Musings on North Korea

These past few weeks, North Korea has been rather testy. Choleric man that I am, my first reaction was simple and visceral. Why, I thought, do we not give this tinpot tyrant the thrashing he seems to want? But a moment's reflection led me this consideration: such a reaction was not humble, it was irritable. It certainly was not an example of wisdom or prudence. But it was not meant to be a reasoned suggestion to call my representatives about. It was mere impatience.

I have a civilian's knowledge of the situation, but North Korea, as I understand it, cannot hit Japan, let alone the United States, with a missile. I asked myself what need there was to do anything at all. When a younger kid on the playground shakes his angry fists, how did we deal with it? We ignored him. Those who taunt because they cannot do always want a reaction. Why grant them one?

Pondering this, I thought about other ways to deal with bullies. Sure, there is the “fight them to the bitter end” method, but I try to see that as a last resort. What does Kim Jong Il expect from us? Sanctions, stern memos, and in his more martial moments, perhaps an invasion? What does he not expect?

Kindness.

Kindness is the antidote to a great many poisonous people. I have seen “enemies” become my friends through a little honesty and a charitable response. I wonder what might happen if the United States were to fly bombers over North Korea. These planes, though, would drop two foot packages filled with medicine, vitamins and foodstuffs into the fields and villages of the country.

How would Kim Jong Il respond? What would his people do? Would the eyes of Europe widen to see America do something so charitable? Assuming we can evade their air defenses, a government that can “find” nearly a trillion dollars in less than a year surely can find the money. Last I heard, a pound of food was cheaper than one of ammunition. That would be change I could believe in.

But would it be a change? I am not convinced. American foreign policy has always been driven by more than mere self-interest. I am not interested in attempting here to disentangle them, but our ideals have always been present in our grand strategy.

Why is it that we bar nations like North Korea from developing into nuclear powers? Is it that we do not want to open Pandora's Box any wider than it has been already? Is it more cynical—a simple refusal to share power unnecessarily? Or is the reason something more justified, more noble? I believe it is.

We hold certain truths to be self-evident in America. We believe that men are not beasts, and should not be treated as such. We believe that the natural rights of man are “written as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”¹ American government is founded on these principles, and ardently, tragically, clumsily or heroically, Americans have borne their ideals of liberty wherever their flag has gone. Our fierce opponents in the Second World War are now firm friends. Why? If we ponder the differences between the countries that border the Sea of Japan, we begin to understand our own opposition to North Korea's nuclear program.

It is not a question of mere power politics. It is a question of principle. America stands against tyranny and slavery, and will lightly allow such a regime to grow powerful. Praise or decry their expansion as we may, the ideals of the Declaration are the heart of American foreign policy.

1 Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, February 23, 1775