In October 2000, all seemed possible in US relations with North Korea. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a groundbreaking visit to Pyongyang for discussions with Kim Jong-il on a possible missile deal. There was even talk of a follow-up visit by president Bill Clinton.
Almost six years later, the memory of Albright and Kim raising glasses to one another seems almost surreal as the two countries head toward what might be a serious showdown.
President George W. Bush has labeled as "unacceptable" North Korea's underground nuclear weapons test. He said the test "constitutes a threat to international peace and security."
In diplomacy, such wording often foreshadows decisive action against the offending party. In the long and usually frosty history of US-North Korean relations, the current tensions may be comparable to any period since the 1950-1953 Korean War, which ended with an armistice. Efforts by the North and South Koreans to reach a peace agreement have failed.
The Albright visit clearly was a rare high point but nothing came of her discussions on a possible missile deal and Clinton never made his proposed end-of-term visit to Pyongyang.
Any hopes for reconciliation with Pyongyang under Bush dissipated quickly, highlighted by his inclusion of North Korea in early 2002 in an international "axis of evil," along with Iran and Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
The sense of unease in Washington on Monday over the North Korean atomic test, apparently in the northeastern part of the country, evoked memories of the spring of 1994 when Pyongyang systematically curbed UN monitoring activities at its main nuclear site.
"We all thought we were going to war," said Lieutenant General Howell Estes, the senior US Air Force officer in South Korea at the time.
He was quoted by Don Oberdorfer, a veteran Korea watcher, in his book The Two Koreas. A hastily arranged, calm-the-waters visit to Pyongyang by former president Jimmy Carter in June 1994 helped ease tensions.
A breakthrough occurred in October 1994 when US negotiators persuaded North Korea to freeze its nuclear program, with onsite monitoring by UN inspectors. In exchange, the US, with input from South Korea and Japan, promised major steps to ease North Korea's acute energy shortage.
These commitments were inherited by the Bush administration, which made clear almost from the outset that it believed that the Clinton policy ignored key elements of North Korea's activities, especially the threat posed by the hundreds of thousands of troops on permanent duty along the Demilitarized Zone.
Trust between the two countries, never high to begin with, hit a low point in October 2002 when the State Department charged that North Korea had violated the 1994 agreement by secretly pursuing nuclear weapons through a uranium enrichment program.
In the ensuing months, North Korea defiantly ejected UN nuclear monitors, withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and restarted a nuclear reactor that US officials said was designed to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
There was an undercurrent of partisanship over the issue. Democrats blamed administration policies for the increasing tensions in Asia. They insisted on direct US-North Korean talks. The administration countered that direct US-North Korean discussions in 1994 under Clinton ended with an agreement that was brazenly flouted by Pyongyang not long after it was signed.
In 2003, the administration began seeking North Korean nuclear disarmament through a six-nation negotiation. In September last year, the six countries seemed to make substantial progress on a deal for the verifiable dismantling of North Korea's nuclear program in exchange for help to ease the country's economic isolation.
But Pyongyang has been boycotting the talks since the following November, blaming financial sanctions imposed by Washington for alleged criminal activity.
James Lilley, a Ronald Reagan-era ambassador to China and South Korea, said Bush would not respond to the current crisis the way Clinton did to the one in 1994.
The difference, he said, is that people now are not thinking of "buying them off, so much as thinking of making them pay a price."
Daniel Poneman, a senior National Security Council official under Clinton, said direct talks without conditions are in order.
"I believe that it's very much in our interest to express our views directly, especially to a regime as isolated as this one," he said.
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —