North Korea and Iran have thrown cold water on US President Barack Obama’s vision of dialogue with US foes — and experts warn there may be little he can do for now to change their minds.
North Korea on Monday detonated an atomic bomb as powerful as the one that ravaged Hiroshima, brazenly defying Obama’s calls both for dialogue and for a global ban on nuclear tests.
On the same day, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ruled out talks with world powers on Iran’s nuclear drive and instead proposed a debate with Obama — who had sent an unprecedented video appeal to Iranians in March.
Obama has made reaching out to US adversaries a hallmark of his young presidency, saying in his inauguration speech in January that he would extend his hand to all leaders “if you are willing to unclench your fist.”
Obama condemned North Korea and urged international action.
But the famously calm leader also showed he was not in panic mode, playing golf on Monday — the Memorial Day holiday — for more than four hours.
Analysts said Obama was up against the stark reality that no matter what his overtures, US foes have their own internal dynamics at play.
L. Gordon Flake, executive director of the Mansfield Foundation think tank who advised Obama on North Korea during his campaign, warned against conventional wisdom that the test was mostly a way to pressure Washington.
North Korea’s main motivation, he argued, was domestic — to shore up the regime’s strength as leader Kim Jong-il’s health wanes following his stroke last year.
“To presume that this is a way to try to get the Obama administration’s attention would be to presume that they want to start negotiations. And there has been zero indication of that,” Flake said.
“It’s pretty clear that in the waning days of the [former US president George W.] Bush administration, they made a decision to abandon the six-party talks process and to go full-speed ahead with their own nuclear program,” Flake said.
North Korea last month pulled out of a six-nation aid-for-disarmament deal reached in 2007 in protest at a UN Security Council statement condemning it for testing a long-range missile.
Monday’s test drew a similar rebuke from the Security Council.
Victor Cha, who was Bush’s top adviser on Korean affairs, also rebuffed the “standard answer” by experts that Pyongyang was trying to provoke Obama to agree to face-to-face negotiations.
“Pyongyang has rebuffed all serious efforts by the Obama administration thus far to engage in high-level talks,” said Cha, now a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Georgetown University.
Cha said North Korea may instead be seeking the status of a nuclear weapons state or security guarantees as the communist state transforms — perhaps without Kim at the helm.
“These goals pose formidable challenges for the United States and other members of the six-party talks,” Cha said.
Iran, for its part, goes to the polls on June 12 and analysts said that Ahmadinejad and other hardliners find it impossible to do an about-face and respond to Obama after campaigning for years on anti-Americanism.
Ahmadinejad has championed Iran’s nuclear drive, which he says is for peaceful purposes despite widespread suspicion in the West that it aims to develop nuclear weapons.
Scott Snyder, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Iran would be watching closely to see how forcefully the Security Council acts against North Korea.
“Iran and North Korea are really connected at the hip on this issue,” Snyder said.
“What happens with North Korea certainly must be viewed through the lens of Iran and vice versa,” he said.
“If the response is perceived as too weak, one effect could be to enhance criticisms of the Obama administration’s handling of foreign policy,” he said.
Outspoken conservative John Bolton, a US ambassador to the UN under Bush, has gone on the offensive, saying Obama’s emphasis on diplomacy allowed North Korea to carry out its second nuclear test.
“The North Koreans have thumbed their nose at the administration and now we have to see what kind of stuff they are made of,” Bolton said.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US