Comments on: ‘Important proposal’ released

By: virtual wonderer

virtual wonderer — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 07:04:12 +0000

Ooooo… Marmot must be busy today. He hasn’t posted

http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....20030.html

Maybe in exchange for electricity NK will agree to SK demand that both side remove guard posts from the DMZ. A triumph in diplomacy.

By: usinkorea

usinkorea — Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:49:19 +0000

Crediting South Korea with it all is a foolish proposition too. South Korea has given the North things in the past with no talks resulting. All of these moves have an ebb and flow, and North Korea picks when it wants to dangle “hope” out there and when it doesn’t. Trying to find the magic key to success in getting these talks going anywhere but in Pyongyang is a lost cause.

Nobody seems to be able to stomach the idea that containment is the only logical solution given the factors involved.

Somebody above mentioned how we could expect an enemy to open up for their enemy.

Fine. That is the siuation. But, why does that make creating a deal we don’t believe will accomplish certain minimal goals more acceptable?

If North Korea wanted to join the world, it could do so with a heavy amount of American support. We would be skeptical at first, but we already have the Soviet collapse example and perhaps others like China and even Japan after WWII or Germany.

Why should Pyongyang’s paranoia about its ability to survive as a regime if it opens up its society be a deciding factor in the US choosing to cut a deal that leaves North Korea with some nuclear bombs and doesn’t create a framework in which it can’t simply unpack its programs in the future when it feels like it?

Maybe North Korea is really afraid beyond a point it can bare that the US is chomping at the bit to invade it.

But, it is clear it is that paranoid about losing power regardless of US actions if it lets the North Korean people find out about the outside world or if the government loosens its grip on the people.

It isn’t the US that can’t adapt to a peaceful Korean peninsula. It’s Pyongyang….

By: R.elgin

R.elgin — Fri, 15 Jul 2005 05:00:17 +0000

The one bit of news regarding this that is simply incredulous is the claim from the Secretary of State that “North Korea’s decision to return to nuclear disarmament talks was a vindication of the Bush administration’s strategy and not solely the result of a South Korean offer to provide the North with electricity.” Read the article here.

I guess since she could not get the Japanese to restart their imports of American (Mad Cow) beef, the next best thing is to claim credit for other’s work.

By: James

James — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:12:11 +0000

I agree with the virtual wanderer: if anything, it is the ‘94 deal adjusted for inflation. GI Korea seems to be content in blaming Clinton and perhaps the idea that NK can be trusted is naive and then again perhaps it was the best thing that he could do and not risk huge casualties or even entering an all-out war. What country will give another country, particularly one that has traditionally been an enemy, completely free and unfettered access to their country? The US doesn’t even do that for its own citizens-let alone for another country. Just for arguments sake, assume that this access was granted. How long do you think this access would last? Surely indefinate access cannot be argued as being a reasonable expectation. That brings us back to the crux of the matter-at what point can NK be trusted to do or not do what they have agreed to? What will it take?
I also agree with knickerbocker-the Roh administration has done nothing to help the situation (except maybe for NK). It seems too much like Seoul is saying we need DPRK to exist because the economic calamity that would accompany reunification would probably cause us to increase taxes, tax the health care/food system and set the country’s economic growth back at least five years. The prospect of refugees from the north and those returning from China and the accompanying crime and housing issues as well as employment issues would, it appears far too clearly, like more than anything to be avoided right now.

By: Knickerbocker

Knickerbocker — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 11:49:29 +0000

I think the only people in the entire world who aren’t skeptical of the impending talks is the Roh administration. Sad to say, but the issue isn’t the DPRK regime. It’s the administration in the ROK. As long as they keep coddling the North, it just doesn’t matter what deal is cut. They continue to reward bad behavior, plain and simple. Hopeless.

By: virtual wonderer

virtual wonderer — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 08:25:49 +0000

Ahh… another depressing news. I can’t see how this is supposed to be any different from the 94 deal. We have ALWAYS had TONS of stuff to offer DPRK and we delivered these goods. The problem is and will forever be the DPRK’s reaction. Under Clinton we managed to slow them down, but ultimately NK was able to produce nukes using different technology. Are we going to have to monitor both their stockpile of plutonium and uranium? I don’t know. I’m not a physicist or engineer, but everything seems so bleak when we failed to guesstimate at Iraq’s WMD research progress, how much more difficult it is to monitor NK? At best, we are giving cash to DPRK to slow them down and to ensure they don’t sell WMD technology abroad.

At this point, I’m almost hoping that the talks fail, just so that we don’t have to pay additional taxes. Maybe the dialogue have been focusing on the wrong issue all this time.

By: kimbob

kimbob — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 03:28:59 +0000

Yawn. Boring. Same old story. Nothing will happen other than the same old thing. It only looks good on paper. Boring.

Marmot, have you ever considered covering some sporting issues? How about the Park Ji Sung transfer to Manchester United? I’ve read Hiddink’s interviews on Korean players having a real difficult times adjusting to European culture. I think it was a bad move by Park to leave Holland. I think he’ll play 3 or 4 games for Man United, fail to adjust nor impress, then end up sitting on the bench. Park was successful in Holland because he got the chance to play under Hiddink who had faith in his Korean players to keep running them up there. Park will not get that same advantage in England. Short sighted move.