North Korean Policy After Kim Jong Il

AP: Officials: N Korea's Kim Possibly Ill
LA Times: North Korea's Kim Jong Il may have had a stroke: U.S. intelligence officials

Background
Kim Jong-Il, the eccentric dictator of North Korea, has suffered a stroke, according to information leaked to the AP from American intelligence officials. Now, let’s keep in mind some context: negotiations on the North’s nuclear weapon program were beginning to get rocky: North Korea had begun to stall on its end of the deal. Could this be a political move? And if not, how will this affect the denuclearization process?

Watching the military
North Korea does not have a succession mechanism in place. Kim was the obvious pick after his father died, but there is no obvious heir for succeeding Kim. His death could lead to the collapse of his regime.

It is more likely, however, that with the death of Kim, the military will take power. That’s bad new for the West: the North Korean military is strongly against giving up its nuclear program.

What can the U.S. do
It is always possible (and maybe likely) Kim is still alive. Our current policy run by Christopher Hill should continue until death is confirmed or denied. With any new leaders, a wait-and-see approach should be adopted: will they be reformers?

All we can do is wait.

China, Iran, and the Denuclearization of North Korea

IHT: U.S. to remove North Korea from terror list

Background
As part of a denuclearization deal, North Korea today handed over 60 pages of information on its nuclear power and nuclear weapons program. The move was an important step in the process of the dismantlement of the North’s nuclear program. In return, President Bush announced that his administration would remove the country from its list of state sponsors of terrorism and end some sanctions ‘symbolically’.

As said above, this action was only a part of a major denuclearization deal. The agreement came as a result of direct negotiations with North Korea in early 2007 under a new policy from the Bush Administration. The previous policy had limited engagement with North Korea, and stressed isolation and sanctions. However, in 2006, the President defied hawks in his administration and enacted a new policy towards the North, launching full fledged talks with North Korea: 6 party negotiations between North Korea, the host China, the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and Russia. North Korea was slow with following through on its promises, but it eventually came through with today’s declaration of plutonium capabilities, which will be verified by the United States in the coming weeks.

Information not yet disclosed
Significantly, the North's declaration is not expected to disclose details on three critical points: the nuclear bombs the North has already produced; its alleged attempts to produce nuclear arms by secretly enriching uranium, which brought on the current crisis in 2002; and accusations that the North had helped Syria build a nuclear plant.

These details need to be disclosed as the next step in the denuclearization process. The information, especially on Syria, is vital

The role of China
From everything I’ve read, China has played a big role in getting Kim Jong-Il to agree to the denuclearization process. Some analysts have gone as far as to say that North Korea would not even have agreed to disarm if weren’t for Beijing. Let’s take a look at China’s motives for a second. Why would they be interested in getting rid of a key piece of leverage they could use against the United States? It comes down to regional stability. China is experiencing rapid economic growth, and it doesn’t want anything to slow it down. As well, Beijing doesn’t want anything to ruin its ‘coming out party’ at the Olympics in August. This has been seen even this week when China allowed a Japanese naval vessel to dock at its ports for the first time since WWII.

Moral of the story: one major reason denuclearization in North Korea has been possible is because of China.

The problem with denuclearization in Iran
North Korea shows us two problems with American policy towards Iran. One, we are not negotiating with the Iranian regime. Two, we have no partner in the region that has significant leverage over Tehran. Some might say, hey, Saudi Arabia could pressure Iran. But why would Riyadh want to? Sure, the country wants to prevent any new wars in the region that might disrupt their oil shipments. But besides that, tensions in the region are only good for Saudi Arabia. U.S.-Iranian tensions have only helped send oil prices to new highs.

So, why does it matter?
Well, it doesn’t really. I just wanted to point that out. But there is one significant lesson we can take from the North Korean denuclearization: negotiations work.

North Korea Tests Short Range Missiles; North Korean Negotiating Strategy

ABC News: North Korea Tests Short Range Missiles

Summary and analysis
North Korea test launched several short range missiles yesterday, in a not-so-veiled response to South Korean Unification Minister Kim Ha-joong’s comments. The North Koreans also kicked out South Korean diplomats. The South Korean government downplayed the missile launch, in their own not-so-veiled attempt at not provoking the North Koreans any further.

North Korea’s attempt at attention
Kim Jong-Il controls NK almost like a child would. Ever since the Soviet Union fell, he has resorted to provoking the U.S., South Korea, Japan, and China, in order to create divisions among the four so it can achieve its primary goal: regime survival. The promising nuclear deal appeared last year to signal the end to one of Kim’s regime’s strongest cards: the nuclear one. Now, it seems not so much (for several reasons; one of which is the fact that some in Washington believe North Korea sent nuclear technology to Syria).

South Korea and the U.S. must proceed carefully
South Korea and the U.S. must proceed carefully in order not to provoke North Korea. Seoul and Washington cannot afford to miss the chance of Kim giving up his nuclear program.

[POLL] Is North Korea Giving Syria Nuclear Technology?

Do you believe North Korea or A.Q. Khan is providing Syria with nuclear technology?
	Yes
	No
	Other
pollcode.com free polls

Hezbollah - Not North Korea

Israel strike on Syria? Yup.
North Korea supplying Syria with nuclear technology? Nope.

Fox news, along with right-wing extremists (notably John Bolton) are publishing stories and op-eds claiming they have (unidentified) ‘sources’ who tell them North Korea may be supplying Syria with nuclear technology. We find that very unlikely.

First, North Korea is just beginning to disclose its nuclear facilities to the U.S. and the U.N, for very large sums of money, oil, and other basic necessities. If North Korea is selling nuclear technology to Syria, Syria would be paying very well. North Korea would not need anything from the U.S. After the North Korean nuclear deal earlier this year, most analysts suspected (for good reason) that North Korea badly needed the aid they were receiving in the deal. North Korea wouldn’t be needing that if they were exporting nuclear know-how.

Second, New deals with the DPRK are being announced every other week it feels like. Kim Jong-Il is giving the impression that he actually wants to shutdown his nuclear program. North Korea has decided to allow American, Russian, and United Nations inspectors to visit the Yongbyon plant.

Third, there are better explanations. It is more likely that Israel was either testing Syria’s defense capabilities, or destroying Syrian arms headed towards Hezbollah. Our bet is on the second.

No matter what the reason was – nukes, defense testing, or to destroy arms – Stat and I are back Israel’s maneuvers. A nuclear Syria would be nearly as disastrous as a nuclear Iran. While we would be back the operation less if it was only a test of Syrian defenses, Syria is still a very dangerous, terrorist-supplying dictatorship. And if our guess is correct, and the strike was to destroy weapons headed towards Hezbollah or terrorists in Iraq, we here are happy that the Israelis took the matter in to their own hands.

BREAKING NEWS: North Korea Shuts Down Yongbyon Nuclear Reactor

BBC:

North Korea has shut down its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, a US state department spokesman has said.

Sean McCormack said that the US had been informed of the shut-down by North Korea and was now awaiting verification from the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

A team from the International Atomic Energy Agency is in Yongbyon overseeing the closure, taking place under a deal agreed in February, but much delayed.

Under this deal Pyongyang got its first heavy fuel oil shipments on Saturday.

North Korea Nuclear Deadline Approaching

The media has completely forgotten about North Korea. The deadline is only seven days away and there's been very little reporting on the subject. On a separate note, they have obliterated Scooter Libby from their mind also.

The Debate Continues

The debate at PoliteTalk Forums continues. Is it ever prudent to submit to blackmail? (Specifically North Korea).

There was an earlier post detailing the first response to the debate.

The rest can be read here.

North Koreans Agree to Disarm

Here's why the deal with North Korea can only be good (in response to a thread at PoliteTalk.com):

There's nothing wrong with buying out North Korea's disarmament. By ending a repressive regime's tyranny through energy assistance, the free world doubly gains. The suffering peoples of North Korea can live a better life, and there is a couple less nukes (in the hands of loony toon) in the world. The governments that agreed to participate lose some oil, maybe some money, but is that really too big of a price?

In this specific case one might worry that North Korea will double cross the world (again) and not give up it's nuclear ambition. At least we tried. At least Bush stopped being such a hard-liner and gave in to talks. At least Bush almost did something right for a change.

What's to lose ?

You can read the whole thread here.

North Korea Claims to Test a Nuclear Bomb

Now, especially after North Korea "tested" a nuclear bomb, the U.N. and the United states must stay together and agree. The U.S. must not offer carrots and sticks, but either just carrots or sticks. The different administrations have varied too much, giving incentives, then imposing sanctions. If the Clinton administration had been hard-line or the Bush administration softer, diplomacy may have succeeded. Although it is too late, now the U.S. and the U.N. still can either only give incentives or be tough about it and possibly achieve success with North Korea, without war.

Although it is cruel to the people of North Korea, aid must also be stopped. Even though there is very little chance of rebellion, and even less chance of it succeeding, there will be benefits. Kim Jong-Il obviously doesn’t care for his people very much, but it may have some effects. If Pyongyang gives more money to spend on the people, they will lower military spending. By giving the people of a communist regime aid, we have allowed North Korea to allocate more money for its military. International assistance must be cut off for diplomacy with North Korea to triumph.

North Korea Threatens a Nuclear Test

North Korea is led by an unstable regime, almost definitely with nuclear weapons. In July, while in the middle of a devastating flood in occurring in their country, killing hundreds and leaving thousands homeless, Pyongyang test-fired six missiles, including the new Taepodong-2, believed to be capable of reaching western United States. Although it failed after 40 seconds, the launching was labeled “provocative” and North Korea was immediately slapped by more sanctions from Japan, and an emergency United Nations Security Council meeting was called in New York. Because of the harsh sanctions the North Koreans are already facing, not much was achieved from this meeting. Recently, evidence has been building up that North Korea is going to attempt a nuclear test. Spy satellites have shown activity around a possible test site. Then this week, Pyongyang has announced that it will conduct a nuclear test. The U.S. representative to the United Nations, John Bolton, said a test “would be extraordinarily serious.” Kim Jong Il, the leader of North Korea, must either reform or choose a new government, as well as not being allowed to carry out a nuclear test.

There are four options to dealing with possibly the most dangerous of the “axis of evil”; non-aggressive diplomacy, more aggressive diplomacy, living with a nuclear North Korea, or the second Korean War. Because aggressive diplomacy is taking a long time to work (if it ever works), non-aggressive diplomacy could seem a good option. There are many problems with soft diplomacy. This would mean mainly the U.S. and Japan would have to give into Jong Il’s demands. Included in these demands are that the United States would return frozen assets of a North Korean’s banks back to the Macau bank. In addition, Japan would have to stop sanctioning Pyongyang. The U.S. would grudgingly sign a non-aggression pack, leaving South Korea at risk. The major problem with a treaty with North Korea and soft diplomacy is that the last time an agreement was made by the U.S., by former President Bill Clinton, it was broken by Pyongyang, and the Jong Il decided to blame it on President Clinton. Another option, a little more aggressive diplomacy, might involve more sanctions but definitely six-party talks involving the United States, Russia, China, South Korea, Japan, and of course North Korea. This has occurred before, but negotiations have stalled. For the negotiations to restart, North Korea demands that the U.S. let go of taken assets from a Macau bank the United States and others believe counterfeits American dollars. China is North Korea’s closest ally, and must work harder in these talks. An additional option, doing nothing, would most likely lead to an arms race in the region if Taiwan or South Korea obtains nuclear weapons. Besides that, the North would also be able to threaten countries, and terrorists might be able to obtain a nuclear weapon, or materials for a dirty bomb. A military operation could easily have dire consequences, but there might be the chance of victory. If successful, there would most likely not be an insurgency, as in Iraq. The problem would not be after the war, as with Iraq, but during. North Korea has the world’s fourth largest army, the third biggest chemical and biological weapons arsenal, and most importantly, probably around 4 or 5 nuclear warheads. But first, diplomacy must be attempted. Even though everyone wants this to have a peaceful outcome, war is still an option. But if the world cannot come to terms with North Korea, and a military force is either unsuccessful or is decided to be not worth the risk, we will have to live with this insane dictatorship.