Deputy Chief of Mission at U.S. Embassy in Seoul Calls Laura Ling and Euna Lee “Stupid”
I wonder how many years of studying international relations it would take a guy like me to become a suave, smooth-talking ambassador of American values like this guy:
A US diplomat in Seoul has shocked a group of visiting Congressional staff members by allegedly making highly insensitive comments about two journalists — Taiwanese Â-American Laura Ling and Korean-American Euna Lee — now facing serious criminal charges in North Korea.
William Stanton, deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in South Korea and a candidate for the next director of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), is said to have told the visitors during a briefing that the two young journalists were “stupid” and that their case was “distracting from bigger issues. [Taipei Times, William Lowther]
First, let me get one thing out of the way: I am absolutely, positively not related to this person. Second, let me posit that this statement is proof that William Stanton has absolutely no idea what the “bigger issues” are.
Congressional sources said most of the nine visitors — all in their 20s and on a training trip to Asia — were particularly distressed because both Ling and Lee could be sentenced to long prison terms and there is strong evidence they did nothing wrong.
At least one of the visitors was so upset about Stanton’s attitude that he wrote a memorandum to a member of Congress giving full details of the briefing, including Stanton’s statements.
The memorandum has become a topic of hot discussion among senior Congressional staff and a copy has been sent to the US State Department. No officials would comment on the situation last night and it is not known if it will lead to a formal inquiry.
The Taipei Times reports that William Stanton has been the subject of previous complaints, but doesn’t specify what for. Oh, and did I mention that he’s believed to be at “the top of the short list for [American Institute in Taiwan] director,” our de facto ambassador to Taiwan and quite possibly the most diplomatically sensitive post in existence? Shockingly, he is “known for his strong support for Chinese policies” and accused of having “impeded internal reports critical of the Chinese regime.” What? You mean in our State Department? Tell me it isn’t so.
William Stanton isn’t the only one in the embassy with that contemptuous view. According to a memo written by one of the staffers, the Seoul Embassy Political Counselor, Joseph Yun, chimed in to say that because of Ling and Lee’s captivity, the United States would now “have to raise thousands of dollars,” presumably in ransom money. (Thousands? Yet again, State underestimates North Korea’s negotiating chutzpah. Surely Kim Jong Il knows how promiscuously we’ve been bailing out insolvent empires lately.)
The families of Laura Ling and Euna Lee have also heard William Stanton’s comments, and now, of State’s true rationale for having “advised [the families] to keep low profiles and not to talk about the case.” State must dread the idea that Lisa Ling could get this story wide media exposure through The View, Oprah, or any number of outlets. State had even promised the families that the North Koreans would release Ling and Lee as part of an April 15th amnesty for Kim Il Sung’s birthday. Astonishingly, our diplomats had believed North Korean “assurances” that it would be so. Tough luck.
The Taipei Times report also says, without offering further detail, that “[t]here is evidence that the North Korean guards crossed the river and grabbed the women on the Chinese side, forcing them into North Korea at gunpoint.” I’d like to know what Lowther has heard, but here’s what a knowledgeable reader told me: Ling and Lee’s Chinese driver was a North Korean operative who led them into a trap — a suspected North Korean plot to take American hostages. Such a plan could only have been approved by Kim Jong Il himself, and was almost certainly meant to shield North Korea from the diplomatic consequences of its then-planned missile test. The main purpose would have been to take the measure of the Obama Administration, and of that, mission accomplished. I don’t doubt that a second North Korean motive was payback for Lisa Ling.
My source tells me that the Chinese cameraman has since disappeared.
If the report is true, it would fit each and every element of the U.S. Code’s definition of international terrorism.
It’s fair to say, then, that the circumstances under which Ling and Lee ended up in North Korean captivity are far from clear. So if William Stanton doesn’t know the circumstances under which these women were seized, we can only assume that what he really means to describe as “stupid” is the act of trying to report the truth of a grave and underreported humanitarian crisis. Would he have said the same about journalists killed or taken hostage while reporting in Iraq? Would the media have let him get away with that?
Regardless of the circumstances of Ling and Lee’s seizure, it’s a strikingly callous thing for a “diplomat” to say, and it’s one for the books as an example of simple diplomatic incompetence. The Chinese will now understand that their “good offices” need not be expended on obtaining the release of two American citizens who may have been seized from their territory. Even assuming that Lee and Ling had intentionally crossed the border — which seems exceedingly unlikely — any North Korean justification for holding them as prisoners ended hours after their detention.
One person who could help us get to the truth of the matter is the Current TV cameraman, who managed to escape. Like everyone else associated with Current TV, he’s suspended his dedication to fearless truth-telling.
Hat tip: Curtis.
Current TV has gone so far as to scrub its site of all postings referring to Ling and Lee. Current TV is doing this, of course, on the advice of our State Department, which would be the same State Department that has been so effective in resolving North Korea’s human rights atrocities, nuclear weapons program, threats to nuke Seoul and Tokyo, proliferation, and defiance of U.N. resolutions. The futility of “quiet diplomacy” isn’t helping to bring Laura Ling and Euna Lee home, either:
Is this what happens when information becomes more democratic? No one’s willing to step up? If you work for a viewer-supplied TV cable network, does that mean no one has your back?
This does not help the argument that the value of large news organizations is dwindling to nothing in favor of small entrepreneurs. There’s no encouragement for 2.0 reporting when its practitioners can disappear into the gulag with no one to fight for them.
Maybe there are furious back door efforts going on and these two reporters aren’t just pawns in the overarching political drama of North Korea’s imminent launch of a long-range missile. CNN, where Wikipedia says Ms. Ling’s sister works as a reporter, and other news outlets report that a Swedish diplomat is hot on the case.
But that shouldn’t stop some public uproar. Do we have to ask Google to go in there and flex a little muscle on behalf of the free flow of information? [Phil Bronstein, Huffington Post]
If there is any good news to this story at all, it’s the fact that this confession of breathtaking moral retardation may block one incompetent’s rise to a position of potentially catastrophic responsibility. The more distressing news is that Kim Jong Il has learned a lesson from the Mohammad Cartoons controversy: that all the talk we sometimes hear about the courage and independence of the news media is just that — talk. When faced with a challenge to their reporting of a legitimate news story that demands real courage, the media kneels before terrorists, and our government treats freedom of information like an encumbrance to its pursuit of bigger deals.
Hat tip to a anonymous reader.
I’ve been all along the border area between China and North Korea, and even spoken with DPRK soldiers there on several occasions. They really don’t seem to care if you’re just taking pictures of North Korea from the Chinese side, and actually there’s a big tourist industry at many points catering mostly to South Koreans to facilitate them taking pictures of North Korea, looking through binoculars or telescopes and whatnot. I also find it hard to believe that China would condone North Korean soldiers stepping onto Chinese territory. So the “trap” theory seems the most plausible, and if that’s the case that’s very bad news for these two reporters. I doubt the North would want to release them back to the West in the near term, which would allow them to tell the world of exactly what went down. Legally speaking, since these two women are being held as “criminals” rather than “hostages,” it would seem that the North has a pretty good fig leaf allowing them to hold onto them for as long as they like.
It’s interesting to try to figure out what “stupid” means in this case.
My theory, based on the missile launch and the kidnapping, is that State is trying the “just ignore them” approach. The fact that NK was able to achieve this provocation could be frustrating to that strategy.
However if they planned this approach, they should have planned on incidents like this.
You hit my first reaction to this statement: that “stupid” was probably a direct reference to their trying to bring attention to the humanitarian crisis in the first place.
I’m having trouble with the silence — by Gore and the news outlet and the US government.
I can imagine people in the State Dept. – especially a SD that has long ago decided not to mention human rights in the name of “working with” NK in “negotiations” – coming up with the idea that the best way to handle this situation is through “quiet diplomacy” — but I’m having trouble picturing them actually meaning it will help solve the specific problem for these two journalists.
What I mean is — seeing as how easily and throughly State through Lefkowitz under the bus for a couple of years —- I can easily picture them doing the same with the reporters all in the name of keeping undue political pressure off the negotiating team trying to work out a deal with Pyongyang.
But, I have a harder time imagining people familiar with Korea believing that silence and backdoor channels are the best way to get the reporters freed…
Silence let’s everyone off the hook:
China isn’t pressured to pressure NK.
Pyongyang isn’t pressured to fear cut backs in aid or a backlash from Beijing.
And Obama and the US don’t have to worry about upsetting the “smart diplomacy” we’ve been following under Hill for the past couple of years.
NK gains much more by silence than it stands to lose by our creating a big international stink about this. — that should be clear.
What could backdoor channels be doing to off set the benefits to Pyongyang of silence?
Does anybody really believe the US is going to be able to convince NK (or China) that it will retaliate with effective sanctions if they don’t let these reporters go?
What possible muscle could the US be flexing behind the scenes that warrants this silence? I can’t picture anything that is reasonably likely….
….I’d give it a much higher chance that — the silence is a sign that the US has decided to simply let this episode “run its course” and prefers not “to allow it to upset bigger issues.”
In short, the reporters are under the bus as long as Pyongyang wants to keep them there. — they mean too little to government to warrant risking damage to a diplomatic approach to Pyongyang (that has proven itself a disaster for the past couple of years).
I want to take a better stab at the heart of my last comment:
All of you who have watched North Korea over the years — which is more likely:
That the two reporters stand a much better chance of being abused by the regime in Pyongyang due to silence on the part of the US and Al Gore and others…
…..or they stand a better chance of not being abused?
I think anybody who knows NK would have to conclude —— the amount of potential abuse these reporters are facing goes up significantly the more the US avoids talking about it in public.
NK is the kind of regime that will take the public silence as a sign the US doesn’t care much what happens to them.
And I don’t believe any amount of behind the scenes bellowing would change that.
I give it a fair likelihood NK will view silence as a greenlight.
Usinkorea, if the US views this provocation as a de facto “kidnapping,” and official US policy is not to negotiate with terrorists, then the likely response on the part of the US is to ignore this matter in the name of a larger interest, specifically, preventing such incidents from happening again. In this sense, the two reporters would essentially be sacrificial lambs.
I’m personally tired of all the attention North Korea keeps receiving. Just ignore them in all respects. Once they realize that they have no more leverage over us, maybe they’ll actually start shaping up, since their “diplomacy as blackmail” model will have been revealed as no longer functional or useful.
King Baeksu, I totally disagree….USinKorea is right on point.
You may be tired asking the DPRK for nuclear arms disarmament in exchange for silence re: death camps, as we all are – the silence with respect to the latter is unconscionable and must end. It is especially hypocritical of the Obama admnistration to remain silent, in light of his public statement that “silence is the co-conspirator to evil”.
What you’re advocating is nothing less that blood on our hands – please refocus your efforts on the hapless North Korean victims, generations of families who have perished in the death camps, and KJI, a genocidal dictator and the world’s largest slaveholder in the world.
Irene, the US government can do and say whatever it wants about North Korea as far as I’m concerned.
I’m mostly sick of the endless media focus on the North. North Korea is an attention whore whose “importance” is vastly disproportionate to its puny size and actual irrelevance.
Ignoring it is exactly what it would hate most. End the codependency now!
King Baeksu, I agree that North Korea is not worth the 15% GDP spent on it by the ROK during the “sunshine years” – but, we have learned about the duplicitous nature of the regime – that is, while it loves the spotlight for being a nuclear threat, it shakes in fear at the possible spotlight on their concentration camps, the heartbreaking details confirmed by our intel assets (camp 22, gas chambers, human experimentation) – as Jack said last year, unless the Obama administration breaks their unconscionable hypocritical silence about these camps, “only in retrospect will we ask ourselves the question, why didn’t we do anything? I shudder the day when North Korea is finally opened.”
King Baeksu,
What about the argument that ignoring KJI too much may simply end up causing KJI to come up with new — and probably more dangerous — ideas? Fred Kaplan wonders about that below.
http://www.slate.com/id/2215488/
Ignoring NK isn’t a catch-all. There are different things that can be ignored and different outcomes.
My main thought was that most people who watch Korea would likely admit that — ignoring the plight of these two reporters makes it more likely they’ll suffer more at the hands of the regime than less….
On the issue of human rights for the North Korean people, I think the same idea works but on a much, much more limited scale: Maybe if the US made human rights a big deal in its relationship with North Korea, it could curb some of NK’s excesses, but it probably wouldn’t do much.
That doesn’t mean, however, that I think it is a waste of time. I advocate making human rights one of the primary subjects of our talks with NK. I’m just thinking realistically about our chances of having a significant impact in that area.
I want human rights to be one of the key issues discussed because, we know for sure remaining silent has ZERO chance of having a positive influence in curbing the regimes atrocities. Also, by remaining silent about the abuses on the one hand and giving NK food, heavy fuel oil, and other much needed material wealth on the other as part of partial agreements or just to get the North to sit down at the table to talk —- makes us on some level an accessory to the regime’s crimes.
On ignoring North Korea’s provocations —- it is seductive to think that silence on them would nullify the North’s strategy of using them.
But, I agree with JW and have blogged and commented about that before: that NK will find a way to gain attention if it wants it. If ICBM and nuke tests won’t do it, the North will return to bloodletting.
Also, the US government can’t dictate how the rest of the world views a provocation either. That was the problem with Obama’s slight response to the ICBM test — if NK sees the world media and a lot of experts taking notice of the provocation and telling us what the US should do in response, it suits the North’s purpose by putting pressure on the US.
The Bush flipflop and handing NK policy to Hill is an example:
The US applied banking sanctions that made the regime hurt and fear for its survival. So, being NK, it reacted with bluster and the use of its two biggest cards – an ICBM test followed by its first nuclear bomb test.
To me, these were signs of desperation which should have been read as an affirmation that the US was finally on the right track in its effort to force NK to reform or else.
But, the media and a fair number of experts had the opposite reaction — that “something” had to be done “before its too late” — and the Bush administration caved under this pressure.
Because nothing deters terrorism like sitting back and waiting for them to escalate.
You know, the merits of this theory really speak for themselves. If only we could arrange to exchange Laura Ling and Euna Lee for someone more … expendable. And who would make a better hostage than a border-lurking “zine” writer?
There is a difference between negotiating with terrorists and putting pressure on them…
The “no negotiating” line means specifically that you don’t hand terrorist or kidnappers or blackmailers money or other concessions in exchange for the hostage or the ending of provocative acts.
It doesn’t mean you ignore the situation hoping it will go away.
If anyone is paying attention to the real story, Laura and her coworker deliberately walked across a frozen border river which they knew was the border. ON PURPOSE. They were not dragged across by N Koreans, this is something new that people are making up.
Laura is apparently fearless and thinks she can go whereever she wants.
Seriously.
Do stupid things, pay the consequences. Do stupid things that involve barging into a terrorist country? Oppsy.
She fucked up on a story. I like her, I hope she comes home safely and soon, but ffs, You can’t just waltz into north korea like you own the place and not expect repercussions.
[OFK: I call bullshit. Who are you and how do you know? If you’re going to make a claim like that, you need to offer up something to establish your credibility and basis of knowledge, or we’re going to dismiss you as just another jackass with a keyboard and an opinion.]
“And who would make a better hostage than a border-lurking “zine†writer?”
I find your snotty attitude amusing considering that you yourself are but a border-lurking blog writer.
Usinkorea, I agree with the idea that behind the scenes, the US and other nations should be turning up the heat on North Korea however possible, making aid contingent upon reciprocation, etc. I also think the focus of the US here needs to be on China, not North Korea.
China is the pimp to North Korea’s ho, after all. Of course, since Bush et al imploded the US economy, China cares less and less about we actually think, and we’ll soon be her ho, too!
Nilla, you’re a testament to the pride of ignorance that obstructs the truth about the DPRK regime and the insanity that pervades our foreign policy with respect to KJI and the North Korean people, the most persecuted and isolated people in the world.
Or, maybe nilla really knows something he’d care to share with us. Comments are still open, nilla.
What I would like to see, as far as general responses to KJI, is a demand for transparency in return for aid. I’ve long found the US position of, at least publicly, ignoring North Korea’s transgressions against humanity disturbing at best.
Nilla: I find it disturbing that you’re basing your statement solely on the North Korean statement. Are you, perhaps, also outraged at the US colonial government in the south?
While I’m very sympathetic to your message about State Department insensitivity and its general lack of interest in protecting US citizens abroad when they’re in trouble, you’ve strung together some probable facts with mere speculation and innuendo. I think you’re looking too hard for bad faith acts on the part of the people you don’t care for to look into dubious acts that muddy the situation on the part of the people you like or at least regard neutrally.
Ultimately, like I said, I’m sympathetic to your overall concern, but I’m troubled by the way some things that have the potential to somewhat undermine your overall point are brushed aside. I don’t have time this week to go over this all in detail, but one thing that stuck out was this:
I admit that I haven’t read your blog for a couple weeks so I may have missed some new information, but I could easily imagine two reporters trying to make a name for themselves on an issue they see as important trying to show how porous the border is by crossing in and then crossing back out. Even if the driver were an operative engaged in entrapping them, it seems absolutely plausible that they were enticed to go to that remote area by this prospect.
If they had intentionally crossed into the country illegally, any country’s justification — even the evil regime in Pyongyang would be for them to be held over far more than just a few hours.
And about Current TV…
I think Current TV’s silence — and this is also speculation — may well be explained by the cameraman knowing something that is wholly unhelpful to those reporters’ case.
Like I said, I’m sympathetic to the overall concern here, but a stronger case is made if we don’t insert speculations and then treat them as likely fact. There are just too many holes in whatever side you want to believe in. Even though, for example, I find the idea that the driver was a North Korea operative, I find it hard to reconcile that notion with the relative ineptitude of how the “kidnapping” was handled — despite the unarmed three being delivered to the vicinity of presumably armed guards along the border, the cameraman escaped! That doesn’t sound like “a plan could only have been approved by Kim Jong Il himself” (another unsupported speculation, unless there’s something in the last few weeks I missed).
Don’t get me wrong, Joshua. I can’t say how many times I really am sympathetic to your point here. As a US citizen living in South Korea and traveling through sometimes unfriendly Asian countries like the PRC, I find it galling how blithely some of the embassy and consulate staffs show disregard and even contempt for US citizens abroad who have ended up in trouble — with this case perhaps being the epitome of such heedless negligence. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if they had done something stupid.
But I will say one thing about that: just as stupid as it was for Stanton to call these people stupid to Congressional staffers presumably on the same team, it was foolish for the “distressed” and “upset” staffers’ memorandum to be released to the press. If there is any damage, that’s where it was done.
I’m also troubled by the source of this. On the surface, the Taipei Times seems more concerned with taking down Stanton because he wouldn’t be good for their position in cross-Strait affairs than they are with the well-being of Lee and Ling. Not that I’m not extremely sympathetic to their desire to nix any chance that someone with “strong support for Chinese policies” would be placed by Washington in Taipei.
No. I think this is an “only an evil regime like Pyongyang” one:
If this were most any other country, two reporters crossing over the border would be — an immigration issue — and while we might quibble over whether they’d be returned in “hours” or not, they’d be released fairly quickly.
Only nations like NK would hold them for a long time to put on show trials and accuse them of threatening national security.
Doesn’t the United States sometimes imprison people who illegally enter the country?
If a couple North Koreans of any profession were caught sneaking in at the Sonora Desert or the Montana Plains, I highly doubt they’d be “released fairly quickly.” Even if not brought to trial for illegal entry, I’m sure they would be investigated.
People caught at or near the border are immediately deported while those arrested inside the country are detained. If they haven’t been accused of other crimes and if they agree to be deported, they are usually deported quickly. Those imprisoned for long periods are usually fighting deportation or awaiting trial on other charges. I’m no fan of the War Against Illegal Immigrants, but note in fairness that one reason why immigrants are detained is that previously most catch-and-release immigrants skipped out on their deportation hearings, and that is why the practice was ended.
It would depend on the circumstances, of course. Journalists? Probably not. If they were carrying dope or guns? Probably so. If they were crossing to immigrate illegally, we might hold them for a short duration before removal from the United States.
But those are not the circumstances of which we are speaking here. Neither the United States nor any other civilized nation would imprison unarmed journalists for straying across a poorly marked border. Laura Ling and Euna Lee were at that border as journalists. Just for a moment, let’s accept as fact your unfounded speculation that they intentionally crossed the border to get a story about the conditions of ordinary life in North Korea (something that wouldn’t be newsworthy anywhere else on earth). That would be pretty stupid, but it’s not espionage. No normal country would hold them incommunicado or deny them access to consular officials of their own country, or charge them with espionage or any other offense that could carry an effectual death sentence (considering prison conditions in North Korea). And even if Ling and Lee intentionally crossed the border, their government ought to make securing their release its highest priority.
But of course, to assume that Ling and Lee (a) crossed the border or (b) did so intentionally would be wild speculation in which I would not want to engage, especially when the preponderance of evidence suggests otherwise. To the extent the L.A. Times speculated to the contrary, I discussed that in my New Ledger piece. But the most recent report, via the Korea Economic Daily, fits with what my sources tell me:
That fact, if true, would suggest that North Korea planned to take Ling and Lee into custody for some particular purpose. After all, it would have been a simple matter to shoo them back to the Chinese side. And if the North Koreans asked the Chinese guide to lead Ling and Lee across the border, it would hardly be any different than if the North Koreans had crossed into China.
Neither Jodi nor I has said that there is conclusive evidence that the North Koreans “kidnapped” Ling and Lee. I have said that our government and Current TV know the answer to that question and ought to tell us what it is. I have said that if North Korea intentionally abducted Ling and Lee to achieve some political, financial, or diplomatic objective, it would be an act of terrorism. Certainly the State Department’s softly-softly approach isn’t working, and those “bigger issues” State is more focused on aren’t going so well lately. Threatening the massive financial sanctions that Executive Order 13,224 allows, on the other hand, would give the North Koreans an incentive that begging alone won’t, would deter (rather than encourage) future acts of terrorism, and could certainly compliment some good diplomacy. There is nothing about pressure and negotiation that’s mutually exclusive.
Regardless of where Ling and Lee were then the North Koreans seized them, it’s clear to me that North Korea is deliberately holding them to terrorize journalists out of reporting on the misery of the North Korean people. Their detention shortly before North Korea’s well planned missile launch probably wasn’t coincidental, and I don’t doubt that North Korea will link Ling and Lee’s release to some form of ransom, monetary or otherwise. And if our government pays, it will be telling the North Koreans (and perhaps others) that terrorism against American citizens is an acceptable way to gain concessions from their government. That will put the safety of other American citizens in danger. And since we’re talking about a country that has kidnapped dozens of people from their own home countries, it’s difficult to believe that North Korea will draw a line that you and I are prepared to live with.
The key to this is again the unique despotic nature of the North Korean regime – which sets itself apart from most every other nation on earth.
If North Korean reporters were caught sneaking into the US from Mexico or Canada, of course it would set off alarm bells and require investigation. North Korea doesn’t let people leave the country. If it sends students or officials abroad, it does so with as tight a system of controls as it possibly can. — There is just no way to create a reasonable hypothetical situation similar to this of the American reporters.
Even if NK were paranoid enough to believe that there is no way these two American reporters could be anything but spies — it would not be an excuse for holding them.
This is another big problem with the US silence.
It seems clear that one reason major news agencies haven’t been milking a very good source of information about one of the most obscure nations on earth is —- fear of legal and moral liability if the reporters were caught by the Chinese or North Koreans.
It similar to how all the major news agencies fled Afghanistan: the insurance costs seem to be rather high, from what I remember reading. With Manchuria, they’d also have trouble with China’s government who doesn’t want reporting about the plight of refugees or international pressure turned up on Pyongyang.
But, the refugees in Manchuria are both a compelling story and a fabulous source of information about NK. The few documentaries that have been made including segments with refugees have been riveting and some of the best journalism work in years — something news organizations crave.
By holding these two reporters, NK probably is sending out a very strong message that will cause a significant drop in coverage by independent or lesser known outlets who have been willing to risk it in the past. Which means even less coverage of what has been a largely overlooked story in the first place.
Which is why the US government (and Japan) should be secretly helping to fund the NGOs who have connections in the area and have helped make those documentaries. The government should try to (covertly) encourage some of those NGOs to make their own documentaries and use the Internet as a means to distribute them. Or maybe just set up front groups itself to do the work.
There is a whole lot of information there that the world should hear about.
Someone should be telling these stories in way that grabs more attention than from just the people already interested in Korea and East Asia.
“Even if NK were paranoid enough to believe that there is no way these two American reporters could be anything but spies — it would not be an excuse for holding them.”
What I meant by that was —– just because NK is a paranoid, despotic state that might actually convince itself the two women could be spies — we can’t lower our level of rebuke for how they are treating the women.
NK’s absurdity can’t be an excuse for itself.
Trying to think of hypotheticals in which NK is regarded as just another generic nation is already crossing a line that harms rather than helps clarify our understanding.
NK isn’t like any other nation.
Joshua wrote:
That “unfounded speculation” is something I’m only saying is a possibility. Frankly, I have no idea if they were trying to enter or not, or if they had successfully entered or not (I think you could make a strong case either way, but both sides would rely heavily on speculation), but my consternation at what William Stanton says or how North Korea is manipulating this case to for political or economic gain — which you and I seem to share — relies in no way on them being innocent of the charges or not.
All we can do is speculate. When (and if) they are eventually released, if they admit that, yes, they had been trying to cross into the DPRK illegally, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit. But more importantly, it wouldn’t change my view about what North Korea is doing right now.
That said, at the risk of undermining what I just wrote, about illegals coming in, I though that it was a felony, not a misdemeanor, for someone already denied access to the US to try to enter illegally. And we in the US do treat certain types as more dangerous than others, like Pakistanis over Peruvians. I would imagine North Koreans, if they were to be caught and determined to be North Koreans, would be in the former category. (North Koreans have on their side the ability to believably claim to be ChosÅnjok Chinese or South Koreans if they are caught.)
Agreed. But elsewhere, you’ve sensibly conceded that NK is detaining Ling and Lee for primarily political reasons, which suggests that behind the veneer of negotiations, we should be threatening to invoke Executive Order 13,224 and freeze their assets wherever we find them.
I do not understand people who believe that begging alone is effective diplomacy. I’m not suggesting you’re one of those people, but that’s the level on which most of our diplomats and political leaders have been operating for the last 3 years.
Perhaps Seoul’s US Embassy Political Counselor Joseph Yun does not recall that Pyongyang initially wanted US $100,000 ransom for the release of Evan Hunziker in 1996, but Bill Richardson negotiated it down to a $5000 hotel bill. Hunziker was a drunken fool with a history of mental issues, so if he’s worth $100,000 can you begin to imagine how much moolah Pyongyang will demand for Lisa Ling’s sister and Euna Lee when they see Al Gore pull out his checkbook?
The Current TV guy that evaded capture at the Tumen River is executive producer Mitch Koss, who must feel like a total schmuck for leaving his 2 colleagues behind on the battlefield. Don’t be surprised if he accompanies Gore as part of the homecoming delegation envoy entourage.
Here is the latest update on what the US government is doing right now courtesy of South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan at a press conference:
Q: What is the probability of former U.S. Vice President Al Gore visiting Pyongyang to negotiate the release of two American female journalists?
Yu: It seems that the U.S. government is discussing whether to tackle the issue directly or have the private sector deal with it. If similar precedents of American figures paying cash to North Korea in exchange for release of U.S. citizens in custody are taken into account, we could imagine Gore visiting North Korea. I personally expect he will limit negotiations to the humanitarian agenda of the journalists’ release, rather than take advantage of the chance for political talks with the North.
The news is Yu’s mention of the the U.S. government “having the private sector deal with it.” Keep an eye on my previous comment’s prediction: Al Gore is going to open his checkbook in Pyongyang on behalf of Current TV (private sector) and Mitch Koss kisses the 2 female colleagues (that he left behind on the battlefield) after their humanitarian release.