10.10.2006 | We already know what did not work

So, what does the North Korean nuclear test have to do with Israel or Jews? Just everything. Do we think that Arab and Muslim terrorists will not buy from the North Koreans because they are not Muslims? And a rogue state that is insanely hard up for cash wouldn't ask too many questions if some moke with a rag on his head stops by with a few hundred million in oil revenues.

The North Korean nuclear test was provocative; it was intended to be. The Hermit Kingdom is testing us, and, so far, we are what the Red Chinese, now our "friends" call a "paper tiger."

The missiles the NKs fired last July 4? "Unacceptable." The perhaps-nuclear test this week? "Unacceptable." What has not worked in stopping these "unacceptable" events has been diplomacy and engagement of Dear Leader Kim.

Despite the flashing neon signs to the effect that diplomacy will not work on this bunch of lunatics, all the usual suspects are still urging more of the same. The New York Times in their editorial whines that it "has been months since negotiators even sat down at the table." Yes, that's the ticket. If we could just find the right shape for that table...

Absent bombing North Korea back to the stone age (oops, forward to the stone age...) our options are limited but we do have them. Just not the ones that the diplomats and appeasers in Congress and the academy would have us exercise.

The current path, going to the United Nations, is a total waste of time. The Security Council is unlikely to do anything meaningful that we could not more readily accomplish by pressuring the North's protector, China.

Let me modify this: the Security Council may issue fine-sounding rhetoric, but that's all it ever will be. Virtually since the first Korean war 55 years ago, the only time that there's been meaningful UN-sanctioned action is when the Russkies go out for some borscht and vodka.

I don't mean that the North Korean problem is easily solved. I do mean that we should not waste any further time or money appeasing them, a la Clinton. His administration's approach was promise anything just to kick the crisis far enough down the road so that they don't have to deal with it. Monica was much more fun, anyway...

The closest I've seen to a realistic proposal so far comes from James Robbins at NRO:

...the U.S. should do what it should have been doing all along: put pressure on Kim’s regime in every way possible. Sabotage, espionage, information operations, subversion, deception — the works.

For those who say that such methods are too destabilizing and will interrupt the diplomatic process, I say: 1) They are supposed to be destabilizing; 2) The diplomatic process has brought us to this point, so why are we so enamored of it?

Stability in Northeast Asia is every much as over-rated as is stability in the Middle East. When a situation becomes unacceptable, in the everyday plain sense meaning of the word, and not how it is used in diplomatic doublespeak, then it is time for a change.

Change means some form of destablization. For North Korea, now is not too late. Tomorrow may well be.