North Korea Punishing the Petulant

North Korea

Punishing the Petulant Toddler: U.S. Policy In North Lorea

It was the first conflict of the Cold War and a politically charged area since the division of the region, but today, the word North Korea inspires fear in the hearts of some Americans. And the feeling is not without some cause. Certainly, a nuclear warhead in the hands of a government that most of the world feels less than stable is not the most sought after position for the international system. Although it would not be wise to advise the current administration to do absolutely nothing about situation under pressure in Asia, media coverage North Korea's missile tests, or satellite launches, is enough to inspire overreaction. In a recent article of Foreign Policy in Focus, Editor Emily Schwartz Greco (2009) writes that North Korea's repeated rocket launches are a cry for attention, much like that of a disobedient child. Of course, a short glance at North Korea's antisocial history gives an accurate explanation of why they would want to capture the attention of the West. A communist legacy from the post-WWII era and the seat of the first violent conflict after the cold war, North Korea has always been a symbol for East-West conflict. In this politically charged era, where terrorism and war in the Middle East, tensions between the United States and China and Russia, and a transitioning government in the United States have made the differences between East and West more pronounced, provocation for North Korea could have been much more subtle.

Examining the history of North Korea's missile testing sets precedent for the nation's precocious behavior. In 1998, North Korea launched what was called a satellite by the East and a missile by the West. Confusion over the type of launch occurred because the technology needed to launch a rocket and the technology needed to launch a satellite in North Korea are quite similar. Greco (2009) argues that North Korea was attempting to abide by its treaty, which was signed after the 2007 nuclear test, is a sign to keep dialogue open between a delinquent North Korea in the United States. Of all of the tests and launches completed by the state -- including the 2006 nuclear test and the most recent rocket launch this past April -- all have failed, suggesting that even if the North Koreans were serious about starting warfare on a global scale, it is likely that they would lack the means to do so. More importantly, however, these past tests suggest that North Korea stages failing launches in such a way that it ads to the political mayhem surrounding the East-West conflict without doing much physical damage (Greco, 2009). What this suggests is that North Korea cannot be considered a threat equal with other, real threats to the United States, like China and Russia, should their commitments to communism become renewed. Certainly, the United States' efforts in the Middle East are of greater significance than the current state of North Korea's armed forces. Like the petulant toddler, North Korea attempts to steal the United States' thunder in the Middle East as part of a larger ideological battle.

Thus, the ideological damage done by the North Korean's missile tests and nuclear threats is greater than the physical damage. Symbolically, and as a future threat, then, North Korea must be kept in the sight of the Obama White House and subsequent administrations. And certainly it should be, as the United States has long been involved in making it the symbol of Eastern politics, of communism, and of the antithesis to American freedom. Indeed, during the civil war that split the region into North and South Korea, the United States and its allies intervened heavily on the part of the South. This was not only the crowning moment in the development of North Korea as the symbolic enemy of democracy and the United States, but it was also the moment that changed life for the Koreans who happened to be North of the 38th parallel. 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.