Archive for January 2008

Your Tax Dollars at Work: Senate Subcommittee Finds Massive Irregularities in UN’s North Korea Development Aid

[Scroll down for updates.]

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has just released its report on the UN Development Program’s North Korea scandal.  Previous postings here concern the U.S. Ambassador’s original complaint, Ban Ki Moon’s unrealized promises of a full investigation, and the suspicious termination of a whistleblower.  First, the main findings:

1. UNDP operated in North Korea with inappropriate staffing, questionable use of foreign currency instead of local currency, and insufficient administrative and fiscal controls. 

2. By preventing access to its audits and not submitting to the jurisdiction of the UN Ethics Office, UNDP impeded reasonable oversight and undermined its whistleblower protections.

3. In 2002, the DPRK government used its relationship with the United Nations to execute deceptive financial transactions by moving $2.72 million of its own funds from Pyongyang to DPRK diplomatic missions abroad through a bank account intended to be used solely for UNDP activities and by referencing UNDP in the wire transfer documents.

4. UNDP transferred UN funds to a company that, according to a letter from the US State Department to UNDP, has ties to an entity involved in DPRK weapons activity. Read more

Just What We Needed: Our Very Own Ministry of Unification.

From a White House press briefing today: 

Q    Is the administration about to remove North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism? Â 
 
MS. PERINO:  No.  Right now where we are is waiting on the North Koreans to provide a complete and accurate declaration of their nuclear activities.  So we’re continuing to wait for that.  We still have people on the ground helping with the disablement of the Yongbyon nuclear facility.  So at this point that’s where we are. Â 
 
Q    So it would be premature to say that that’s going to happen? Â 
 
MS. PERINO:  To say the least. Â 

Recall that just yesterday, Richardson caught the State Department saying that “North Korea has complied with [the]criteria” for removal from the terror sponsor list.  So take Condoleezza Rice’s public humiliation of Jay Lefkowitz for what it’s worth.  Her Department has its own message discipline problem.

Just when I thought we were finally rid of the UniFiction Ministry, another one grows out of this soil.

Classless Condi

[Update:  Miss that warm, moist pungence rising around your ankles?  Here's your fix for that:

"I'm going to have a great deal more to say about elevating the issue of human rights in North Korea, which is clearly a priority for the president and Congress," he said.  [N.Y. Times, Helene Cooper]

Exactly how stupid do these people think we are?  Condi Rice has scarcely uttered a word about this in four years, has prevented anyone else but the marginalized Lefkowitz from doing so, and has made a cruel joke of the North Korean Human Rights Act by (a) not funding it, (b) locking our embassy gates to refugees, and (c) taking the position that North Koreans in China aren’t refugees without a ChiCom seal of approval. Â Can we expect more of the same hollow, occasionally caustic, and reliably meaningless rhetoric this Administration sometimes says and sometimes means?  Not that the rhetoric bothers me, but talk is cheap.  For once, I’d like to see Condi do something that will save just one North Korean life.  More here.]

Wow.  Just, wow. 

SECRETARY RICE:  Since Jay Lefkowitz has nothing to do with the six-party talks and I would doubt very seriously that they would recognize the name, no, I don’t think they’re confused.

QUESTION:  You don’t think the Chinese (inaudible)?

SECRETARY RICE:  No.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible) a Boston Journal editorial page doesn’t (inaudible) suggested that he was (inaudible) the Administration.

SECRETARY RICE:  Well, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that he wasn’t.  He’s the human rights envoy.  That’s what he knows.  That’s what he does.  He doesn’t work on the six-party talks.  He doesn’t know what’s going on in the six-party talks and he certainly has no say in what American policy will be in the six-party talks.

QUESTION:  (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY RICE:  And by the way, the President has spoken as to what our policy is in the six-party talks.  I think that’s what –

QUESTION:  (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY RICE:  I know where the President stands and I know where I stand and those are the people who speak for American policy.  [Briefing, en route to Berlin, emphasis mine]

Yes, Lefkowitz broke a Washington rule when he commented on an area beyond his portfolio.  But Rice’s offense, by publicly, deliberately, repeatedly, and gratuitously insulting a subordinate, was at least equally severe.  And if Lefkowitz’s error was an unguarded lapse of truth, Rice’s error revealed her as mean, classless, immature, and defensive.

This is also very revealing in another way Rice must not have intended.  Read more

Anju Links for 23 Jan 08

WHAT HE SAID:  Richardson has a must-read commentary on State’s persistent clinging to the assinine idea of removing non-complaint, non-performing, unreformed North Korea from the terror-sponsor list.  He does a terrific job on tracking how State airbrushes its justification for listing North Korea year-by-year.  I could only add that the idea of rewarding people who do absolutely everything we want them not to do has to be the dumbest idea since Windows Vista.  I have to wonder if Congress would approve, with so many influential members — mostly in this President’s own party — lining up to oppose it.  How much of his remaining capital does President Bush want to expend on giving terrorism a free pass and alienating Japan?  How much does he relish the prospect of a skeptical John McCain opposing this flawed and failing deal on the campaign trail?

MAYBE THEY CAN TAKE UP A COLLECTION at the six-party talks, suggests a reader on hearing that North Korea will close its embassy in Australia for financial reasons.  (Shh. You’ll give them ideas.)  More at GI Korea’s blog. Read more

Plan B: How to Disarm Kim Jong Il Without Bombing Him

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Â  — Albert Einstein

Plan A, gentle diplomacy, has again failed to disarm Kim Jong Il.  Whenever this happens (every time it’s tried) advocates of doing the same thing over and over again fall back on The False Choice, whether expressly or by implication:  it’s their way or war.  They know better, of course, which technically makes this a lie. Â And usually, this lie stands uncorrected:

“People lambaste the six-party process, and sure, it offers no refuge for those in need of instant gratification,” Mr. Hill, the negotiator, said in an interview. “But when asked for alternatives” to the nuclear pact, Mr. Hill said, “even the noisiest critics fall silent.Â  [N.Y. Times]

Hill knows better.  Last year, North Korea talked him into abandoning the one alternative that’s ever succeeded in modifying Kim Jong Il’s behavior:  economic constriction.  In just 17 months, the Treasury Department’s sanctions against one small bank in Macau brought Kim Jong Il’s palace economy to the brink of the same catastrophe the rest of the North Korean economy reached 15 years ago.  Not only did the State Department force Treasury to abandon that pressure, Hill even helped Kim Jong Il launder $25 million in mostly ill-gotten gains.  In exchange, Hill bought us some exceedingly nebulous North Korean promises to disarm, eventually.  Not only did North Korea predictably renege, it continued to proliferate nuclear materials and/or technology to Syria right under our noses.

Quietly, the appeasement camp is now talking about an alternative of its own — negotiating an acceptance of North Korea as a “responsible” nuclear power (see here, here, and here).  This is madness; not just for the obvious reasons, but because we have yet to even try a comprehensive, sustained effort against Kim Jong Il’s regime-sustaining finances.  In the year President Bush has left in office, he could inflict a shock such of such voltage that it could deprive Kim Jong Il of the ability to pay and feed the military, intelligence, and bureaucratic organizations on whom his survival depends. Â Plan B starts with ten executive decisions, but President Bush must make them now:

1:  Declare Bureau 39 of the North Korean Workers’ Party to be an “entity of special concern” for money laundering under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act. Then impose the so-called Fifth Special Measure on Bureau 39 and its bankers.  Bureau 39 is the carotid artery of Kim Jong Il’s palace economy. It is responsible for earning, laundering, and recouping foreign exchange through such illegal businesses as drug dealing, counterfeiting, and missile sales.  The Fifth Special Measure prohibits the designated entity from holding correspondent accounts in U.S. banks and would cut off most of Kim Jong Il’s access to international finance. Â This same sanction proved devastating when applied to Banco Delta Asia, and when applied to foreign jurisdictions such as Nauru and the Ukraine. Â Nuclear option:  Apply PATRIOT 311 to the entire government of North Korea.

2:  Sue.  File criminal and/or civil RICO and/or money laundering charges against Bureau 39 for any criminal conduct occurring inside the United States, such as the distribution of counterfeit currency, cigarettes, or pharmaceuticals.  Putting the evidence before an impartial tribunal places it before the eyes of the world.  By adding forfeiture counts, prosecutors would gain the means to attach and seize Kim Jong Il’s personal assets. Â If North Korea can be proven responsible for crimes of violence against U.S. persons, it lacks many of the protections of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act because of its listing as a state sponsor of terrorism. Â The clearest case of this may be North Korea’s suspected abduction, torture, and murder of the Rev. Kim Dong Shik, one of whose suspected abductors now sits in a South Korean jail.  Korea North Korea would almost certainly not send a lawyer to defend itself in U.S. courts, in which case, the U.S. government (or Kim Dong Shik’s widow) would win by default judgment. Â Nuclear option:  Charge Kim Jong Il as an individual defendant.

3:  Strictly and aggressively enforce U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1695 and 1718, using the Proliferation Security Initiative to stop and search North Korean ships believed to be carrying prohibited cargoes such as missiles or nuclear material.  These important resolutions ban North Korea from trading in most major weapons systems, components, and technology.  They also require those tendering payment to the regime to ensure that those funds are not used for its WMD programs, never an easy thing to do in the case of secretive North Korea.  Nuclear option: Â A “soft” blockade.  Search any North Korean merchant ships we find on the high seas, seizing any we find carrying illegal cargo.

4:  Halt the sale of North Korean blood gold. Â Following Treasury’s sanctions against Banco Delta, Kim Jong Il began selling off his nation’s gold reserves to buyers in Thailand and on the London exchanges.  President Bush should ask Britain to halt the sale of North Korean gold, subject to appropriate assurances required under resolutions 1695 and 1718.  He should also raise publicity and awareness of the fact that concentration camp prisoners mine much of that gold as a prelude to seeking international sanctions.

5:  Divest U.S. pension and other funds from companies doing business in North Korea, such as Hyundai Asan.  The divestiture movement has had significant success within some state legislatures and enjoys bipartisan support.

6:  Push China aside.  Let’s be realistic:  China isn’t going to help us force Kim Jong Il to disarm.  China has undermined every previous multilateral action against North Korea and still subsidizes Kim Jong Il.  China prefers a divided Korea that acts as a distraction for U.S. influence and power in Asia. Â Under Executive Order 13,382, however, Treasury can sanction and freeze the assets of entities that support or finance North Korea’s WMD programs.  We have already sanctioned Chinese companies under 13,382 for transferring sensitive techology to North Korea.  Treasury could let the Chinese know that we’ll also apply it to any finanancial institutions acting as conduits for China’s aid to North Korea. Â After all, China voted for U.N. Security Council Resolution 1718 but still does not “ensure” that North Korea isn’t using Chinese aid money for WMD programs; thus, the language of 1718 supports this more aggressive interpretation of E.O. 13,382.  Because North Korea continues to engage in continuing acts of international terrorism, another possible vehicle would be E.O. 13,382′s terrorist financing counterpart, Executive Order 13,224Nuclear option:  Investigate larger Chinese banks for money laundering, something Treasury may already suspect in the case of the Bank of China.  Even a whisper of a PATRIOT 311 designation might cause a bank run.

7:  Work with South Korea and Japan.  Japan has already cut off most commerce with North Korea, and it probably wouldn’t take much coaxing to get Japan’s full support.  A greater opportunity lies in the potentially cooperative government about to take power in South Korea.  Seoul had provided billions of dollars in unconditional aid to Kim Jong Il’s regime in the last decade, but incoming President Lee Myung Bak has already stated that he wants to condition continued aid on North Korea’s disarmament.  Lee also wants some things from us, such as a delay in the handover of wartime operational control to the ROK military. Â In return, he might agree to end all subsidies for the unprofitable and unpopular Kumgang tourist project, a cash cow for Kim Jong Il whose proceeds are suspected of financing North Korea’s military.  We should also ask Lee to end direct bilateral aid and channel all of South Korea’s humanitarian aid through the World Food Program (this would also mean better monitoring and less diversion).  We could leave the Kaesong Industrial Park mostly alone for now, but ask South Korea to enforce laws prohibiting direct payments to North Korea strictly.  We should also encourage strictly humanitarian aid to the North Korean people.  That leaves the South Koreans some leverage to hold in reserve.  Nuclear options:  “Rotate” more of USFK’s forces home for temporary exercises; apply Executive Order 13,382 to Hyundai Asan Corporation and Woori Bank.

8:  Restrict trade.  North Korea’s trade with the United States is infinitessimal, mostly because North Korea can’t produce high-quality consumer merchandise and has no credit rating.  Still, it’s important to recall that President Clinton eased trade sanctions in 1999 as a reward for North Korea’s missile testing moratorium. Â Those sanctions should have been reimposed after North Korea’s July 4, 2006 missile test, but never were.  After the passage of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1695 and 1718, however, the United States accepted an obligation to account for where Kim Jong Il spends any money our corporations are sending him. Â Today, most imports, exports, and other large transactions with North Korea require approval from Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC).  OFAC should deny permission for transactions with North Korea unless the applicant can verify a non-military use for the funds to be tendered.

9:  Engage the people.  Kim Jong Il’s hermetic seal around the North Korean people is breaking down, thanks to (a) radio, (b) curiosity, (c) capitalism, which drives a thriving black market, (d) corruption among the border guards, and (e) the regime’s financial inability to maintain control over its borders.  Even as we seek to weaken Kim Jong Il’s capacity to oppress, we should do what we can to feed, strengthen, and empower the North Korean people.  Our quarrel isn’t with them; they’re Kim Jong Il’s greatest victims and potentially, our greatest allies.  First, the Bush Administration must make good on its cheap talk about human rights by implementing the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004. Â Congress passed this legislation unanimously, but the State Department has blocked its implementation ever since President Bush signed it more than three years ago. Â This is not to say that the Administration shouldn’t also talk about human rights.  But instead of childish epithets like “pygmy,” President Bush should simply restate what we know about the concentration camps, the infanticides, the mistreatment of the handicapped, the persecution of Christians, and the political manipulation of the Great Famine.  At the same time, we should offer the North Korean people food aid, conditioned on strict monitoring and independent distribution by the World Food Program.  We should also tell the North Korean people that we stand ready to help them by broadcasting into their country 24 hours a day.  We should tell them about the depraved opulence of Kim Jong Il’s life, the corruption of their government, and the prosperity of South Korea. Â We should demand that the Red Cross be given access to the concentration camps, and that the World Food Program be given access to the hungry.  The P.R. battle has great power to constrain or support our options.  Bad P.R. for Kim Jong Il can deter leaders, investors, and candidates from defending policies that have prolonged Kim Jong Il’s misrule, and the misery of the North Korean people.

10:  Start preparing for reconstruction.  Unless Kim Jong Il believes that we’re prepared to accept the collapse of his regime as an alternative to verifiable disarmament, he won’t disarm.  We should also understand that rebuilding North Korea will be a task of incalculable scale that we’ll eventually have to face, one way or another.  Even if South Korean and Chinese aid continues indefinitely, it’s probably just a matter of time before Kim Jong Il’s regime collapses or dissolves into chaos.  Kim Jong Il is over 60, his health is said to be bad, and he has no suitable successor.  The economic system is in steady decline, resistant to reform, and probably incapable of reform.  Information is leaking in and discontent is spreading.  The food situation, which had recovered to more-or-less subsistence levels after the Great Famine, has worsened again following Kim Jong Il’s rejection of international aid and severe floods.  North Korea is a failed state — stripped, gutted, and traumatized.  Its reconstruction challenges could dwarf those of post-Saddam Iraq.  That’s why we must wrap our minds around how big a problem we’re facing, financially, politically, diplomatically, militarily, and psychologically.  Legislation such as the the North Korean Refugee Relief and Reconstruction Act would be a good start toward preparing to deal with those problems.

None of this requires us to close off our diplomatic channels to North Korea.  We should keep talking, but we should also be realistic about our approach to those talks and widen their agenda.  Even if negotiated disarmament seems exceedingly unlikely, we should express our willingness to talk any time, even if only for P.R. reasons.  We should also be realistic enough to understand that a bad deal is not better than no deal, and a meaningless deal is a bad deal.  We’ve learned that deals must be backed by pressure, that they must have clear terms and strict deadlines, and that we must extract tangible and immediate concessions instead of vague and distant promises.  North Korea is such an exceptionally opaque place that we can’t begin to hope for success without turning “trust but verify” on its head.  The first goal — not the last — should be to push inspectors and verification teams through North Korea’s walls of secrecy.  Kim Jong Il will never give us an honest declaration.  We’ll have to help him write it.

We should also expand the agenda to cover all of our disagreements with North Korea:  missiles, chemical and biological weapons, human rights, food aid, and conventional weapons.  That way, prolonged North Korean recalcitrance imposes a political and economic cost on its government.  Our goal here should be nothing less than full access for international aid workers, investors, development teams, journalists, and Red Cross teams.  Call it “compassionate self-interest” – when North Koreans receive food and medical aid from foreigners instead of the regime, decades of xenophobic propaganda will lose all credibility.  It is the transparency that leads us to truth, not a worthless signature, that will tell us when Kim Jong Il has committed himself to disarmament.

I’m under no illusion that Kim Jong Il is likely to agree to this.  He knows what it could cost him.  But then again, Kim Jong Il should be under no illusion that he could easily survive a year of Plan B, and I don’t think he is.  To say that pressure doesn’t help or harms diplomacy requires one to believe that any relationship between the events of September 15, 2005 and September 19, 2005 was mere coincidence.  Last year, we saw what happens when we relax our pressure prematurely.  Even if the next Administration chooses a different course, implementing Plan B will at least demonstrate what other, better options we have than trusting Kim Jong Il to use his nukes responsibly.

Gridlock and infighting stalk collapse of Agreed Framework 2.0

You could write the epitaph for the President Bush’s North Korea policies in six words:  There are worse things than gridlock.  Now that Agreed Framework 2.0 has reached its failure point and not even sympathetic media can still deny it, the New York Times reports that the same old factions have formed up to battle about the fruitlessness of dealing with Kim Jong Il. 

With North Korea sending signals that it may be trying to wait out Mr. Bush’s time in office before making any more concessions, administration officials are grappling with how the United States should react.  The debate has fractured along familiar lines, with a handful of national security hawks in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office and at the State Department arguing for a more confrontational approach with Pyongyang.  [Helene Cooper, N.Y. Times]

Well, this was about as predictable as the sunrise; still, can anyone deny that I am the Nostrafriggingdamus of Korea bloggers?  This time, my predictive powers were eerie enough to border on the paranormal.  Not that I mean to overstate this.  Anyone intelligent enough to be reading this already knows that Robert Downey, Jr. can say no to crack longer than Kim Jong Il can keep an agreement.  And unlike Kim Jong Il, Downey can probably manage ten whole minutes of abstention on his way home from rehab … unless he had the foresight to stash a rock in the ashtray of his limo.

JOHN BOLTON, ARE YOU READING THIS?

Bush is now right back where he started in 2001, except that North Korea’s nuclear capability, though still primitive, has advanced to the point of demonstration.  Bolton says, “It’s like groundhog day; we’ve lived through this before.Â Â (Ambassador Bolton, if you’re reading this, I’d happily waive my copyright infringement claim for an interview here.) 

The State Department counsels patience as the clock runs out, but the sticking points are a wee bit elemental:

Mr. Bush said the two countries needed to resolve three sticking points: the number of warheads that North Korea has built; the amount of weapons-grade nuclear material produced by North Korea; and the need for North Korea to disclose that it has passed nuclear material to others.  [N.Y. Times]

Someone remind me just what the hell they even agreed to do, if not those things.  Doves are making much of the partial disablement of Yongbyon, but as I’ve pointed out here repeatedly, Yongbyon was probably a used-up wreck before this deal was even signed, and its replacement, which would take less than two years to complete, will generate 50 megawatts, not five.  Wanna see it?  You know you do:

     yongbyon-1.jpg     yongbyon2.jpg     yongbyon3.jpg 

Did I forget to mention the 200-megawatt reactor?

                yongbyon8.jpg     yongbyon5.jpg

                yongbyon6.jpg     yongbyon7.jpg

The key point being:  the North Koreans aren’t disabling either of those facilities.  Recall that on his return from Pyongyang last December, Hill said that he had visited, “all three sections of the facility there. That is, the fuel fabrication facility, the reactor, and then finally the reprocessing center. There is disabling activity going on at all three.” Â That means these three facilities only:

                yongbyona0.jpg     yongbyona1.jpg  

                yongbyona2.jpg     yongbyona3.jpg

The big new reactors are being watched by the IAEA, but they’re not being dismantled or demolished.  North Korea hasn’t accounted for the nuclear materials needed to make those facilities operable.  For all we know, they’re under a pile of sand in Syria.  Let’s not pretend we’re any safer.  We aren’t.

Conservative opposition gained strength from four key developments:  the Syria revelations; North Korea accidentally sending us a sample of the enriched uranium it denied having; the passage of the December 31st deadline; and Chris Hill getting caught in a lie after denying that North Korea had offered a false declaration last November. Â As a result, several very bad ideas have waned. Â North Korea can probably forget about being taken off the terror-sponsor list. Â We can probably also forget about Secretary Rice visiting Pyongyang. Â The probability of ferocious opposition made it impossible for Chris Hill to accept a patently false North Korean nuclear declaration in November. 

In case you’re keeping score, those who oppose this deal, or whose skepticism is tantamount to opposition to it, include John Bolton, of course, plus candidates John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson; influential Republican senators John Kyl (the Minority Whip), Sam Brownback, Charles Grassley, and Jim Bunning; and independent Joe Lieberman. (… and Larry Craig.)  If Bush tried to ram legislation through Congress today to either de-list North Korea, ratify a deal, or appropriate funding for one, it might not survive an up-or-down vote.  I wouldn’t have said that a month ago.

LEFKOWITZ:  FINDING HIS VOICE?

We’ve known for a few weeks, since it hit the Washington Post, that there was considerable opposition to this deal among the Administration’s nonproliferation experts.  Now we even have public opposition from one of the Administration’s serving officials, and from a guy I’d left for dead long ago.  Listen to this:

In a public departure from administration policy, Jay Lefkowitz, a conservative lawyer who is Mr. Bush’s envoy on North Korean human rights, said this week the North would likely “remain in its present nuclear status” when the next president took over in January 2009.  “North Korea is not serious about disarming in a timely manner,” Mr. Lefkowitz told an audience at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. “We should consider a new approach to North Korea.Â  [N.Y. Times]

“It is increasingly clear that North Korea will remain in its present nuclear status when the administration leaves office in one year,” he told a forum in Washington.  Using unusually sharp words, he said North Korea “has not kept its word,” was “not serious about disarming in a timely manner” and “its conduct does not appear to be that of a government that is willing to come in from the cold.”  Lefkowitz also accused Pyongyang of being a “serial proliferator” and using its nuclear arms to “extort” foreign aid, saying there was no guarantee that US military and nuclear strength could prevent it from passing on nuclear arms or technology to Islamists or their backers.  [AFP]

I’m happy someone say this, and I’m kicking myself for the fact that I couldn’t be at AEI to hear it in person.  Lefkowitz didn’t just criticize his bosses, either:

Jay Lefkowitz [...] also lambasted China and South Korea for not exerting enough pressure on Pyongyang while the six-way discussions have been seeking for years to denuclearize the North.  [Kyodo News] 

Maybe Lefkowitz said this because there’s enough division that he can get away with it again. Â Maybe he already knew that Nicholas Burns was on his way out.  I had even wondered if the Administration was using Lefkowitz to send a message to the North Koreans that our patience is thin.  After all, his attack was not a direct comment on North Korea’s human rights record, it struck at North Korea’s bad faith in disarmament.  The White House noticed the same thing, and obviously didn’t want anyone in Beijing speculating the same way I had:

“Let me make it very clear: He is the envoy for issues related to human rights in North Korea,” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters Friday. “He is not, however, somebody who speaks authoritatively about the six-party talks. His comments certainly don’t represent the views of the administration.Â  [AP; h/t DPRK Forum]

Procedurally and bureaucratically, Lefkowitz probably crossed the line, but substantively, not only were his words factually correct, but after all, it’s the six-party agreement that sidelined his job out of existence.  Most of the news sources covering this story omitted the fact that Lefkowitz did tie his comments directly to human rights:

Lefkowitz said the United States needs to rethink its approach to North Korea to one that links concerns about security with North Korea’s poor human rights record, making improvement on both fronts a condition of better relations with the United States.  Dubbed “constructive engagement,” such an approach would ensure human rights “cannot be discarded in any future rush to “get to yes” in an agreement, he said.

“The way the North Korean government treats its own people is inhumane and therefore deeply offensive to us,” Lefkowitz said. “It should also offend free people around the world. Clearly we want to see an improvement in this, just as we want to see an abatement of the threats to our security created by the regime.”

The six-party talks do not address North Korea’s human rights record but, Lefkowitz said, “there is a valid question of whether this continues to make sense.”  He said the United States should also consider expanding its bilateral contacts with North Korea to discuss such issues, but should also consider “other leverage” against the nation if it doesn’t improve, including restricting the regime’s access to United States and international financial systems. [CNN; h/t Richardson]

The question is just who the White House thinks it’s still kidding.  They stopped caring about human rights years ago.  Maybe Lefkowitz’s mistake was to believe that he still has a job.  He has other options at his disposal, of course; he doesn’t have to take this insult quietly.  Lefkowitz was most recently mentioned here when Christopher Hitchens wondered whatever happened to him. Â Today, at least reporters are quoting him again — they love contradiction, especially of Bush – and the things he’s saying are undeniably true. 

Really, I just feel great sympathy for anyone who brings a conscience into the U.S. Department of State.  At least now I know Lefkowitz isn’t the problem.  He stuck his neck out to say the right thing.  Good for him.

The Candidates on North Korea (Fred Thompson)

Whew.  I had expected these primary things to make this project a little less ambitions.  I expected wrong.  Next:

SIMON: Well, here’s our final question, though. As you probably know, I’m sure you know, Ambassador Bolton has become very critical of the Bush administration since his resignation from the United Nations. He wrote a book about it and he’s made a lot of public statements. Do you think — and implying that the Bush administration is essentially walking backwards on the war on terror. Do you think he has a point?

THOMPSON: I will say this. I do share his concern about a deal with North Korea. North Korea is a country that’s never kept a bargain it’s ever made. Any deal with them has got to be based upon verification. It’s a country that it may be impossible to carry out verification. They’ve lied to us before about that. And now it looks like from all we can tell and from statements that current members of Congress have made that they can make due to the classified nature of what they’re seeing, my guess is that North Korea is now outsourcing a lot of its stuff to Syria. And we saw the Israelis launch a strike against the Syrian location and the word is that they were in the process of building a plant there and with Syrian assistance perhaps.

I hope the administration is not so intent on making a deal on its way out that they get into the situation that the Clinton administration did with the agreed framework when North Korea was giving us here and taking back over here, you know, behind the scenes.

At the end of the day, we’ve got to have verification before we start rewarding them again. We’re giving them current rewards for future promises. It’s never worked before with them. And I’m skeptical of it.  [Pajamas Media]

That’s a close second to McCain’s answer in my book, but Fred didn’t say anything about human rights and doesn’t have much other information of interest on his site.  You can watch the whole thing on video here.  By the end of the day, we’ll know if his campaign is viable.  Conventional wisdom is that if he doesn’t win in South Carolina, he’s finished. 

Good Riddance, Ministry of Silly Talks

After weeks of conflicting reports, Lee Myung Bak’s transition team had made it official:  the UniFiction Ministry goes to the ash-heap, along with the Ministries of Truth Information and Communication, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Science and Technology, and the Anti-Sex League Gender Equality and Family.  The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade will become a much larger and more powerful Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Unification.  As a whole, the government will shrink by more than 5%, about 7,000 employees.  

I would add to what GI Korea and Robert Koehler have said, but they’ve already said almost all of it well enough.  Mourning UniFiction’s demise is reporter Choe Sang-Hun, who tries to give Roh and D.J. their legacy:

The two leaders, promoting a so-called sunshine policy, brought about profoundly closer relations with the North, but they have been faulted for pouring aid across the border without managing to end North Korean nuclear weapons programs and human rights abuses.  [N.Y. Times]

Define “profoundly closer,” please.  The DMZ is as impermeable as ever, although its countours have shifted to wall off two little subsidized Potempkin enclaves of reform and openness that couldn’t last for an instant in the real North Korea.  North Korea has more artillery and more fearsome weapons aimed at South Korea today, not less.  Commercial relations remain infinitessimal and dwarfed by aid.  Families are still divided and can’t talk to each other.  Talks aimed at reducing tensions still end in brawls. Â Prisoners of war and abductees are still hostages after decades.  North Korea’s people are still terrorized, stunted, and starving.  Can anyone really list one single significant way in which North Korea has become less ghastly to its people, less threatening to its neighbors, less open to the world, or less a quicksand for the hapless investor than North Korea in the last decade?

Like Choe, Robert thinks that the leftist opposition will fight this.  Lee gave them a nasty beating in the December presidential election, and as things stand now, Lee’s Grand National Party is expected to give them another nasty beating in next April’s elections.  Lee has a choice to make:  either he can try to bulldoze his reforms through now, or later, after the election.  The latter is the safer choice, though it won’t prevent this from becoming an election issue.  But wouldn’t it be more fun for the rest of us if Lee opts for the former?  If he plays this right, it’s a no-lose issue for him:  either he gets his way, or he loses, capitalizes on the loss, and runs against the obstructionists in the do-nothing National Assembly.  Plus, we’d get to see Lee Myung Bak actually defend his views in opposition to appeasing Kim Jong Il.

Good Riddance, Nick Burns

Nicholas Burns, the State Department’s number three diplomat and the man whom a reliable source told me was the one who blocked implementation of the North Korean Human Rights Act, will step down for “personal reasons.”  Alas, the reasons are not known to include painful bleeding hemorrhoids, and so I must go on doubting God’s existence. 

Burns’s legacy will include such notable accomplishments as Iran’s nuclear bomb.  His replacement is the eponymous William Burns (no relation) who has enjoyed such great success as our ambassador to Vlad Putin that all of the journalists there have to employ food tasters.

Anju Links for 18 Jan 08

NORTH KOREA FINALLY MENTIONS LEE MYUNG BAK, sorta:  “U.S. conservative hardliners broke into cheers upon hearing about the results of the “˜elections’ in South Korea … asserting that the power change in South Korea marks a new occasion of strangling North Korea.Â  Well, yeah, if he actually does.  Wow.  Did I really just agree with KCNA?

TOO MANY NORTH KOREANS ARE HOARDING FOOD, so the regime is cracking down with layer upon layer of bureaucracy and permits that are now required to move significant quantities of food.  That may help prevent diversion, but it will also destroy the markets that many North Koreans have come to depend on to supply what the government can’t. 

THE POWER STRUGGLE within the Democratic Peoples’ Republic Labor Party continues (third item), with the non-North Korean-agent faction now responding by announcing its intent to purge the party of the Fatherly Leader’s sleeper agents.  Just lovely.  Well, it doesn’t look like I was reading too much into KCNA after all, which means that I obviously have what the Daily NK considers to be a special skill (the trick is to believe exactly the opposite of what they say!). Â Similarly, assume that whichever faction’s views are presented by KCNA is not the faction you want to see win.  Myself, I learned my skills by reading the New York Times and watching Fox News. Â The DLP may be about to shatter.

A ROSA PARKS MOMENT IN CHINA as Maersk workers riot over bullying by company thugs.

LETTING GO OF THE PAST, or rather, exploiting it less:  Lee Myung Bak will stop demanding apologies from Japan, which has already done much more apologizing (or to be precise, expressing regret) than Roh Moo Hyun would have you believe.

ONE MORE REASON WHY NORTH KOREA WILL NEVER REFORM:  Every time a North Korean business miraculously turns a profit, Kim Jong Il’s cronies expropriate it for the use of His Porcine Majesty.  When I speak of North Korea’s ”people’s economy” and “palace economy,” this is what I mean. 

WILDLY OFF TOPIC: Â Ever wondered who that kid was in “Deliverance” who played the banjo?  Me too