“Chúng ta không muốn một bán đảo Đại Hàn thống nhất, Chúng ta cũng không muốn một Bắc Hàn gây thêm trở ngại hơn những gì mà hệ thống có thể chấp nhận được  We don’t want a unified Korean peninsula … We [also] don’t want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb.”
—Hillary Clinton, 2013, speech to Goldman Sachs

Bắc Hàn tiếp tục bắn thử vài hỏa tiễn tầm xa hay liên lục địa, mà theo bọn “chiên da” Âu Mỹ cho rằng có khả năng đến tận thủ đô Mỹ và Nhà Trắng! Xì Chum khen Ủn khôn ngoan! Bố khỉ!

Một nguyên lý căn bản mà những người “nghe tin nguyên tử” cần biết trước khi đi khoác lác nơi góc phố vỉa hè cà phê quán nhậu là có NGUYÊN TỬ chưa được kể là VŨ KHÍ khi chưa tạo ra được phương tiện phóng đi hữu hiệu (effective delivery system).

Phương tiện phóng bom hoặc đầu đạn nguyên tử gồm MÁY BAY, HỎA TIỄN hoặc vệ tinh từ ngoài KHÔNG GIAN.

1- Máy bay: Máy bay thả bom nguyên tử chiến lược bắt buộc phải tối tân và lặng lẽ. Nghĩa là không chỉ trình độ kỹ thuật bay cao mà kỹ thuật “tàng hình” cũng phải cao nhanh, phải âm thầm lặng lẽ (Stealth technology) thoát khỏi hệ thống dò tín hiệu (radar) bắn chặn (intercept) của đối phương. Nghĩa là phải bao gồm luôn cả trình độ chế tạo máy bay và kỹ thuật điện toán.

2-Kỹ thuật hỏa tiễn (rocket technology): Dù bắn đầu đạn nguyên tử từ đất liền, dưới lòng biển,  qua tầu ngầm v.v cũng phải cần kỹ thuật hỏa tiễn tinh vi để bắn xa, nhanh, chính xác và tự điều khiển để tránh bị đánh chặn ở mức tối đa trước khi đến và phát nổ tại mục tiêu mong muốn. Hiển nhiên điều này cũng đòi hỏi không chỉ riêng kỹ thuật hỏa tiễn mà còn cần luôn kỹ thuật điều khiển điện toán vô tuyến và/hoặc vệ tinh v.v

Trong hơn 20 năm qua, từ khi khối Sô Viết sụp đổ và khối Cộng Sản Á Châu  (Trung Cộng, Việt Nam, Miên, Lào và Bắc Hàn)  vẫn GIỮ TÊN nhưng đã lột xác thành tư bản độc tài và được Âu Mỹ trợ lực không chỉ tồn tại mà ăn nên làm ra vững chắc hơn xưa- Riêng Bắc Hàn đã tìm riêng cho mình một vị thế (hay nói thẳng ra là được cho phép) với khả năng phát triển nguyên tử từ Sô Viết.

Vì thế chúng ta có thể giả định không sợ  sai la bao xa,  là Bắc Hàn đã có NGUYÊN TỬ! Nhưng khả năng phóng, kỹ thuật phóng (delivery system) thì cho đến nay qua các tin tình báo cũng như  bao nhiêu lần chính thức thử đều cho thấy…chưa thành công dù ngay ở giai đoạn đầu. Nghĩa là khả năng bắn đi và đến địa điểm (gần) theo đúng qui trình!

Xét về khả năng trong kỹ thuật điện đoán và điểu khiển vô tuyến thì Bắc Hàn qua thể hiện -cũng còn quá non- chưa thể nắm gót được Nam Hàn chứ chưa nói đến tầng cao khác. Cho nên “sức mạnh” còn lại của Bắc Hàn chính là… khả năng đe dọa tàn diệt, không phải Mỹ hay Nhật … mà là đối thủ anh em trong nhà gần sát nách:  Nam Hàn, mà chẳng cần các loại kỹ thuật cao cấp nào hết!

WikiLeaks on Twitter_ _Hillary Clinton on North Korea_smallerÂu Mỹ chúng nó biết và nắm vững điểm then chốt này làm “vũ khí chiến lược khống trị” khu vực Á Châu. Vì thế trong vài chục năm nay, chúng nó cứ à ơi dí dầu giữ Bắc Hàn làm cái cớ để CÓ MẶT CHÍNH ĐÁNG tại đây- khu vực nơi Nam Hàn và Nhật Bản, hai tiềm lực duy nhất của Á Châu hiện tại,  để KHỐNG CHẾ  ngay hai tiềm lực Hàn Nhật này và TOÀN KHU VỰC (xin xem tài liệu “War with China= John Pilger), đặc biệt là NGA, chứ không chỉ riêng tên đàn em tư bản mới Trung Quốc, TQ “con rồng thật, nhưng bại não”  này chỉ được dùng như cái cớ ngáo ộp trong khu vực mà thôi. Bọn khống trị dù là ai,  quốc gia hay quốc tế,  Mỹ hay không Mỹ, đều  không muốn vị trí nắm quyền sinh sát,  ăn trên đầu thiên hạ bị thách  thức. Nhất là những ai có TIỀM LỰC THÁCH THỨC và VƯỢT TRÊN đều sẽ phải bị mọi thủ đoạn phá nát và kềm chế! Đây là vấn đề nguyên lý của quyền lực và quyền chính.

Chúng ta còn được nghe bọn “chiên da” phao tin thất thiệt của nền báo chí đĩ điếm chính qui (presstitutes) hù dọa rằng nếu chiến tranh Bắc Hàn xảy ra thì chiến phí thiệt hại sẽ lên đến ba (3) ngàn tử Mỹ kim (3 trillions). Mẹ tiên sư bọn này hô to  “tốn tiền,” cho thiên hạ não trạng qui ra thóc “tiếc của” – còn sinh mạng người dân vô tội sẽ bị thiêu sống hàng triệu trong dự cảnh này,  chúng coi như không có! Mà ngay cả có tổn hay 30 hay 300 ngàn tỉ thì đã có hề gì? Người khác tan nát thì chúng càng lợi, cứ đập cửa kình, chúng nó sẽ vừa IN TIỀN  để cho vay tiền tái thiết -vừa là kẻ  bán kính mới  của chúng nó với lãi suất “phải chăng”- nắm hai nguồn lợi-  y như cái gọi là Marshall Plan cho Âu Châu sau cái “thế chiến” do chính chúng nó bày ra để “tàn phá cửa kính”!

Thật sự đám đại bản băng hoại tâm thần Do Thái Mỹ xứng đáng làm bậc thầy của gian manh: Chúng vừa đấm vào mặt đám ngu ngục, vừa bóc lột, vừa được bọn ngu ngục nạn nhân này  “viết sử” cảm tạ!

Dân Âu Châu khi nói đến Marshall Plan, dân Nhật khi nói đến 2 quả bom nguyên tử và “hiến pháp hậu chiến”… cứ hít hà cảm động cảm tạ Mỹ. Chả trách gì bọn ngụy ngục bị lính Mỹ kéo vào làm đảo lộn xã hội, đá đít bạt tai, ám sát đảo chính, rồi dội bom, chất độc v.v  bảo sao nghe vậy… Cho đến khi nó bỏ rơi cho Tầu đá đít và bảo đi chết.. thì  cả đám lãnh đạo cao cấp ôm gói tiền của vợ con bỏ trốn trước-  và cái chế độ “tiền đồn tự do dân chủ với đạo quân bách chiến bách thắng” lăn ra chết  …Đám thấp bé hơn  ôm quần đua nhau chạy….Đứa nào chạy không kịp thì đành bị bọn thổ phỉ Bắc Việt nó hành hạ cho tan hoang tả tơi… Nhưng tất cả thằng chạy đi đứa  kẹt ở lại cũng vẫn cứ tuân hành phủ phục tận tình gào nhớ công ơn của Mỹ cho đến hôm nay.. khi Mỹ đã là bạn đàn anh của Việt Cộng lẫn Trung Cộng! Đám Hàn ngục như con gái Phác Chính Hy vẫn chưa học bài học này của ngụy ngục.

Rốt cuộc xét lại thì chỉ có những thằng có tí tài nhưng tối dạ với chủ nghĩa quốc gia giống dòi như Hitler là thua đậm tối mặt. Hôm nay những thằng Hàn, Nhật bản sắc giống dòi cũng vậy, vẫn cứ phải loay hoay chủ nghĩa quốc gia dân tộc tự hào…trong … đũng quần Mỹ không thoát ra được. Mỹ nó nhấn vào cổ họng cái gì là nuốt cái đó- Mỹ muốn kéo súng đạn vào đưa bọn sát nhân quần lính của chúng nó vào ăn nhậu, hiếp dâm,  gây căng thẳng xã hội v.v nhưng  vẫn cắn răng chịu nhục mà .. vẫy cờ .. trong khi thiểu số nhận thức kiên trì miệt mài chống!

Tiền đồ của chú Ủn và gia đình xem ra sáng lạng hơn Ông nội và bố, và chức “lãnh đạo tối cao” có cơ hội truyền tiếp cho đời con thứ 4, và cháu chít thứ 5, nếu như cả cái đám Hàn ngục phía Nam không mở mắt tìm cách tống đám lính Mỹ sát nhân đang kềm chế họ ra khỏi quốc gia họ để tìm cách mở cửa rộng về phía Bắc tạo một cuộc “diễn tiến hòa bình”  thật sự – (peaceful evolution)- cho dân chúng tại bán đảo này.

Nói chung, nhìn vào chiến cảnh hôm nay, khó đoán tương lai, nhưng một điểm chắc chắn khẳng định là cái đám Á Châu giống dòi nói chung  vẫn thích vui cười làm nô lệ. Và đám Trung đông Hồi giáo vẫn chưa có nền tảng nhân trí dù văn minh có tiến. Như vậy, xem ra vị trí khống trị của Âu Mỹ còn kéo dài cả vài trăm năm nữa và ngay cả vài ngàn năm nữa. Ngày nào mà làn sóng di dân tự nguyện chưa chuyển hướng khỏi trời Tây, làn sóng sản phẩm kỹ thuật, văn hóa phẩm nhân bản chưa phát khởi từ trời Đông thì ngày ấy thế giới chẳng thể có hòa bình, chẳng thể có tự do đích thực cho nhân loại.

PQCNKPTC

=====

 

North Korea test-fires ballistic missile

North Korea test-fires ballistic missile in defiance of world pressure

DEFIANT North Korea launched another missile test today just hours after stern warnings from Donald Trump that a “major, major conflict” was possible.

US military said Pyongyang launched a ballistic missile that blew up over land, failing to clear the hermit nation’s own territory.

The launch was just hours after the publication of comments by the US President that conflict between the west and Pyongyang may be more likely.

“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely,” Trump told Reuters in an Oval Office interview.

“We’d love to solve things diplomatically but it’s very difficult.”

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un isn’t afraid to be provocative.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un isn’t afraid to be provocative.Source:Supplied

Following the Pyongyang launch, Trump tweeted: “North Korea disrespected the wishes of China & its highly respected President when it launched, though unsuccessfully, a missile today. Bad!”

He did not answer reporters’ questions about the missile launch upon returning to the White House from a day trip to Atlanta.

Reports in the US quoted officials saying the test-fire was probably a medium-range ballistic missile called a KN-17, a land based solid-fuel fired from a mobile launcher.

Military analyst John Kirby said North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was sending another message to the US and it allies including Australia, which it has threatened with nuclear attack.

“This is Kim giving us the finger. Giving China the finger. Giving the UN the finger. I think timing is absolutely planned and preordained in his mind,” he said.

The US military has moved an aircraft carrier strike group into the region, docked a powerful nuclear submarine in South Korea and staged large military drills with South Korea and Japan.

Before the launch, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Friday in New York called for new economic sanctions on North Korea and other “painful” measures over its nuclear weapons program, warning military action was an option.

“Failing to act now on the most pressing security issue in the world may bring catastrophic consequences,” Tillerson told the UN Security.

“The more we bide our time, the sooner we will run out of it.”

NK MISSILES ‘TARGET US MAINLAND’

North Korea’s state media has reiterated the country’s goal of developing a nuclear missile capable of reaching the continental US following the launch.

The Rodong Sinmun newspaper also said today the North revealed two types of new intercontinental ballistic missiles in an April 15 military parade honouring its late state founder, Kim Il Sung, the grandfather of current ruler Kim Jong Un.

“The large territory that is the United States has been entirely exposed to our pre-emptive nuclear strike means,” it said.

Referring to the US sending the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier to Korean waters, the newspaper said “rendering aircraft carriers useless is not even a problem” for its military.

It said the North displayed three types of ICBMs during the parade, including two new types that were inside the canisters.

Analysts say the North’s existing liquid-fuel ICBMS, including the KN-08 and KN-14, are potentially capable of reaching the US mainland, although the North has never flight-tested them.

The North has been ratcheting up tensions for months with a series of missile launches, including a volley of rockets in early March which saw three fall provocatively close to Japan.

At the time, Pyongyang said it was a drill for an attack on US bases in Japan.

North Korea routinely test-fires a variety of ballistic missiles, despite UN prohibitions, as part of its push to develop a long-range ballistic missile capable of hitting US shores.

While shorter-range missiles are somewhat routine, there is strong outside worry about each longer range North Korean ballistic test.

JAPAN CONDEMNS MISSILE LAUNCH

JAPAN has condemned the launch as absolutely unacceptable and a violation of UN resolutions.

Japanese government spokesman Yoshihide Suga said he had been in touch with Prime Minister Abe, who is travelling in Europe, and officials were gathering information about the missile test.

He said Japan “cannot accept repeated provocation by North Korea” and had “lodged a strong protest against North Korea”.

Japan has become increasingly concerned in recent weeks about the possibility of a North Korean missile attack targeting Japan or US forces stationed in Japan.

UN CALLS FOR UN ACTION ON NK

Addressing the UN Security Council for the first time, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called for a global campaign of pressure to force Pyongyang to change course and put a halt to its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

He said that because China accounted for 90 per cent of North Korean trade, its role was particularly important.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley arrive for a security council meeting on North Korea at the United Nations headquarters in New York.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley arrive for a security council meeting on North Korea at the United Nations headquarters in New York.Source:AFP

Mr Tillerson also told the UN that the “threat of a North Korea nucler attack on Seoul or Tokyo is real.”

Donald Trump has said he would prefer a diplomatic solution, but acknowledged the stand-off is highly dangerous.

“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely,” he told Reuters.

“We’d love to solve things diplomatically, but it’s very difficult.” The US has called for stronger UN sanctions on North Korea, but it wants China to take the lead in diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis by using its leverage on Pyongyang.

China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi said dialogue and negotiations on North Korea are “the only right choice”.

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said dialogue and negotiations on North Korea are “the only right choice”.Source:AP

“We are going to be discussing what steps may be necessary to increase pressure on Pyongyang to have them reconsider their current posture,” Mr Tillerson said in an interview with Fox News.

Turning to China, Mr Tillerson said: “We are going to test their willingness to help us address the serious threat.

“We were told by the Chinese that they informed the regime that if they did conduct further nuclear tests China would be taking sanctions actions on their own.”

Mr Tillerson said the United States is not ruling out direct dialogue with North Korea but that it would seek guarantees that Pyongyang is ready to abandon its nuclear and missile programs.

“Obviously, that would be the way we would like to solve this,” he told National Public Radio, when asked whether Washington seeks talks with Pyongyang.

“But North Korea has to decide they’re ready to talk to us about the right agenda — and the right agenda is not simply stopping where they are for a few more months or a few more years and then resuming things.”

US President Donald Trump with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a bilateral meeting at the Mar-a-Lago estate in West Palm Beach, Florida.in April.

US President Donald Trump with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a bilateral meeting at the Mar-a-Lago estate in West Palm Beach, Florida.in April.Source:Supplied

No resolutions will be adopted at the UN meeting, but it will allow the United States and its allies to put the onus on China to use its leverage to rein in Pyongyang.

North Korea is seeking to develop a long-range missile capable of hitting the US mainland with a nuclear warhead, and has so far staged five atomic tests, two of them last year.

China, Pyongyang’s number one trade partner, has repeatedly called for a return to talks on denuclearisation but has been reluctant to use economic pressure that could destabilise North Korea.

The Security Council has imposed six sets of sanctions on North Korea — two adopted last year — to significantly ramp up pressure and deny Kim Jong-un’s regimen the hard currency revenue needed for his military programs.

But UN sanctions experts have repeatedly told the council that the measures have had little impact on Pyongyang because they have been poorly implemented.

– with staff writers and wires

 

The $3 trillion ‘catastrophic’ cost of a North Korea-US war

Exclusive: Trump says “major conflict” with N. Korea possible

IF A North Korea war does become a reality, one unmanageable $3 trillion consequence that hasn’t been widely acknowledged threatens to wreak havoc on the world.

The defiant nation launched another missile test today, just hours after stern warnings from Donald Trump that a “major, major conflict” was possible.

The conflict between Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump could unfold in several ways, but it is the 25 million citizens of the hermit state whose fate could trigger a global catastrophe.

A thermonuclear war would be a humanitarian and ecological disaster for the entire region, with radiation causing a nuclear holocaust that tears into South Korea, China, Russia and Japan.

But if conventional weapons are used and the Kim regime collapses (a more likely scenario), we may face an alternative nightmare.

The 25 million citizens of the hermit state could be displaced by a war, triggering a costly humanitarian crisis. Picture: KCNA via KNS/STR/AFP

The 25 million citizens of the hermit state could be displaced by a war, triggering a costly humanitarian crisis. Picture: KCNA via KNS/STR/AFPSource:Supplied

‘NO SPACE FOR THE KIMS’

The first consequence would be that the Kims and all those connected with the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea would have to flee compatriots angry at years of human rights violations and public executions.

“Secret police and party officials would seek refuge in neighbouring China or Russia,” Australian National University researcher Leonid Petrov told news.com.au. “There’s no space for the Kim clan in a unified Korea, his brother, cousin, aunts and uncles, they are inseparably connected with the regime and will be prosecuted as criminals.

“Some South American countries might be willing to give refuge to people — Bolivia, Venezuela, Guatemala … countries that are anti-American might be supportive.”

So what will Kim Jong-un’s people do without their supreme leader? With a lack of money, food and shelter if the regime collapses, they too may seek refuge in China, Russia and South Korea, but those countries will not necessarily be open to an influx of North Korean refugees.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and his supporters would be forced to flee the country if the regime collapsed, leaving its impoverished people increasingly desperate. Photo: AFP

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and his supporters would be forced to flee the country if the regime collapsed, leaving its impoverished people increasingly desperate. Photo: AFPSource:Supplied

THE 25 MILLION PERSON PROBLEM

China is already home to an estimated 100,000 North Korean defectors, and is unlikely to want the pressure of more. The Chinese have been concerned about such a scenario for some time, and might reinforce the border with troops, Rand Corporation scientist Andrew Scobell told Foxtrot Alpha.

Others may try to travel from city to city in search of refuge, while others could try to cross into South Korea, although if fighting persists in the DMZ, that would be almost impossible.

The most likely conclusion would be the reunification of Korea, according to Dr Petrov, but this may mean deep economic and social problems.

“The South Korean economy is reaching crisis,” he said. “It needs to urgently access cheap resource and labour.

“South Korea might use the opportunity to exploit North Koreans who have less education or experience in enterprise. Millions of North Korean workers could become second class citizens, there could be widespread discrimination, even the border might be kept for years to stop mass immigration. It will take at least a decade before the level of prosperity will be equalised between North and South. During that 10 years, the reunification is going to be very expensive, $3 trillion or more. There’s going to be definite social tension between South Koreans and North Koreans.

“Both countries have been isolated from each other, they speak different dialects, understand the world differently. South Korea doesn’t need its impoverished, aggressive, poorly educated brothers to inundate South Korea.”

North Koreans could be exploited, abused or turn criminal if they were forced into a sudden and unequal reunification with their estranged South Korean cousins. Picture: KCNA via KNS/STR/AFP Photo

North Koreans could be exploited, abused or turn criminal if they were forced into a sudden and unequal reunification with their estranged South Korean cousins. Picture: KCNA via KNS/STR/AFP PhotoSource:Supplied

‘A CRASH LANDING’

The reunification of Korea has been under debate for years, and former South Korean president Kim Dae-jung won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2000 for his implementation of the Sunshine Policy to improve political relations between the two states.

But in 2008, the new conservative government put an end to the process, and experts now fear a “crash landing” rather than a soft one. “The East and West Germany unification is a walk in the park compared to what is going to happen in North and South Korea if a reunification happens uncontrollably,” said Dr Petrov. “It will be a huge sociological and demographic issue.”

Korea might expect abuse, crime and other social problems. And the US could feel the consequences too.

US condemns North Korean missile test

“South Korea would probably not support America in open military stand-off against North Korea,” said Dr Petrov. “The America-South Korea alliance will melt away.

“Economic growth in North Korea means more opportunity for South Korea to access natural resources, cheap labour and transport projects (e.g. linking South Korean railways with China).”

He said the experience could be a “bonanza” for both states, as opposed to “military action with catastrophic consequences for both.”

South Korea is due to hold a presidential election on 9 May. If left-wing Moon Jae-in should win, reunification looks likely and the power of the US will take the hit it dreads.

emma.reynolds@news.com.au

Donald Trump, Xi Jinping and other world leaders would also have to cope with the fallout of mass migration and a change in relations with a new, unified Korea. Picture: Jim Watson/AFP

Donald Trump, Xi Jinping and other world leaders would also have to cope with the fallout of mass migration and a change in relations with a new, unified Korea. Picture: Jim Watson/AFPSource:Supplied

=

Monday, April 24, 2017

Hillary Clinton Explains Our North Korea, South Korea, China Policy

>

by Gaius Publius

[Update: It’s been suggested in comments (initially here) that Clinton’s “we” in her answer to Blankfein’s question was a reference to China’s policy, not our own. I’m doubtful that’s true, but it’s an interpretation worth considering. Even so, the U.S. and Chinese policies toward the two Koreas are certainly aligned, and, as Clinton says, “for the obvious economic and political reasons.” (That argument was also expressed in comments here.)  I therefore think the thrust of the piece below is valid under either interpretation of Clinton’s use of “we.” –GP]

“We don’t want a unified Korean peninsula … We [also] don’t want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb.”
—Hillary Clinton, 2013, speech to Goldman Sachs

Our policy toward North Korea is not what most people think it is. We don’t want the North Koreans to go away. In fact, we like them doing what they’re doing; we just want less of it than they’ve been doing lately. If this sounds confusing, it’s because this policy is unlike what the public has been led to assume. Thanks to something uncovered by WikiLeaks, the American public has a chance to be unconfused about what’s really going on with respect to our policies in Korea.

This piece isn’t intended to criticize that policy; it may be an excellent one. I just want to help us understand it better.

Our source for the U.S. government’s actual Korean policy — going back decades really — is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She resigned that position in February 2013, and on June 4, 2013 she gave a speech at Goldman Sachs with Lloyd Blankfein present (perhaps on stage with her) in which she discussed in what sounds like a very frank manner, among many other things, the U.S. policy toward the two Korea and the relationship of that policy to China.

That speech and two others were sent by Tony Carrk of the Clinton campaign to a number of others in the campaign, including John Podesta. WikiLeaks subsequently released that email as part of its release of other Podesta emails (source email with attachments here). In that speech, Clinton spoke confidentially and, I believe, honestly. What she said in that speech, I take her as meaning truthfully. There’s certainly no reason for her to lie to her peers, and in some cases her betters, at Goldman Sachs. The entire speech reads like elites talking with elites in a space reserved just for them.

I’m not trying to impugn Clinton or WikiLeaks by writing this — that’s not my intention at all. I just want to learn from what she has to say — from a position of knowledge — about the real U.S. policy toward North Korea. After all, if Goldman Sachs executives can be told this, it can’t be that big a secret. We should be able to know it as well.

What Clinton’s Speech Tells Us about U.S. Korea Policy

The WikiLeaks tweet is above. The entire speech, contained in the attachment to the email, is here. I’ve reprinted some of the relevant portions below, first quoting Ms. Clinton with some interspersed comments from me. Then, adding some thoughts about what this seems to imply about our approach to and relations with South Korea.

The Korea section of the Goldman Sachs speech starts with a discussion of China, and then Blankfein pivots to Korea. Blankfein’s whole question that leads to the Clinton quote tweeted by WikiLeaks above (my emphasis throughout):

MR. BLANKFEIN: The Japanese — I was more surprised that it wasn’t like that when you think of — all these different things. It’s such a part of who they are, their response to Japan. If you bump into the Filipino fishing boats, then I think you really — while we’re in the neighborhood [i.e., discussing Asia], the Chinese is going to help us or help themselves — what is helping themselves? North Korea? On the one hand they [the Chinese] wouldn’t want — they don’t want to unify Korea, but they can’t really like a nutty nuclear power on their border. What is their interests and what are they going to help us do?

Clinton’s whole answer is reprinted in the WikiLeaks tweet attachment (click through to the tweet and expand the embedded image to read it all). The relevant portions, for my purposes, are printed below. From the rest of her remarks, the context of Blankfein’s question and Clinton’s answer is the threat posed by a North Korean ICBM, not unlike the situation our government faces today.

MS. CLINTON: Well, I think [Chinese] traditional policy has been close to what you’ve described. We don’t want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one South Korea would be dominant for the obvious economic and political reasons.

We [also] don’t want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb. So we’ve got a pretty good thing going with the previous North Korean leaders [Kim Il-sung and Kim Jung-il]. And then along comes the new young leader [Kim Jung-un], and he proceeds to insult the Chinese. He refuses to accept delegations coming from them. He engages in all kinds of both public and private rhetoric, which seems to suggest that he is preparing himself to stand against not only the South Koreans and the Japanese and the Americans, but also the Chinese.

Translation — three points:

  • The U.S. prefers that Korea stay divided. If Korea were to unite, South Korea would be in charge, and we don’t want South Korea to become any more powerful than it already is.
  • We also don’t want the trouble North Korea causes South Korea to extend beyond the region. We want it to stay within previously defined bounds.
  • Our arrangement with the two previous North Korean leaders met both of those objectives. North Korea’s new leader, Kim Jung-un, is threatening that arrangement.

It appears that China has the same interest in keeping this situation as-is that we do. That is, they want South Korea (and us) to have a Korean adversary, but they don’t want the adversary acting out of acceptable bounds — coloring outside the lines laid down by the Chinese (and the U.S.), as it were. Clinton:

So the new [Chinese] leadership basically calls him [Kim Jung-un] on the carpet. And a high ranking North Korean military official has just finished a visit in Beijing and basically told [him, as a message from the Chinese]: Cut it out. Just stop it. Who do you think you are? And you are dependent on us [the Chinese], and you know it. And we expect you to demonstrate the respect that your father and your grandfather [Kim Jung-il, Kim Il-sung] showed toward us, and there will be a price to pay if you do not.

Now, that looks back to an important connection of what I said before. The biggest supporters of a provocative North Korea has been the PLA [the Chinese People’s Liberation Army]. The deep connections between the military leadership in China and in North Korea has really been the mainstay of the relationship. So now all of a sudden new leadership with Xi and his team, and they’re saying to the North Koreans — and by extension to the PLA — no. It is not acceptable. We don’t need this [trouble] right now. We’ve got other things going on. So you’re going to have to pull back from your provocative actions, start talking to South Koreans again about the free trade zones, the business zones on the border, and get back to regular order and do it quickly.

Now, we don’t care if you occasionally shoot off a missile. That’s good. That upsets the Americans and causes them heartburn, but you can’t keep going down a path that is unpredictable. We don’t like that. That is not acceptable to us.

So I think they’re trying to reign Kim Jong in. I think they’re trying to send a clear message to the North Korean military. They also have a very significant trade relationship with Seoul and they’re trying to reassure Seoul that, you know, we’re now on the case.

Clinton ends with a fourth point:

  • From the U.S. standpoint, the current problem is now on the Chinese to fix.

Clinton:

So they want to keep North Korea within their orbit. They want to keep it predictable in their view. They have made some rather significant statements recently that they would very much like to see the North Koreans pull back from their nuclear program. Because I and everybody else — and I know you had Leon Panetta here this morning. You know, we all have told the Chinese if they continue to develop this missile program and they get an ICBM that has the capacity to carry a small nuclear weapon on it, which is what they’re aiming to do, we cannot abide that. Because they could not only do damage to our treaty allies, namely Japan and South Korea, but they could actually reach Hawaii and the west coast theoretically, and we’re going to ring China with missile defense. We’re going to put more of our fleet in the area.

So China, come on. You either control them or we’re going to have to defend against them.

The four bullets above (three, and then one) give a very clear definition of longstanding U.S. policy toward the two Koreas. I think the only surprise in this, for us civilians, is that the U.S. doesn’t want the Korean peninsula unified. So two questions: Why not? And, do the South Koreans know this? I’ll offer brief answers below.

The “Great Game” In East Asia — Keeping the Korean “Tiger” in Check

South Korea is one of the great emerging nations in East Asia, one of the “Asian tigers,” a manufacturing and economic powerhouse that’s lately been turning into a technological and innovative powerhouse as well.

For example, one of just many, from Forbes:

Why South Korea Will Be The Next Global Hub For Tech Startups

American business has long led the way in high tech density or the proportion of businesses that engage in activities such as Internet software and services, hardware and semiconductors. The US is fertile ground for tech start-ups with access to capital and a culture that celebrates risk taking. Other countries have made their mark on the world stage, competing to be prominent tech and innovation hubs. Israel has been lauded as a start-up nation with several hundred companies getting funded by venture capital each year. A number of these companies are now being acquired by the likes of Apple, Facebook and Google. Finland and Sweden have attracted notice by bringing us Angry Birds and Spotify among others. But a new start-up powerhouse is on the horizon – South Korea. […]

In other words, South Korea has leaped beyond being a country that keeps U.S. tech CEOs wealthy — it’s now taking steps that threaten that wealth itself. And not just in electronics; the biological research field — think cloning — is an area the South Koreans are trying to take a lead in as well.

It’s easy to understand Ms. Clinton’s — and the business-captured American government’s — interest in making sure that the U.S. CEO class isn’t further threatened by a potential doubling of the capacity of the South Korean government and economy. Let them (the Koreans) manufacture to their heart’s content, our policy seems to say; but to threaten our lead in billionaire-producing entrepreneurship … that’s a bridge too far.

Again, this is Clinton speaking, I’m absolutely certain, on behalf of U.S. government policy makers and the elites they serve: We don’t want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one, an already-strong South Korea would be dominant for obvious economic reasons.

As to whether the South Koreans know that this is our policy, I’d have to say, very likely yes. After all, if Clinton is saying this to meetings of Goldman Sachs executives, it can’t be that big a secret. It’s just that the South Korea leadership knows better than the North Korean leader how to handle it.

GP

Advertisements