Last week–as the Bush administration sees it– diplomacy came out victorious in the standoff between North Korea (aka the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) and the five other “parties” attempting to halt its nuclear weapons program. Pyongyang submitted an accounting of its nuclear arsenals to the Chinese government–a first step in reigning in the nuclear weapons program North Korea declared to be persuing back in 2003. To further demonstrate its intentions, on Friday the DPRK exploded the cooling tower of one of its main nuclear reactors.
In turn, the US removed North Korea from the “Axis of Evil,” more specifically, from its list of state-sponsors of terrorism, as well as the lifting of some economic sanctions. As President Bush remarked in the rose garden after the DPRK's declaration:
“The six-party talks are based on a principle of “action for action.” So in keeping with the existing six-party agreements, the United States is responding to North Korea's actions with two actions of our own: First, I’m issuing a proclamation that lifts the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act with respect to North Korea. And secondly, I am notifying Congress of my intent to rescind North Korea's designation as a state sponsor of terror in 45 days.”
Condoleezza Rice sounded triumphant in a Wall Street Journal column published the day of the declaration titled “Diplomacy is Working on North Korea:”
“If North Korea chooses cooperation , by fulfilling its pledge from the September 2005 Joint Statement to “abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs” , a path is open for it to achieve the better and more secure relationship it says it wants with the international community. That includes the U.S. We have no permanent enemies.”
The declration could be considered a victory for diplomacy not only because diplomacy was the method employed to reach the deal, but also because the US’ diplomatic agency (the State Department) beat out the White House to change to course of US policy toward North Korea after much wrangling on this issue. According to the New York Times:
“In the internal Bush administration war between the State Department and Mr. Cheney's office over North Korea, Secretary of State Condoleezza Riceand her top North Korea envoy, Christopher R. Hill, won a major battle against the Cheney camp when President Bush announced Thursday that he was taking the country he once described as part of the "axis of evil" off the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism.
The administration sought to portray the move as a largely symbolic, reciprocal move, made in return for North Korea's long-delayed declaration of its nuclear program to the outside world. It is the first step in what will be a long, drawn-out diplomatic process that is meant to lead eventually to establishing a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula…
…Thursday's announcement intensified a pitched battle in Washington, where Democrats and many foreign policy experts said the administration had dithered too long before reaching this deal, allowing North Korea to acquire enough plutonium to make several nuclear weapons. From the other side of the fence, conservative hard-liners complained that the United States gave away too much for too little, and should have adopted a more absolutist approach with the secretive North Korean government.”
But for many critics, diplomacy won too little too late. Again the New York Times’ Helene Cooper explains:
“Accusing the North Koreans of violating a previous diplomatic accord on ending its nuclear program, called the Agreed Framework, which was negotiated during the Clinton administration, Mr. Bush pulled out of talks with North Korea in 2002 and pressed to isolate the North Korean government. The abandonment of talks gave North Korea greater leeway to produce plutonium and become a nuclear power, critics say.
Had Mr. Bush instead stuck with a diplomatic course, the critics say, North Korea might not have acquired enough plutonium to make a nuclear weapon.
“What is absolutely clear is the decision they took in 2002 to terminate the Agreed Framework gave North Korea the opening" to kick international inspectors out of its Yongbyon nuclear plant and press ahead with its work on the bomb, said Carlos Pascual, director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. "That was the tragedy of the Bush administration's policy," Mr. Pascual said. "That by opting for terminating our engagement, we opened the door to North Korea's becoming a nuclear power."
On the other hand, John Bolton, a former Ambassador to the UN and old Bush administration hand, said of the declaration “"This is a sad, sad day… I think Bush believes what Condi is telling him, that they're going to persuade the North to give up nuclear weapons, and I don't think that's going to happen. I think we've been taken to the cleaners."
Steve Clemmons, foreign policy expert at the New America Foundation, captures the contradictions in this victory” for diplomacy, and gives credit where credit is due:
“This is huge news– and is a giant step in putting US-North Korea relations on a new and more constructive track. This is a success for the Bush administration– and more importantly for Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian & Pacfic Affairs Christopher Hill who has been a punching bag for former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton who has been spitting on Hill's deal-making for the last year.
There are still a lot of questions ranging from the interesting issue of North Korea cooperation with Syria's alleged nuclear facility that was destroyed by Israel and other issues — but when President Bush gave Colin Powell the positive nod in the first week of April 2003 to proceed with the Six Party Talks, Bush and Cheney ignored Iran's offer of a structure for normalized US-Iran relations the very same week in 2003.
The contrast in circumstances between where America is today with North Korea and where we are with Iran is vital to note. We ‘engaged’ North Korea and blew it with Iran.
Congrats to Christopher Hill, John Negroponte, Condoleezza Rice, the former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns and his successor William Burns. And for those who want to knock China around, they should know that this entire process was impossible without China's impressive, collaborative diplomacy.”
Clemmons talks more about the implications of this move in this video:
[kml_flashembed movie="http://youtube.com/v/CGX62o5iWAA" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
