The Korean Issue

North Korea has publicly stated that it has nuclear weapons today:

ALERT! North Korea Admits It Has Nukes

The BBC is now running a story about the US' uncertainty about whether or not the claims are true:

US uncertain over Korean nuclear capability

The fact is, in strategic terms, North Korea's announcement has not really changed much.

...as we are so often told, intelligence rarely deals in certainties.

And until North Korea tests a nuclear warhead - or in other words, sets off a nuclear explosion for everyone to see - a measure of uncertainty about what Pyongyang does and does not have will remain.

And Pyongyang's sudden, stark claim to being a nuclear power will not change that.

It seems that the US administration is still purposely driving NK towards nuclear development and are now daring them to set off a nuclear explosion to "prove themselves".
.

Gools Gools Gools, the problem with NK is that it cannot be "driven" anywhere or to anything, nor can its capricious foreign policy be in anyway dealt with strategically. Whatever ones take on the Bush administration's grand strategy NK is clearly the wild card that they wish would shut up and go away. Rebuilding NK is as scary to the White House as Kim's nukes.

as posted by deevee
Rebuilding NK is as scary to the White House as Kim's nukes.

Don't mind me, but what are you exactly refering to when you mention "rebuilding," deevee? Is this a reference to after Kim is removed by a military coup or when he dies? Is this a reference to after a deal is struck between Kim and the US and others? Is this a reference to if a 'war' takes place? I'm mystified by your comment here; I'm not grasping your "rebuilding NK" remark.



seekerof

as posted by Gools
It seems that the US administration is still purposely driving NK towards nuclear development and are now daring them to set off a nuclear explosion to "prove themselves".

It "seems" that what you elude to is a matter of personal perception, no?
N.Korea does not need and has not needed any type purposeful pushing or nudging to seek and acquire its own nukes. You may view the current US policy as such, but does that take into account past U.S. policies, as well?

In the case of "daring" N.Korea, there is no "daring". Again historically, virtually all of the major nuclear capable nations have ultimately tested nukes. Russia, India, Pakistan, France, etc. have set off nukes, in nuclear testings, as referenced from your current article, "for everyone to see," hence what you quoted from your article:

And until North Korea tests a nuclear warhead - or in other words, sets off a nuclear explosion for everyone to see - a measure of uncertainty about what Pyongyang does and does not have will remain.

And Pyongyang's sudden, stark claim to being a nuclear power will not change that.

As mentioned, till they do test one, N.Korea's claims will have to be verified by other means, and Kim simply reiterating that they possess nukes is either a ploy, gamble, imaginary, or for real. N.Korea testing one will only allow the verification process to become simplified. Not seeing a 'dare" here; just plain simple past nuclear testing historical sentiments.



seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by deevee
Rebuilding NK is as scary to the White House as Kim's nukes.

Don't mind me, but what are you exactly refering to when you mention "rebuilding," deevee? Is this a reference to after Kim is removed by a military coup or when he dies? Is this a reference to after a deal is struck between Kim and the US and others? Is this a reference to if a 'war' takes place? I'm mystified by your comment here; I'm not grasping your "rebuilding NK" remark.



seekerof

Just saying that IMHO the White House doesn't have a NK agenda as Gools suggests. No option is palatable and Kim's mercurial policy makes a coherent strategy damn near impossible.

I don't believe there is a strategy I think Kim is a wild card that is dealt with reactively rather than proactively.

Edit: I LOVE the avatar Seekerof

[edit on 10-2-2005 by deevee]

Originally posted by Seekerof
It "seems" that what you elude to is a matter of personal perception, no?

Yep. Pretty much personal opinion based on the material in this thread.

N.Korea does not need and has not needed any type purposeful pushing or nudging to seek and acquire its own nukes. You may view the current US policy as such, but does that take into account past U.S. policies, as well?

Past U policies are taken into account. That is why Im thinking that either the US does not really care if NK gets nuks or the US by either accident of design is pushing them towards it.

I mean, if I was a leader of a country and I had made a deal with a foreign power to give up my nuclear program in exchange for some much needed light water reactors to generate electricity and feed my people and the foreigh power reneged on the deal... then called my country and evil menace...and then seeing their willingness to attack another country under false pretenses... I might also try to defend myself by at least claiming to have the ultimate deterrent.
.