Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHY KERRY'S WRONG ON KOREA
New York Post ^ | October 4, 2004 | PETER BROOKES

Posted on 10/04/2004 6:28:37 AM PDT by OESY

John Kerry has strongly criticized the Bush adminis tration for its "go it alone" — or unilateral — approach to foreign policy. For months, Kerry has claimed America has shouldered too much of the burden in Iraq by itself. He says he would have taken a multi-national — or multilateral — approach, bringing along more allies for the fight and the reconstruction afterwards.

But after vehemently denouncing the Bush administration for being a cabal of foreign-policy unilateralists who needlessly alienate allies at every opportunity, Kerry took quite the unilateral tack himself — on North Korea.

After singing the praises of multilateralism in Iraq in last Thursday's debate, Kerry reversed course at the podium to castigate President Bush's refusal to engage in head-to-head (read: unilateral) negotiations with North Korea over the Stalinist state's nuclear-weapons program.

[E]ven more important than Kerry deviating from his "Multilateralism or Bust" approach to foreign policy is that he failed to mention that America already tried unilateralism with North Korea under the Clinton administration.

The result? It failed miserably....

Of particular note, the administration realized that the country with the most influence on Pyongyang is China, its largest aid donor and most powerful neighbor. Beijing was needed to put the squeeze on a reluctant North Korea to bring it to the negotiating table as well as ensure Pyongyang's future compliance with any new agreement.

It's also clear that failure to include China and other regional powers as stakeholders with a voice in the outcome of the talks would mean almost-certain failure for any agreement — and continued Korean nuclear brinkmanship and blackmail.

...[T]he only effective way to end the North Korean nuclear game — completely, verifiably and irreversibly — is to meet it head-on with a united, multilateral diplomatic offensive.

...Kerry's head-to-head approach won't fare any better.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: carter; china; clinton; coalition; defense; frameworkagreement; iran; japan; kerry; kerryforeignpolicy; kimjongil; missile; multilateralism; northkorea; nuclear; pakistan; proliferation; southkorea; unilateralism

1 posted on 10/04/2004 6:28:39 AM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OESY

Wow! From the NYT's? Spanking their god JF'nK? Must be a mistake that slipped through!


2 posted on 10/04/2004 6:31:15 AM PDT by 50 Cal (A Lawyer is nothing but a Politician in Larval Form!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY

Very simple. China tends to make NK more "cooperative". Take them out of the picture and KJL will flip off the world.


3 posted on 10/04/2004 6:32:43 AM PDT by UsnDadof8 (Proud Virginian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY

Kerry is wrong about everything. His supporters are also wrong about everything. Makes one suspect they smoke a lot of dope.


4 posted on 10/04/2004 6:33:21 AM PDT by RightWhale (Withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and establish property rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY

In John F-ing Kerry's mind he is never wrong as he is the greatest thing since sliced bread and above all the peon's out there. Besides that, he is a Vietanm Vet.


5 posted on 10/04/2004 6:34:48 AM PDT by Piquaboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 50 Cal

No it was from the Post and not the Slimes


6 posted on 10/04/2004 6:35:11 AM PDT by hawkaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hawkaw

Looks like I did a CBS.

That will teach me to post before coffee!


7 posted on 10/04/2004 6:41:43 AM PDT by 50 Cal (A Lawyer is nothing but a Politician in Larval Form!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 50 Cal
Looks like I did a CBS.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

8 posted on 10/04/2004 6:43:54 AM PDT by hawkaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy
"Besides that, he is a Vietanm Vet...."

Well Dang! I didn't know that........where did you hear that?

9 posted on 10/04/2004 7:22:18 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OESY

Even the Korea issue is another fine example of the madness that the RADICAL LEFTIST DEMS represent. Not one lesson learned from what their reprobate Billy did??? Yet even though wrong -- they preach it BECAUSE IT IS ANTI-BUSH METHODOLOGY --- EVEN IF IT IS WRONG!!!!!


10 posted on 10/04/2004 7:35:44 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY

The Clinton administration, including many officials now working for Kerry's team gave North Korea half a billion dollars in aid to bribe them to not develop nuclear weapons. The aggressive bilateral approach taken by Clinton in the Agreed Framework of 1994 led to the current prolif situation in North Korea. By 1999 Congressional committees acknowledged that the bilateral policy of North Korea did nothing to stop the nuclear weapons development that had taken place by then.

This bilateral aid provided food and oil to the million man army of North Korea profoundly perpetuating one of the deadliest Stalinist regimes of our time.


11 posted on 10/04/2004 7:37:32 AM PDT by lonestar67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY
The best hope for a peaceful resolution of the NK nuclear standoff is to persuade the CHICOMs that if Kim Jong Il isn't disarmed soon, Taiwan (which is developing a cruise missile of its own), Japan and (possibly) South Korea will soon have nukes. This may involve actual pronouncements by the Allied governments concerned, or it could be done through information operations (e.g. "leaking" news reports of Japanese intentions). Once the Chinese clearly understand what they could be up against if all of Asia goes nuclear, they will develop a now missing sense of urgency to compel Kim Jong Il to disarm.
12 posted on 10/04/2004 7:51:16 AM PDT by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson