← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Zoroaster

Thread 4256

Thread ID: 4256 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2002-12-31

Wayback Archive

Zoroaster [OP]

2002-12-31 01:13 | User Profile

[url=http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_china/story.jsp?story=365483]http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_c...sp?story=365483[/url]

South Korea denounces US pressure on Stalinist North By Phil Reeves Asia Correspondent 31 December 2002

Washington's plan to use economic pressure to stop North Korea from restarting its nuclear plants – seen by the CIA as nuclear warhead factories – has been rejected as ineffective by South Korea.

The outgoing President, Kim Dae Jung, and his successor poured scorn on the American strategy yesterday, saying it would not persuade Pyongyang to change tack.

America is seeking to use "tailored containment" against North Korea to stop Pyongyang fulfilling threats to reactivate its nuclear programme, including plants that can produce large amounts of weapons-grade plutonium.

The strategy failed to impress President Kim, who leaves office in February. In remarks that underscore the rift between the Bush administration and Seoul, President Kim told his cabinet: "Pressure and isolation have never worked with Communist countries – Cuba is one example."

His newly elected replacement, Roh Moo Hyun – an advocate of Seoul's "sunshine policy" of dialogue and aid with the North– criticised Washington's attitude, saying it would only serve to aggravate differences. North Korea is likely to welcome the gap between the US and South Korea, which it has been seeking to widen.

Today, inspectors from the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are due to leave North Korea. Their expulsion is the latest instalment in a worsening stand-off, which has seen the North Koreans move to start up activities at their sprawling nuclear complex at Yongbyon, which had been frozen under a 1994 agreement. The IAEA was monitoring the freeze.

Many hundreds of fuel rods have been moved into storage areas, ready to be used to fire up a Soviet-era atomic reactor there, which US intelligence believes can make enough plutonium for one warhead a year.

The North Koreans also said they intended to start up a plutonium-producing reprocessing plant at the site. This has caused concern because they have 8,000 spent fuel rods in storage, which the CIA believes could provide material for up to five bombs. They also disabled IAEA security seals and surveillance cameras.

In a further sign of dissent, North Korea hinted it might pull out of the treaty on the non- proliferation of nuclear weap-ons, which seeks to confine nuclear weapons to the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China. North Korea signed the treaty in 1985, although the Americans believe it has made at least one nuclear bomb since.

Despite this, America has played down the stand-off, arguing there is not yet a crisis. It is pushing the case for economic, rather than military, pressure but has ruled out direct talks unless Pyongyang reimposes the freeze on its nuclear activities.

Fears abound in South Korea – which is within range of the North's artillery – that playing hardball with the regime of Kim Jong Il will prove counterproductive, resulting in the Stalinist state taking a more intransigent and dangerous line.

Some South Korean analysts believe President George Bush's decision to include the North in his "axis of evil" played a central part in aggravating relations in the region.

These misgivings have meshed with an upsurge of anti-American sentiment in South Korea, fuelled by anger at the acquittal by a US military tribunal of two American soldiers involved in a car crash that killed two schoolgirls.

The United States will send James Kelly, the assistant secretary of state, to South Korea next month to try to smooth over the wrinkles in its relationship with Seoul, which it sees as a close ally. America has stationed about 37,000 troops in the country.

Meanwhile, South Korea is looking for help from China and Russia.

The latter has been openly critical of Washington's decision to cut off fuel oil aid to North Korea in retaliation for Pyongyang's secret uranium-enriching project.

But yesterday Moscow balanced this criticism with denouncements of North Korea's decision to expel the IAEA inspectors and reactivate its nuclear programme. 30 December 2002 19:09

N.B. Forrest

2002-12-31 01:41 | User Profile

It's way past time to pull those 37,000 troops out of South Korea. The South Koreans have had 50 years to get their military sh-t together. If they haven't done so by now, they deserve to be destroyed, and I won't waste a tear on the dog-eaters. Many of them want us out, and the rest are nothing but grumbling ingrates. Let's give them their wish.

As for a nuke-armed commie north, it's no real big deal. They know that if they ever burn Honolulu or Anchorage, their entire toilet of a country will be vaporized, so it'll probably never happen. In any case, Boosh hasn't got the cojones to attack a country that can actually put up a stiff resistance, so bluster is all we'll hear from him, rather than a serious response.

Zoroaster

2002-12-31 03:51 | User Profile

If there is a walking, talking archetype of the evil Jew, it's Charles Krauthammer. Recently, on Fox News, he was absolutely drolling over a catastrophe on the Korean peninsula. After addressing the Iraq problem, which the Zionist preceive as Israel's chief threat, and pronouning the American occupation there as an easily accomplished military operation, he proceeding on to Korea and a glorious war in which millions of goyim would perish.

The Thirty Years War in Europe brought enormous profits to World Jewry, and they've been fermenting wars between nations ever since. Perhaps Krauthammer personifies the odd behavior Wintermute has lately detected in the collective Jewish psyche. Considering that there are only 14-million Jews in a world of 6-billion souls, they may have decided that billions of goys must perish to ensure their kind survives. If America goes down in the slaughter, Israel can always turn to China as her new champion.

-Z-

Leveller

2002-12-31 11:21 | User Profile

Originally posted by wintermute@Dec 31 2002, 01:49 > It's way past time to pull those 37,000 troops out of South Korea.**

Someone help me out here. What coalition of special interests is keeping such a large occupying force in that country? Or is our grotequely misguided foreign policy now just on auto-pilot?

(or auto-destruct, as it all comes to the same thing)

Wintermute**

Wintermute, you might ask the same question of troop levels in Germany - still in the tens of thousands I believe. An important motivation is that Korea/Japan and Europe would have been the most capable recent military competitors to the US if they didn't defer to her as the guarantor of their security. With things as they are, the host nations get security on the cheap, the US gets guaranteed military supremacy (and global reach) without worrying about high tech competitors.

naBaron

2002-12-31 15:19 | User Profile

My father, looking at a story about our troops in Afghanistan, said, "Now we'll never leave. We NEVER leave.."

Maybe it's animal instinct.

mwdallas

2002-12-31 17:15 | User Profile

If America goes down in the slaughter, Israel can always turn to China as her new champion.

How would that work? The Chinese have greater ethnic cohesion than we white folks, and the genetic distance between Jews and Chinamen is many times greater than that between Jews and Europeans. Would a strategy of crypsis have a chance at working in China?

Zoroaster

2002-12-31 17:54 | User Profile

mwdallas,

What is crypsis? It's not in my dictionary.

David Ben-Gurion once said that Israel and China had a very special relationship because they were the world's oldest civilizations. During the cold war Israel was China's main supplier of sophisticated weapons. Moreover, China is a dictatorship; it is not necessary for Jews to control the media there to influence the leadership.

[url=http://www.foreignwire.com/phalcon.html]http://www.foreignwire.com/phalcon.html[/url]

China-Israel ties worry US

Harvey Morris One element of the diplomatic crisis that erupted between Washington and Beijing this spring, after a US surveillance aircraft narrowly survived a close encounter with a Chinese warplane, went almost unnoticed in the drama surrounding the fate of the American crew.

Photographs released by the Pentagon of two Chinese jets that had shadowed the EP-3E Aries II on April 1 showed they were armed with Israeli-made Python air-to-air missiles. It was the first public proof of what had for years been an open secret in the defence community – that Israel is a supplier of sophisticated modern weaponry to the Chinese military.

This unlikely relationship has been a persistent cause of friction in the otherwise close US-Israeli relationship over the years. China’s relationship with Israel has existed for 20 years and long predates the opening of diplomatic relations between the two countries and Israel’s readiness to supply the Chinese with sophisticated weaponry – some of it developed in co-operation with the US – is something that increasingly concerns Washington.

On one level the relationship is financial. In the early days, China paid for the supplies with raw silk which the Israelis used for products sold into the international market. For Israel, however, there may be a wider strategic interest: as China moves towards superpower status in years to come, it will be as well for the Jewish state to have maintained intimate ties with Beijing in the hope of influencing its policy towards the Middle East.

When the then Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Peking in 1998, he noted that: “We are very fortunate that China and Israel – the Chinese people and the Jewish people that are two of the oldest people on earth – have developed the capacity to develop dynamic societies that can seize the future. And we believe that the co-operation between us can bring prosperity and peace to our peoples and to our neighbours as well.”

What worries US strategic planners is that, as a consequence of these apparently warm ties, high-technology weaponry that leaks from Israel to China could, in turn, find its way to what the US regards as rogue states in the Middle East.

Israel itself appears aware of the risk and is understood to set strict conditions on how China uses the technology it acquires. At the end of 1999, Israel publicly raised for the first time its concerns that China was transferring missile technology to Iran. This came after US officials expressed concerns that Israeli advanced technology supplied to the Chinese might end up in Iranian hands. Already in 1997, the New York Daily News carried a report suggesting that US pilots patrolling the skies over the Iraqi no-fly zones faced the risk of being shot down by Chinese PL-8 missiles, developed in Israel.

Such reports help explain the motivation behind the setting up of a House of Representatives sub-committee to investigate the relationship under the chairmanship of the Republican, Christopher Cox, which made its findings partially public in May 1999. The Cox report noted that recent years had been marked by increased Sino-Israeli co-operation on military and security matters. It also noted that Israel had given China “significant technology co-operation” in aircraft and missile development, most notably in developing the F-!0 fighter and airborne early warning aircraft. The F-10 is closely modelled on Israel’s Lavi fighter, a project dropped in 1987 after it had been funded by the US to the tune of some $1.5bn.

Later, shortly after the second Gulf war, the administration of George Bush Snr, acknowledged it was investigating Israel’s secret transfer of Patriot missile technology to China. Patriot batteries had been set up in Israel amid great fanfare during the war as a first line defence against Saddam’s scud missiles in a move also designed to keep Israel out of the conflict.

Israel's most recent planned sale of high-tech weaponry to Beijing was the cause of a rare public spat with the US during the premiership of Ehud Barak, Mr Sharon's predecessor.

The dispute last year involved Israel's contract to supply Beijing with the Phalcon airborne early warning radar system developed by Elta, a subsidiary of Israel Aircraft Industries. The deal was frozen after a congressional committee protested, amid threats to cut military aid to Israel, that the sale would give China {Aa military edge over Taiwan.

Israeli military analysts say that, while Mr Sharon is eager not to revive the dispute, some officials and defence industry executives are smarting over what they regard as US interference in Israel's affairs and still hope the sale will go ahead.

"The project was frozen but not killed," said Gerald Steinberg, a Middle East arms expert at Israel's Bar-Ilan University. "Some people in the military industries lobby think they can still salvage it."

He said there had already been relatively low-level discussions with Washington since the Phalcon affair over how to handle such deals. "The US would like to be able to give prior approval and Israel wants to limit that. At the same time Israel wants to avoid another (dispute). Barak handled it very badly and Sharon has learned the lesson."

Other recent concerns have centred on the transfer of laser weapons technology. In early 1999, the Washington Times said the Defense Intelligence Agency suspected Israel had shared with the Chinese restricted technology obtained during a joint US-Israeli effort – the Tactical High-Energy Laser (Thel) programme - to build a battlefield laser gun. The evidence was said to have come from US contractors in Israel who had seen Chinese technicians working with one of the Israeli companies involved in the laser project.

Nevertheless, 18 months later, the joint project was still going strong, with US officials announcing in July 2000 that a test-fired Thel had tracked and brought down a rocket. The US army described the test as “a major technical step toward a system to protect northern Israel from rockets fired by guerrilla groups”.

Although it benefits from billions of dollars of US aid to give it the military edge in the Middle East, Israel has proved quite prickly when challenged by the US about passing on the related technology, accusing Washington of interfering in legitimate sales. At the some time it has tried to keep the trade as secret as possible.

No evidence has been put forward to suggest the targets of the February 16 raids were installations based on US technology and transferred to China via Israel. It is obvious, however, that the Israelis are playing a dangerous game by opening a potential conduit for high-technology weaponry to get into the hands of its declared enemies.

China might argue that it has as much right to militarise the Middle East as has the US, the region’s principal weapons supplier. The policy, however, will do little to contribute to a de-escalation of tension.

On the missile technology front, transfers to the region are governed by the missile technology control regime (MTCR) which the US obliged Beijing to sign in 1992. There is concern, however, that if Washington is too heavy handed in enforcing MTCR and other restrictions on weapons sales, it could encourage the Chinese to circumvent the rules. That could seriously upset the military balance in the Middle East, whose exposure to Chinese-supplied weaponry is still relatively limited. So far only Saudi Arabia has been supplied with Chinese intermediate-range nuclear missiles and that was in 1988. The signals are that the new Bush administration and the Beijing leadership are determined to resolve the current upset through quiet diplomacy.

But, if Beijing were to get seriously involved in a proxy arms race with Washington in the region, Israel would not be alone in ruing the day it started its secret affair with the Chinese.

mwdallas

2002-12-31 19:20 | User Profile

Crypsis is the resemblance of an organism to its environment to avoid detection.

[url=http://www.ic.ucsc.edu/~envs24/Lecture11/sld035.htm]http://www.ic.ucsc.edu/~envs24/Lecture11/sld035.htm[/url]

MacDonald mentions it frequently regarding Jews, as here:

[url=http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/SLATE_SHULEVITZ.htm]http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/SLATE_SHULEVITZ.htm[/url]

[url=http://www.fpp.co.uk/StMartinsPress/MacDonald1998.html]http://www.fpp.co.uk/StMartinsPress/MacDonald1998.html[/url]

You state that

If America goes down in the slaughter, Israel can always turn to China as her new champion.

But if America goes down, the reason for any Chinese-Jewish alliance disappears. The Jewish tick would have to find another dog (other than the US), and the points raised in my prior post suggest that China cannot be that dog.

Zoroaster

2002-12-31 20:17 | User Profile

mwdallar,

So, I learned a new word "crypsis." Though I'm familiar with MacDonald's works, as you can see I'm no expert.

I conceed you have a valid point, but I suggest Jews have enough smarts to find reasons other than the American/Chinese struggle for supremacy in and around the Pacific Rim to make themselves useful, if not indespensible, to China's leadership.

-Z-

Ed Toner

2003-01-02 20:07 | User Profile

We continue to feed the N Koreans.

[url=http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030102-20653417.htm]http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030102-20653417.htm[/url]

How smart is this?