While U.S. military officials continue to comb Iraq for weapons of mass destruction, negotiations in North Korea may have provided a veiled justification for the war in Iraq. Over the weekend, North Korean officials admitted to having nuclear weapons, confirming a statement that was made and withdrawn over six months ago.
Since the Bush administration set its eyes on Iraq, conservative and liberal critics alike have accused Bush of setting a double standard when it comes to the foreign policy toward these two countries. The critics believe North Korea, with its million-man army, known stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, recent expulsion of inspectors, and reactivation of a nuclear plant that could make weapons-grade plutonium, is a far greater threat to the United States and its allies than Iraq.
Iraq, on the other hand, is relatively weak, shows no definitive signs of a substantial nuclear weapons program, and gave in to international inspections. Obviously, the critics say, Iraq is not the real threat. Now that North Korea has admitted to having nuclear weapons, the situation becomes completely different. Pyongyang is in desperate need of currency and is the world’s biggest exporter of weapons technology, according to the CIA. A real possibility now exists that North Korea could turn to exporting nuclear material to generate more revenue.
First and most importantly, preventing Iraq from having nuclear weapons would make eliminating the threat easier. For over 12 years, the world has tried all conceivable means to disarm Iraq. Diplomacy, economic sanctions, inspections and more have failed. Every option had been exhausted and tons of chemical weapons remain unaccounted for. The threat that Saddam could develop nuclear weapons remains, and negotiating with a nuclear Iraq would be far more difficult than negotiating with a non-nuclear Iraq.
Saddam could use his weapons as blackmail and could even engage in the sale of nuclear weapons through the black market. The dwindling war in Iraq has assured this won’t happen, and the world is better off because of it.
Attacking a nuclear North Korea risks nuclear war. Even without nuclear weapons, North Korea’s artillery give it the capability to crush Seoul in a matter of minutes. Government think tanks have predicted an all-out war with North Korea could cost millions of lives on both sides. North Korea would also likely use their weapons of mass destruction on Japan and possibly the western coast of the United States. The massive implications of an attack are more reason for deterrence rather than disarmament in North Korea.
Diplomacy has already proven to be successful with the North Koreans. In 1994, the United States and North Korea signed an agreement pledging to eventually dismantle the Asian country’s blossoming nuclear weapons program in exchange for aid to build two power-producing nuclear plants. There is no reason to believe that diplomacy would not work again.
However, the stakes were much different in 1994. An invasion or any sort of military strike by the United States would not have faced the threat of nuclear retaliation.
Negotiations with North Korea will now be much more difficult because of their nuclear capability. Had Iraq developed these weapons, the same situation would likely have arisen.
The real question lies on what price we are willing to pay for waiting. Surely, the world prefers a non-nuclear Iraq to a nuclear one headed by an erratic and violent dictator. The whole idea of stopping Saddam now is that it may be all the more dangerous later like it is now in North Korea.
Derek Montgomery ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in journalism and political science.
