Ex-CNN journalist Mike Chinoy has written a new book that echoes the Iraq war controversy, namely, ideologues in George W. Bush’s administration took a creative approach towards intelligence reports and helped create a nuclear crisis with North Korea. Per the article from AFP and an article from the Washington Post.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
26 Comments
Judging by the reviews, Chinoy has two main criticisms. The first of these is that Bush allowed ideological factionism to paralyze his policy for years. This is generally true.
The second is that Bush’s “hard liners” inflated intelligence on uranium enrichment. That criticism gives a new and unwanted meaning to Chinoy’s title — U.S. scientists have since found traces of enriched uranium on samples of aluminum and boxes of documents the North Koreans turned over.
The revelation of the uranium in the aluminum samples came out last December. How could Chinoy be so sloppy that he’d fail to revise his argument accordingly? Could have book have already gone to press? The uranium was found on the documents in June, and Chinoy’s book was probably in its print run by then. Down melts that argument.
And naturally enough for Agence France-Presse, it assigns an ill-informed reporter who echoes the argument without even realizing that it’s already obsolete. There’s no by-line on it, and there’s no way of knowing if the AFP reporter has any knowledge of the subject matter. You will note that the WaPo’s Glenn Kessler — for all of his effusive bias, at least he’s current on the facts — doesn’t mention this in his review.
Of course, this criticism misses the entire point. It’s not for us to present air-tight cases about things the North Koreans hide from us, nor is it for us to pretend that it’s possible. If there’s some evidentiary basis for our suspicion, it’s for the North Koreans to let us have a look around and resolve our doubts before they get to cash in on our aid and largesse.
Chinoy’s criticism of Bush’s failure to decide on a consistent policy holds up better, although Chinoy is so partisan in making it that even Glenn Kessler comments on it. Pressed by both factions to try either appeasement or pressure, Bush never really opted for either until it was too late for either to work. Bush’s NK policy was effectively paralyzed by ideological factionalism for six years. His State Department and a certain anachonistic “ally” undercut attempts to put pressure on the regime and engage its people, while Bush’s own hollow rhetoric complicated any attempt to appease. It is the responsibility of “the decider” to resolve such disputes. Bush didn’t decide. Clearly, he didn’t devote much depth of thought to this issue, and as a result, he’s leaving a worse situation behind than the one he inherited.
” CNN journalist ”
You lost me right there.
The WaPo review concludes: “Because Bush did not pursue a consistent policy, we will never know if engagement from the start, or isolationism to the end, would have yielded a better outcome.” N.K. uses engagement to cadge monetary and food aid, and isolationism to bolster KJI’s control, so neither approach works on its own. There has to be a coordinated policy of engagement and sanctions among the U.S., Japan and S.K. where N.K. moves toward int’l norms, draws down its troops from the DMZ, liberalizes its economy, etc. The Bush administration had a great tool at their disposal, the six-party talks, to pursue this approach, but they flubbed it royally. It didn’t help that Roh played the enabler to Kim’s regime and made a farce of the talks, but that’s another story.
As per Joshua’s comment, at least Mr. Bush has been consistently indecisive and that is being nice about it.
I am just surprised that Bush has changed course on anything.
I may not be reading Chinoy’s book anytime soon, but I am curious to see who his sources may have been.
Time to take the red pill. The regular J6P has been pwned.
For Bush’s change of direction, I credit Victor Cha the director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council in 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01336.html
However, I doubt he’ll get proper credit for it.
Does Mr. Chinoy know that the Norks admitted to the uranium enrichment program?
I listened to an interview of Chinoy on NPR’s “Fresh Air” today (a program that for the last few weeks, and this week in particular, has had an anti-Bush or anti-conservative message for most broadcasts).
One main argument was consistently that North Korea has always been ready to talk and negotiate, but not the U.S. If that were true, and it is not, it assumes that talking could actually achieve something, which history to this point has also proved false.
Chinoy noted that the 1994 Agreed Framework - the product of “talking” - froze plutonium reprocessing successfully; but he failed to mention, at least on the radio, that North Korea started it’s HEU program just a couple of years later, under Clinton. Oh he noted the program, or the “acquisition” of “parts” for a program, but could never admit the extreme likelihood of the existence of the program, or mention the fact that it occurred despite all the “talking” that went on.
As Joshua notes, the HEU found on the documents was completely skipped over, at least in the interview (I think, but I was away from the radio for a few minutes).
NPR was just giving him free advertising for a book with agenda. Yeah, objective journalism, uh-huh.
Like so many other areas with North Korea, it’s not a given that talking to your enemy is better than not talking to them.
” Does Mr. Chinoy know that the Norks admitted to the uranium enrichment program? ”
Facts have never been known to stand in the way of the agenda of a “CNN Journalist”.
Tong Kim;
http://www.dprkstudies.org/200.....-the-year/
The Bush administration was a helpless victim of bad intelligence. FOX news and Rush Limpballs said so…so it must be true. Stop perpetuating liberal lies about George Bush!!!
Ah - its all Clinton or Carter’s fault anyway
” Does Mr. Chinoy know that the Norks admitted to the uranium enrichment program? ”
American officials claiming North Korean officials ommited something is not substantive evidence. Washington can claim that North Korea admitted to being a leading defender of socialism and human rights, but that would not make it true.
Am I right in presuming posters Joshua and Richardson are employees of right-wing lobby groups in the US, so their comments should also be taken with grains of salt. People like that get paid to put information into the public sphere with the intention of bettering their cause. Whatever that is.
I would think that anyone interested in genuine “inside accounts” of the First and Second NORK nuclear crises would want to skip Chinoy for the real deals:
Wit, Poneman and Gallucci: Going Critical: The First North Korean Nuclear Crisis, and
Pritchard: Failed Diplomacy: The Tragic Story of How North Korea Got the Bomb
@12 Kujo
You forgot about Free Republic:
http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....5627/posts
Stop blaming the democrats in Congress for voting for the war before they were against it!
It’s all Bu$HITler, Bu$Haliburton, and Carl Rove’s fault anyway.
hojusoju, I don’t work for any lobby group or in any political capacity, not that it’s any of your business. You don’t know WTF you’re talking about. Do you have anything of substance to add to the discussion, such as a refutation of any of my points?
It’s really good that North Korea has Juche. Is there a more self-reliant country in the world?
http://13695.spreadshirt.com/u.....che-521404
Hoju…, no, you’re wrong in presuming commenters Joshua and I are employees of any political groups in the US, or anywhere else.
As Joshua said, you should try to address our points. But I don’t think you can; I think you’re en empty head who doesn’t know jack about this issue.
considering that the S.Korean government has a history of flat out giving cash money to opinion makers, it surprises me that you would post this
I knew there was a reason I read your blog
Good work!
Sorry Josh and Corey, I was under the impression that both you guys were paid to beat off on the propanganda drum, but I’ll accept your affirmations that you do it like Bevers and do it for free.
Its just that your try so hard, like this little rant by Webmaster Stanton, before elected officals no less, and complete with a comparison between South Korea and apartheidt South Africa. Or here , something that has destroyed my faith in wikipedia forever.
Keep up the volunteer work, I’m sorry I implied you were anything other than tools for yourselves.
Ooops, second link should be here. Actually, this one would make a good blog post.
Grow a pair and try to respond on topic.
Corey, I don’t see how raising awareness of the voluntary information dissmenination activities of two members of the K-blogosphere is in anyway unrelated to a post that is about how “ideologues in George W. Bush’s administration took a creative approach towards intelligence reports and helped create a nuclear crisis with North Korea.”
Why are you doing it for free when Uncle Sam is out there paying people to do it?
Do you know what a red herring is? But I do understand you; you can’t lose if you don’t play…
Oh, I do play, however, unlike your dad, I don’t play with little boys.
I’m guessing your probono and prolific propaganda activity is either due to an actual belief in what you ejaculate, or it is part of angling for a cushy government job. But of course, I am open to there being other possibilities. I liked the spoof you showed in your fight to get your blog included on wiki. Thats determination I envy.
hojusoju, your conduct is shameful.
One Trackback
[...] the Heydrichs and Eichmanns of Pyongyang (the title of Chinoy’s book, “Meltdown,” unintentionally acquired new meaning before it was even published when the North Koreans undermined his major premise — his [...]