Watching the doomsday clock via telescope

The North Korean government is beginning to annoy the international community. And that is about it. The UN is contemplating drafting a resolution to write a recommendation for a committee to issue a statement "strongly implying but with nice words" that North Korea's recent missile test is unacceptable.

In South Korea, people are marching in the streets and rioting.

Interesting, isn't it? How easy it is to talk about resolutions and policies and sanctions while you are sitting out of range? Russia has no population centers within North Korea's probable missile envelope. Neither does the the U.S. China has little or no quarrel with North Korea. Europe has other concerns, like, well, everything. That leaves Japan and South Korea. And Kim Jong Il has threatened to turn Seoul in a "lake of fire." I'd be worried, too. This situation is not annoying or distressing to the people of South Korea. It's analogous to Mexico developing nuclear weapons and declaring that it wants its workforce back.

The next question, then, is what the United States should do about it. What are our obligations to our allies and what are our tools?

With regard to the first question, the short answer is that I don't know. Japan and South Korea are both important to our country economically, and our political ties are similarly close for obvious reasons. Here's my personal opinion: we should be open to selling, at reasonable rates, Patriot missile defenses and similar weapons to South Korea, and perhaps politically support a first strike against nuclear of missile sites in the North. Japan is a more interesting case. After all, we sort of hamstrung their military ourselves, what with the conditions of the 1945 surrender. Japan has a "self-defense force" but not much offensive power with which to counter an attack from North Korea. I'd say we should seriously giving Japan access to non-nuclear second strike ability. For example, a few dozen Tomahawk missiles with conventional warheads probably would not be out of place. Government leaders are usually less inclined to commence wars of aggression when they know that twenty minutes later every building they've occupied in the last six months will become a crater.

This is just not enough, though, as you have probably deduced. These means might, might, discourage North Korea from an attack or even further buildup, but "might" is insufficient and turning over more technology to a known human rights violator (Japan) or committing more resources to South Korea are both unattractive prospects. Kim Jong Il is not wholly rational, I'd guess. The last thing we want is a war in the region at all, because China might get dragged into it. So, what can the United States do directly?

For now, nothing. I know it is aggravating, but until North Korea demonstrates that is has the ability to be a threat to Juneau I see no justification for flattening Pyongyang or assassinating Kim Jong Il.

Once it does, well, that's different. Sabre-rattling is unacceptable when the sabre is long enough to reach American shores and broad enough to destroy cities. The most cost-effective solution, should North Korea develop power to match its threats, would be a devastating, though probably not nuclear, series of airstrikes against known missile and nuclear-related facilities, coupled with a campaign against North Korean high officials implicit in the threats. I've written on this policy before ("Putting Jason Bourne's kids through college"). Populations don't start wars. Politicians do. Politicians should pay the consequences. Enforcement would be tricky, but certainly not impossible. North Korea launches a missile that travels far enough to put Alaska inside its range, we start taking out military facilities until someone says "Uncle."

The conditions I've put forth as justification for a U.S. attack have already been met in South Korea. The Israelis hit Iraq''s first nuclear reactor. I wonder if South Korea would not be justified in taking similar action. The real question is one of how the North would respond. All Iraq could do was whine. We've let North Korea develop further, and it shares a border with the other nation in question.

No easy solution is evident, but I guarantee you this: we can either deal with the situation now or let it grow out of hand to ever greater degrees. For the people of Seoul, the question is not academic. We watch from the stands. They wait to take to first blow. During the Cold War the "Doomsday Clock" maintained by a group of scientists peaked at 2 minutes to midnight in 1953. For the South Koreans, the minute hand is invading the hour hand's personal space. And the distant rest of the world is watching with binoculars or, worse, a telescope.