http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/3586
Right Web | Analysis

Neocons: Regime Change or Bust

Jim Lobe | October 11, 2006

IRC Right Web
rightweb.irc-online.org

Encouraging Japan to build nuclear weapons, shipping food aid via 
submarines, and running secret sabotage operations inside North 
Korea's borders are among a raft of policy prescriptions pushed by 
prominent U.S. neoconservatives in the wake of Pyongyang's nuclear 
test.

Writing in venues ranging from the National Review Online (NRO) to 
the New York Times, neoconservatives are claiming, contrary to 
lessons drawn by "realist" and other critics of the George W. Bush 
administration, that the nuclear test vindicates their long-held view 
that negotiations with "rogue" states like North Korea are useless 
and that regime change-by military means, if necessary-is the only 
answer.

"With our intelligence on North Korea so uneven, the doctrine of 
preemption must return to the fore," wrote Dan Blumenthal, an Asia 
specialist at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) who worked for 
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld during Bush's first term, in the 
NRO (October 10, 2006). "Any talk of renewed Six-Party Talks 
[involving China, Japan, Russia, the United States, and the two 
Koreas] must be resisted."

The North Korean test "has stripped any plausibility to arguments 
that engaging dictators works," according to Michael Rubin, a Middle 
East specialist at AEI, who added that the Bush administration now 
faces a "watershed" in its relations with other states that have 
defied Washington in recent years.

"This crisis is not just about North Korea, but about Iran, Syria, 
Venezuela, and Cuba as well," according to Rubin. "Bush now has two 
choices: to respond forcefully and show that defiance has 
consequence, or affirm that defiance pays and that international will 
is illusionary.

"[He] must now choose whether his legacy will be one of inaction or 
leadership, Chamberlain or Churchill," he added in a reference to the 
pre-World War II debate between the "appeasement" of British Prime 
Minister Neville Chamberlain and the war policy of his successor, 
Winston Churchill.

The neoconservatives' influence on the Bush administration has 
generally been on the wane since late 2003 when it became clear that 
the Iraq War, which neoconservatives had championed, was going badly. 
Nonetheless, neoconservatives retain some clout, particularly through 
the offices of Vice President Dick Cheney and Pentagon chief Rumsfeld.

They are opposed by the "realists," who are concentrated in the State 
Department and also include former Secretary of State Colin Powell, 
his chief deputy Richard Armacost, and a number of top national 
security officials in the administration of former President George 
H.W. Bush, such as former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft 
and former Secretary of State James Baker.

The realists' stance is anathema to the neoconservatives and their 
right-wing allies, such as Cheney, who, at one National Security 
Council meeting on North Korea several years ago reportedly said, "We 
don't negotiate with evil; we defeat it."

The neoconservatives' main area of concern has historically been the 
Middle East-indeed, their central focus in recent months has been 
publicizing the threats to the United States and Israel allegedly 
posed by Iran and Hezbollah and opposing any realist appeals to 
engage Tehran and Damascus in direct talks. But they have also been 
warning for some time against "the appeasement" of North Korea and 
its chief source of material aid and support, China.

In their view, Beijing has always had the power to force Pyongyang to 
give up its nuclear arms programs, and the fact that it has not done 
so supposedly demonstrates that China sees itself as a "strategic 
rival" of Washington, a phrase much favored by administration hawks 
during Bush's first year in office.

Indeed, in the most prominent neoconservative reaction to the North 
Korean test to date, in a New York Times column former Bush 
speechwriter David Frum called for the administration to take a 
series of measures designed to "punish China" for its failure to 
bring Pyongyang to heel. Frum, who is also based at AEI and is 
sometimes credited with inventing the phrase "axis of evil" for 
Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, urged the administration to 
cut off all humanitarian aid to North Korea, pressure South Korea to 
do the same, and thus force China to "shoulder the cost of helping to 
avert" North Korea's economic collapse (October 10, 2006).

Frum urged that Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and 
Singapore be invited to join NATO, and that Taiwan, which China 
regards as a renegade province, be invited to send observers to NATO 
meetings. He also suggested that Washington "encourage Japan to 
renounce the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and create its own 
nuclear deterrent."

"A nuclear Japan is the thing China and North Korea dread most 
(after, perhaps, a nuclear South Korea or Taiwan)," he asserted. "Not 
only would the nuclearization of Japan be a punishment of China and 
North Korea," he wrote, "but it would also go far to meet our goal of 
dissuading Iran [from obtaining nuclear weapons] Š The analogue for 
Iran, of course, would be the threat of American aid to improve 
Israel's capacity to hit targets with nuclear weapons."

Other neoconservatives echoed Blumenthal's position that the 
Six-Party Talks should be abandoned and called for the administration 
to resist any further appeals for bilateral talks between Washington 
and Pyongyang, which have been repeatedly made by China, South Korea, 
and Russia, as well as by realists in the United States, over the 
past several years.

"There will be renewed calls for bilateral talks between Washington 
and Pyongyang. That would be a mistake," opined a lead editorial in 
the neoconservative Wall Street Journal, which also urged the United 
States to "make clear that a military response is not off the table."

Other commentators called for strong efforts to achieve regime 
change. James Robbins, senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy 
Council, called for covert action, including "sabotage, espionage, 
information operations, subversion, deception-the works. A highly 
paranoid totalitarian regime like Kim [Jong Il's] will be highly 
susceptible to these methods," he predicted.

At the same time, former House Speaker and Defense Policy Board 
member Newt Gingrich, also based at AEI, said he favored continuing 
shipments of U.S. food aid but through a covert delivery system 
"consciously designed to undermine the dictatorship."

"Food might be parachuted into the country, delivered from submarines 
and small boats by clandestine services, shipped in from China and 
Russia through anti-regime middlemen and delivered in every way 
possible to divert energy and authority away from the government and 
toward an alternative organizing system of individuals dedicated to a 
better, more prosperous, life," he wrote.

Like his fellow neoconservatives, Frank Gaffney, president of the 
Center for Security Policy, called for accelerated development and 
deployment of Washington's embryonic but extraordinarily costly 
missile defense system, including a ship-launched system that could 
shoot down ballistic missiles of various ranges, "whether launched 
from places like North Korea or from tramp steamers off our coasts."

He also urged Washington to resume periodic underground nuclear tests 
of its own, ending a moratorium on such testing announced by former 
President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

Jim Lobe is a contributing writer to Right Web 
(rightweb.irc-online.org) and the Washington bureau chief of the 
Inter Press Service.

 


_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to