In one fell swoop, North Korean leader Kim Jong-il's ill-timed nuclear demarche enabled Japan and China to find common ground on security.
One of the occupational hazards of being a dictator is that it is easy to get out of touch with the everyday world. Officials are wary of offering candid advice for fear of giving offense. The media are usually muzzled, the public intimidated. And absolutist hubris requires that tyrants of every type decree rather than consult. Otherwise where is the fun in the diktat?
The results have often proven to be disastrous. Former Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin's stubborn refusal in 1941 to believe intelligence reports from a wide range of sources that Germany was preparing to invade his country is but one famous example of uninformed, self-deceiving dictatorship.
Some might say US President George W. Bush was suffering from the same sort of disconnected, self-delusional syndrome when he insisted in 2003 that Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was doing all sorts of things he plainly wasn't.
Now it seems that Kim, who last weekend celebrated nine thoroughly undemocratic years at the helm in North Korea, the world's most isolated nation, may be the latest victim of this sorry condition.
So divorced has Kim apparently become from the mundane doings of mere mortals that he has decided to fundamentally challenge the international community at the very moment that it is finally arriving at a shared view of his antics.
Looked at from every perspective except Kim's, the timing of this week's North Korean underground nuclear test could hardly have been worse for Pyongyang. It came precisely at the moment that Japan was putting into office a new, tough-talking nationalist prime minister, Shinzo Abe, who has vowed to take a hard line on North Korea's nuclear weapons.
Abe made his name in Japanese politics by championing the cause of Japanese nationals abducted by North Korea. In July, after Kim's regime fired ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan, Abe suggested that future pre-emptive military strikes against the North might be required.
Japan's first action on the international stage after his appointment was to rally support for a tough statement by the UN Security Council warning North Korea of serious, unspecified consequences should it go ahead with the test. Abe's predecessor, former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, had been more open to dialogue with Kim. Now the North has played into the hands of hardliners who want to impose much tougher sanctions on Pyongyang.
Kim's ratcheting up of the stakes in his long-running nuclear poker game with the west also came at the precise moment that Japan was mending diplomatic fences with China and South Korea after several years of acute tension.
Tokyo and Beijing do not agree on many issues and are rivals for energy resources and regional clout, but Kim's ill-timed nuclear demarche has enabled them to find common ground on security. Both strongly condemned the test as a risky escalation following their weekend summit in Beijing.
"We saw eye-to-eye that North Korea's announcement of a nuclear test cannot be tolerated because it is a great threat to east Asia and the international community," Abe said.
South Korea, which has found fault with attempts to squeeze the North in the past, is now also closer to Japan on this issue than for many years.
Analysts say that Kim's action is actually an appeal for attention by a impoverished and desperate regime that is suffering painful consequences from US financial sanctions imposed last year.
What Kim really wants is bilateral talks -- on an equal basis -- with the Bush administration, they say.
Some in Washington believe that should happen to avoid further escalation. James Baker, who was secretary of state during the administration of former US president George Bush said that direct talks should go ahead.
"It's not appeasement to talk to your enemies," he said. "I don't think you restrict your conversations to your friends."
But by stepping up the dispute at the very moment that Iran's alleged attempt to build nuclear weapons is due to go before the UN Security Council, Kim may have ensured that the punitive measures that could be taken against Tehran will also be applied to his government.
Kim is effectively proving the contention advanced by hardliners and neo-cons in Washington that current international non- proliferation arrangements are not working and that a much tougher line of action needs to be followed.
Some see signs of collaboration between North Korea and Iran as part of a joint bid to fend off pressure from the US and its allies. But more likely Kim's unilateral action and inept timing has brought the two issues into collision, ensuring that opposing positions in both cases become more, not less polarized.
If Kim really wants talks with the US that could lead to the end to sanctions, security guarantees and a normalized relationship, then appearing to side with Iran is an odd way to go about it.
It is also suggested that this week's appointment of the former South Korean foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, as UN secretary-general is also seen by Pyongyang as a way of advancing its case.
But that, too, looks like a miscalculation. Although Ban says he will prioritize the issue, he is a diplomatic lightweight who will not take office until January. And it will take him years, if ever, to build up the sort of respect and influence enjoyed by the Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Kim's failure to grasp such worldly realities really does suggest that he should get out more. But it also suggests that the depths of his miscalculation remain unplumbed -- and are truly dangerous.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95