As reckless as over-simplistic foreign policy metaphors can be, Hillary Clinton was spot-on several weeks ago when she compared North Korea to an attention-hungry, unruly teenager.
If Kim Jong-il and his ramshackle government wielded any real clout or relevance in the international community, then John Bolton’s op-ed condemnation of Bill Clinton’s trip to North Korea might have merit. The knee-jerk neoconservative thrust of Bolton’s response, however, distorts the nature of Mr. Clinton’s trip and overestimates the significance of its symbolism.
Bolton argues that by coordinating Mr. Clinton’s rescue mission to North Korea, the White House was negotiating with an undemocratic, terroristic regime, thus endowing the North Korean government with legitimacy — legitimacy, that is, to participate in nuclear negotiations as a country with credible interests.
But there are two problems with Bolton’s argument. First, although the White House was deeply involved in arranging the captives’ release, both President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have forcefully iterated that Clinton did not travel on behalf of the US government and that the trip should not be interpreted as a diplomatic overture. In the words of New York Times reporter Mark Landler, “nothing has changed.” Although one can dispute the sincerity of the President’s sentiment in light of the White House’s active involvement in the mission, his word, in directing America’s foreign policy, is final. There are no indicators of a quid pro quo arrangement, and as Daniel Drezner of foreignpolicy.com wrote,
At the end of the day, the two journalists were released without any change in official U.S. policy. A fake apology from a former U.S. president might be worth something in Pyongyang, but it doesn’t really amount to much.
Drezner’s assertion alludes to the second problem with Bolton’s argument. Not only has there been no reversal in American foreign policy toward North Korea, but international relations do not necessarily hinge on symbolic actions, as the neoconservative position would suggest. Sending a former president to North Korea might have given Kim the attention he desperately seeks. But to save the lives of two American journalists without making any major concessions, that seems like an awfully small price to pay.
Christian Hines, an undergraduate at the Indiana University, is a weekly contributor to The D.C. Writeup.
Loading ...