Friday, November 13, 2009

South Korea grows a pair; Obama asks "A pair of what?"

To South Korea's Navy I say, "Nice shooting."

Apparently 'Lil Kim decided to test SK resolve by ramping up naval tensions. The ROK navy responded by blasting one of his rickety battle ships.


South Korea understands that the KFR is a bully. They realize that, like any bully, they will push you until you punch them in the face, then they will cry and run away. This is a good sign for South Korea's ability to defend itself. It shows that their military is becoming both operationally capable and confident enough to meet a threat with violence of action, and that kind of assertiveness is as important in deterring a war as it is in winning one. 

The Obama administration, on the other hand, doesn't understand how to handle the KFR. Just a few days after the incident between the KFR and ROK the administration announced that the U.S. is willing to meet bilaterally with the KFR.

This is a great disappointment to me. Less then two weeks ago, I wrote that SECSTATE Clinton
seemed determined to ramp up tensions with the KFR in order to collapse the regime. It now appears that the adminstration has decided to go in a different direction, continuing the absolutely pointless 6 party talks on non-negotiable issues - like the KFR's criminal nature and need for nuclear weapons.

The KFR is not a state - it is a criminal enterprise. Expecting the State Department to negotiate with the KFR is no different then asking the attorney general to negotiate with John Gotti, rather then sending the FBI to snatch him up and throw him in jail.

This is not change I can believe in.

Of course, I should note that Stephen Bosworth, and not the SECSTATE, announced the bilateral talks, so its entirely possible Obama is being forced to use his own people (assuming Bosworth - a "special envoy" actually works for the White House and not for the State Department per se) because Clinton's people - maybe - just maybe - understand the futility of negotiating with the KFR.

No comments: