Bush warns N Korea but options are limited
Bush warns N Korea but options are limited
By Guy Dinmore in Washington
Published: October 9 2006 18:28 | Last updated: October 9 2006 23:45
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Although President George W. Bush delivered a stern warning to North Korea over the consequences of its nuclear test, analysts say the US has few options but to rely on its international leverage, which has been severely weakened by the war in Iraq.
Critics say the Bush administration blundered in trying to confront North Korea in late 2002 just as it was committing itself to invading Iraq.
“The Bush administration deserves particular criticism,” said Gary Samore, vice-president of the independent Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “They had unrealistic expectations of what they could achieve through pressure. The US ability to coerce North Korea is quite limited, especially in the middle of a war with Iraq.”
US relations with China, already under strain over its support for Iran and Sudan, will be further tested as the US pushes for a tough response through the UN Security Council. Russia’s drift towards war with a US-backed Georgia also complicates US efforts to get its way with Moscow.
Washington is seeking UN approval for 13 measures, most crucially inspections of cargo moving in and out of North Korea and a ban on trade in “dual use” materials that could be applied to development of weapons of mass destruction. Less controversial is the proposed ban on selling “luxury goods” to North Korea.
US ambitions to set up a global network of allied states willing to intercept suspect cargo by land, sea and air led to the formation in 2003 of the Proliferation Security Initiative. China has refused to join, however. It would be wary of giving a blanket approval for such interceptions, and analysts in Washington rule out a full naval blockade.
“That’s an act of war that could get out of hand if challenged by North Korea,” Mr Samore commented. “The US is not in a position to start a conflict on the Korean peninsula.”
Wang Guangya, the Chinese envoy to the UN, called on the Security Council to respond “firmly, constructively and prudently”. Ted Galen Carpenter of Washington’s Cato Institute warned of a chill in Sino-US relations, saying the US might view “prudent” as “a synonym for weak”.
North Korea may be calculating that the punishment it might suffer from China and South Korea will be short-lived as they weigh up the dangers of a nuclear-armed regime imploding under economic duress.
Minxin Pei, director of China studies at the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, said Beijing was angry at having its “face rubbed in the dirt” by North Korea but its priority was to “contain the fallout rather than punish”. China might restrict energy supplies to North Korea but was unlikely to cut off all food supplies or support blanket interdictions, Mr Pei commented.
Even before the test, US officials did not hide their frustration with what they saw as China’s foot-dragging. But some are starting to concede that the US might have overestimated China’s influence and even the extent of its intelligence gathering.
The crisis over North Korea may also affect the impasse over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The failure of US policy towards Pyongyang had already influenced a shift towards a more pragmatic approach in dealing with Tehran.
By Guy Dinmore in Washington
Published: October 9 2006 18:28 | Last updated: October 9 2006 23:45
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Although President George W. Bush delivered a stern warning to North Korea over the consequences of its nuclear test, analysts say the US has few options but to rely on its international leverage, which has been severely weakened by the war in Iraq.
Critics say the Bush administration blundered in trying to confront North Korea in late 2002 just as it was committing itself to invading Iraq.
“The Bush administration deserves particular criticism,” said Gary Samore, vice-president of the independent Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “They had unrealistic expectations of what they could achieve through pressure. The US ability to coerce North Korea is quite limited, especially in the middle of a war with Iraq.”
US relations with China, already under strain over its support for Iran and Sudan, will be further tested as the US pushes for a tough response through the UN Security Council. Russia’s drift towards war with a US-backed Georgia also complicates US efforts to get its way with Moscow.
Washington is seeking UN approval for 13 measures, most crucially inspections of cargo moving in and out of North Korea and a ban on trade in “dual use” materials that could be applied to development of weapons of mass destruction. Less controversial is the proposed ban on selling “luxury goods” to North Korea.
US ambitions to set up a global network of allied states willing to intercept suspect cargo by land, sea and air led to the formation in 2003 of the Proliferation Security Initiative. China has refused to join, however. It would be wary of giving a blanket approval for such interceptions, and analysts in Washington rule out a full naval blockade.
“That’s an act of war that could get out of hand if challenged by North Korea,” Mr Samore commented. “The US is not in a position to start a conflict on the Korean peninsula.”
Wang Guangya, the Chinese envoy to the UN, called on the Security Council to respond “firmly, constructively and prudently”. Ted Galen Carpenter of Washington’s Cato Institute warned of a chill in Sino-US relations, saying the US might view “prudent” as “a synonym for weak”.
North Korea may be calculating that the punishment it might suffer from China and South Korea will be short-lived as they weigh up the dangers of a nuclear-armed regime imploding under economic duress.
Minxin Pei, director of China studies at the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, said Beijing was angry at having its “face rubbed in the dirt” by North Korea but its priority was to “contain the fallout rather than punish”. China might restrict energy supplies to North Korea but was unlikely to cut off all food supplies or support blanket interdictions, Mr Pei commented.
Even before the test, US officials did not hide their frustration with what they saw as China’s foot-dragging. But some are starting to concede that the US might have overestimated China’s influence and even the extent of its intelligence gathering.
The crisis over North Korea may also affect the impasse over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The failure of US policy towards Pyongyang had already influenced a shift towards a more pragmatic approach in dealing with Tehran.
posted by Carlos T Mock @ 7:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home