Another “3 or 4″ nuclear tests to come

The US is sending further diplomatic signals that it is ready for negotiations with N Korea. White House spokesman Tony Snow said that the US wants “Better economy, more security, better relations with their neighbors, integration into the world economy. A pretty good deal.” At the same time, Condoleezza Rice’s visit to South Korea did not alter the North-South economic relations: South Korea will continue its economic cooperation with Pyongyang.

Meanwhile, it has been reported that there is intelligence that suggests three or four more nuclear tests to come. Ms Rice’s response to this is “We want to leave open the path of negotiations. We don’t want the crisis to escalate.”

So far, N Korea is being very successful at playing their cards. Carrying out those three tests will not be the right thing. But sending out (false?) intelligence is going to give them even more leverage in the negotiations to come.

Slovakia to pull out of Iraq in February 2007

As reported on BBC News, Slovak President Fico announced that Slovak troops will be out of Iraq by February 2007.

This is not a major shift in Slovak policy as Fico was elected under a platform which included immediate withdrawal of the troops; once elected, Fico opted to keep his troops in the country for an extra six months.

Who’s next? And what will US response be? Certainly Fico’s announcement is no surprise, but no welcome news for the US Iraqi mission. It follows the recent speculation that British troops may be out of Iraq as soon as ten months from now.

New Iraqi Policy May be on its Way: UK and US send signals

Following General Sir Richard Dannatt’s comments about UK forces leaving Iraq within a year, British Prime Minister Tony Blair has echoed the sentiment saying that government policy was to leave Iraq in 10-16 months as long as security allowed it.

It will be interesting to see what the policy towards Iraq will be in Washington after the US mid-term elections, which are expected to be a political loss for the scandal-ridden Republican Party. Prime Minister Blair has said that the UK is still committed to a liberal democracy in Iraq, despite the troop withdrawal. Is a similar policy to be expected from Washington?

The US currently has two high-profile diplomatic situations to handle: Iran and N Korea. N Korea, having run a successful nuclear test, can expect negotiations to occur and finding a diplomatic solution. Iran, on the other hand, has long been reported as the next US target in its Middle East portfolio. However, American troops have been over-stretched in Iraq and any military activity in Iran is simply impossible and bound for disaster.

There is reason to believe that US policy in Iraq may change: in the widely publicized interview with ABC news, President Bush has accepted an Iraq-Vietnam parallel. Also, the US military today sait that its security strategy in Baghdad is failing to stop violence. These could be the first signals that the US may be changing course.

N Korea Negociations Sought

As expected, the negotiations process has begun in North Korea. On her swiftly organized Asian tour, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said the US is open to negotiations. At the same time, Chinese envoy Tang Jiaxuan met Kim Jong Il to discuss the Chinese position.

Caught by surprise, the US has few other options but to negotiate with its ideological opponent. China, a long time ally of North Korea, has been careful in its rhetoric saying that “Sanctions are a signal, not a goal.”

The Chinese, though, have reason to be alarmed: their regional nuclear dominance is directly threatened by North Korea’s potential nuclear arsenal. N Korea is also engaged in old-school politics, which the modernized China has long left behind. If N Korea is too assert any influence in world politics, it must start talking and stop its self-isolation. The nuclear test was an initial political victory, but one that needs to be capitalized on properly. This is probably the message carried by the Chinese to their N Korean neighbor.

If N Korea acts with prudence, we can expect the kind of deal that Clinton had negotiated during his stay in power. A deal that will halt N Korean nuclear development, in return for American technology and aid.

Canada’s Conservatives once again in line with US policy

The Tory government today anounced its plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

As the CBC’s report states: “The bill…calls for the reduction of car emissions by 2011 to align Canada with regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.” The next four years are meant for the government to consult with industry on ways of adopting this policy.

The Conservatives have once again turned their backs on the Kyoto protocol — a policy, that despite the government’s efforts, was favoured by the House of Commons this fall when MPs voted in favour of Bill C-288 (the bill to ensure that Canada is in line with the Kyoto protocol’s gas emission levels) getting a second reading. Instead of listening to Members of Parliament, the Conservatives have simply marched on with their own environmental policy, which is several steps behind Kyoto.

The most interesting aspect of today’s proposed bill is that all its goals are outside of the government’s term in office, the first being set for 2011. The latest that the next federal election can take place in Canada is 2010. Are the Tories acting with prudence? Or are they just realizing that they might not be able to deliver on their promise in time for the next election?

It’s not even clear how long the current minority government can last. The mistakes have been far and wide, the latest being yesterday’s ouster of Conservative MP Garth Turner, who will now sit as an independent in Parliament.

For more, see this article in the National Post on the opposition’s stance on the Kyoto protocol.

President Bush responds to N Korea, warning of “a grave consequence”

In an interview with ABC News, American President Bush has warned North Korea against transferring its nuclear technology information to other international actors. The US is apparently concerned that North Korea may pass nuclear information on to Iran or Al-Qaeda.

Clearly, the US administration is truly at a loss, in terms of dealing with this crisis. Suggesting that Pyongyang will share its nuclear information with Al-Qaeda is simply ridiculous. The successful test has given North Korea leverage it has never had and sharing it with other actors is simply idiotic. It’s quite possible that Mr Bush is just using this rather unlikely scenario (transferring nuclear information to Al-Qaeda) as a means of continuing to employ his direct rhetoric; this way, he’s still ’standing up’ to ‘crazy Kim’ and not bowing down. After all, this is what made the American president so popular, the famous “with us or without us” formula. (Which is counter-intuitive in terms of having any diplomatic relations.)

The fact that the US is at a loss is evident in the aforementioned ABC interview with President Bush; Mr Bush could not present any specific measures that would be taken if North Korea shared its valuable information. The President simply replied: “You know, I’d just say it’s a grave consequence.”