Hillary Clinton, grandly, cynically, and falsely, proclaimed that Kim's death has suddenly left northeast Asia strategically problematic. Translation: the Obama administration has a klew how to interpret the rise of the 'Dear Leader's' chosen successor, Kim Jong eun. Plainly put, it knows less about him than you can fill a thimble full of water.
Now, Mme. Clinton knits her broad brow: Kim Jong il's death has put the US, its right wing ally Lee Myung bak in Seoul's Blue House in a bind. Regional stability is threatened, she opines. Wrong. Kim Jong il did not challenge regional stability; Clinton is shoeing the wrong horse. She would do better to look towards Washington and Seoul whose clearly defined and stated policy is and has been 'rolling back North Korea' to the point of its internal collapse, starvation, or making a false step by heating up the frozen Korean War.
Don't take GuamDiary's word for it. Check out the facts: the seemingly endless joint military manoeuvres along the Northern Limit Line with live ammo. In November 2010, in spite of the North's warning that it would respond were the South's live shells falls into its territorial waters, the DPRK forces lived up to its threats. Suddenly the arrogant teeth in the White and Blue Houses were set a chattering, lest war really did start anew in the divided Korean peninsula. And Obama's hand stayed mad Lee Myung bak's hand from responding.
Consider the tying of food aid which Obama and Lee to an over the top political agenda to which the North would never agree. The US and ROK were not in the least concerned with the immiseration and near starvation conditions in the DPRK, brought about by global warming. They held famished North Korea hostage, egging it on to rise up and overthrow Kim Jong il & co.
Clocking her words in deep concern for the physically weakened North Koreans subsisting on a subnormal diet, Clinton captiously thrust out her chest by saying the us$900m in food aid that the US was considering grandly showering the DPRK, owing to the current situation, calls us to reconsider our options. What hypocrisy!
GuamDiary wonders what in God's world does the US spend its money on in funding a gaggle of US North Korean clerics who haven't the least hint of what drives North Korean history. What about the war in Korea where the US led UN troops carpet bombed the North back to the year zero? What about a DPRK, under Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong il and soon Kim Jong eun, motivated by a fierce pride in its independence after fighting Japanese colonialism and visiting a stinging defeat on US designs to wipe out the DPRK during the Korean war?
GuamDiary suggests a look into the very recent past: Clinton scurrying off to Myanmar, not so much to encourage 'democracy' but to cut ties of friendship of Myanmar and North Korea, which she failed to do. The US is keeping to its agenda for regime change in North Korea, do not forget.
You'd think with the death of Kim Jong il, who stubbornly tried to open negotiations with the US with no preconditions, the Obama administration would seize the opportunity for a thaw in the Cold War it unrelentingly pursues against the North. Forget about it!
In the end, Clinton's words ring hollow and false. Yet the winds of change will knock out the rabid anti North Lee Myung bak in 2012 and it looks as though a rewarmed version of the 'Sunshine Policy' will breathe new life. The war in Afghanistan will consume America's energies more than they are worth and the US economy will sink lower and lower on the horizon.
'Jaw, jaw, jaw rather than war, war, war', it is useful to recall Churchill's words. But the US, right now, is a warfare state and remains blind to rewards of negotiation and true regional stability in the Korean peninsula and northeast Asia.