Regardless of whether you're a Republican or a
Democrat, if you are concerned about events on the
Korean Peninsula, you had to come away from the first
presidential debate feeling quite distressed. Neither US
President George W Bush nor Senator John Kerry had his
facts straight and, collectively, they managed to
significantly reduce the already slim chance that there
would be any near-term progress in the currently stalled
six-party talks process.
In response to the
question as to whether he supported bilateral or
six-party talks with Pyongyang, Kerry rightfully stated
"both", but you had to go over the transcripts several
times to hear it, since he said it before moderator Jim
Lehrer had finished his question. Senator Kerry then
proceeded to talk exclusively about the need for direct
dialogue with North Korea, without once mentioning that
- as clearly stated in his official pronouncements -
this bilateral dialogue should occur within the context
of the six-party talks, not as a separate initiative.
What's worse, the best that he could say in
response to the president's repeated assertion that
bilateral talks would drive the Chinese away from the
table was that "Just because the president says it can't
be done, that you'd lose China, doesn't mean it can't be
done ... we can get those weapons at the same time as we
get China because China has an interest in the outcome
too." Neither one seemed to know that Beijing - like
Seoul, Moscow, and even Tokyo - have long encouraged
Washington to deal directly with Pyongyang and that, at
the last round of talks (in late June), such a side
discussion actually occurred between the US and North
Korea, much to China's (and everyone else's) delight.
By repeatedly pledging that his administration
would not discuss the problem one-on-one with the North
because "it's precisely what Kim Jong-il wants", the
president has once again undercut the credibility of his
own negotiators while seemingly putting his personal
disdain for North Korea's leader ahead of the pursuit of
America's national security interests. To paraphrase
Kerry, just because Kim Jong-il wants us to do it
doesn't mean it's the wrong thing to do. The key
question, avoided by the president and barely touched
upon by Kerry, is "would direct dialogue between
Washington and Pyongyang, within the context of the
six-party talks, enhance or detract from the
accomplishment of our objective (the complete,
verifiable, irreversible dismantlement of North Korea's
nuclear weapons program - which neither candidate chose
to mention)?"
Before the debate, it seemed that
the Bush administration's answer to this question was a
cautious "yes". Has the president "flip-flopped"? If
there were any South Koreans left who were still
prepared to give the Bush administration the benefit of
the doubt when it proclaims that it is willing to solve
the problem diplomatically and is not intent on regime
change, they must be shaking their heads wondering,
"Where do we go from here?" The Republic of Korea
government is also wondering why President Bush (once
again) neglected to mention South Korea's contribution
to the war in Iraq - the third largest foreign troop
presence after the US and UK (unless you count the
thousands of al-Qaeda "troops" that have flocked to Iraq
since the US invasion).
President Bush was quick
to "correct" Senator Kerry that the problem with North
Korea today is uranium enrichment, not plutonium. The
real problem, of course, is both. Yes, it was the
discovery of North Korea's clandestine uranium
enrichment program that prompted the current crisis in
October of 2002. However, while the Bush administration
has been busy fighting with itself over how best to
proceed with this crisis - with hardliners consistently
attempting to undermine various diplomatic approaches -
the North Koreans have thrown out inspectors,
reprocessed 8,000 spent fuel rods, and now claim to have
"weaponized" the extracted plutonium; actions that
Senator Kerry alluded to once in passing but did not
seem prepared to focus on, despite his stated belief
that nuclear proliferation is the greatest threat facing
the United States today. This was one of the few points
on which the two candidates agreed (although President
Bush rightfully added that it was not proliferation per
se but the fear that such weapons would fall into the
hands of terrorists that constituted the real danger).
If the situation on the Korean Peninsula is a
serious one - and both candidates seem to agree that it
is - and if nuclear proliferation is the greatest threat
that America faces in the future - another common point
of agreement - then you would think that President Bush
and Senator Kerry could at least get their facts
straight and understand their own stated positions
before entering into an internationally televised
debate. They clearly had their positions on Iraq
memorized, and found opportunities to repeat them
continuously, regardless of the questions being asked.
Perhaps before their next debate they could
acquaint themselves with the issues and be prepared to
discuss events outside Iraq that also constitute a
threat to America's national security interests.
