Global News : Passport : Ricks : Drezner : Walt : Rothkopf : Lynch
The Cable : The AfPak Blog : Net Effect : Shadow Govt. : Madam Secretary : The Call
Quick hits on the Clinton field trip to North Korea
You'd think I would have something very deep to say about former President Clinton's recent excursion to Pyongyang to secure the release of two U.S. journalists. Well, I have four reactions, but I'm not sure how deep they are:
- Man, the North Koreans love backchannels more than Henry Kissinger. They love backchannels more than MTV loves stupid reality shows involving washed-up former rockers. They love backchannels more than Obama loves teachable moments. They love backchannels more than Ryan O'Neal loves hi--[We get the point--ed. Right, sorry.] The North Korean government has always used unofficial interlocutors to communicate with the United States when things get tough and they want a way out. I'm curious what their message was on the nuclear issue.
- While the DPRK might like private communications, Bill Clinton is no Jimmy Carter. Carter went on CNN in 1994 to announce the outlines of a nuclear deal with North Korea without fully briefing the Clinton administration. Clinton clearly remembers that experience.
- At the end of the day, the two journalists were released without any change in official U.S. policy. A fake apology from a former U.S. president might be worth something in Pyongyang, but it doesn't really amount to much.
- My visceral reaction to Clinton and his delegation sitting with Kim Jong Il posing for a formal photograph was one of complete and utter revulsion. I don't think Clinton apologized, but in many ways this looks worse.
Foreign policy should be conducted free of emotion, so I'm hoping that this feeling will fade fast. I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one who had this reaction, however. I'm therefoe betting that beyond providing fodder for Maureen Dowd during the dog days of August, this little rescue mission is going to complicate nuclear diplomacy with North Korea for a spell.
Advertisement
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Slate Group,
a division of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC.
All contents ©2009 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. All rights reserved.
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Contact me at:
ddrezner [at] gmail.com
(But click here to read my e-mail policy)
Reviews
"Sharp but informal commentary on politics and foreign policy." -The New Republic
"Dan Drezner is terrific.... Excellent blog." -Andrew Sullivan
"Dan's stuff is always worth reading." -Eugene Volokh
"One of the essential weblogs." -Gawker.com
"Old battle horse of the blogosphere." -Jewcy.com
"Soft porn." -Amitai Etzioni
"Spawned grave atrocities and vast destruction." -Glenn Greenwald
"Monday morning quarterback... conservative robot... the very foundation of troubles in this country." -not-so-random readers
Clinton held Hostage?
Very good post. My reaction to the photo was quite different - it looks like Prez Clinton is the one who was held hostage for four months. I have never been an FOB but even I felt for the guy. The look on his face is "I-can't-believe-the-s***-I-gotta-do." He just doesn't appear like the same man who about 9 years ago was itching to have his Nixon in Peking moment with the Koreans.
Photo
I had yet another reaction to the photo: I thought that Kim looked like a little kid trying really hard to look like an adult. Although i concur that Clinton looks extremely uncomfortable.
Intelligence Gathering
My reaction to the photo, and the entire ordeal, was that we probably gathered better intelligence about the internal workings of the regime in the past few days than we have in years. There are few better ways to assess Kim's health and the positioning of the various succession factions than by physically observing them in high-level meetings.
This is another side benefit of diplomacy and we traded precious little other than the discomfort some observers feel at their "sense of revulsion."
Don't kid yourself. You have
Don't kid yourself.
You have no idea what we gave up in exchange for their freedom. You may never really know what we paid (i.e. Saberi ransom paid to Iran).
Regardless, it's foolish to look at these situations in isolation; how we respond each time is an indicator for the regime that snatches Americans the next time. You think this won't affect how the 3 Americans arrested by Iran are going to end up? And the next time an American gets taken? Or even the willingness of these regimes to snatch Americans?
It's kind of ironic, in a
It's kind of ironic, in a way. Here was Clinton comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson after the S. Carolina primary. And what's Obama done? Basically turned Clinton into Jesse Jackson (or Jimmy Carter, if you prefer). I bet somebody's having a big laugh over it.
at least they didnt make him...
...wear a beanie
LOL
!
Two further reactions?
Nice one. By extension, I wonder whether, with all the emotion surrounding the return of the journalists, we are missing a bigger picture here.
1. What were the circumstances of their arrest by the North Koreans? According to some reputable press reporting at the time, they were aware of where the border was and warned not to cross it (other reports suggested they were actually apprehended in China). Surely journalists have a responsibility not to knowingly endanger themselves in this way, especially in such a politically contentious region? It's one thing to celebrate the return of Americans detained abroad. It's another to look past dangerous and irresponsible behavior. That's an important debate to have.
2. It's difficult to compare instances of detention around the world. But suffice it to note the contrast between (a) our repugnance at the detention of Americans in the DPRK and (b) our relative tolerance of some questionable, and highly politicized, detention policies in the West. I agree that we should be concerned about the well being of the released American journalists after several months in DPRK custody. But doesn't that underscore our obligation to deal efficiently and justly with our own detainees?
With regards to nuclear
With regards to nuclear diplomacy I think a more telling indicator would be the membership of the DPRK National Defence Council.
It might be politely described as being composed of hardliners from the military and security services following the 11th Supreme People's Assembly with the DPRK Foreign Ministry being effectively removed from the equation entirely.
So much like with Iran I'm still waiting to hear a single idea from the West's collective leadership on what might be done when it finally comes to pass that North Korea's nuclear positions turn out to be non-negotiables.
After 15 years of deception and program advancement in both country's cases maybe it's time to take their programs as a given.
want to post evidence of iran's weapons program...?
...or are we supposed to believe the same lies from the same liars who lied us into iraq?
You mean the IAEA?
You mean the IAEA?
who lied us into iraq?
who is attempting to lie us into iran?
if you have evidence of a nuke weapons program in iran, give it to the UN inspectors so they can bust iran for violating the NPT.
if your "evidence" is so shoddy that the inspectors cant find the program, how do you expect airstrikes to find the program?
...or are you just planning to lay waste to the whole country?
Perhaps you may want to refer
Perhaps you may want to refer to the IAEA reports that continually find Iran in non-compliance with it's treaty obligations.
As Mr. Drezenr said this time around it's the IAEA.
*sigh* I just punched
*sigh*
I just punched Wadosy's name into Google and discovered he's pretty much a raging conspiracy crackpot that ties everything back into Israel. Or as one wit put it "He/She has more loose screws than a Chevy".
9/11, Peak Oil, Financial Crisis you name it he thinks it's Israel's fault.
Any chance of getting an "ignore poster" button added to the comments section?
non compliance with the voluntary additional protocol?
.
...and...
.
as you probably know, iran's been trying to get nuke power...
...since the days of the shah.
at that time, seeing as how we'd overthrown the elected iranian govt and installed a puppet dictator, the US was supporting iran's nuke project with the "atoms for peace" program.
now that america's running out of oil and the israelis are running out of ideas, we suddenly find an interest in controlling iran's oil, gas, and pipeline routes, and also find ourselves confronted with a hostile govt in iran because our dictator was such a nice guy... remember SAVAK?
.
.
none of this appears to be my fault
Sadly for your little pet
Sadly for your little pet theory Wadosy Iran will probably be effectively "out" of oil by 2016 or so.
When you look at their declining exports coupled with expanding domestic demand they're scheduled to import more oil somewhere around 2015 than they export. And it will only continue to decline from there.
And neither the Russians or the Chinese have the technical competence to bail them out no matter what they may claim.
Which actually does give them a legitimate defence for a nuclear power program. Sadly the deceptions they've used in the past and continue to use according to the IAEA certainly leads a less... biased... observer than yourself to wonder precisely why they need to practice said deception for a program they'd be entitled to under international agreements anyways.
And care to point out precisely which pipeline routes Iran controls right now Wadosy? I'd be really curious to know.
Lastly... as for your SAVAK comment... it's also telling that while the mullahs executed most of the upper command they just rolled the rest of the SAVAK over into their own agency.
No need to discard a perfectly good tool of oppression after all. Or meet the new bosses same as the old bosses.
iran doesnt control any pipeline routes other than those...
...within iranian territory.
unfortunately, those pipeline routes would connect persian gulf gas and oil to china, would connect russian gas and oil to the gulf of oman, would connect persian gas and oil with europe, and would connect turkmenistan gas with europe, pakistan and china.
...but, thanks to the Project for the New American Century, iran has, so far, been unable to hook up to any international pipelines except for a few dribbles of gas from turkmenistan, and a few dribbles of gas from iran to turkey.
not to mention the fact that iran controls the gulf of hormuz, and 16 or 17 million barrels of oil a day go through hormuz.
do you honestly think there's anybody (outside of israel and israeli america) that thinks closing hormuz is a good idea?
please post urls to reputable sources confirming that the mullahs are using SAVAK.
nice to see you admit that iran has a legitimate reason for wanting nuke power.
please explain why your "evidence" of iran's weapons program is so lame that you cant direct the UN inspectors to the facility, and please explain how you can expect to damage the supposed weapons programs with air strikes if the UN inspectors cant find the program from the ground.
First off Iran is not a
First off Iran is not a natural gas exporter Wadosy.
Secondly there's nothing stopping Iran from connecting into any of the Russian sponsored pipelines that will allegedly be under construction any day no... no really any day now... such as Gazprom's South Stream project.
Or the entirely European controled Nabucco project for that mater... Well nothing aside from the fact they don't actually have anything to put into the pipelines of course.
As for the SAVAK you may want to consult a translation of Ruz Shalomar-e Enqelab-a Eslami (Chronicles of the Islamic Revolution) if you can find one... or alternatively pull your thumbs out and do a bit of research on the SAVAMA and it's successor the Ministry of Intelligence.
Lastly with regards to Iran's nuclear program I'm just going to quote the IAEA. Or in other words the onus is on Iran to prove it's in compliance:
19. Regrettably, as a result of the lack of cooperation by Iran in connection with the alleged studies and other associated key remaining issues of serious concern, the Agency has not been able to make substantive progress on these issues. For the Agency to make progress, an important first step, in connection with the alleged studies, is for Iran to clarify the extent to which information contained in
the relevant documentation is factually correct and where, in its view, such information may have been modified or relates to non-nuclear purposes. Iran needs to provide the Agency with substantive information to support its statements and provide access to relevant documentation and individuals in this regard. Unless Iran provides such transparency, and implements the Additional Protocol, the
Agency will not be able to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran.
iran is not a natural gas exporter...
...because the neocons wont let them export gas... bulgaria has signed onto nabucco, so south stream is up in the air. the main problem with nabucco is that israeli america has to steal enough gas from iran to fill it.
if you cant post urls to reputable sites confirming the mullahs' use of SAVAK, you have defaulted, in my opinion, to your natural state.
you might want to sort out which information in dispute came from the laptop from hell, which apparently was shopped, by israel, to jewish iranian ex-pat outfits (who wouldnt touch it with a ten-foot azerbaijanian) before the MEK came into play.
.
other than that, we agree on almost everything.
LOL The Neocons won't let
LOL
The Neocons won't let them export gas?
LOL
Oh man that's a good one.
It's actually due to the fact that Iran uses all of its natural gas supplies either for domestic consumption or reinjection at the wellhead to maintain reservoir pressure on operating wells.
As for defaulting to my natural state I'm not going to get into a link war with someone who's been booted off sites like Prison Planet if for no other reason than you're not going to listen even if I post them. If you want to do real research it's there but I'm not going to wate my time spoon feeding someone like yourself.
And given that it was information from the MEK that outted Iran's hidden nuclear facilities I think I'd rather believe them than someone, once again, like yourself.
So in a nutshell we actually agree on nothing so don't flatter yourself.
who torpedoed the...
iran/pakistan/india pipeline?
oh, and by the way... it seems that bulgaria had a change of heart about south stream today... which puts nabucco back up in the air.
it would probably help nabucco's chances if israeli america didnt have to steal gas to fill it, dont you think?
LOL No Wadosy in fact it
LOL
No Wadosy in fact it would help Nabucco's chances more if the Germans weren't shacked up with Gazprom and favouring either the Nord or South Stream deals for political reasons.
Given that Nabucco is supposed to provide Europe with a non-Russian source of Gas you may want to point your fingers at the Russians for any delays on it.
I would expect that once the Germans crawl out of bed with the Russians there are going to end up being some very uncomfortable corruption trials related to Gazprom's dealing in Western and Central Europe.
As for the Iran - Pakistan - India pipeline I would expect that ought to go through right about the point that the Iranians and the Balochis stop trying to kill each other.
Which should happen sometime around the heat death of the universe I suspect...
the unfortunate fact remains...
russia and iran have the gas, and you dont.
given the fact that north sea production has peaked, russia is the logical supplier for northern europe.
the fact that putin dumped the israeli russians who were such an integral part of the PNAC project is a tragedy, all right, but you'll get over it...
...or maybe you wont.
you've always got your samson option... and sooner or later, if you dont come to your senses, somebody will get around to calling your bluff.
did you miss the point of that "enduring turmoil" map?
stirring up the hillbillies is your preferred method of operation... you can sell them guns, then sit back and laugh as they kill themselves off.
when they finally capitulate, you can continue laughing at them because you never had the slightest intention of building their dismal pipelines in the first place.
just look how well that tactic worked out in the balkans... you filled the power vacuum caused by the collapse of the soviet union, but the AMBO and PEOP and SEEL and whatnot havent been built, for the simple reason that those pipelines were never anything more than lures to cause conflicts you could exploit.
all i know is what i read in the papers...
...and seeing as how we've been through this song and dance once before, with iraq, reports of israel fabricating the laptop evidence have more credibility than israel's accusations.
too bad, but that's just how it is.
you might want to take a little peek at...
...asaluyeh, where iran's south pars gas comes ashore...
that might give you an inkling of why exactly the neocons are so bent on grabbing control of iran's gas.
then you can look at gwadar, pakistan, where china installed five cranes at a cost of maybe 200 million bucks and has thereby lured israeli america into spending hundreds of billions on a project to thwart chinese access to persian gulf gas and oil.
Once again it just goes to
Once again it just goes to show that being able to google something doesn't imply any sort of understanding.
Once again Wadosy go look at the requirements Iran has... both current and projected... for domestic consumption of gas as well as use in Iran's petroleum industry.
Even if... and that's a major if I may add... the reserves in question will barely cover Iran's projected domestic use. And based off the Qatari there's every chance those reserves are over estimated anyway.
As the European companies involed in developing those fields may well find out. Assuming their projects ever get off the ground in the first place that is which based on Iran's contractual rules for foreign invilvment seems unlikely.
here's another couple hundred billion nails in iran's coffin...
Wonderful... they've signed a
Wonderful... they've signed a deal.
Now how much has actually shipped according to schedule?
Hhmmm... deal was signed in 2004 and almost six years later LNG shipped to date?
Zero.
Construction of LNG facilities will start when?
No idea. Not even shovel ready as far as anyone in the oil industry can tell.
Projected date LNG will start shipping? No clue on that either since Iran keeps botching it's end of the commercial negotiations and as China is finding out in Africa you want just as transparent a contract as Western companies would demand for very good reasons.
I would expect that 25 year contract will expire before Zhuhai Zhenrong sees any of the LNG shipping.
yeah, i have to admit it's kinda tough to build stuff...
when you're being continually threatened by people who are perfectly willing to trump up excuses to bomb the dogshit out of you.
And it's even tougher to
And it's even tougher to build stuff when the mullahs want to have their cake and eat it too contract wise.
In this case the regime has no one to blame but themselves.
Their buuy-back financing scheme makes dealing with them a lot like dealing with North Korea on nuclear negotiations.
The deal is as good as gold until they change their mind. And oddly even the Chinese don't seem to be too enamoured of that kind of contract...
sorry.
you've had iran in your crosshairs for years, and your 9/11 operation solidified everything for you, especially your control of america... which explains why PNAC said they needed "a new pearl harbor", and helps explain why bibi thought 9/11 was such a good deal.
so the PNAC people are installed by an election recount in a state governed by a PNAC signatory, then their "new pearl harbor" happens a few months later, then iran becomes part of the "axis of evil" because they have gas and oil and pipeline routes you need to control to establish your "benevolent global hegemony".
the thing that really scares you, i'd imagine, is that there are decent people who will outlast you because you need a dwindling resource to attain the might that makes you right.
Sadly for your little theory
Sadly for your little theory Wadosy I'm actually a Canadian.
And one who actually works for an international oil company so unlike yourself so I do have a nodding acquaintance with reality on this subject unlike yourself.
All I'm going to say here is the US simply needs a real oil shock as in the 1970s to re-align their consumption habits.
60% of oil consumed in the US right now is in the form of gasoline. All it will take to reduce US consumption is $150+ / barrel. And that's coming either through general demand or through instability in the US.
Ultimately the US can survive without Middle East Oil. Even China and India can based on how much of their current prosperity is based off US consumption and general economic well being. If nothing else they go back to being second/third world countries.
Can the petro-dictators survive without US dollars?
As Chavez will attest to right now probably not.
Give it another ten years of the current status quo and I would expect you're looking at massive upheaval in the Middle East in general due to the fact that not a single country in the region has a diversified economy.
although i also have to admit that there seems...
...to be a lot of stuff going on at asaluyeh, despite the fact that you are skeptical of the gas there.
too bad halliburton got busted for violating the sanctions and had to leave south pars, isnt it?
just looks to me you've bitten off way more than you can...
...chew.
Israel pushing for sanctions on Iran
so maybe the only thing left for you to do is bomb iran, and hope it wont escalate into global nuke war.
Gloabl nuclear war? Over
Gloabl nuclear war? Over Iran?
Hehe... that's a good one Wadosy. In your dreams maybe.
That raises a good point though. If I were Israel I'd be quietly pointing out to the Europeans and Asian countries who do purchase oil from Iran that unless they start putting pressure on Iran tehy may end up losing their source of oil
In terms of targets flattening Iran's five major oil export terminals and seven refineries would cripple the regimes income and ability to fund said nuclear program. And be a hell of a lot easier to execute than buried and hidden nuclear program sites.
I doubt the mullahs would last more than six to eight months in office after that. Admitedly it would probably end up being a Pasdaran junta that replaced them but once again no income = no anything.
like i said before...
if you think you can pull it off, go for it.
I would suspect it's
I would suspect it's coming... and sooner rather than later thanks to the utter inability of the so called "international community" to agree on anything of substance thanks to parochial interests.
Hizbullah seems to be soiling their pants right now over the possibility of an Israeli strike and removing that annoyance before a strike on Iran would definitely be a must so... we shall see.
your main problem is that the might that makes you right...
is totally dependent on petroleum.
your might will only last as long as the resource you're dependent on.
it's a problem.
Actually if you extrapolate
Actually if you extrapolate usage versus reserves out over the long term you'll discover that the US will actually be the best positioned in the coming decades thanks to the fact they haven't allowed exploration/exploitation anywhere.
Completely unintentional but in a hundred years the US may very well have the largest petroleum reserves left on the planet.
And once again it's not like any petroleum exporting country outside of Norway or Canada can afford to stop exporting oil.
Most of them would be neck deep in revolution inside six months if they did once the local elite and/or general populace lost their entitlements.
here's a map for you
iran: the hole in the neocon curtain
full size (careful, now... it's 3 mb)
as long as i'm doing maps...
"operation enduring turmoil" afpak
overview of the PNAC project for eurasia, south asia, north africa
dumb persians just dont understand, do they?
torture is good, executing regime opponents is good.
might makes right.
we've abandoned even the pretense of moral behavior, we got the horsepower, and we will bomb you to smithereens because we need an excuse to close hormuz so we can get on a total war footing, grab your oil and gas, and build those pipelines to israel.
how else is israel supposed to make a living once israeli america implodes from oil shortages and looters?
.
seems like a cockamamie scheme to me, especially in view of the fact that it's a rerun of the iraq fiasco, but what do i know?
and the backlash on israel could be real bad news.
on the other hand, if you think you can get away with it...
go for it.
blix was going "we cant find the weapons... cant find'em!"
...and he has to leave in his socks the night before they start shock-and-aweing.
then we spend millions looking for the wmds after we've occupied the goddamned place... still cant find them.
meanwhile, details of the "evidence" fabrication machinery start emerging, and anyone who'd been paying attention already knew about sharon's little office that manufactured "evidence" that the mossad refused to vet, and sharon's outfit passed the "evidence" to shulsky and feith and the rest of the neocons in the "office of special plans", which was set up to "stovepipe" the "evidence" past the professional intel agencies.
meanwhile, the neocon press, led by the new york times, was gobbling up crap from chalabi, one of the sleaziest operators ever to come down the pike... which is, i guess, what made him such a favorite of the neocons.
it stank, and this stinks.
Hey, if Bill Clinton
Had to endure a little bit of discomfort sitting with "Dear Leader" to get those women home, then so be it. It changes nothing with North Korea policy wise, and tells me the Big Dog still has it. Congrats to Bill and Hillary. Another thing is that Clinton came home, and probably gave the White House some good information on Kim's health. I thought it was a win-win.
Cruel Realism
I am fully aware of the cruelty in my statements, but my first reaction to the entire affair was anger that one of the greatest powers in history was viewed in terms of how the fate of two people was handled. I have the utmost respect for journalists as I, unlike a statesman, rely on journalism for information. However as someone who aspires to at least work for a statesman one day I have to say that it is a serious problem when two people's misfortune can ruin the policies of a nation of over three hundred million.
The only good I can find in the situation is that it was handled quickly, with relatively minimal concessions, and that it might be enough to convince the North Korean government to at least consider diplomacy.