Archive

Posts Tagged ‘South Korea’
November 12th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
It’s Dangerous to Have a President This Weak

Traditionally, presidents facing opposition at home go abroad to find policy and political success.  Basically, if you can’t beat them, play with someone else.  It’s an especially useful move in the latter part of a president’s second term, when lame duck status settles in and speculation about a successor mounts.

Perhaps we’re seeing that now with one-term President Barack Obama.  One thing is missing, however, from the script: a foreign policy success.

So far, the president’s 10 day Asian trip has been a disaster.  It started with a badly handled mis-impression that 34 warships costing $200 million a day were escorting the president to India.  (They weren’t.)  Then his staff was embarrassed by press handlers working for the Indian government.  Now, he’s failing to secure a crucial free trade deal with South Korea while being ostracized at the G-20 meeting for his fiscal and monetary policies.

All this may make him more likely to be defeated in his reelection campaign, but it is a terrible projection of powerlessness to the rest of the world.

July 12th, 2010 at 10:27 am
Imagine Israel, Not North Korea, Sank a Ship and Killed 46
Posted by Print

The United Nations, that vast reservoir of righteousness and international justice, has once again defined absurdity downward.

In March, North Korea sank the South Korean Navy ship Cheonan, killing 46 in a bald and remorseless act of international aggression.  The U.N.’s reaction?  On Friday, the Security Council expressed “deep concern” without even bothering to name the attacking party, and urged “appropriate and peaceful measures to be taken against those responsible.”  North Korea naturally and rightfully labeled that U.N. evasion “our great diplomatic victory.”  In other words, the U.N. lamented the murder without daring to name the murderer.  In contrast, Israel was labeled “murderous” and “guilty” by U.N. officials earlier this year, and remains the most condemned target of the U.N. collection of dictators and kleptocrats.  Israel’s transgression?  Commandos firing in self-defense when attacked by knives, steel pipes and even guns taken by the mob from the commandos themselves.

The Obama Administration and liberals continue to dismiss the U.N.’s malfeasance as harmless, but the fact is that it isolates Israel, emboldens murderous dictators and only encourages similar future behavior.  Sadly, the U.N. continues to more closely resemble its failed predecessor, the League of Nations.

June 28th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
State Department Minces Words

Before leaving office, then President George W. Bush allowed his State Department to take North Korea off the department’s list of “State Sponsors of Terror.”  Earlier this year, an international panel concluded that North Korea was responsible for firing on and sinking a South Korean warship, killing 46 sailors.  Today, President Barack Obama’s State Department said this:

State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said during a regular news conference that the sinking was the act of one state’s military against another’s and not an act of terrorism. Thus, it is not ground to put North Korea back on the U.S. terror blacklist.

“It is our judgment that the sinking of the Cheonan is not an act of international terrorism and by itself would not trigger placing North Korea on the U.S. state (sponsors) of terrorism list,” he said.

But Crowley assured head-scratching journalists that if North Korea complies better with “sponsoring” terrorism, the regime will be rewarded.

“We will not hesitate to take action if we have information that North Korea has repeatedly provided support for acts of terrorism,” Crowley added.

So, it sounds like there are two reasons for no relisting North Korea on the “Sponsors of Terror” list.  Both require quibbling with definitions.  First, when a sovereign nation’s military kills members of another sovereign nation’s military, it is not an act of terrorism.  Okay, but it is most certainly an act of war.  Is the Obama State Department implying that North Korea engaged in an act of war?  If so, it seems like there should be consequences for such an act above and beyond concluding that it doesn’t meet an overly technical definition of terrorism.  (Anyone think the South Korean sailors weren’t terrorized as they died?)

The second reason is that “sponsoring” terrorism apparently requires a sovereign nation to have “repeatedly provided support” for acts of terrorism.  But when did sponsoring something require “repeated” support?  Is the local car dealership not a sponsor of a Little League team unless it “repeatedly” sponsors them?  At this point, does “repeated” mean twice, or more than twice?  And is North Korea staying off the list because they did an act directly instead of just “sponsoring” it?  Just tell the North Korean government what it has to do to get back on that list, Mr. Crowley!

People are dying to know.

May 22nd, 2010 at 11:46 pm
Is Kim Jong-Il the World’s Most Powerful Man?

Not only is North Korea responsible for the unprovoked sinking of a South Korean warship, the American intelligence community concludes that the government’s supreme leader, Kim Jong-Il ordered the attack.  It’s difficult to fathom any government other than North Korea’s being able to kill 46 members of another country’s military personnel by executive fiat, and be threatened with – at most – a United Nations sanction.

Since North Korea’s “Dear Leader” has it in his power to kill other people’s sailors at whim and expect almost no response, maybe he is the powerful man in the world.  If not, wait ‘til he gets a nuclear bomb.

May 20th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
If Gangsters Get the Death Penalty for Drive-By Shootings, Why Can’t Rogue Governments Who Target Warships?

If a carload of Crip gang members shot up a Los Angeles Police Department bus killing 46 officers, every gang member involved would be convicted of murder and given the death penalty.  They wouldn’t be fined and given a stern warning.

So, why can’t that law enforcement approach be applied to rogue governments like North Korea who was identified as sinking a South Korean warship, an act that killed 46 South Korean sailors?  After all, “cop killers” are singled out for particularly harsh penalties precisely because they target the guardians of law, order, peace, and safety.  How can the mass murder of 46 military personnel aboard a sovereign nation’s vessel be any less of an attack on a nation’s security?

Sadly, that isn’t the tenor coming from South Korean officials and their allies.  They sound like they’re more interested in meaningless United Nations resolutions and economic sanctions.

The South’s president is vowing to “take strong resolute countermeasures against North Korea and make it admit its wrongdoing through strong international cooperation.”  Such cooperation includes calling the North’s attack “inexcusable” (Japan) and an “act of aggression” (USA), which are only slightly bolder than China’s declaration that the event is “unfortunate.”

The truly unfortunate reality is that we live in a world where terrorist groups and governments slaughter innocents under the guise of fictitious provocations, while so-called civilized societies let those who volunteer to defend their safety suffer the consequences of enlightened restraint.