ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

ThinkFast: October 9, 2006

After warnings from the U.N. Security Council just two days ago to not conduct a nuclear test, North Korea yesterday announced that it had set off an atomic weapon underground. The test was the first “manifest proof” of the country’s nuclear capabilities. (Timeline of North Korea’s atomic march HERE.)

Yesterday, James A. Baker, the Republican co-chairman of a bipartisan panel reassessing Iraq strategy for President Bush, said he “absolutely” agrees with Sen. John Warner’s (R-VA) recent remarks on setting a timetable for redeployment from Iraq. “[T]here are alternatives between the stated alternatives…of ‘stay the course’ and ‘cut and run,’” said Baker.

“The United Nations human rights chief said on Monday ‘several hundred’ civilians — far more than first thought — may have died in late August attacks by militias in the south of Sudan’s violent Darfur region.”

“Rising concern over immigration has prompted a wave of cities and states this year to try to make English the official language.” Critics charge that the measures are “a way of putting immigrants in their place.”

“Moving with unusual speed,” the House Ethics Committee has started interviews in its probe of the Mark Foley scandal. Longtime Foley aide and former chief of staff for Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) Kirk Fordham will be testifying this week. Read more

Politics

Kolbe confronted Foley about improper emails in 2000.

Retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) confronted Mark Foley in 2000 about his personal communications with pages. Kolbe had been informed of sexually explicit Internet messages from Foley that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley was taking their email relationship. “The revelation pushes back by at least five years the date when a member of Congress has acknowledged learning of Foley’s behavior with former pages.”

Yglesias

Nukes for the North

mushroom.jpg

North Korea conducts a nuclear test and America’s non-proliferation policy is officially a mess. At this point, there are two kinds of questions one can ask. One set is about non-proliferation policy as such and what one needs to do to get it back on track. Another specifically concerns North Korea. When we were talking DPRK on BloggingHeads, Dan Drezner made the point that there actually are a couple of steps that could be taken that really would stand a decent chance of bringing the Pyongyang regime to the breaking point, namely an end to the money coming in from South Korea under the “sunshine policy” and a shift in Chinese policy aimed at facilitating, rather than preventing, DPRK residents from crossing the border into China.

The trouble is that nobody especially wants to see the North Korean regime actually collapse. Certainly the South Koreans aren’t looking forward to needing to assume responsibility for a relatively large and incredibly impoverished country. The reuinification of Germany has created a lot of economic and social problems for the former West Germany, and this would be like that situation on steroids. China, meanwhile, isn’t enthusiastic about the idea of giant cross-border refugee flows. The issue for US policymakers then becomes whether there’s anything we might be able to offer in terms of assistance that would make Seoul and Beijing more comfortable with ending their efforts to prop up North Korea’s government, and whether that’s something we would actually want to offer.

Similarly, would we actually want to see North Korea collapse, or would that make the nuclear situation even worse since, presumably, we don’t want to see those weapons and material floating around.

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up