Envoy: N. Korea Is Misunderstood

United Nations special envoy Maurice Strong sees himself as a bridge for peace between the United States and North Korea:

"The single most important thing that comes out of my discussions there is their strong conviction that their country is threatened by the United States," says Strong. "They contend that that is the reason, and the only reason, that they require nuclear weapons."

As CBS News Anchor Dan Rather reports, Strong says it was President Bush's State of the Union speech two years ago that shook them.

"They were very influenced, indeed shocked, by their designation as part of the 'axis of evil,'" says Strong. "That confirmed to them that they were next on the U.S. list of those subject to attack."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/26/eveningnews/main619762.shtml

Watch out Maurice, Bush is sending Novak to kill your wife instead of just outting this time.

Sort of like the Bush misunderstood Saddam's nuclear weapons?

I live in Korea and I can say that North Korea does not feel they have to have them because of Bush. That ego-centric, maniacal, fool (Kim, although this description applies to shrub too) began his program long before shrub-nut was elected. Kim's goal is to unite Korea under his oppressive and ruthless rule.
In North Korea if you commit a "political crime" like singing the wrong song, you and two other generations of your family are thrown in jail.
Kim lies. And anyone who believes what they (north korea) say is a fool.

because it was clearly evident that the KEDO was not going to live up to it's obligations under the agreed framework deal made in 1994 (which only came about because then South Korean president Kim Young Sam said that if the US attacked North Korea, South Korean troops would not budge an inch in support). Now I don't know if you're familiar with this little tidbit of information, but the North is highly dependant on outside energy supplies, so they were trying to build their own (ie nuclear power).

However, North Korea knows that they need nuclear weapons now more than ever because they've seen what Bush will do to countries that have no means to defend themselves (besides killing thousands of South Korean and Japanese) against America. Think about it for a second. If North Korea wanted to attack, do you think they would do it now, when the country is still chronically mal-nourished, or back in the late 70's early 80's when they had the support of the USSR and China, an dthe country was still in relatively good shape?

This whole uranium enrichment program is still very much undecided, they still don't know if the uranium that was reportedly sold to Libya (I just find that too convenient, Libya re-joins the "free" world, then bam...up turns the North Korean uranium) is yellow cake or refined uranium. Article from today's Korea herald
I'l also argue with the author of the article I linked to: he says that "There is no innocent explanation for Pyongyang's enrichment program and hardware acquisition around the world and therefore, for related fuel developments at the front or "uranium" end, it states.

"There is no economic rationale for an independent enrichment program in a small country like North Korea, with plans for only one or two light water reactors before KEDO postponed the project." "

However, there of course is the small matter of fact that North Korea relies on coal and hydroelectricity for power, and both of those are somewhat unstable in North Korea. Now why wouldn't they want to develop another means of generating electricity...

Let's hope that the two Koreas can come to an agreement on their own, without US intervention (the CVID demand is ridiculous). The more South Korea invests in North Korea, and the more meetings they have, the closer they can move toward peaceful reunification.

In 1995, Kim said, "Nuclear weapons are the cornerstone of a respected modern country. India and Pakistan are respected nations because they have nuclear weapons. North Korea should be respected as well." This is not a vague comment that can be taken any other way than he wants nuclear weapons.
You can say that he feels more pressure to have nuclear weapons now than he did in 1995. But the fact still remains that he has said many things that keep people in this country (Republic of Korea) on alert.
No one in Korea (South), except for the exceedingly small and insignificant communists, see him as anything but dangerous. His weapons program did not crop up over night. It began before 2002 (KBS1-TV in Korea reported of such a progam in 1999).
North Korea is NOT going to give up their program. NOT because they fear bush and the US (shrubbies inane comments do not help), but because kimmie sees nuclear weapons as his road to respectability.

I assume he meant that such nations are not as easily pushed around by the self-appointed World Cop. The nuclear apartheid club commit international crimes daily, raping the world over the span of decades, but their ability to destroy anybody who would do something about it allows them to do so with impunity.

For a modern example of what happens to those who don't, Saddam Hussayn did not have any such weapons, and Iraq was easily invaded and occupation, now seeing its people murdered, seized, raped and tortured on a regular basis.

I don't much care for the current incarnation of the DPRK, but such is perhaps a piece of the reasoning behind it.

After the Clinton-Bush people swindled and lied to them in the 90s "agreement".

I also happen to live in South Korea, in fact I've been here since 1996. I would say that the majority of people between 20 and 30 see him as neither here nor there, rather they see North Korea as a completely foreign country. Or they might even see the US as more of a threat:
link 1
link 2

If he said that in 1995 (I'd like to see some links to that and also to the report that KBS1 TV ran in 1999), it was most likely because in 1994, the US had stationed nuclear weapons in the ROK and were seriously considering using them link


Here's an article that is wholly without merit from the JoongAng Ilbo-Korean views of US examined

Some choice quotes from that article:
"Younger and better-educated South Koreans tended to have the least favorable view of the United States" wel duh, anyone knows that he more education you have, the more you are able to question.

"The United States should survey Korean textbooks, teaching methods, teachers' incentives and schools' curricula to see if they might be encouraging anti-American views, the report said. American media reported late last year that the U.S. Embassy here had already begun examining Korea's history textbooks, hoping to tone down any anti-American bias." lol...I can just picture the US ambassador: 'Yes South Koreans, we view you as equals...'

I can always count on you to point out the shades of grey between the extremes.

Thank you!!!

decades before them..

Nobody in this corner of the world, including the Chinese Government, will tell you the the Korean government (South) is a threat to anyone. The Republic of Korea has had an elected government since 1988 and has a very small standing army. There are only four countries with standing armies larger than 1,000,000 persons (the US, China, Russia and North Korea). Prior to 1990, three of those countries posed a severe and immediate threat to Korea.
Kim has said on numerous occassions that his father will be buried in Seoul. And he will use whatever methods necessary to make it happen.
Do NOT EVER equate the intentions of the two Korea's on the same plane. The North is a brutal dictatorship that employs fear, torture and starvation as methods of control.
The Republic of Korea for all its faults, has a good democracy, an independent National Assembly (the Impeachment Vote and the subsequent elections of April bear that out), and a citizen body that freely criticizes it's government and does not go to jail for it.

...for having a slightly kooky and paranoid neighbor to the north.

http://www.g2mil.com/Jan2001.htm

I somewhere remember reading 600,000 soldiers, counting reserves and lots of modern equipment. They can take care of themselves.

And the right wing here is wailing and gnashing their teeth that the US is pulling out 3,700 American troops for the folly in Iraq, abandoning the South in the process. And of course that's what happens when the South Koreans voted for that dirty liberal Roh Moo Hyun :eyes:

"Oh but those are the 3,700 invincible troops who wouldn't get killed by artillery shells!!"

More like a bizarre death cult.

nt

Axis of Evil and Evil Doers is certainly a threat for war in my book.

The neat thing N.Korea did was tell W to "bring it on"

Can't help but laugh.

Senator Nunn said this yesterday at the CSIS press conference on Nuclear proliferation.

The fact is that the N. Korean nuclear program was an economic endeavor that incidently presented a proliferation threat. The economic goal was to produce more energy. The North has a substantial supply of nuclear fuel. The US focused on the proliferation threat and the Clinton administration came up with a relatively inexpensive fix in the agreed framework. The stonewalling and delays on US performance in the light water projects were early evidence of bad faith on our side. When the US failed to perform, the N.Koreans began talking of resuming their nuclear projects. The more apparent the US anticipatory breach became, the more concrete northern threats of weapons programs became.

This administration then quit performance of virtually all aspects of its obligations under the agreed framework.

As far as the N.Korean military is concerned, it is not very strong at all. Size is no indication of strength. Most N.Korean soldiers are hungry and spend their time in common labor and looking for food. The threat to Seoul is substantial because of its proximity to the North. The N.Korean armed forces however are not capable of a sustained offense, because of shortages of fuel and antiquated equipment. I couldn't see any N. Korean offense getting across the Han River in the face of S.Korean forces augmented by the US Air Force. However, as former Secretary of Defense William Perry has noted, the threat of the destruction of Seoul is a big enough bargaining chip.

But it is the threat of economic and social collapse of the north from internal weakness with the ability to sell strategic nuclear materials that is the threat. Any US military agression against the North would eventuate in a Chinese military response which would prove diastrous for our nation. There is already a stabilizing nuclear threat on the peninsula, it is China. In order to raise itself from the status of doormat for the clash of the great powers, with the genocidal losses that go along with that, Kim thinks having a nuclear threat is helpful. The objective is to resume an economic and political relationship with the Americans with the Chinese overlooking as a fair broker. This position is hardly nuts or crazy.

Just before the mysterious explosion at Sinuiju, Cheney was in Korea and annouced to the troops that, we would, "destroy the vestiges of oppressive regimes." American ignorance of the Chinese committment to the demilitarized zone as the border of its strategic interest is what is destabilizing in northeast Asia. As the Chinese say, after listening to the ranting and raving of lunatics like Cheney and Bolten, " the US doesn't have a policy in northeast Asia."

Got a link for that Nunn speech? Would be much appreciated to have a link to a US politician making some sense about North Korea.

Annyong!!

I don't have a link.

That would be wednesday, American time. This conference was primarily focused on security issues in Russia concerning nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, to direct attention of the G8 to make this a priority, which has been sorely neglected, in part, due to the opportunity cost of war in Iraq. Issues were money, (30 billion needed), lack of transparency in the US and Russia, the absence of leadership and priority in US and Russia, and antiquated cold war views in a world where the cold war has basically been over for fifteen years. The matter was regarded as an urgent problem which would ultimately result in smoking nuclear ruins of a major city if nuclear weapons end up in the hands of non-state actors with "no return address."

The Korean proliferation issue came up in the question and answer period and was briefly discussed by the former Senator. He said he did not believe that a military solution was possible and that the Chinese would have to be enlisted to make a diplomatic solution happen. He also considered the N.Korean proliferation issue a greater threat than Iraq, which after all was the most inspected and searched country on the face of the earth and was proven not to be such a threat. He referred to the extensive tunneling of N. Korea making knowledge of the location of nuclear materials virtually an impossible task in military terms.

Ultimately, Nunn stated that the failure to move on the Russian special weapon issues, was a "10,000 times greater threat" than Iraq.

Anyang, Chen sun seng nim. Su go het saw yo!

you be thinking about us?