Enslaved Journalists, Nuclear Proliferation: The Fight Betwean Values in the Conflict With North Korea

Several intriguing and disturbing events have been reported on over the past twenty-hour hours, each raising questions regarding the United States willingness to uphold human rights of its citizens and its overall commitment to promoting just acts world-wide.

Laura Ling and Euna Lee, two journalists and citizens of the United States were sentenced to twelve years in a North Korean labor camp by the North Korean High Court. The basis for this decision is that these two women committed crimes against the North Korean state simply be being close to its borders; Officials also claim that they entered North Korean territory illegally (a questionable charge at the very least).

Being held prisoner since March 17^th, the United States government has done surprisingly little to secure the freedom of their citizens, except to say that their capture and subsequent sentencing is against human rights standards. As reported by the New York Times, Ian C.  Kelly, a state department representative, the United States government has all but acknowledged this sentencing as a political move meant to provide the North Korean government leverage in negotiations and hostilities with the United States.

This understanding is accompanied with the knowledge of the harsh conditions of the labor camps and that horrible things could (and with all likelihood will) happen to these journalists.

In an era where terrorism is the talk of the day, no one seems to consider the unjust and terrible torture being conducted by North Korea an act of terrorism, even if it is against one of its enemies. Such an oversight is wrong. The imprisonment of Ms. Ling and Ms. Lee is an act of terrorism and cannot be tolerated any more than nuclear proliferation.

Of course, in the midst of this humanitarian travesty, the United States continues to lobby the United Nations Security Council to sanction an embargo on all North Korean exports, claiming that they are in the business of promoting terrorism and possibly enticing a massive arms race in Northern Asia through nuclear proliferation.

The United States has sought support from China in an effort to curb North Korean aggression. According to Chinese Law, military intervention against North Korea would be acceptable. However with North Korea already promising to conduct additional weapons tests of short, medium, and long-range missiles, the results of such a threat could be devastating to South Korea and even go as far as to provoke Japan into beginning its own weapons projects. Such an action would destabilize the region and spark a war that’s far less containable than what the United States has already begun in the Middle East.

President Obama should be applauded for his hard-line stance against North Korea, pledging that the United States was through “rewarding provocation.” At the same time, the President has expressed a willingness to re-open the six-party talks with North Korea in an attempt to come to a peaceful resolution to this nuclear threat.

There is however legitimate reasons to be concerned about the United States motivations in this conflict. The United States seems willing to sacrifice the safety of its own citizens trapped unjustly in North Korean prison camps in favor of military posturing. Also President Obama is treating this conflict as if he is dealing with a rationale government. All indications show that the North Korean government would rather engage in war than acquiesce to Western compromises.

Scholars of United States foreign policy should also be concerned that through its requests to intercept North Korean ships in transit via the sea is a clear violation of international law and could very well be considered a legitimate act of war. While President Kennedy got away with this act when he blockaded Cuba in the 1960s, it should be hoped that the United States could act with greater prudence in regards to this matter.

President Obama is a fair and just man who undoubtedly is acting in a manner consistent with his predecessors (even though Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s involvement may prove problematic given her husband’s former military stance). The threats against South Korea and Japan are important and very real. But so is the atrocity of North Korea’s desire to harm United States citizens.

Neither nuclear development, continental threat, or the imprisonment and torture of United States citizens can be condoned here; steps must be taken to stop these dangers. The political process is ideal but the right thing to do, the just thing to do, is for President Obama to consider all options in these scenarios.

It is difficult to stomach any mistreatment or pain being inflicted on others, but having faith in one’s government is important even if it’s sometimes difficult. In the mean time all Americans should hope for quick and decisive action to preserve the well-being of every individual affected by these atrocities and not give in to hate, fear, or political propaganda.

The North Korean Quagmire: Where Patience and Understanding Must Begin a Long Road Toward Peace

Before one reads this article, please understand that this piece in no way supports North Korea’s military actions. Instead it is meant to help understand the situation and trouble shoot possible solutions.

There are some facts that political analysts seem to forget when discussing North Korea, especially when they make overt nuclear tests. The first fact is that North Korea, despite having a large foot-soldier army, it is incapable of mounting a winnable attack against South Korea—which has become a symbol for democracy in the Far East. Secondly, the simple fact is that North Korea’s missile tests, which have been conducted over the past few days, in no way directly affect the United States; aside from offering strategic intelligence and being a potential conflict mediator, the United States should leave this matter to the sovereign countries involved.

One of the countries considered involved is of course China. China’s involvement cannot be underestimated in this circumstance. While much of the international community has leveled severe economic and aid sanctions against North Korea, China has maintained a relative peace between both Koreas. It has no interest in war, despite the political posturing of North and South Korea, claiming their readiness for it. China has a tremendous economic connection to the United States and to aid North Korea would likely devastate their economy. Also, peace is a mechanism for social, economic, and industrial innovation, all of which China is investing in. War is simply not in their best interest and it’s inconceivable that, despite his sociopathic tendencies, Kim Jong Il, can’t ignore that. China’s resolve to completely condemn the nuclear and missile tests being conducted by North Korea should ring loudly in their ears. It is a far greater threat than the United States could possibly throw North Korea’s way.

A vital question must therefore be asked: what role should the United States play in this conflict? As stated before, being mediators and collecting intelligence is entirely permissible. However, the United Nation’s Security Council has seen this situation before. Led in large part by the United States, heavy sanctions were laid upon North Korea, assisting in its global isolation, increasing poverty, and in general forcing the country to take aggressive measures in order to gain attention and aid.

One possible solution is to lift the sanctions, monitor North Korea’s military actions, and introduce a free market economy. This most likely cannot be done under Kim Jong II’s rule. But if the North Korean people are put in the position to change, they very well might take it.

In the meantime, this situation should be handled delicately, as President Obama seems to understand. The North Korean government is volatile and one needs to be assertive enough to get a point across while not setting off a powder keg that’s just waiting to blow. The United States cannot go it alone here; it is imperative that other global leaders participate in any political discussions with North Korea. Theoretically common sense should prevail in this matter. Even the Bush administration believed that was true. However the larger the contingent of political leaders being willing to talk to North Korea may diffuse the tension. If the global leaders can, for the moment, look beyond the military implications of these nuclear tests, they might begin to focus on the underlying causes for them, mainly increased poverty and desperation.

Above all else, patience must prevail in this situation. North Korea is capable of political discourse and has an organized government with an established population that they can’t sweep under the rug. All of these specifics lend credence the notion that discussion can work here. President Obama promised to speak with rogue nations. Perhaps North Korea is his first challenge, as the New York Times suggests.

But Obama’s greatest role may become that of a mediator, a task which requires far greater skill than presenting military force and arguing for greater sanctions. President Obama is up to this task. And with his cool intellect, this situation can be resolved and hopefully for more than a year or two.