http://freekorea.us/2008/01/26/fox-white-house-may-accept-incomplete-n-korean-declaration/ Tue, 22 May 2012 21:47:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://freekorea.us/2008/01/26/fox-white-house-may-accept-incomplete-n-korean-declaration/comment-page-1/#comment-58336 OneFreeKorea » Absolute Must Read: Chris Hill Explodes at Reporter Over Leaked Plan to Accept Incomplete, Incorrect N. Korean Declaration Sun, 06 Jul 2008 05:27:53 +0000 http://freekorea.us/2008/01/26/fox-white-house-may-accept-incomplete-n-korean-declaration/#comment-58336 [...] of Chris Hill’s Disagreed Framework I have yet read, and that certainly includes .  Rosen’s detailed narration of Hill’s many public reassurances that he would accept nothing less than a “complete and correct” North Korean declaration is devastating.  I had wished for the time to write something like it myself, and that is now done for me. And yet that is not even the best part of Rosen’s piece.  Reacting to a January report by Rosen (which I linked here) that Hill would accept an incomplete and incorrect North Korean declaration, Hill’s typing fingers sprouted venomous fangs: In a series of angry e-mails, all on the record but unpublished until now, Hill vehemently denied the story. “Completely inaccurate,” he wrote. “This idea that we would ignore the most contentious items and take them up later is ridiculous. I don’t believe in ‘carve outs’ and even if I did (which I don’t) how in the world would this work in practical terms? Do you really think we could make concessions on the basis of an incomplete declaration, then somehow we would be able to return to the contentious issues AFTER – AFTER!!!??? — giving away all our leverage? Why? I can tell you this stupidity has never been under consideration by anyone who is part of the process or truly close to the process. [...] [...] of Chris Hill’s Disagreed Framework I have yet read, and that certainly includes .  Rosen’s detailed narration of Hill’s many public reassurances that he would accept nothing less than a “complete and correct” North Korean declaration is devastating.  I had wished for the time to write something like it myself, and that is now done for me. And yet that is not even the best part of Rosen’s piece.  Reacting to a January report by Rosen (which I linked here) that Hill would accept an incomplete and incorrect North Korean declaration, Hill’s typing fingers sprouted venomous fangs: In a series of angry e-mails, all on the record but unpublished until now, Hill vehemently denied the story. “Completely inaccurate,” he wrote. “This idea that we would ignore the most contentious items and take them up later is ridiculous. I don’t believe in ‘carve outs’ and even if I did (which I don’t) how in the world would this work in practical terms? Do you really think we could make concessions on the basis of an incomplete declaration, then somehow we would be able to return to the contentious issues AFTER – AFTER!!!??? — giving away all our leverage? Why? I can tell you this stupidity has never been under consideration by anyone who is part of the process or truly close to the process. [...]

]]>