This is a fabulous piece, I know we're supposed to do analysis in diaries, so here goes: It's a fabulous article and can speak for itself:
the purpose of negotiating with North Korea is not to settle anything,"... "You have these multilateral negotiations in Beijing simply to show to the other parties in the region - China, South Korea, Russia and Japan - that it is not possible to make any deals with North Korea... the purpose of the negotiations is to mobilize a `coalition for punishment'."... "hawk engagement," is only a means to an end... "engagement does not operate without an exit strategy, engagement is the exit strategy."
That is the BushCo MO- talks are only a prelude to an attack.
This is from
this article by Gregory Ehlich. But the policy is that of Victor Cha, the new Asia chief at the NSC. Mr. Cha calls this policy "hawk engagement"- and as far as N. Korea goes, it might be a good approach. However:
The North Korean position, as articulated by its foreign minister, Paek Nam-Sun, was that if the United States would produce evidence, then the DPRK "would certainly show" suspected sites, "as was the case with the Kumchangni incident." The reference was to an occasion in 1999 when the U.S. claimed to have solid evidence that a nuclear weapon facility was operating in a cave located at Kumchangni, and charged the DPRK with violating its treaty obligations. The U.S. pressured North Korea into allowing inspectors into the area, only to find nothing more than an empty cave.
Examples such as this, as well as the deliberate lies about Iraqi weapons programs used to justify invasion tended to leave third parties skeptical of overheated accusations and claims of evidence which are never produced. One Asian diplomat, requesting anonymity, said what was on the minds of many. "We think the U.S. claims are a little exaggerated, not as much as with Iraq, but still we have to be careful of what the U.S. says."
Ooops, did I mention N. Korea has just declared it has nukes?
What strikes me about this, beyond the usual bloodthirsty and mendacious incompetency of BushCo is how this behaviour applies to everything they do. They pay attention to a thing for the sole purpose of destroying it- I can't begin to imagine what sort of pathology that represents. Negotiations as a
means of acheiving the
ends of war?
Fixing education, SS, the environment? All means of destruction.
Same problem in
Iran:
Iran's top nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani told Reuters in an interview this week there was nothing the West could offer Iran that would tempt it to give up its atomic fuel cycle.
Those at Thursday's annual demonstration, which tends to draw the hardcore supporters of Iran's clerical establishment, said Iran would not back down in the face of U.S. threats.
"The U.S. is after an excuse, if we stop atomic technology, they will find another excuse," said Habibollah Hosseini, a 68-year-old cleric carrying a walking stick in one hand and an umbrella in the other.
"They invaded Iraq although there were no weapons (of mass destruction). The best response to intimidation is unity and power. We are here to show this," he said.