North Korea deserves Bush’s attention

Between the Lines

North Korea’s withdrawal from the six-party talks concerning its fledgling nuclear program is a major distress signal for political relations in that part of the world.

Its public announcement of openly pursuing a nuclear weapons arsenal should send cold shivers down all our backs. Yet, their announcements should be viewed first and foremost from a political bargaining perspective. South Korean officials are very skeptical as to whether or not North Korea’s nuclear weapons program even exists, and U.S. intelligence officials admit any weapons they might possess are likely similar to the bombs used by the United States in World War II. Lack of advanced missile delivery technology would limit North Korea to using planes to deliver its nuclear bombs.

However, North Korea has made a bold step in directly and deliberately stating its intentions to pursue a nuclear arsenal. The rate at which the components and intelligence of nuclear weapons are being dispersed in today’s world should raise concerns about any nation willfully seeking to expand its nuclear capabilities.

But, if we take a step back for a moment, perhaps we can better understand this political move. During his first term, President Bush and his administration sent very strong signals to North Korea, calling it a member of an "axis of evil" and an "outpost for tyranny." The second-term administration has offered much of the same rhetoric, except now Bush plans to use his "political capital" to eliminate tyranny around the world. What was North Korea — labeled an "outpost of tyranny" by the very same president — supposed to think of that?

I don’t know how our diplomatic leaders like to think, but I was raised to believe that if you want someone to come to your table, you don’t insult them before they even get there. Common respect and courtesy don’t seem to be on this administration’s diplomatic agenda.

The Bush administration gave reasons and intelligence for invading Iraq that turned out to be false, so it switched its goal to spreading freedom through regime change. With Bush’s reelection, this goal quickly spread to encompass all nations deemed tyrannical. Knowing this, why would any nation on the administration’s bad side not want to bolster its defenses?

Don’t get me wrong — nuclear weapons are the epitome of man’s capacity for self-destruction and the proliferation of nuclear programs does nothing to help our chances of survival as a species. But events have escalated to the point that small nations like North Korea see having nuclear weapons as their only means of preventing aggression from a larger, more powerful nation.

The goal in Iraq was to make it a democratic nation that would help stabilize the region. Ironically enough, South Korea and China believe the fall of North Korea’s government would dramatically destabilize that region. South Korea is an easy voice for the administration to silence, but the Chinese are the superpower of that region and their authority is not easily contested. China has given North Korea incentives to negotiate with other nations about its nuclear ambitions but is reluctant to pressure them. This should come as no surprise. China and North Korea are communist allies just as we are democratic allies with Great Britain. Would we ever pressure Britain to slow down its defense programs?

North Korea is — and always has been — a bigger threat to the United States than Iraq, but with China standing behind North Korea, don’t expect any military actions against it for now. The Bush administration isn’t that overzealous — yet.

Patrick Callahan is an undeclared freshman.