It's official: Dear Leader has nukes

[Jon Miller]

it's interesting

I was just talking to my freind, from South Korea

she thought that NK needed nukes, to protect itself against the US (and other big countries)

when I asked her about the point that we were in SK to protect it from NK, she said that it was to defend itself economically, and in case the US creates some issue (like in Iraq)

she was also very sure of the fact that SK and NK should join back up

Jon Miller

[lord of the mark]

Global precendent? As oposed to the current global precedent, that if you are scary enough, you get to have nukes anyways?

LOTM - theres a difference between allowing, and offering a bribe.


Our bribes to them in 1994 do not seem to have pushed anyone towards getting nukes, which remains a singulalrly expensive and diffciult task- only countries that are rich enough or advanced enough even have a chance,

LOTM - NKor is advanced? Rich?


and the fact is, once you are in a position to get nukes anyways, by buying or making them locally, you are already more than just some tin pot dictatorship. As for it being preferable for it to come from "locals" (powers like Japan, China, and SK hardly seem just "locals")

LOTM - by contrast to the US.


have their own interests,

LOTM- of course.

None of them called NK evil

LOTM - so its all about word choice in that damned speech? I dont buy it.

and said them getting nuclear weapons was an utter no-no they would never allow it.

LOTM - theyre hardly in a position to "not allow it"

It was the US that said that. Essentially you are saying we can speak our ass off and demands others pony up for OUR actions? Not a very wise mode of international relations.


LOTM - pushing for multilateral talks was hardly demanding others pony up. In fact the neighbors all supported multilateral talks. It was NKors resistance that delayed them, not resistance from Japan or Skor.



China and Russia both have reason to invest in Iran. More importantly, sanctions are likely to fail, in the sense that if they are placed, it just gives the regime a bigger reaosn to speed up its program.


LOTM - or to drop the program. Depends on how much they value the investments.


Hoping for a counterrevolution in Iran is a poor strategy at best.


LOTM - thats really difficult to say. Public source info on the situation within Iran is limited. I hope someone in the US govt has info that is better.

Its also counterproductive to our aims in the region- I doubt greater Iranian poverty is a boon in any way to Iraq or Afghanistan.

LOTM - the value of Iran as an engine for growth in Iraq and Afghanistan is marginal compared to our other issues wrt to Iran. Economic growth in Iraq is largely constrained by security - Iraqs principal export is oil, of which Iran is NOT an importer.



Why drop the HR speak? We have relations with China and we criticize them all the time for humans rights abuses. Our talking about Chinas attorcious HR record has done nothing to make it impossible to work with them.


LOTM - i wasnt referring to talk, but to insistence on HR improvements as PART of a deal. I dont think theyd agree to THAT.



And on your final point- as I said, I find no reason to drop our ciritcisms of their regime or their laws, and there is a huge difference between being the arms dealers and main international backers of a regime (as we are with KSA and Egypt and were with Iran under the Shah) as having an embassy and trade. Do you honeslty think the people of Iran will be anti UK or Anti-German because they trade with the Mullahs as they did with the Shah?


LOTM - depends on the situation. If they think theyre on the point of a revolution, and are counting on our continued encouragement, they could well be very concerned.



Why would China ever chose chaos? Freedom and democracy in NK mean nothing to them- as for a remilitarized and nuclear Japan, well, NK makes a handy trobulemaker and scapegoat, plus, that is great news for the Chinese in the sense that it reoppens the Japanese menace, against which the brave Chinese people must rally around the Party and not rock the boat and endanger national security when it comes to the Japanese.

LOTM - or the Chinese people could ask why the leadership screwed up and followed a path that led to a rearmed Japan in the first place. I think the domestic effects in China are probably awash. Certainly not worth the REAL costs to China of a rearmed Japan.


Besides, on that end SK is also opposed to a nuclear Japan, so a remilitarized Japan if anything might help to break the togetherness of the US northwest Asian allies, and make it easier in a sense for China.


LOTM - except Skor is not a threat to China. And if Nkor goes nuclear, they may decide to live with a nuclear Japan.


And what can we offer China that is more valuable than keeping Korea quiet? Drop support for Taiwan perhaps, or sell them arms?

LOTM - I presume we have a range of issues. Some kind of more explicit arrangement over Taiwan would be one thing, assurance of Chinese interests in other places, would be another.

In any case China has to face the possibility that Nkor will end in chaos anyway, whatever we or they do. If so, better not to first have a rearmed Japan, and then NKor chaos later - thats the worst of both worlds.

[Q Classic]

usual reactions, not surprised:

the right blames clinton for this
the left blames bush.

meanwhile, the dear leader is living it up and having a grand old time with his party's party.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
usual reactions, not surprised:

the right blames clinton for this
the left blames bush.

meanwhile, the dear leader is living it up and having a grand old time with his party's party.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by GePap
Besides, on that end SK is also opposed to a nuclear Japan, so a remilitarized Japan if anything might help to break the togetherness of the US northwest Asian allies, and make it easier in a sense for China.

Not just RoK but from South Korea all the way down to probably Australia. All these countries are against Japan remilitarising.

If Japan want to make nuclear weapons they have to first amend their peace time constitution. If they try that it will surely lead to an uproar so huge that Uncle Sam probably would try its best to pressure Japan into dropping the idea.

[lord of the mark]

Hoping for a counterrevolution in Iran is a poor strategy at best.

AFAIK, no dissidents in Iran want a regime that resembles the pre-79 regime. We're not talking about a COUNTERrevolution, but about a democratic revolution. Only the Mullahs categorize the opposition to them as COUNTERrevolutionary. And those who sympathize with the mullahs.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
LOTM - theres a difference between allowing, and offering a bribe.

Yes, one shows you are weak, the other might work.

LOTM - NKor is advanced? Rich?

NK is certainly advanced- how many states make and export ballistic missiles? As for Rich, until the collapse of the USSR NK did not do that badly-and it was then that the foundation of this nuke program were set.

LOTM - so its all about word choice in that damned speech? I dont buy it.

Yes, that and the actions that followed, like Invading a country we also called Evil. Cause, Effect- I am sure you know how it works.

LOTM - theyre hardly in a position to "not allow it"

Ditto for the US, but it was still Bush who did say it, not them.

LOTM - pushing for multilateral talks was hardly demanding others pony up. In fact the neighbors all supported multilateral talks. It was NKors resistance that delayed them, not resistance from Japan or Skor.

We accepted multilateral talks after our stance of not talking failed utterly. But you point is that if a bribe is to be paid, it should be other people's money.

LOTM - or to drop the program. Depends on how much they value the investments.

Regime survival> money. Every time.

LOTM - the value of Iran as an engine for growth in Iraq and Afghanistan is marginal compared to our other issues wrt to Iran. Economic growth in Iraq is largely constrained by security - Iraqs principal export is oil, of which Iran is NOT an importer.

Iraq's south gets a lot of Iranian tourism now, and Herat is one of Afghanistan's richest cities thanks to trade over the border, which happens to be through Iran.

LOTM - i wasnt referring to talk, but to insistence on HR improvements as PART of a deal. I dont think theyd agree to THAT.

I am sure they wouldn't, but then, we shouldn't even ask-that is not the point.

LOTM - depends on the situation. If they think theyre on the point of a revolution, and are counting on our continued encouragement, they could well be very concerned.

They will revolt one way or another- I see few ways in which any future regime might be even more anti-Americans, but that is besides the point because if you believe that the regime that would follow a new revolution would be democratic, then there should not be any serious and dangerous problems with it and US, now will there?

LOTM - or the Chinese people could ask why the leadership screwed up and followed a path that led to a rearmed Japan in the first place.

Re-arming is a Japanese decision- why on earth would people in China blame their leaders if those people who won't apologize for raping nanking decide to get nukes? They won't.

I think the domestic effects in China are probably awash. Certainly not worth the REAL costs to China of a rearmed Japan.

What "real cost"? Two nuclear armed states cancell each other out. China alreayd plans miliatry modernization- a nuclear Japan just means a more convinient reason for military modernization.

LOTM - except Skor is not a threat to China. And if Nkor goes nuclear, they may decide to live with a nuclear Japan.

SK hates Japan more than anyone else- I bet many in SK would have no problem if NK nukes Japan. The issue here is the US position in NE Asia, and even greater chilliness between SK and Japan does not help.

LOTM - I presume we have a range of issues. Some kind of more explicit arrangement over Taiwan would be one thing, assurance of Chinese interests in other places, would be another.

Asking to help with NK is a big ask, a VERY big ask.

In any case China has to face the possibility that Nkor will end in chaos anyway, whatever we or they do. If so, better not to first have a rearmed Japan, and then NKor chaos later - thats the worst of both worlds.

Why? China expects it economic ascendency to make up for everything else. If in 40 years the Japanese economy is tied essentially to China's, then who cares if NK collapeses and Japan is nuclear? For their own good the Japanese would not do anything anti-Chinese. That is what China is counting on, and keeping the lid down as long as possible is their main aim.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Hoping for a counterrevolution in Iran is a poor strategy at best.

AFAIK, no dissidents in Iran want a regime that resembles the pre-79 regime. We're not talking about a COUNTERrevolution, but about a democratic revolution. Only the Mullahs categorize the opposition to them as COUNTERrevolutionary. And those who sympathize with the mullahs.

Oh, yes, Ayatollah Gepap! Don't make me go fatwa on your heiny!

[DanS]

I think this is good news. Now Japan and Taiwan can declare themselves nuclear powers without consequence.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap



NK is certainly advanced- how many states make and export ballistic missiles? As for Rich, until the collapse of the USSR NK did not do that badly-and it was then that the foundation of this nuke program were set.

LOTM - if NKor pre 91 was rich enough, then theres no shortage of countries that could follow its example.

Yes, that and the actions that followed, like Invading a country we also called Evil. Cause, Effect- I am sure you know how it works.

LOTM - except that the crisis started BEFORE we went into Iraq. Hard to seperate cause and effect from chronology. Im sure you know that.


Ditto for the US, but it was still Bush who did say it, not them.

LOTM - if the US is NOT in a position to not allow it, then they dont have much to be afraid of, now do they. Cmon, either the US is capable of an invasion or its not, you cant have it both ways depending on which supports a particular point.


We accepted multilateral talks after our stance of not talking failed utterly.


LOTM -and Nkor continued to resist that idea.

But you point is that if a bribe is to be paid, it should be other people's money.

LOTM - cmon, like we havent done enough monetarily for Japan and SKor over the years? the issue isnt the money, its precedent.


Regime survival> money. Every time.


LOTM - not every time. But in Iran unemployment seems to be driving the widening of discontent with the regime. So for Iran, yes, trade and investment ARE connected with regime survival.



Iraq's south gets a lot of Iranian tourism now, and Herat is one of Afghanistan's richest cities thanks to trade over the border, which happens to be through Iran.

LOTM - Herat was also one of the last places to retain warlord rule, hardly a good thing for Afghanistan or the US agenda there. And I doubt that tourism in Najaf will disappear if there are sanctions on investment in Iran. Glad to hear youre aware of the economic boom in Najaf, though.

LOTM - depends on the situation. If they think theyre on the point of a revolution, and are counting on our continued encouragement, they could well be very concerned.

They will revolt one way or another- I see few ways in which any future regime might be even more anti-Americans, but that is besides the point because if you believe that the regime that would follow a new revolution would be democratic, then there should not be any serious and dangerous problems with it and US, now will there?


LOTM - gad, you love strawmen. Even strongform democratic peace theory doesnt hold there will be no serious problems between two democracies. See France.

LOTM - or the Chinese people could ask why the leadership screwed up and followed a path that led to a rearmed Japan in the first place.

Re-arming is a Japanese decision- why on earth would people in China blame their leaders if those people who won't apologize for raping nanking decide to get nukes?

LOTM - if it happens in response to Nkor nukes, and the Chinese leadership did nothing to stop Nkor nukes, why wouldnt they? Are they like stupid, in your opinion?

They won't.

LOTM - Its just magnificent that you know with certainty what will happen in so many different places.

What "real cost"? Two nuclear armed states cancell each other out. China alreayd plans miliatry modernization- a nuclear Japan just means a more convinient reason for military modernization.

LOTM - i dont for a minute believe that the Chinese leadership is indifferent to a nuclear Japan. Any actual evidence, aside from the fact that this is needed to support your other arguments?


SK hates Japan more than anyone else- I bet many in SK would have no problem if NK nukes Japan.

LOTM I doubt anyone in a position of responsibility in Skor feels that way.



Why? China expects it economic ascendency to make up for everything else. If in 40 years the Japanese economy is tied essentially to China's, then who cares if NK collapeses and Japan is nuclear?


For their own good the Japanese would not do anything anti-Chinese. That is what China is counting on, and keeping the lid down as long as possible is their main aim.

LOTM - everything ive read about them indicates the PRC leadership is cautious - I simply dont believe theyre indifferent to a nuclear Japan, or that they expect their economic size to protect them in every conceivable eventuality.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap




Oh, yes, Ayatollah Gepap! Don't make me go fatwa on your heiny!

Obviously not everyone who thinks an overthrow of the mullahs would be bad thing is an islamist. There are other possible motives, among them a desire for a counter to Israel, and for the frustration of US power in the region.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Oerdin
There is zero need for one for the same reasons there was no need for one against the USSR. The NK has 1-5 nukes and we know their return address so we'd strike back with thousands of nukes. They are silly but not stupid.

I tend to agree, but having spent an ungodly amount of money on the existing missile "shield," it sure would've been nice had it actually worked.

Going on memory alone, isn't missile defense research getting a hefty *cut* in Bush's proposed budget? Heh. If so, too little, too late. All the funds spent so far on this fiasco probably would've had more impact had it gone to more "mundane" security matters, such as further securing our borders and ensuring ports are properly vetted.

Gatekeeper

[lord of the mark]

CS Monitor, August 15, 2003.

'In some foreign policy circles in Beijing, however, old worries are ending. "The Chinese are a lot more rational about Japan these days," says a Japanese specialist with a Beijing think tank. "We understand they aren't any longer a threat." Should Japan use North Korea as a pretext to develop nuclear weapons, however, "that would be a problem."'

[lord of the mark]

RFE/RFL March 2004

'Iran: Unemployment Becoming A 'National Threat'
By Golnaz Esfandiari

According to official estimates, some 3.5 million working-age Iranians are currently unemployed. The jobless rate is particularly high among the women and youth of the Islamic Republic. Authorities are calling unemployment a national threat and one of the country's most pressing priorities.


Prague, 12 March 2004 (RFE/RL) -- Ali, a 24-year-old Iranian, has spent the past four years looking for work. He has a high-school degree and is qualified to work as a make-up artist, but has never been able to find work suited to his interests.

A month ago, he finally relented and accepted a job as a taxi driver. It was, he says, his last choice.

"In fact I [had] to look for a job to make a living even if it is in no way connected to my interests and expertise. The main thing which is clear to everyone in Iran is that is that there are no jobs. There are very few job opportunities and when there is one, there are so many applicants that you can get that job only if you're lucky enough or you have good contacts. For every job opportunity, there are hundreds of applicants," he says.

"I don't think things will get better. I mean, considering how things are moving here, I would say this is it."Iran's official unemployment rate is about 13 percent. But economists estimate the real figure is more than 20 percent.

According to official estimates, unemployment is especially rife among Iran's youth and women, where jobless rates can soar as high as 30 percent.

The rise in unemployment comes as more and more young women are pursuing university degrees, despite the lack of jobs. The Planning and Policy Affairs Ministry says the female unemployment rate is twice that of men.

Economists say Iran will have to create more than a million new jobs every year in order to accommodate its young population. But only about 300,000 new jobs are created each year, leaving the country's youth frustrated and disillusioned.

Observers say the rising unemployment rate is behind many of Iran's emerging social ills, such as drug addiction. There are currently more than 2 million drug addicts in the country. Young people like Ali say unemployment is also causing deep rifts in family relationships.

"I've noticed that no matter how open-minded and intellectual [the parents] are, and no matter how much understanding they have for their children, they come to the point where they have only one question for their children and that is 'Why don't you work?'" Ali said.

Ali Rashidi is a leading economist based in Tehran. He says the roots of Iran's unemployment crisis date back to the early 1980s and the country's policies following the start of the Iran-Iraq War.

"[Iran] wanted to have an army of 20 million. And as a result, they encouraged pregnancy and the rate of population increased from something like 1.7 to 4, 4.5. As a result, the population of Iran has doubled during the last 25 years. So this increasing population is far from what the economy can absorb, and at the same time the policies that have been followed since the end of the war have nothing to propose in terms of absorbing this extra population," Rashidi said.

Furthermore, he says, Iran's investments in industry and agriculture have not been planned to produce the greatest number of jobs possible.

"In other words, the industrial policy has been concentrated in industries absorbing a lot of capital with little labor. For example, you spend a lot of money for steel production or the metallurgy industry and the rate of employment does not go as far as the capital is concerned. So the policy in industry, agriculture has not been conducive to absorb this extra population," Rashidi said.

Rashidi says that most new jobs are being created in the private sector or on the grey market, and therefore do not contribute to reducing overall unemployment rates or raising production rates.

Most of Iran's jobless population is classified as unskilled labor with a high school education or lower. But unemployment is also growing among university graduates, pushing many of them to seek opportunities abroad. According to the International Monetary Fund, Iran has the world's highest rate of brain drain.

Iranian officials have also expressed concern about the growing rate of joblessness among physicians. Nearly 10,000 doctors in Iran are currently unemployed.

Unemployment is also a major problem for educated young Iranians who cannot find suitable jobs in line with their level of education.

Economists say in order to tackle the growing unemployment rate, Iran should push through economic reforms that will increase production and investment.

"We have to revitalize the economy by changing the planning system, the decision makers, and also the sectors of the economy which could produce more productive jobs rather than relying on the service sector or illegal, black market, and things of that sort," Rashidi said.

Meanwhile, 24-year-old Ali says there is little hope among Iran's youth that things are likely to improve anytime soon.

"We all know that we live our life day by day, always hoping that things will get better on their own. I don't think things will get better. I mean, considering how things are moving here, I would say this is it. Many things will never change but humans always keep hoping," Ali said.

The International Labor Organization in a recent report urged countries to tackle youth unemployment in order to avoid what it called "the creation of a huge cadre of frustrated, uneducated or unemployable young people that could have a devastating impact on long-term development prospects."'

[Q Classic]

SK hates Japan more than anyone else- I bet many in SK would have no problem if NK nukes Japan. The issue here is the US position in NE Asia, and even greater chilliness between SK and Japan does not help.

There has been a thaw, you know, between SK and Japan. Why, Sony flat panels are now being made from Samsung parts, and you can get Japanese pr0n in SKorea!