Were Attacks By North Korea The Result Of Bungled Diplomacy By Hillary Clinton?

From A Charging Elephant:

Were attacks by North Korea the result of bungled diplomacy by Hillary Clinton?


Posted on November 26, 2010

by dancingczars
1 Comment

by Jim Campbell



Doing the bidding of President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton may have sent the wrong message to South Korea, as the United States appeared to backpedal on the sinking of a South Korean vessel, Cheonan.









Was this seen by North Korea as further weakness by the United States in dealing with a rogue nation led by the dictator Kim Jong Il? Was this the reason the North launched a barrage of missiles upon the South last week?











As Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates met in Seoul with their Republic of Korea (ROK) counterparts Yu Myung-hwan and Kim Tae-young in an historic “2+2″ summit, the Cheonan sinking in March, the defining crisis that was supposed to highlight the relevance and effectiveness of their relationship, instead cast an ugly shadow over the event.



Secretary of State Clinton, representing The United States failed to organize a vigorous international backlash against North Korea for its apparent sinking of the South Korean frigate Cheonan.



There is little doubt that North Korea sank the South Korean warship, killing everyone aboard, and now after four months of diplomacy faces no punishment. South Korea and its American ally came away with nothing from their political momentum. And China claimed diplomatic victory.



How did the Obama administration make this blunder? Blame Hillary Clinton’s State Department for butting heads with the one country that matters: China.



It appears North Korea engineered the outrage, it cleverly and effectively exposed a faulty assumption behind America’s Korean policy: that, when push came to shove, China would give decisive weight to its booming economic relationship with South Korea and side with Seoul against Pyongyang.



The exact opposite occurred. Rather than ask China for help, America asked everyone but China:



Beijing viewed the entire orchestrated Cheonan exercise, which included an “international investigation” that pointedly excluded China, the subsequent elevation of the issue to the UN Security Council.



China was treated as if it had little legitimate role on the peninsula and, indeed, could only hope to have its national interests considered if it purchased an admission ticket, demonstrating its “responsible superpower” qualifications by putting economic and diplomatic pressure on North Korea in the wake of the sinking.



China called Secretary Clinton’s bluff, backed North Korea, and showed that Clinton was playing a losing hand.



Has Secretary of State Clinton now begun exhibiting second thoughts on the U.S. response?



In light of the missile attacks by North Korea on the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong it seems reasonable to re-evaluate the United States handling of the situation.



The North is unable to exist without China, and the South too seems to rely on the US to prevent a war. In a sense, they are protected by America and China.



Perhaps a bigger headache for the United States is the perception that the U.S. knuckled under in the face of vehement Chinese objections to Yellow Sea exercises.



Now China has acquired the understanding that the United States can be made to back down through a combination of vocal opposition and pressure on its allies.



The US will seek to avoid leaving an impression that it has caved into Chinese pressure.



If Beijing were to conclude that the exercise was modified because of its pressure, that could lead China to believe that it can intimidate the U.S. into not operating its ships close to China’s shores. Such a judgment could lead to future miscalculations.”



An additional scenario might be plausible; North Korea’s attack on the South was aimed at restarting nuclear talks with the United States.



North Korea’s attack on a South Korean island, along with its disclosure of nuclear advances, is part of a strategy to draw the U.S. back to the negotiating table.









It isn’t likely to succeed, and the result could be increased tension between the U.S. and China, North Korea’s closest ally, said the analysts, including Bruce Klingner, a former chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Korea branch.



“If anything, it’s likely to have the reverse effect, in that Washington and Seoul are likely to be more determined to resist” North Korean tactics.



Let it not be lost upon the reader that the Obama administrations penchant for dealing with it’s enemies using continual attempts with diplomacy have resulted in the United States being in a much more precarious situation in the world.



This administration has shown its ineptness in dealing with Iran nuclear development plans, Iran’s support of the Taliban and providing lethal weapons used on our troops in Afghanistan, complete and utter failure dealing with North Korea’s advancing nuclear program, and China’s support of these efforts.



No, as has been proved time and again, to be effective in international diplomacy the U.S. must operate from a position of strength. While a nuclear arms race may begin in the Middle East and South Asia, incomprehensibly, the current administration is preoccupied with resuming the START talks reducing the number of missiles between the U.S. and Russia.



The current administration is viewed as a paper tiger much the same as former President, Jimmy Carter was not taken seriously by the world.



It was certainly no coincidence that Iran released the hostages on the same day that Ronald Reagan was sworn in as President. President Reagan’s approach to diplomacy and potential military engagement was perfect. On war, there is only one outcome, “we win they lose.”



Contrast this with the current administration policy and progressive administrations before it, diplomacy, with no serious threat of consequences. Could it be that these folks have an endless loop of John Lennon’s beautifully written song “Imagine” continually feeding their delusions of grandeur?









That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C.