Sunday, June 14, 2009

N. Korea

We can summarize options into three possible strategies for dealing with North Korea - all with the intent of precipitating a collapse and peninsula re-unification:

1) Direct Diplomatic Engagement. Bring pressure on the criminal regime by freezing or seizing assets when/where possible, stifling missile and counterfeit currency exports, and through consistent international condemnation of human rights abuses and illicit activities.

2) Do Nothing. Do not comment on or act on any North Korean action. Ignore the missile and nuclear tests, and all their bluster.

3) Quarantine & Forced Collapse. Saturate their coast and airspace with intent to trigger a military response or regime implosion. This includes shooting down all future missile tests, boarding all vessels that leave N. Korean waters and confiscating all weapons and weapons-related materials. Announce US intentions and preparations to use tactical nuclear weapons along the DMZ and missile sites in order to protect both Seoul from artillery attack or invasion, and neighbors from missile attack.

We have advocated the Do Nothing strategy in a previous post - here. We thought this was the Administration's 'strategy' by default, as previous actions have demonstrated, plus our belief that Obama and his team do not have the discipline, values, nor courage to pursue either of the other two options.

We also question Obama's alignment to our premise above: that the collapse of the commie regime is preferred to continued threatening behavior. Maybe an ongoing international crisis is preferred?

The missile and nuke tests of last month were followed by Obama's 'Do Nothing' approach. If those actions cannot trigger concern, then we assumed nothing would.

Now, weeks later, Secretary Clinton is sending signals that the US will react in a harsh manner if tests continue. A shift to strategy #1 above?

Bottom line: today's Democrats suck at national security. It is not strategy to let a tyrant's actions dictate your supposed 'leadership'... after the fact. Nor is it 'leadership' to pick a strategy (#2), then shift to another strategy (#1) on a whim, only to shift back to the original strategy once the Communist has settled down been paid off.

We think the risks have gone up since the Administration's recent posturing. They, and the world, had a good thing going when they tried to ignore this problem.

No comments: