Working the Axis of Evil
■"U.S. and Allies Agree on Steps In Iran Dispute: Incentives and Penalties on Nuclear Issue," by David E. Sanger and Steven R. Weisman, New York Times, 11 March 2005, p. A1.■"South Korean Aid To North Increases Tensions With U.S.: Seoul, Fearing Collapse, Tries To Keep Neighbor Afloat; Nuclear Situation Heats Up," by Gordon Fairclough, Wall Street Journal, 11 March 2005, p. A1.
The U.S. agrees to a joint approach with the Europeans to offer economic carrots to Iran to stop its nuclear effort. We'll give Tehran spare parts for its aging jetliner fleet and we'll support their entry into the WTO, something we've successfully blocked in the past. If this doesn't work, the Bush White House sends all the signals that it'll push for UN Security Council resolutions that elevate the tensions further.
What has Iran said all along? It will not stop enriching uranium under any conditions and that, because it's a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation, it's allowed to do so for peaceful purposes.
We should have both low expectations of success with this offer and low hopes for any meaningful action in the UNSC, because China is likely to veto any effort given its recently-concluded huge oil and gas deal with Iran. Further pressure from the U.S. on this issue is likely to push Iran to give us more trouble in both Iraq and Lebanon/Palestine and Israel. Eventually, we'll be forced to decide what we want more: an isolated Iran or a peaceful Middle East. But I do not believe we can have both at the same time.
As for North Korea, we're told we'll never get serious support from South Korea to change the regime in the North because it "would be simply too expensive, in both economic and political terms." Not everyone agrees with South Korea's rather fantastic projections of the economic cost of rehabbing North Korea, noting that it doesn't have to be done overnight (it never occurs that way) and that the private sector will bear the brunt of the burden, as well as the subsequent profit. As the article points out, "critics also say that South Korea isn't doing enough to prepare itself in case Kim Jong Il's regime does fall. Instead, Seoul seems to do its level best to prop the regime up with foreign aid and investment.
How long is the rest of the Core supposed to pay, in terms of defense effort, to defend itself against North Korea's missiles or its spread of WMD? America's number one rationale nowadays for Star Wars-lite is North Korea. So I guess we should pay whatever it takes to make sure that South Korea, the world's 10th-largest economy, doesn't get stuck with any bills too large to pay.
And if all that suffering to the North doesn't move them to open up their wallets, America should just pull out of the peninsula militarily, because Seoul shouldn't be able to have it both ways.