Of Money and Missiles
June 24,2006

North Korea’s Kim Jong has felt out of the spotlight for too long. News of al Zarqawi’s demise and a resurgent Taliban have turned attention from his well-coifed hair. Not any more. Debate rages on how to deal with his imminent missile test that could establish the means to deliver a nuclear payload to San Francisco. The answer lies with getting China, Russia and South Korea as riled-up as we are.

To wit -- Bush continued his European tour this week with a dramatic stop in Hungary. Bush courted a predominantly supportive crowd. Amid continued allegations of human rights abuses and charges of American arrogance, Eastern Europe is a port in the storm. Equating Hungary’s struggle against Communism with the Iraqi struggle for freedom, Bush was uncharacteristically persuasive from his bully pulpit. The obvious difference in Eastern Europe is that iron curtain memories are still fresh.

Bush’s challenge is to elicit this same visceral reaction from Russians, Japanese, South Koreans, Jordanians, Saudis and others. He has been largely unsuccessful because the United States is not seen as the great liberator in Asia it is in Eastern Europe. Even in Hungary, Prime Minister Solyum was compelled to reference recent gaps in U.S. credibility by stating that “This fight against terrorism can be successful only if every step and measure taken are in line with international law.”

Every Bush meeting with foreign leaders ends with a press conference detailing how the war on terror was at the forefront of conversation. It’s time for the U.S. to give equal credence to other worldly concerns. The war on terror must be prevalent in foreign policy debate, but not enough attention has been given to the role economics plays in building international partners. Latin America is a great example. While Bush has been fighting the war on terror, Venezuela, Bolivia, and other Latin American economies have become collectivist and openly hostile to open markets. Reagan understood that the cold war was as much a war of economic philosophy as it was a superpower showdown. Bush needs the same perspective.

Normalized Indian relations exemplify a new approach to regional alliances necessary to gain credibility for American interests. Bush pledged to welcome India into the nuclear club and provide the economic assistance necessary to sustain a safe nuclear program. He appealed to Indian nationalism and desire for acceptance on the world stage. If Bush learned to talk softly while carrying his big stick – it would go far. Recent admissions regarding his poorly crafted rhetoric are promising, but too little too late for his presidency. With luck, it’s not too late for long-term American foreign policy.

So, back to North Korea. Kim Jong is obviously trying to blackmail the West, following the Saddam and Iranian playbook. That said, American foreign policy exclusively focused on war plays right into the hands of maniacs clamoring for legitimacy. When the President of the world’s only super power does nothing but talk about a world on the brink, we see a self-fulfilling prophecy. Ironically, Bill Clinton’s recent remarks about blowing-up North Korea’s missile on its launch pad makes Bush look measured and rational.

The answer is not simple, and we PurpleThinkers are certainly not experts. However, a long-term approach to American foreign policy is badly needed. The glimmers of hope must become beacons of reality – utilizing American economic strength as much if not more than its military strength to bring about change. For North Korea, this means talking to Beijing and Moscow as much about open markets as the war on terror. If Seoul and Tokyo had the economic incentive to take more ownership for their own military protection, they would care about the war on terror and North Korea. China, Iran, and Venezuela see the advantage of economics as a bargaining chip – it’s time we did as well.

|

 

Home|epinion|Purple People Eater

Feedback@PurpleThink.com

©2006 PurpleThink.com