October 10, 2006
McCain Challenges Clinton On North Korea
In his first direct challenge to the Democrat he expects to face in the 2008 presidential race, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) today alleged that Sen. Hillary Clinton and Democrats fail to recognize the gathering threat posed by North Korea in voting to block a national missile defense program and by supporting an approach to Asian diplomacy that McCain believes is a proven failure. McCain scheduled a press conference late this morning in Michigan, where he is campaigning for Senate candidate Mike Bouchard, to draw a bright line between himself and Clinton on national security, according to an adviser.
In doing so, McCain tethered himself to the Bush administration's foreign policy initiatives on the Korean peninsula, which are supported by a wide range of conservatives, including realists and hawks. McCain's negotiations with the administration over detainee interrogation legislation strained his relationship with many of his foreign policy allies, including Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol. Ahead of the 2006 election, an adviser said he hopes to heighten the contrasts between policies favored by Democrats and those propounded by Pres. Bush.
McCain, long an opponent of Pres. Bill Clinton's framework approach to North Korea, endorsed Bush's call for tough financial and trade sanctions against the country and for a full, enforceable embargo on arms. The United Nations, McCain said, has the right to interdict and inspect all cargo entering and departing North Korean waters. McCain will urge the UN and US policy markers to punish the North Koreans' "bad behavior." North Korea, McCain said, has received billions in energy assistance through the "framework agreement" negotiated by the Clinton administration in '93 but managed to divert resources to secretly enrich uranium without detection.
"I would remind Sen Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush Administration's policies that the framework agreement her husband's administration negotiated was a failure," McCain said.
An adviser to Hillary Clinton, who provided background information on the condition of anonymity, said that Clinton believes the 1993 agreement was largely a success in that it deterred North Korea from reprocessing plutonium. Clinton credits direct diplomacy by members of the administration, who publicly rebuked and privately threatened North Korea in 1994. Through the end of the Clinton administration, North Korea refrained from plutonium enrichment. In this account, it was only when Pres. Bush rejected the framework agreement that North Korea secretly began to reprocess plutonium, which eventually culminated in this weekend's test. Clinton acknowledges that the national security apparatus failed to effectively police North Korea's hidden efforts to reprocess uranium in the 1990s but has concluded that the framework agreement generally contained the threat. [MARC AMBINDER]
But "[t]he idea that anybody can point to the Bush Administration policy and can say it's successful when we see what North Korea has done seems to be defending the indefensible," the Clinton adviser said of McCain. Clinton, on 10/9: "Some of the reasons we are facing this dangerous situation is because of the failed policies of the Bush Administration. I regret deeply their failure to deal with the threat posed by North Korea. And I hope that the Administration will now adopt a much more effective response than what they have up until now."
Bush's approach to North Korea has emphasized multilateral talks and de-emphasized bench marks and bright lines. Bush, who has a visceral dislike of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, refused to negotiate until the country gave up its nuclear energy program.
Sen. Clinton's aide said that Clinton doesn't oppose multilateral negotiations with North Korea but has pressed the Bush administration to take a leader's role and not cede that responsibility to China. Clinton, according to the adviser, believes that the Bush administration's "policy paralysis," referring to sharp differences of opinion between the State Department, the National Security Council and the Department of Defense, has allowed North Korea to dictate its terms to the world. In an op-ed written with Sen. Carl Levin in 2005, Clinton worried that "time is running out. Either the North Koreans will conduct a test (and transfer nuclear material, technology or weapons to our enemies) or the administration will finally act, using carrot and stick, to stop the clock and bring this crisis to a peaceful end before it's too late."
Both Clinton and McCain worry about a nuclear arms race in Asia and both seem to favor a more robust U.S. role in the six party talks.
Clinton, a member of the Armed Services Committee, has voted in the past to fund research into missile defense initiatives and considers herself an advocate for a scientifically-validated missile shield. She has departed from Democrats - and has been criticized by her party -- in pushing for aggressive shield experiments. But like others in her party, she has refused to support hundreds of billions in spending for shield technologies she considers unproven. Still, in 3/04, she acknowledged that a "deterrent effect" from a system that didn't work might be useful.
Many attempts to intercept missiles in their boost phases have failed, but several recent tests have been judged successful, including a September 2006 attempt to intercept a missile over the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Alaska.
The current national missile defense strategy calls for a three-stage deployment of radar, ground-based interceptor missiles and ship-based missiles
In the same press conference, McCain called for a permanent increase in the size of the Army and Marine Corps, a rebuke at Defense Sec. Donald Rumsfeld, who has worked to streamline those services. The Army's Chief of Staff, Peter Shoomaker, won reluctant permission from Rumsfeld to directly negotiate his budget with the OMB.
Posted at 11:52 AM
Comments
It's time for McCain decide what road he wants to drive down...always riding the jersey barrier will eventually get in the way...and for him to go after Hillary directly puts him on a par or should I say subpar with Bush...be your own man and stop towing the line on a sinking ship...it has begun to drag you down.
Michael | 10.10.06 12:25 PM
 |
Nice meme, Senator McCain. I hope you drive this point home. Not only can the Republicans run against Bill Clinton's failed policy, but they can point out it was Jimmy Carter entrusted to negotiate with North Korea, and then dump it all on Hillary, expected to praise her husband's appeasement of totalitarian communism.
Missile defense? Nice one. Let's make the fall campaign about supporting missile defenses.
Fletcher | 10.10.06 12:25 PM
|
this north korean situation is a nightmere for the people of the usa what with there congress(men)??? and senators??? being morally corrupct. lack of morals is evil.and god turned them over to the adversary. CORRUPTION THESE SO CALLED LEADERS WOULD SELL THEMSELVES TO THE LOBBYIST REPRESNTING THE IMMORAL CORPORATIONS. ARE YOU STILL WONDERING WHY THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD IS IN A FREE FALL? WAKE UP AMERICA. FORGET ABOUT E-MAILS AND LETTERS THEY DONT WORK A MORE DRASTIC ACTION HAS TO BE UNDERTAKEN TO RID THESE DEVILS.FROM OUR MIST. I WISH TO HAVE SUGGESTIONS FROM YOUR READERS AS TO HOW OR WHAT SUGGESTIONS THEY HAVE AS TO MY CONSERN THANKYOU
john bianco | 10.10.06 12:56 PM
|
Funny how Mrs Bill Clintoon forgets her man's failed overseas legecy.
Mary Bowmen | 10.10.06 01:00 PM
|
Hey, Sen. McCain? If Clinton's approach is a failure and Bush's is a success, why did development on a bomb stop during Clinton's tenure and start again after Bush changed the policy?
How, exactly, do you define "success"?
ALloydF | 10.10.06 01:00 PM
|
NOT talking to North Korea has produced a Nuclear Bomb, Mr. McCain....so which policy is worse, talks or no talks?
Troy | 10.10.06 01:12 PM
|
Suggest that your newspaper hire someone with physics 101 as an editor. It wasnt a U235 "gun" bomb. It was a plutonium implosion initiated attempt at criticality, which "fizzled" - the explosives which should have compressed the plutonium sphere to critical did not do so, might have been poor machining, poor explosives, contaminated PU, bad timers, etc.
Sidenote - cannot enrich plutonium - it doesnt exist "naturally"
Kavanagh | 10.10.06 01:33 PM
|
Negotiate with North Korea? There is no negotiation. There is only delay and gamesmanship designed to forestall. The North Koreans have acted this way since 1951. They do not change. You cannot judge either Clinton or Bush policies as failures or successes. North Korea does not play the carrot/stick or big stick game. Their threat is real and immediate and has been for years. Unfortunately the only end game is either open conflict or internal collapse. The challenge is forestall the first and encourage the second. McCain is both correct and consistent in his approach, but that does not make Clinton wrong. This dangerous issue desperately needs a bi-partisan solution. Sad that politics no longer ends at the water's edge.
Moore | 10.10.06 02:44 PM
|
The following is a statement from presidential candidate John Cox on the continuing nuclear crisis in North Korea:
"As North Korea defied the world yesterday and set off an explosion that could herald that nation’s entry into the Nuclear Club, Democrats took to the airwaves to denounce Pres. Bush for his “failure” to stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.
Sen. Hillary Clinton blamed the failure to stop the program on the “failed policies of the Bush administration.” She and other Democrats urged Pres. Bush to immediately begin one-on-one talks with strongman Kim Jung-Il.
For Democrats to use this reckless regime’s latest provocation for political gain is reprehensible. But what is ironic about Sen. Clinton’s statement is that her husband, Pres. Clinton, is the one who actually gave technology to North Korea in the 1990s on the advice of his envoys, former President Jimmy Carter and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. They believed, naively, it turned out, North Korea’s promises to give up its nuclear program in exchange for food and technology aid.
Pres. Clinton’s failure to take resolute action in the mid-1990s is in fact the reason why we are in the position we are in now. His action, or in truth his inaction, emboldened Kim Jung-Il and brought us to the precipice.
The worst thing we could do now is reward North Korea for continuing with its defiance of the world by engaging in two-party talks. This isn’t about a struggle between the U.S. and North Korea, and the Democrats don’t seem to understand that.
The Asian nations surrounding North Korea, and indeed the entire Pacific region, are endangered by that country’s reckless actions. These nations, especially China, have a responsibility to step up and put pressure on this regime to force it to abandon its aggressive posture.
It is time for positive action. I have urged the world to support a naval blockade on North Korea, led by the United States, to show that the international community cannot tolerate its actions."
JCox fan | 10.10.06 02:53 PM
|
I would hardly call paying a country billions of dollars to not produce nukes a "success." Would you consider the mafia receiving payments to keep you business "safe" a success too? It's the same thing. Extortion is what it is. If you pay one idiot not to produce nukes then it creates a chain reaction of idiots doing the same thing. The UN needs to grow a set and follow-up on the resolutions they pass, but they won't. Hillary, and the Socialist left, apparently want to model our country after North Korea, Cuba, and other Socialist/Communist countries, so it is no wonder she views her partner's (I wouldn't call him a husband) policy.
And to Mr. McCain - you'll never get my vote either. John McCain is the last person I see fit to discuss any matters. This guy decides to stand up to somebody finally just before an election.
Joe G. | 10.10.06 03:08 PM
|
the clinton era mistakes must be aired and exposed again and again and again in perpetuity.
in any arena, at any venue the policy decisions regarding ben laden, korea, the first WTC attack, refusal to arrest bin laden, the lie about "the military plan" to invade afghanastan, the aspirin factory bombing, the sordid white house affairs, failing to visit ground zero in 1993, hillary's criminal futures trading, paula, the nurse he raped,ignoring the cole attack on
doctor sam | 10.10.06 03:24 PM
|
...
, let me make my point. these people...clintons,albright, carter et.al. are trying, desperetly trying to alter history. eg. the b.s. clinton said to chris wallace 10 days ago. if we don't continue to confront the VOTING citizens with what really happened,in korea for ex. they will convince enough voters and will regain power... imagine hillary, kerry, gore, in power in this time in our history?
doctor sam | 10.10.06 03:37 PM
|
how sad that america gives out about north korea,, at least north korea only tested this weapon,what country has ever used nuclear weapons on other countries .No wonder north korea is arming itself , it does this out of fear ,,, it wants to be in the club like ever one else , now other countries will be a little slower threating north korea . Clinton was right , talks are the only way to go forward in any situation like this
tom | 10.10.06 06:52 PM
|
For decades successive US administrations have failed to use America's greatest weapon, democracy. Our open society, respect for human rights and freedoms is what the world admires the US for and not for it's arrogant and selfish foreign policies driven by narrow minded and incompetent bureaucrats. Now we have a North Korea regime acting like a caged animal with nukes, an Iraq bleeding us to death and an Iran making us look like idiots. If the US had pursued an open and engaging foreign policy in the past fifty years the Soviet Union would have collapsed 20 years earlier, Cuba's Castro would be history and there would be no North Korea to speak of. We opened up to China and broke down the communist fortress without firing a bullet. It's time we stopped spending our energies on how to screw the other guys and let the American ideals empower the masses and push all these dictators over the cliff.
Soto | 10.10.06 09:18 PM
|
Senator John McCain attacked Clinton's framework agreement in 1994, just as he does now. You can't have a carrot/sticks tactic with all carrots, but no sticks.
Clinton based his foreign policy on trusting a mad, irrational figurehead in Kim Jong Il. He made Kim promise to halt his nuclear weapons in return for BILLIONS in aid for food, technology, and energy. Kim kept pursuing enriching uranium and used the food for his standing army.
For more about this story and other McCain topics, please visit: Senator John McCain attacked Clinton's framework agreement in 1994, just as he does now. You can't have a carrot/sticks tactic with all carrots, but no sticks.
Clinton based his foreign policy on trusting a mad, irrational figurehead in Kim Jong Il. He made Kim promise to halt his nuclear weapons in return for BILLIONS in aid for food, technology, and energy. Kim kept pursuing enriching uranium and used the food for his standing army.
For more about this story and other McCain topics, please visit: http://michiganformccain.blogspot.com/
Michigan For McCain | 10.10.06 09:58 PM
|
How funny to see so many ill informed blaming this all on Clinton.
I don't have any particular like for him or the Dem's, however the FACTS suggest that North korea did suspend activities after the agreement and only jumped in full steam after Bush opened his mouth.
Where has his hard right policy had any effect???? It was under his watch that the north koreans developed the bomb - no point trying to blame Clinton, Carter or anyone else.
Bush has been so focussed on Iraq, a dumb war he insisted on outside of any evidence (other than manufactured by his own team), that did not turn up weapons and has ended up losing far too many US lives only to end up in a lose lose situation.
Instead of pissing around in Iraq, if he had matched the bs with action he might have stopped Kim. For those who chose to ignore the facts and focus on Clintons many personal failings... What about Bush's booze, drugs, etc. Focus on the reality not personal - they both have/had massive personal failings.
As a right Wing supporter I have totally been turned off by Bush's stubborn pig headed approach. "I hate you so I'll not negotiate with you" and then stands on the sidelines making useless bluster while all the real despots you do whatever they want. BUSH ET AL FAILED ON THIS - NO ONE ELSE!!!
ruff | 10.10.06 11:14 PM
|
McCain is now showing his true colors and is doing the typical Republican game of Back Blaming. Never mind that all of last year the North Koreans said they would create a nuclear bomb, all Bush wanted to do was to invade Iraq. What was McCain or Bush doig then? Nothing. Their so called "War on terror" is a farce. He let Bin Laden (remember the real bad guy) out of Afghanistan and then went inexplicably after Saddam. So don't pull this crap about its all President Clinton's fault. Dialogue is always preferable to war. You're supposed to have learned that in grade school.
Betty D. | 10.10.06 11:32 PM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
