Comments on: USIP working paper on disabling DPRK nuclear facilities http://koreanunification.net/2007/10/26/usip-working-paper-on-disabling-dprk-nuclear-facilities/ the DMZ will not last forever... or will it? Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:32:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Richardson http://koreanunification.net/2007/10/26/usip-working-paper-on-disabling-dprk-nuclear-facilities/comment-page-1/#comment-172 Richardson Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:10:57 +0000 http://koreanunification.net/2007/10/26/usip-working-paper-on-disabling-dprk-nuclear-facilities/#comment-172 A working group like that defining “disablement” is rather fanciful; it’s up the teams of Chris Hill and Kim Kye-gwan to define the term. Their defining “disablement,” while interesting, is not official unless the executive branch (Department of State) chooses to use the definition they craft. Albright had to tone down his usual rhetoric for that paper, but I would in no way consider him “reputable.” http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/04/08/david-albright-responds-sort-of/ http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/02/22/david-albright-north-koreas-latest-apologist/ Sadly, the definition probably won’t matter much; North Korea has a proven history or reinterpreting terms and entire agreements on whim. And what <i>could</i> the U.S. really do about it, the “so what?” question? Or rather what <i><b>would</i></b> the U.S. do about it – since the entire range of coercive options that had begun to have real effect have been abandoned for pseudo diplomacy/engagement. A working group like that defining “disablement” is rather fanciful; it’s up the teams of Chris Hill and Kim Kye-gwan to define the term. Their defining “disablement,” while interesting, is not official unless the executive branch (Department of State) chooses to use the definition they craft.

Albright had to tone down his usual rhetoric for that paper, but I would in no way consider him “reputable.”

http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/04/08/david-albright-responds-sort-of/

http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/02/22/david-albright-north-koreas-latest-apologist/

Sadly, the definition probably won’t matter much; North Korea has a proven history or reinterpreting terms and entire agreements on whim. And what could the U.S. really do about it, the “so what?” question? Or rather what would the U.S. do about it – since the entire range of coercive options that had begun to have real effect have been abandoned for pseudo diplomacy/engagement.

]]>