Letters to the Editor

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen

By

Saddam's legacy and North Korea

Our policy of prevention ("A Policy of prevention," Op-Ed, Tuesday) may set a good example for some countries, but other countries will get the wrong idea, and as Saddam Hussein imperfectly proved, the suicide bomber has gone international.

Saddam was the most effective "suicide bomber" in the Middle East. He spent years terrorizing people, both at home and abroad, but his actions ultimately led to his own demise. He was able to inflict massive casualties on his own people but proved to be a suicidal bluffer against the rest of the world when it was discovered that he was lying.

He bluffed to the point of his own extinction. Turns out his weapon of mass destruction was simply his own credibility against the world. The United States found him credible and decided we had to take out the threat of a future war in which he would employ WMDs, which turned out to be phantom.

We not only brought down his regime, but are bringing down the dominoes. We proved our prowess at the game of chicken, and we have countries caving right and left. We demonstrated credible deterrence against the rest of the world in taking out Saddam, including in his own bad neighborhood. Already, Libya has caved at the real possibility of our taking out Moammar Gadhafi and his regime, and Iran is making overtures.

In other neighborhoods, though, we may need other countries to deter the threat of WMDs. For example, North Korea poses a supranational suicidal threat and actually possesses nuclear weapons. Our conquest of Iraq threatens North Korea, which believes in our capacity to follow through on threats and, paradoxically, is defending itself against us. It seems that short of our swearing off attacking it in exchange for promissory notes, the only vulnerability that North Korea has could be China.

So what can we do about Kim Jong-il? Pressing for multilateral rather than bilateral talks is a start. But we cannot expect to get anything in return from the intransigent outlaw state. We need serious negotiations with China. We need China to convince North Korea that economic aid will end if the latter does not verifiably forswear possession of WMDs. After all, a pacified, fat North Korea is in China's best interest. If North Korea goes belly-up, China will be faced with a potentially destabilizing refugee crisis. In addition, China contends with the possibility of loose nukes leaving North Korea destined, for example, for Muslim Uighurs in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, whom the Chinese, rightly or not, have labeled a terrorist group.

The key to the Middle East is the United States, and the key to North Korea is China. So far, we are doing our part, but we need those extra ounces of pre-emption from China to eliminate the suicidal madman who has the capability of destroying others while he destroys himself.

ONA BUNCE