Experiencing a quality of life that is much lower than their Southern counterparts, as North Koreans suffer with a quality of life that is worse than even those in other totalitarian regimes, such as Cuba (Oh, 2007). Just a few of the issues that citizens of North Korea have to deal with each day include famine, death, a caste system, and poverty. While famine and poverty are problems that immediately threaten the physical body, the strict caste system is the social problem that probably, more than anything, affects the life of a typical North Korean. With no ability to dream, to have a hope in increasing one's position and station, or of overcoming one's circumstance, it is difficult to be human. For these reasons, the symbolic value of North Korean's threats are damaging in the worst way. And it is just for this reason that North Korea can't be treated like a misbehaving toddler and simply ignored, although this was the policy of the previous administration. Although President Bush's opinion of North Korea was made clear to his constituents, Bolton (2008) calls his North Korean policy filled with "fanfare and choreography" (para. 2). The president talked, but did little else. Despite the fact that the Bush administration was able to come up with a satisfying agreement for peaceful interaction between the East and the West in the advent of the nuclear test of 2006 (Greco, 2009), Bolton (2008) contends, and I agree, that President Bush's overall attitude toward the brewing situation in North Korea was too lax for comfort. This is an example of the kind of policy that today's administration cannot afford. Because of this politically charged history of temper tantrums and symbolic threats, North Korea becomes a difficult case study for the Obama administration. Greco (2009) praises the current administration for its current stance favoring diplomacy and negotiation, even with states that are ideologically different than the United States. However, Greco also warns that the U.S. be careful to shy away from actions...

While Greco's (2009) ideas are partially correct, it is important that the United States respond to North Korea in kind. Because the state has not posed a real, physical threat to the United States, it would be inappropriate for the United States to launch an invasion. Similarly, Greco (2009) is correct that further punitive actions may simply serve to alienate Il's administration, making it difficult to discuss, let alone agree, on anything. Thus, it is possible for the Obama administration to keep their position in favor of diplomacy and peaceful resolution while still responding to North Korea's symbolic threats. This means that the United States must be prepared to issue statement after statement condemning North Korea for its disastrous treatment of its people. While negotiating with the country, the Obama White House should be prepared to use as a carrot the conditions of the North Korean people. Further, the United States must be prepared to launch a full-scale attack on North Korea, in addition to building to this climax with further sanctions and other punitive actions if necessary. These should not be used unless provoked, and they should be used in moderation, but it is important that the United States be ready to stand up for its democratic ideals should North Korea become more than a symbolic threat. Thus, just as one deals with a toddler's behavior as it escalates, so to must the United States be ready to address an ever-worsening North Korea.
References

Bolton, J.R. (2008, June 30). The Tragic End of Bush's North Korea Policy. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121478274355214441.html

Greco, E.S. (2009, April 5). What's Up With North Korea. Retrieved July 20, 2009,

from http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/6014

Oh, K. (2007, May). North Korea: The Nadir of Freedom. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http://www.fpri.org/footnotes/1216.200705.oh.northkorea.html