The blog that I read is the Defcon Hill defense
blog, in which the author, Jeremy Herb, analyzes and critiques Obama’s “containment”
policy toward the nation of North Korea. The North Koreans have posed a problem
to the rest of the world for decades, and the United States has been trying to
contain their communist regime and ideology from spreading to any other country
generally, and the United States in particular. The article particularly addresses
one of Obama’s agreements with the North Koreans that entailed the following:
The United States would send food aid to North Korea if Pyongyan (capital of
North Korea) would suspend its nuclear testing. The North Koreans have over and
over again in the past proven that they are not trustworthy, and are dangerous
people yet Obama is applying a light handed appeasement type of agreement to
try and contain any sort of outbreak or act of violence from them. Surely enough,
two months after the fact, the North Koreans launched a missile. Mitt Romney,
as cited in the blog, said “At the same time, he has cut critical U.S. missile
defense programs and continues to underfund them” This to me, brings about the
question: why in the world would we be cutting funding towards defense for
things that it would appear, that we may need the most? With the election right
around the corner, and Obama’s foreign policy sector being a strong point as
viewed by many, the setbacks that keep occurring with North Korea could really
end up hurting him, especially if the republicans milk the passivity that he is
showing, because honestly, it’s really easy to defend the claim that he is not
doing enough to deal with the North Koreans (do you think he is doing enough in
this department?). In the instance with the North Koreans, while containment
may be the easiest way to deal with them, any sort of appeasement policy that
we direct toward them will more than likely be short lived as by nature, the
North Korean government is extremely aggressive (particularly so when talking
about the subject of military or similar arms topics) and will not very easily
be deferred from whatever sort of testing or launching that they want to do.
Dependent of this, the people of North Korea are experiencing one of the finest
examples of containment within their own country. They are extremely cut off
from the rest of the world, and basically receive absolutely no outside
intelligence about the world around them. Everything is so highly regulated in
that country that the people there don’t even know enough about the rest of the
world (making generalizations) to think that their country may or may not be
doing something wrong. That is why their leaders are praised as gods, and when
their most recent leader died, literally just about everyone there was
hysterical and terribly upset over his death, even though he was one of the worst
dictatorial figures of the modern world, and created living conditions for his
citizens that were minimalist at best. This blog really does a nice job of
highlighting of the attempted and failed containment employed against North
Korea and serves to enlighten that more needs to be done before things get really
out of hand.
Blog analyzed: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/221363-north-korea-missile-launch-could-weaken-obamas-foreign-policy-strength
I learned in my Global Politics class that it seems that Obama may not be doing enough, but too much spending in defense could cause North Korea to launch a pre-emptive strike.
ReplyDeleteI think it is very interesting that we are cutting defense spending, which in my opinion has been to high for many years, but there is a fine line to walk with those cuts. The USA needs to figure out what the right amount of money is it needs to spend on defense while at the same time spending the money necessary to jumpstart the economy at home. The situation with North Korea is another example of why finding that line is so important.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mark, I think a balance must be struck in deciding how much the budget for defence should be, and how much should be used to stimulate the economy.
ReplyDelete