A Delegation That SHOULDN'T Go to North Korea

HONOLULU: Some unsolicited advice to professors, congressmen, former diplomats and anyone seeking a Nobel Peace Prize nomination: If you really want to help resolve the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula, stay home.

Such delegations are always well intentioned but generally not very helpful in actually resolving the crisis. True, former President Jimmy Carter's mission to Pyongyang in 1994 did help save the day, moving the Clinton administration and Kim Il Sung, father of North Korea's current leader, back from the brink of sanctions and possibly war. But 2004 is not 1994 and heads of recent delegations, competent as they might be, fall short of Carter's prestige and capabilities. The delegation that plans to visit North Korea this week is headed by John Lewis, a Stanford professor emeritus and a genuinely sincere scholar, and includes Jack Pritchard, a former diplomat who likewise means well but should know better. The delegation may visit the North Korean nuclear complex at Yongbyon, where reprocessing of spent fuel rods has reportedly taken place.

Even with the former director of the Los Alamos laboratories, Sigfried Hecker, in the entourage, it is questionable just what the group may be able to ascertain, if they indeed make the side trip to Yongbyon - North Korea has yet to confirm that this excursion will be allowed. Even if they return with an intelligence coup, it is likely that the potential diplomatic damage would far outweigh any benefits from the trip.

Like earlier trips by Representative Curt Weldon, Republican of Pennsylvania, and Don Gregg, a former ambassador to South Korea, the end result is likely to be counterproductive. At best, North Korea uses such trips to play rival American political factions against one another while also trying to drive a deeper wedge between the United States and its other dialogue partners - South Korea, Japan, China and Russia - over how to proceed in dealing with North Korea.

The current delegation may also create false illusions in North Korea about alternative ways out of its current dilemma other than returning to the six-party talks, which it recently agreed to do "in principle" but not yet at any set date. It will also interfere with the efforts of the State Department diplomats whom the Bush administration has tasked with actually solving this problem. Whether or not you agree with the Bush administration's approach toward North Korea, it is clear that the United States and its partners are at a sensitive juncture in trying to get Pyongyang back to the negotiating table while also maintaining one voice in demanding that there must be a "full, verifiable and irreversible" end to North Korea's nuclear weapons program. If all the Lewis delegation was going to do was to reinforce this message - as a recent European delegation did - at least it would do no harm. But if the end result is to make new suggestions - as Curt Weldon did, going as far as presenting his own plan for solving the crisis - this will complicate and could delay or undermine the careful diplomatic effort that has gotten us to where we are today.

As long as North Korea sees the opportunity to create more mischief, it is unlikely to sit down and negotiate away its nuclear weapons program. Creating new delays or diversions merely plays into the hands of those in Washington - and their numbers are strong and growing - who see no value in pursuing the diplomatic option in the first place. Private diplomacy, especially by those ill suited to perform such a task, is no substitute for the real thing. If, in the end, an independent delegation proves necessary, may I suggest - stealing a thought from Charles Morrison, president of the East-West Center - someone more suited to the task and perhaps more likely to be listened to in Pyongyang: Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Libyan leader.

Like Kim Jong Il, Qaddafi was caught with his hand in the nuclear cookie jar. But rather than turn confrontational, he decided to come clean and a peaceful dismantling of Libya's nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction programs is now under way. (Having just witnessed what happened to Saddam Hussein may have had something to do with this, despite Libyan denials.) Perhaps Qaddafi could talk some sense into Kim Jong Il; it is doubtful that the current American delegation will.

The writer is president of Pacific Forum CSIS, a Honolulu-based research institute affiliated with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

The North Koreans are playing the US like idiots. It is extremely wise for the Administration to have distanced itself from such a delegation (in fact, should not even allow it to go in the first place) as it clearly undercuts US negotiation strength vis-a-vis North Korea. Not to mention, the trip is being put togther by factions in the US clearly opposed to the Bush Policy...this is something that North Korea, Bill Richardson, Jimmy Carter, Howard Dean, Jack Pritchard, Sig Hecker, Bill Clinton, Mad Albright, South Korea's appeasing President Roh, and others can all agree with and drink from the same trough.

Fact is, suspicion is that the North Korean mission in NYC to the United Nations, namely Li Hyung Chol, made overtures to his friend, to the delegation through the Carter Center or another appeasing intermediary (Richardson?), and paved the way for their visit to Pyongyang, N.K. and, perhaps, "Yangbyon". It is a foolish visit and a foolish delegation.

The U.S. ought to seize the passports of the delegation members upon arriving back in the United States.

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
51	South Dakota	20.00	1	20.00	44	0.45	30.00	2

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

John Lewis is the Stanford "China expert" going.

This is Clinton team that transfered or wanted to transfer all sorts of technology to China 10 years ago.

Now they are going to N. Korea?

"John Lewis is the Stanford "China expert" going. This is Clinton team that transfered or wanted to transfer all sorts of technology to China 10 years ago. Now they are going to N. Korea? "

You got it. Highly exploitable. Highly agenda-ed.

This is the shadow opposition cabinet of scientists and sellouts.

I guess selling America to the Chinese People's Liberation Army wasn't enough for them in the 1990s (as covered extensively here on FR). They want a goodly portion, too, of the USA within range of DPRK Taepodong-2 nuclear ICBM 'umbrella'.

They will all occupy prominent positions in a Dean Administration, and the Korean Workers Party will have gotten their hooks in good. Good wedge & control operation.

[In fact, regarding 'occupying prominent positions' somebody ought to debrief them or hook them up to the wire and see if they were offered any 'Asian delights' from the 'kipmujo' team when they were in Pyongyang........]

Prior to the recent war in Iraq, there were many private delegations that took it upon themselves to visit Baghdad. Between them, and the efforts of the French and Russian diplomats, they encouraged the false notion in Saddam's head that he might defy Bush's ultimatum and survive it.

In effect, the private peace delegations guaranteed war by making Saddam think he had another way out. They did not avoid war, they sealed the deal. Had Saddam understood that there was no way out, and had he understood that he was going to wind up in a hole in the ground, war could have been avoided.

We have in part these private efforts to thank for keeping Saddam in his palace right up until the end. Its better this way, a transition government which followed a voluntarily exiled Saddam would have left the Baathists alive and in power.

Saddam could have indeed not have had deadly false hopes, were he not successful in the various wedges that he drove between the 'peace' and 'war' factions in the United States and the world.

Had those delegations not gone to Baghdad, Carter-esque, to "seek peace", as you said:

A) There would have been some deal for Saddam to go into exile in some M.E. country. (As it stands now, his sons were killed and he himself will be executed).

B) A new regime that the US could have dealt with may have been instituted, and the US would have gone in to conduct the necessary inspections without war.

JUST as you say, marron, these self-proclaimed Nobel Hopefuls and their retarded actions ACTUALLY GUARANTEE THE LIKELIHOOD OF WAR, just as throughout history such Chamberlainian exploits have always emboldend tyrants and only put off the inevitable day of their demise, but allow them to build up forces in the meantime whereby many many more people are killed in the conflagration.

...Chamberlainian exploits have always emboldend tyrants and only put off the inevitable day of their demise, but allow them to build up forces in the meantime whereby many many more people are killed in the conflagration.

Indeed, BTTT! We have learned from our grandparents and parents to fight threats to liberty before it's too late. Noble Nobel prize winning appeaseniks , Dean, and their ilk would forget the lessons of our war dead, pretending that mere negotiations mean anything to these kinds of powers.

But we haven't heard the last of this story. Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea must stand with us in resolute will to strike this monstrosity despite the risks involved if we can gain no provable disarmament. As for proliferation, that too must be verifiably ended.

The free world's future generations deserve better than for us to back down by empty negotiations.

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.