
T
he sudden turn of events in North Korea - especially its destruction of some key nuke facilities - seems to have shocked even the NYT into momentary recovery from chronic Bush Derangement Syndrome:
North Korea’s declaration of its nuclear activities is a triumph of the sort of diplomacy — complicated, plodding, often frustrating — that President Bush and his aides once eschewed as American weakness.
In more than two years of negotiations, the man who once declared North Korea part of an “axis of evil” with Iran and Iraq, angrily vowing to confront, not negotiate with, its despotic leader, in fact demonstrated a flexibility that his critics at home and abroad once considered impossible.
The compliment couldn’t be allowed to stand too long, as the NYT quickly shifted over to John Kerry, a guy you can always count on for a bit of Bush-bashing, and he came through, with bellicosity and a typical odd view of history:
“Historians will long wonder why this administration did not directly engage North Korea before Pyongyang gathered enough material for several nuclear weapons, tested a nuclear device and the missiles to deliver them.”
He’s harkening back to his stand for single-party talks and Bush’s insistence on six-party, one of the sparking points of their debates, even though he was proved wrong. And he’s ignoring how history will write of Clinton’s utterly incompetent mishandling of NoKo through single-party nativity.
More significant that Kerry’s knee-jerk are the comments of the likes of me, conservatives, who are worried that this is just another Pyongyang puppet show, and that progress on the nuclear issue comes at the expense of the NoKo people, the world champs at enduring human rights abuses.
I cannot find much hope that Li’l Kim will be honest, forthcoming or prone to continuing progress on the nuclear matter, if for no reason than he’s got little else going for him, foreign trade-wise. And it’s regrettable that part of the deal didn’t include the start of a mechanism to better the lives of his citizens slaves.
Those feelings are pretty intense here at C-SM, but even I can see that progress on the nuke front is more critical than progress on the human rights fund; if it were otherwise, I would be a Jimmy Carter/Barack Obama supporter.
Bush’s sophisticated, tenacious approach to diplomacy, backed with the big stick cred he spent his first four years building, may give him true historical significance, on two conditions: He’ll have to keep the pressure on and accomplish even more in his final six months, and the next president will have to keep up the good work - something Barack Oppeaser appears incapable of doing.