yomiuri Shimbun said that the U.S. has settled on a policy that would prompt strict measures against the North if it tries to hand over nuclear materials to a third nation or organization.
The high-level official didn’t specify what type of action the U.S. might take, but the Washington-datelined report said that “military strike could not be ruled out.”
The U.S. had previously refrained from setting a clear “red line” due to concerns it might provoke the communist regime to escalate its nuclear activities to just below the set level, the official was quoted as saying.
The Chosun report added a warning to North Korea that it should not consider the situation in Iraq a hindrance to U.S. action on the Korean Peninsula:
Another U.S. official, responding to criticism the U.S. could not apply enough military pressure on North Korea because of commitments in Iraq, said Iraq wouldn’t be a major handicap because while the U.S. Army was deployed in Iraq, it was the U.S. Navy and Air Force that would primarily deal with North Korea.
OK, this is certainly interesting, although the usual caveats about quotes from unnamed officials apply. I do have concerns, however, some of which I mentioned in a comment over at Winds of Change:
What scare me, quite frankly, is that the U.S. let what was supposed to be a “red line” get crossed without so much as a peep, which might lead Pyongyang to believe that a red line might not in fact exist. I’m pretty certain (although by no means 100% so) that the DPRK would never start a war it knew it couldn’t finish. What I’m also certain of is that it might provoke one accidentally by crossing another line, believing (quite understandably) that the U.S. would not attack. Unlike a lot of the Kerry folk, I believe the six-party talks, rather than bilateral negotiations, are the best way to go, but the problem with the Bush people with N. Korea is that they’ve made it extremely unclear where the real “line” is drawn (perhaps because the administration itself has yet to decide where it’s drawn), and given N. Korea’s inclination to find out exactly where such lines are, this could lead to a very dangerous — and potentially tragic — situation.
Well, the red line may have now been drawn, so some degree of uncertainty is gone. However, as I mentioned above, reprocessing used plutonium rods was supposed to be a “red line” (admittedly one set by a previous administration), and nothing was done, so North Korea might be well within reason to believe that this red line is pure bullshit as well. Moreover, one must assume that knowing where it now stands, Pyongyang is likely to push things as far as it can believing the B-2s will remain in the hangers just so long as it keeps its nuclear materials within North Korea, although one must also assume that the U.S. hasn’t ruled out non-military options — like bringing the North Korea issue before the U.N. Security Council (for what little good that would do) to respond to acts less than those delineated by the red line.
9 Comments
No matter how ‘clear’ we make our ‘red lines,’ the fact is that our credibly is pretty low given our inaction in the past. If the Norks continue their past behavior of breaking limits, it’s only a matter of time before we retaliate — and wait for their reaction following it. And then we will learn if Kim Jong Il is truly the unrestrained, spoiled-brat leader willing to dash it all in the face of a temper tantrum, or the leader of a failed state driven by fear.
The problem is that there are degrees of “transferance” of nuclear weapons. On the one hand you could have North Korea delivering 10 nuclear bombs to some looney Arab country - a clear violation of the ‘red line.’
But what about North Korea selling dual use nuclear technology, renting out the services of nuclear scientists, or selling components of nuclear bombs? This gradual approach is less likely to raise a diplomatic storm, and the North Koreans could plausibly claim they are selling peaceful technology here.
Of course we would see the French, Germans, Russians and Chinese rushing to the defense of North Korea in that situation because THEY DO THE SAME THING ALREADY! That ‘red line’ has been crossed a gazillion times already and the North Koreans will walk across it on the beaten path.
The Red Line: A New US Policy for NK?
Has the Bush administration enunciated a new policy toward North Korea, specifically regarding transfer of nuclear weapons? Several stories in the Asian press (this one from Chosun Ilbo) are reporting so: Quoting a high-ranking U.S. government official…
red line? you mean like the red line saddam crossed?
The red-line decision must have been made based on Team America: Global Police.”
Asia by Blog
Asia by Blog is a twice weekly feature, posted on Monday and Thursday, providing links to Asian blogs and their views on the news in this fascinating region. Previous editions can be found here.
This edition contains Chinese Playboy, Superman, Alexan…
I wonder what six-party talks will do that direct negotiations won’t? I think that either policy, considering what options the US has, are just a way to continue to muddle through this “crisis”. I think that the ‘red line’ is a bunch of shit, because you have to be willing to go to war with the DPRK (and start it) and the US just can’t afford it on many levels. I’m not saying that the DPRK leadership isn’t capable of making mistakes, but it has handled one US administration after another quite well, and I don’t see this changing anytime in the future…anyway, that’s my take.
Simon’s China and East Asia Briefing: 30th Nov 2004
The following is a digest of highlights from the past month’s Asia by Blog series over at simonworld.mu.nu. The round-up has four key areas of focus: China, Taiwan Hong Kong (Politics, Economy lifestyle, History sport culture, Information), Kore…
martian money
You may find it interesting to check out some relevant information on flashgame