Moving Along

Thanks to tommyblog who noted that I wasn't posting new Blogs, but simply carrying on through "Comments" posted to the initial Blog.

In my last "comment" I praised Secretary of State Rice for achieving UN sanctions against North Korea so quickly. That praise stands; however, I would like today to point out what may have been an error during her recent Asian trip of potentially enormous proportions.

Her error relates to one of the legendary moments of American foreign policy. In 1950, shortly before North Korea's invasion of South Korea, then Secretary of State Dean Acheson gave a famous speech outlining the new boundaries of "containment," - i.e. a sort of drawing the line in the sand and outlining where in the free world (as it was called at the time) the United States would stand and fight against any communist encroachment. In Asia, he noted "Japan" and the U.S. commitment to Japan's defense. Notably, he did not mention South Korea. Shortly thereafter the North Korean invasion of the South took place and some historians today point to Acheson's oversight as an encouragement to the North Korean action.

Similarly, Rice's Tokyo speech focused on Japan, wherein she made it very clear that the United States would defend Japan with whatever it takes...including nuclear weapons, if necessary. It will be interesting to see if she will give the South Koreans the same assurances and, if she does not, the significance of the omission.

Would such an omission be an Acheson-like error or a redefinition of American foreign policy within the region? If the latter, are we now drawing the line in the sand at the Japanese shoreline and transferring the burden of the defense of South Korea to China, in recognition that South Korea lies within the Chinese sphere of influence? In view of the Administration's rhetoric regarding global democracy, this would be an extraordinarily calloused change of policy.

For the sake of the 38,000 U.S. troops currently on the North Korean-South Korean border, South Korea and Taiwan it might behoove Secretary Rice to clarify her remarks.

Note on the Republican Congress Pre-Election Mode:

In the aftermath of 9/11 when GW took us to War, he also made it clear, "but it will be business as usual...not to worry." The response of the House Republican leadership to the recent scandals, particularly those of Representatives Foley and Ney, seem to be in the same vein. With Foley, it's been, "oh well, we took care of that a long time ago, to bring Foley up now must be a Democratic election ploy." In the case of Ney, who as a confessed felon continues to occupy his offices and receive his salary and allowances, its "oh, we'll take care of that after the election and when we reconvene." The overwhelming impression is that within the Party leadership, scandal like War has become "business as usual." Where's the outrage?