After North Korea tested its second would-be intercontinental missile earlier in the month (another failure as you'll recall), amid the panic that was swirling about the North Korean 'threat', I argued that the best response would be to just ignore the whole thing. Why? Because the North Koreans have yet to have a test of any of these feared weapons (the ICBMs or nuclear bombs) end in success. But past that, North Korea uses weapons tests like a five year old uses a temper tantrum – as a desperate bid to get your attention and give them what they want. So why play the game?
It seems that the Cato Institute agrees. Earlier in the week Doug Bandow, one of Cato's senior fellows, argued that in dealing with North Korea, we need to change the rules of the game - namely to not get sucked into negotiations in order to stop the North Koreans from developing another dreaded weapon, and that the best way for the US to react is "with bored contempt rather than excited fear" the next time Dear Leader Kim decides to play with one of his missiles or bombs.
All of this isn't to make light of the situation in North Korea, which is fairly dreadful. Bandow correctly states that there really are no good options when it comes to dealing with North Korea. Kim Jong-Il's health is obviously poor, though he has no clear successor, meaning when he does die, there will likely be a power struggle (check this BBC piece for a possible contender to replace Kim). And this will happen in a country that already has a starving population and a crippled economy (both thanks to Kim's fetish for dumping billions of dollars into weapons like ICBMs and nuclear bombs).
Of course even after all that sacrifice North Korea still can't make one that actually works properly. And that's the point of the Cato Institute article - in dealing with North Korea its best to focus on the very real problems posed by the country and not to scare ourselves silly over imaginary threats.
No comments:
Post a Comment