Defiant N. Korea Vows to Confront U.S.

SEOUL, South Korea - Showing no willingness to ease tensions over its nuclear weapons program, North Korea vowed Wednesday to build an army-based "powerful nation" and defy pressure from the United States.

North Korea said it fears a possible U.S. military attack, but President Bush said he was confident the North's nuclear issue can be resolved through diplomacy.

"This is not a military showdown. This is a diplomatic showdown," Bush said Tuesday.

North Korea, in its New Year's Day message, called on its people to unite under "the banner of the army-based policy" and build a "powerful nation" to counter a possible U.S. invasion. The reality is that North Korea is impoverished and dependent on outside food aid, much of it supplied by the United States via the U.N. World Food Program.

"The United States is now becoming all the more frantic in its moves to stifle (North Korea), openly clamoring about a preemptive nuclear attack on it," said the message, carried on the country's foreign news outlet, Korean Central News Agency.

The English-language message did not mention rising international concern over Pyongyang's decision to reactivate its nuclear facilities at Yongbyon, but stressed the importance of uniting around the country's military.

In an apparent effort to take advantage of an upsurge in anti-U.S. sentiment in South Korea, the message urged "all the Koreans in the North and the South and abroad" to join in confronting the United States.

"It can be said that there exists on the Korean Peninsula at present only confrontation between the Koreans in the North and the South and the United States," it said.

U.S. and South Korean officials say their alliance is strong, though North Korea often has tried to drive a wedge between them.

Some South Koreans worry that the nuclear dispute could trigger armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula, the world's last Cold War frontier. More than 2 million troops are massed on both sides of the Korean border, while about 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea.

South Korean President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, who won a Dec. 19 vote partly because of surging anti-U.S. sentiment among his people, on Tuesday warned against "blindly following U.S. policy."

"The United States should consult fully with South Korea, rather than making a decision unilaterally and then expecting South Korea to follow it," said Roh, who begins a five-year term in February.

Roh supports outgoing President Kim Dae-jung's "sunshine" policy of engaging North Korea. They believe dialogue is the only viable way to resolve the North's nuclear issue peacefully.

South Korea sent a senior diplomat to Beijing on Wednesday to try to win Chinese support in persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. Lee Tae-sik, South Korea's deputy foreign minister, will meet Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing on Thursday, South Korean officials said.

U.S. and South Korean deny a rift is developing between the two close allies over the nuclear dispute.

But in the past two days, both Roh and Kim have expressed concern that Washington might impose heavy economic pressure on Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions, and this could backfire and harden the North's stance.

U.S. State Department spokesman Philip T. Reeker said, "I don't think anybody has suggested at this point imposing sanctions."

Anti-U.S. sentiment was evident on the streets of Seoul on New Year's Eve, when about 22,000 South Koreans gathered near the U.S. Embassy to protest the deaths of two teenage girls accidentally killed in June by a U.S. military vehicle.

Two U.S. soldiers whose vehicle killed the girls were cleared of negligent homicide charges in U.S. military courts last month.

Some protesters shouted for an end to the U.S. military presence in South Korea.

Tensions over North Korea's nuclear ambitions intensified Tuesday when Pyongyang expelled two U.N. inspectors monitoring its nuclear facilities and signaled it might pull out of the global nuclear nonproliferation treaty.

North Korea's ambassador to Moscow, Pak Ui Chun, told Russian news media Tuesday that his country intends to free itself from its last legal obligations under the international nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which seeks to confine nuclear weapons to the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China.

In recent weeks, North Korea removed monitoring seals and cameras from nuclear facilities at Yongbyon that were frozen under a 1994 deal with the United States. It says it is willing to resolve concerns over its nuclear program if the United States signs a nonaggression treaty, but Washington rules out any talks before the North changes course.

I wonder if N.Korea is trying to help Saddam by trying to draw some of the fire. Hoodlum nations stick together.

If we did not believe this to be true, then our whole concept in the first place of an AXIS OF EVIL would be devoid.

Of COURSE, they are coordinating. They are an AXIS. Nazi Germany, Teikoku Japan and Fascisti Italy all coordinated.

We tell it like it is (e.g., they are in cahoots) and then some are surprised when they actually do what we suspect and accuse them of doing.

We will have to deal with all three within the next two years, IMHO.

North Korea has very little to sell outside of some technology. I mean how many scuds can a country like Yemen buy. It would be a lot easier to get this sort of technology somewhere else if there was an embargo put on the North Koreans. And I don't see other countries that surround them helping. They are just as worried as we are that the Koreans have a nuke. If done properly, an embargo could work. Just look at Cuba and Libya. I will grant you that these dictators are still in power, but their countries have been crippled.

The Bush administration (especially Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and company) have talked about creating a "Democratic Iraq." This is almost an impossible job in great part because Iraq has no democratic tradition to build on. When I brought this up I was thinking of those who confidentally point to the the German and Japanese models of U.S. democracy building.

If "not walking away" is not the same as "nation building," then what is it? When Dubya said this, he was not just talking about military occupation but something more. If it wasn't nation building that he had in mind, what was it?

Having said that, I do not believe that defeating Saddam's forces in the initial stage will be that difficult. In fact, his generalis will probably overthrow him as soon as the troops cross the border IMHO. I am far more worried about the long-term occupation. In my view, it will indeed take a decades long pacification and military occupation througout Iraq....for the simple reason that the Iraqis have little to hold them together.

Then again....nothing in certain in such matters. All the more reason, in my view, to prudently and firmly concentrate on the defense of U.S. borders rather than plunging into the darkness in an ancient hell hole half way around the world. <{P> Happy New Year

It is getting to be complicated though I sense a certain weariness from some conservatives. How many wars do the armchair world policeman think that they fight at the same time? One would have hoped that conservatives would have learned more from the failures in Kosovo, Haiti, and Somalia.....but apparently many of them continue to think (like the liberals do on welfare) that "it can work this time if we do it right!"

South Korean President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, who won a Dec. 19 vote partly because of surging anti-U.S. sentiment among his people, on Tuesday warned against "blindly following U.S. policy."

Move our troops south, well away from the border.

Tell the dog-eaters that this is Step One of a plan to vacate the country completely.

Let's see how "anti-U.S." they remain. And if they call our bluff, so be it. Let's pull out.

Let them eat dogshit.

The Iraq people are a multi-religious/ethnic stew who hate each other and have no common tradition.

Sounds like a harvard elitists Nocturnal Emission doesnt it. Gee, Multiculturalism is a big success dont you think?

Second, Iraq has *no* democratic tradition to build on. At least, the folks in Japan and Germany had relatively recent democratic memories.

Japans tradition was a genetic imperial monarchy and Germany had the Kaiser before WWI was considered a tyrannical emporer... the Germans chafed under the democracy imposed by the League of Nations. And didnt Iraq just have a 'democratic' election that voted for Saddam as the Supreme Generalissimo by a 100% Margin? No Democratic tradition indeed!

Finally, the U.S. has a poor recent record in nation building and "securing" democracy e.g. the abject failures in Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo and Somalia.

Where is the United Nations when you need them?? Oh yeah, too busy passing Resolutions Condemning the Isrealies for defending themselves against Al Quedan Hizbullah and Arafats Fatah Murderers. Those Bloodthirsty isrealies. Not to mention the all important and thinly veiled effort to cripple the Economy of the world with a myopic agreement trying effect a negligible reduction in CO Emissions.

Better yet, let's concentrate on something that is manageable: "securing" building up the defense of the U.S. rather than overextending ourselves in futile and expensive world policing.

World's too small for isolationism....

Look... either lead, follow or get out of the way... but lets get with the program.

The N. Korean government is much more tricky to take out than that of Iraq, and we'll be in a better position to focus on it once we have secured Iraq.

And that's precisely why No. Korea isn't going to wait for us to take care of business in Iraq before they make their move, which could be anything from the quick manufacture of literally dozens of nukes to even invading South Korea. If the latter is the case our 37,000 troops will be sitting ducks for the North Koreans million man army now poised on the southern border.

When I brought this up I was thinking of those who confidentally point to the the German and Japanese models of U.S. democracy building.

Yes, different than Japan/Germany in that respect. Along those lines, what traditions of democracy existed in Japan/Germany when they were "rebuilt"?

If "not walking away" is not the same as "nation building," then what is it?...If it wasn't nation building that he had in mind, what was it?

Yes, that is the question. Your guess is as good as mine.

I do not believe that defeating Saddam's forces in the initial stage will be that difficult. In fact, his generalis will probably overthrow him as soon as the troops cross the border IMHO.

It will be interesting to see how much fighting we actually have to do to ensure the end of the WMD regime. I'm with you that this initial phase will be quite short.

...the Iraqis have little to hold them together.

Yes I believe this will be the problem that haunts us. But I don't think that it will be only the US helping.

All the more reason, in my view, to prudently and firmly concentrate on the defense of U.S. borders ...

I couldn't agree more! But there are differing opinions on the best way to do this. Some say close borders and bring all soldiers home from foreign lands. Some say put soldiers in every village in the world. While I am neither of those, each group has the best interest of the US at heart... just that they have different ideas on how to do it.

IMHO we need to severely restrict borders AND actively seek out and destroy known terrorist enemies...JMHO.

Does anyone think this timing is just happenstance or just the N. Korean's deciding that it is the optimum time?

Obviously the former. They know our downgraded military (thanks to Clinton) would be hardpressed to fight two wars simultaneously. We essentially have three options at this point, and each is disconcerting, to say the least:

1) Pre-emptive strike on North Korea's nuclear facilities. Of course, we can't be sure that such an action will not provoke them to invade the South.

2) Economic pressure combined with a military blockade of their export of missiles (to Iraq and Syria). This is risky because of the unliklihood that their gov't will collapse peacefully.

3) Let them joing the nuclear club (which includes dangerous Pakistan), and rely on nuclear deterrence. The message this would send is a very dangerous one -- that mere possession of such weapons buys one international respect, and is unlikely to result in any punitive action against the possessors.

I have been thinking for quite a while that the North Koreans and Iraq did a conference call and decided to pull this stunt.

Hmmmmm and maybe we vacuumed up that call and finally traslated it, and everyone wondered where Bush was coming from in the state of the Union Speech a year ago, when he said we have an Axis of Evil?

And then some decided to use Bush's Axis of Evil term against him politically?

I hope we can get some more Clintonites on the record, talking about the cowboy diplomacy of Bush. It will make for some great exit polls in Nov 04.

We probably agree more than disagree. I have to run but briefly, Germany had a democratic tradition with the Weimar Republic which (had it not been for the depression) would have survived. Even under the Kaiser, Germany had a tradition of elections (including opposition parties in parliament) and a relatively free press.

Japan also had a democratic/free market tradition though much weaker than Germany's. As Milton Friedman has pointed out, Japan's initial economic development in the late ninteenth century was modeled on the British free market model of gold standards and free trade. After the turn of the century, it also had parliamentary elections and, for a time, a series of relatively democratic prime ministers, and a fairly cosmoplitan middle class.

This tradition was quick weak, however, when compared to Germany. During the 1920s and 1930s, the militarists were able to seize power through coups and assasinations. Nevertheless, Japan had *more* of a tradition of democracy than Iraq which has literally nothing to build on.

In my post #36, I meant "obviously the latter," not the "the former."

I knew what you meant, but I didn't phrase it very well. I don't think it is either, happenstance or just N Korea by it self. They have rushed this up so fast, they are walking on their own threats. I say they haven't given up their night job, but they found a new part-time way to earn some hard currency from Saddam.

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.