North Korea is acting up again. I think the US response thus far has been generally correct. Options are obviously limited and the best way forward, as I have suggested before, might be something like: don't feed the troll.
With all that said, however, I was thinking today: what would Han Feizi do?
Han, of course, views all things through the lens of his number one priority: keeping the ruler in power. Thus, he is wary of foreign policy generally, worried that it might distract a ruler from more important domestic political dynamics:
We can, nonetheless, adapt some of his political principles to foreign policy, in this case to the question of what US objectives should be when it comes to NK.
In the opening chapter of Watson's Basic Writings translation (section 5 of the original text), Han speaks to the question of "The Way of the Ruler." He writes:
The ruler must not reveal his desires; for if he reveals his desires his ministers will put on a mask that pleases him. He must not reveal his will; for if he does so his ministers will show a different face. (16)
It must be kept in mind here that, for Han, ministers pose a fundamental political threat to the ruler: they are closest to his power and the ones most likely to foment and benefit from an overthrow of his power. Han does not mince words in warning of the dangers ministers pose to the ruler: "The only reason the ministers do not assassinate their sovereign is that their parties and cliques are not strong enough." (40).
Thus, Han's analysis of the ruler-minister adversarial relationship might be transferable to other adversarial relationships, such as that between the US and NK.
In that case, Han would counsel the US not to reveal its objectives, because if those "desires" are known to Pyongyang, then Kim Jong-il will use that knowledge as leverage for his own political benefit. And that is precisely what is going on in NK now.
The US and other regional actors have announced that denuclearization is their prime objective in the NK standoff, it is their desire. Kim knows that. Thus, he promises denuclearization to get what he wants and, alternatively, threatens further development of nuclear weapons to promote his interests. This has worked, to some degree. He got the 1994 Framework Agreement. He compelled the Bush administration to change policy and negotiate with "evil doers." And now he is ramping up the threats to get more of what he wants.
In these circumstances, Han Feizi might suggest to Obama that the US should stop declaring its objectives. It might even be sensible to announce that we no longer seek denuclearization of NK, that we can live with NK as a nuclear power (which we have essentially been doing for years now). And then shut up. Make no statement as to what we want from NK. Do not reveal our desires and our will. Let Kim guess at our intentions. Perhaps, then, the momentum would shift. Instead of NK knowing how to manipulate the US based on its stated objectives, NK would have to be more forthcoming in revealing its desires, which would put the US in a position to steer events.
That, in any event, would be Han Feizi's advice....
Some reality check on North Korea from Paul Craig Roberts: Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. BTW, isn't Han Fei supposed to be a all evil bad guy? or he is fine when he willingly serve the Empire?
=====================================================================================================================
Doublespeak on North Korea
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
"Obama Calls on World to ‘Stand Up To’ North Korea” read the headline. The United States, Obama said, was determined to protect “the peace and security of the world.”
Shades of doublespeak, doublethink, 1984.
North Korea is a small place. China alone could snuff it out in a few minutes. Yet, the president of the US thinks that nothing less than the entire world is a match for North Korea.
We are witnessing the Washington gangsters construct yet another threat like Slobodan Milosevic, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, John Walker Lindh, Hamdi, Padilla, Sami Al-Arian, Hamas, Mahkmoud Ahmadinejad, and the hapless detainees demonized by the US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld as “the 700 most dangerous terrorists on the face of the earth,” who were tortured for six years at Gitmo only to be quietly released. Just another mistake, sorry.
The military/security complex that rules America, together with the Israel Lobby and the financial banksters, needs a long list of dangerous enemies to keep the taxpayers’ money flowing into its coffers.
The Homeland Security lobby is dependent on endless threats to convince Americans that they must forego civil liberty in order to be safe and secure.
The real question is who is going to stand up to the American and Israeli governments?
Who is going to protect Americans’ and Israelis’ civil liberties, especially those of Israeli dissenters and Israel’s Arab citizens?
Who is going to protect Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans, Lebanese, Iranians, and Syrians from Americans and Israelis?
Not Obama, and not the right-wing brownshirts that today rule Israel.
Obama’s notion that it takes the entire world to stand up to N. Korea is mind-boggling, but this mind-boggling idea pales in comparison to Obama’s guarantee that America will protect “the peace and security of the world.”
Is this the same America that bombed Serbia, including Chinese diplomatic offices and civilian passenger trains, and pried Kosovo loose from Serbia and gave it to a gang of Muslin drug lords, lending them NATO troops to protect their operation?
Is this the same America that is responsible for approximately one million dead Iraqis, leaving orphans and widows everywhere and making refugees out of one-firth of the Iraqi population?
Is this the same America that blocked the rest of the world from condemning Israel for its murderous attack on Lebanese civilians in 2006 and on Gazans most recently, the same America that has covered up for Israel’s theft of Palestine over the past 60 years, a theft that has produced four million Palestinian refugees driven by Israeli violence and terror from their homes and villages?
Is this the same America that is conducting military exercises in former constituent parts of Russia and ringing Russia with missile bases?
Is this the same America that has bombed Afghanistan into rubble with massive civilian casualties?
Is this the same America that has started a horrific new war in Pakistan, a war that in its first few days has produced one million refugees?
“The peace and security of the world”? Whose world?
On his return from his consultation with Obama in Washington, the brownshirted Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that it was Israel’s responsibility to “eliminate” the “nuclear threat” from Iran.
What nuclear threat? The US intelligence agencies are unanimous in their conclusion that Iran has had no nuclear weapons program since 2003. The inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency report that there is no sign of a nuclear weapons program in Iran.
Who is Iran bombing? How many refugees is Iran sending fleeing for their lives?
Who is North Korea bombing?
The two great murderous, refugee-producing countries are the US and Israel. Between them, they have murdered and dislocated millions of people who were a threat to no one.
No countries on earth rival the US and Israel for barbaric murderous violence.
But Obama gives assurances that the US will protect “the peace and security of the world.” And the brownshirt Netanyahu assures the world that Israel will save it from the “Iranian threat.”
Where is the media?
Why aren’t people laughing their heads off?
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
Posted by: isha | May 31, 2009 at 12:10 PM