CIA to put kibosh on faith-based North Korea nuclear policy?
In laying out the case against Bush’s faith-based North Korean nuclear policy, I asked this question:
The story about the Israeli strike was that North Korea had given Syria nuclear technology. If they didn’t, who did?
Well, the LA Times says the CIA is going to brief Congress (keeping the details classified) on the fact that it really was North Korea giving plutonium technology to Syria:
CIA officials also will say that though U.S. officials have had concerns for years about ties between North Korea and Syria, it was not until last year that new intelligence convinced them that the suspicious facility under construction in a remote area of Syria was a nuclear reactor, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing plans for the briefing.
By holding closed, classified briefings for members of several congressional committees, the administration will break a long silence on North Korean-Syrian nuclear cooperation and on what it knows about last year’s destruction of the Syrian facility. …
It was not clear Tuesday how recently North Korea may have been aiding Syria. But disclosure of the relationship to the committees is likely to bring criticism from conservative lawmakers who already believe that U.S. overtures to North Korea have offered the government in Pyongyang too many benefits without assurances that it will disclose the extent of its nuclear arms effort or ultimately surrender its weapons.
Apparently we’re just supposed to ignore this in order to get a deal with the DPRK–a deal that North Korea obviously can’t be trusted to honor. It’s like hiring a violent, convicted meth addict as a babysitter–would you really feel peace of mind because, hey, they’d signed a contract?
Some administration officials are believed to be unhappy with the latest developments in talks with North Korea. But several analysts were skeptical of speculation that the briefing might have been initiated by internal opponents who hope to set off an outcry that would scuttle any deal with Pyongyang.
“You’ll have some outcry, but I doubt there are enough people on Capitol Hill even paying attention to oppose it,” said Gordon Flake, who follows the issue as executive director of the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation and is a critic of such a pact.
Well, their attention can be focused. And when the Bush administration is ignoring North Korea’s attempt to set up a plutonium plant in Syria, it ought to be focused.
Capitol Hill switchboard, (202)224-3121.
____________________________________
Look, I’ll be the first to admit there’s probably a lot going on in the nuclear proliferation demimonde that we civilians don’t understand. There may be some good reasons for the administration to do what it’s doing. Those may include threats and intelligence that the public doesn’t need to know. I’m fine with that.
But Congress? Congress supposedly has an oversight role. They ought to be focused in on North Korean plutonium transfers to Syria and God-knows-where-else like an anal-retentive laser.
So should the press.
P.S. Where’s the Sea Prince?
{Post by See-Dubya.}
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Dropping the Dime on the Assad/Kim Nuclear Lovefest : The Sundries Shack
- Michelle Malkin » Faith-Based North Korea Nuke Policy Revised
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Homeland Security, War
Confederate Yankee
» G.I. In Afghanistan: Obama "Blew Them Off"Blog Maverick
» My FCC Presentation on the Future of Digital MediaConfederate Yankee
» On The Surge: McCain Was Sorta Right, Obama WasGateway Pundit
» Obama Wows Berlin-- Barack Goes After the German Vote ...Update: Obama Drops Troop VisitPatterico
» Edwards’s Affair: Why It’s Not NewsWeekly Standard
» Daily Blog Buzz: Obama's Berlin Campaign EventPower Line
» McCain Closes the GapWeekly Standard
» Obama Has Time to Go Sightseeing But Not Meet Wounded Troops
There’s always a motivation for saber rattling and proactive military maneuvers. Just ask the majority shareholders of GE, Lockheed and TRW and they’ll wholeheartedly endorse taking the initiative.
After the ol’ Uranium for Plutonium switcheroo they pulled on the Carter/Clinton “agreed framework,” why we even bother speaking to the Norks is beyond me.
Our “foreign policy” toward Kim Jong Il should consist solely of engaging in activities to hasten his overthrow.
Keeping details classified is not a thing that congress does well at any rate just like paying attention. Am I silly to think congress’s judgement on anything where they would need to pay attention is worrisome?
TEEEEEEJ
DEFSEC Gates’ face lit up brightly and suddenly today in the Petraeus presser when a media person asked when the details of the Syrian WMD would be released to the public, “Soon … soon!” he smiled.
Is it me, or is the current administration pulling all the stops in trying to accomplish ANYTHING positive to hold out as it’s legacy?
The pali/Israeli thing doesn’t seem to be working out, the Afghanistan/Iraq/Al Qaeda thing isn’t going to be resolved in time, so now they are trying to put together a “workable solution” to the North Korean nuclear issue.
Face it GW, your presidential legacy will be open borders, attacking the wrong country (Iraq) and the loss of both houses to the demoncrats.
The attack of 9/11, no terrorist attacks in 7 years, and tax cuts that stimulated the economy will be overshadowed by Iraq, $3+ gas prices, still can’t find
ObamaOsama and a republican congress that spends money like drunken sailors on shore leave.meatpie– Sure, there’s such a thing as unnecessary saber-rattling, and I’m not advocating an attack on North Korea or anything. But if there aren’t consequences of some sort for setting up a plutonium shop in Syria–and they’re rewarded for it–well, that saber’s rusted tight in the scabbard.
WalterC– In my earlier post linked at the top I agreed with you on one point: that hey, at least we know W isn’t sitting around obsessing about his legacy like Clinton did.
Now I’m not so sure. I think he may be trying hard to say he signed a non-proliferation deal with North Korea. I think he might be trying too hard.
I don’t know where my old post is but I called this one when Isreal bombed the site. This is what I thought at the time, N. Korea has nuclear technology, Iran has missle technology, the NKs were helping syria obtain the means to produce nuclear warheads and Iran will give them missle technology, marry the two together what do you have.
Nuclear Warheads + Missles = Nuclear anhiliation of Isreal
Send in Carter, He’ll fix it.
/sarc
Right, we will be reading the minutes of the meeting in the New Dork Times.
I thought about the New York Times angle.
But I’ve noticed that their scoops of classified info tend to run in a particular direction. So we may be safe here–unless the NSA was monitoring someone’s phone call of course.
October 2006:
Why give them the chance to refine their technology? The next “test” will be more efficient and possibly a larger yield.
Talk about faith-based - trust but verify - Bush fails.
North Korea - Exposing the stupidity of Iraq’s Invasion since ‘The Axis of Evil’ SOTU.
Having spent four years as a US National Escort for the INF and START treaties in the mid-late 90s I have a really good idea of how a non-proliferation agreement should work between two nation states. Physical on-site inspection with short notice declarations of intent to inspect (72 hours) and an even shorter notice (12 hours) to declare the site to be inspected allowing the host nation to transport the inspection team to the declared site is the only way to validate that your partner in the agreement is keeping their end of the contract. Also all operations at the inspection site shut down 1 hour after the declaration is made. This type of inspection protocol worked out pretty good between the former Soviet Union and the US.
We already know that the North Koreans smoked the Clinton Administration on the last agreement this country had with them so why the heck would we want another deal unless it allows real verification through physical on-site inspection of suspect facilities. Without the ability to verify compliance and their track record of trying to smuggle missile & nuclear technologies why have any non-proliferation agreement at all. Anyone remember the freighter found to be housing missiles a few years ago the French Navy found? Now we have credible evidence that the suspected Nuclear Plant in Syria the Israeli Air Force was good enough to wipe off the face of the planet was a joint Syrian-North Korean venture. Since we can’t trust the oppressive government of Kim Jun Il as far as we can throw the little tyrant why would any rational person want to be the next sucker in his “let’s make a deal” scheme.
The smartest process we had going was the joint nation talks we had going on using China and Russia to keep the pressure on this Communist regime. It almost sounds like Bush really is extremely desperate to leave a legacy if he is willing to enter into an almost suicidal non-proliferation treaty on a faith-basis with a government proven to lie like a rug.