What Beltway Republicans Need To Do
The premier source for
California political news
your part to do right by our troops.
They did the right thing for you.
tOR Talk Radio
Beret lieutenant colonel, Gordon Cucullu is now an editorialist,
author and a popular speaker. Born into a military
family, he lived and served for more than thirteen years in East
Asia, including eight years in Korea. For his Special Forces
service in Vietnam he was awarded a Bronze Star, Vietnamese Cross
of Gallantry, and the Presidential Unit Commendation. After separation
from the Army, he worked on Korea and East Asian affairs at both
the Pentagon and Department of State as well as an executive
for General Electric in Korea. His first major non-fiction work,
at Birth: How North Korea became the Evil Twin, is
based in large part on his extensive experience in
Korea and East Asia as a governmental insider and businessman.
[go to Cucullu index]
will Kerry be able to make a decision...
[Gordon Cucullu] 10/6/04
there were reports that North Koreans are preparing to fire
an intermediate-range ballistic missile that may be
able to carry a nuclear warhead. I will work with our allies
to get the six party talks with North Korea back on track -
and I will talk directly with the North Koreans - to get a
verifiable agreement that will eliminate their nuclear weapons
program completely and irreversibly. We have to get serious
about diplomacy with North Korea now. Only then will we have
the support of our allies for action if diplomacy fails. Senator
John F. Kerry, September 23, 2004
Years ago when I was
a kid growing up in Louisiana people used to joke about how
a campaigning Huey P. Long would promise ‘a
chicken in every pot, every man a king.’ Old Huey would
enjoy listening to John Kerry fire out promises like a stuck
Gatling gun. But in America promises are empty; action counts.
And there is little or no reason to assume that Kerry has any
plan of action to back up his vainglorious promises.
Worse, Kerry ignores
the reality of serious situations – it
is difficult to imagine a more serious situation than a nuclear
North Korea with a functioning warhead and delivery system – in
order to attack his opponent and promote his own agenda. One
can make an economic case for or against tax cuts, can argue
the nuances of health care systems and can debate outsourcing
of jobs. But to tread carelessly on what is potentially the most
volatile international crisis of our time for political gain
Let’s take a quick review of the facts, something that
Senator Kerry hopes we ignore because they work against him.
First, the six party talks that include in addition to North
Korea, Japan, Russia, South Korea, China and the US, are ‘on
track.’ Are they producing anything worthwhile? Not really.
The North Koreans, as is the instance with just about all countries
in the world – especially our enemies, are waiting to see
what America decides on November 2. Diplomatic positions will
change radically depending on who is the victor. If our enemies
see four more years of a Bush presidency they will know that
they must accept accommodations regardless of how unpleasant
in order to achieve the stated security goals of keeping the
US safe. Our allies will know that we appreciate their sacrifice
and are committed to staying the course to victory.
A Kerry presidency
will put friends and enemies in the same mindset that was prevalent
during both the Clinton and Carter
administrations and to a degree the George H.W. Bush presidency.
The US will take a more withdrawn, legalistic approach to international
security issues and will be more willing to accept deception
and appeasement as a tradeoff for ‘stability’ in
the international arena. Freedom and democracy will be traded
for assurances of taciturn hostility. Human rights abusers will
be given a pass as long as they don’t upset the international
But how long do these
standoffs normally last? Not long usually. This is one of the
factors that makes appeasement such a losing
proposition if only from a practical standpoint. Appeasement
and accommodation simply don’t work if an enemy only uses
them as ways to keep the US on ice while he grows stronger. Want
some historical examples? Hitler’s Germany, Kim Il Sung’s
North Korea, Breszhnev’s Soviet Union. Appeasement didn’t
stop the mullahs from seizing the American embassy in Teheran,
not did it keep Soviet MiG aircraft out of Grenada and Nicaragua. ‘Peace
processes’ have not tempered the terrorist activity directed
at Israel from Palestinian sources, nor did ‘more sensitive
diplomacy’ bring down the Berlin Wall.
Diplomacy is typically
a carrot. But a carrot only works if a big stick is behind
it. And the stick only works if the potential
recipient knows that the wielder of the stick is willing to swing
it. Enemies of the United States have good reasons to think that
John Kerry’s promises of toughness are empty wind. After
all his twenty year record of anti-military, anti-intelligence
voting, his firm stance for nuclear freeze and against virtually
all military action by the US would give them confidence that
this rhetoric is strictly campaign oriented.
On the other hand
while Bush haters at home and abroad don’t
like him they are learning rapidly not to ‘misunderestimate’ him.
He has pledged to work within the multilateral context in dealing
with North Korea because he understands that China and other
regional players must be part of any long lasting solution. He
also refuses to succumb to the ploy that this is a contest between
the US and North Korea only and that the others do not have a
dog in the fight. His firm actions in displacing the Taliban,
hunting down al Qaeda, and dragging Saddam Hussein from his hole
have give the seldom used stick of American military power a
whole new impressiveness.
John Kerry clearly
has little facility with international diplomacy beyond yielding
to whatever the other side wishes. He has indicated
a moral philosophy that is willing – indeed that will seek – to
transfer much of America's security and defense posture over
to international bodies such as the UN or the EU. His promises
have reached the point where they sound less like appeals than
cries of desperation for a power-hungry but impotent would-be
Gordon Cucullu 2004