The New York Times is reporting that the Bush administration is considering holding negotiations for a peace treaty with North Korea. To many, this will be a shock. After years of six-way talks to try to convince them to abandon their nukes, it comes to this. However, if you read Publius, this may not be so surprising. It is part of a new, huge diplomatic effort underway by the Bush administration in collaboration with other regional powers to show certain rogue regimes (i.e. North Korea & Iran) that they do not have to fear invasion.

This is actually the next step in a process that started with renewing diplomatic relations with Libya. To understand where this is going, it is very important to read yesterday’s post that explained the entire concept in detail. Here are the relevant parts:

As you might have heard, the United States resumed diplomatic relations with Libya, one of the most totalitarian countries in the world. To even begin trying to account for how this matches up to the stated ???????Bush Doctrine??????? of promoting democracy, and how it will benefit the people of Libya, boggles the mind. It does go to show, however, that the world is a complex place and the administration isn????????t single-mindedly ideological when it comes to foreign policy. The reasons for this move therefore have little consideration for democracy, and everything to do with how the attainment of nuclear weapons by pariah states in the short-term will prevent democracy in the long-term.

It must be remembered that the Brotherly Leader Muammar al-Gaddafi has been in constant conflict with the United States for over twenty years, about the same timespan as the Islamic Revolution in Iran. He turned Libya into a state sponsor of terror and developed a secret nuclear weapons program. There was a constant threat of regime change. When President Bush toppled Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi soon realized that America was serious about preventing rogue regimes from obtaining nuclear weapons; that it would topple that regime if necessary. He sought dialogue, abandoned his nuclear program, and changed his more directly threatening policies in exchange for assurances of safety and diplomatic relations.

This brings us back to the concept that preventing rogue regimes from obtaining nuclear weapons is the most important thing that can be done to assure both the national security of the United States and the eventual democratization of such countries. It also brings us to the broader meaning of the United States???????? resumption of diplomatic relations with Libya.

It is a signal to other rogue regimes, particularly Iran and North Korea, that they will not be invaded should they give up their nuclear weapons programs. The belief that they face the threat of being deposed is one of the main reasons these regimes are developing nuclear weapons in the first place. Furthermore, they will actually receive some kind of tangible benefits to go with it. Whether or not having diplomatic relations is appropriate, especially with Iran, is up for debate. The important thing to note is that it is a show of what will really happen if these programs are given up.
Ä…Å
As you can see, America????????s tango with Libya is connected in a very direct way with the ongoing nuclear proliferation crisis. The move may smack of realpolitik, but it is one that must be made for both the safety of the democratic world. If North Korea and Iran are nuclear, they will never democratize. And if they collapse, the weapons will show up in a major Western city. If democracy is going to be pushed, then these nuclear programs must first be dismantled so that it can take root in the long-term.

In the post, I made sure to distinguish the differences between North Korea and Iran. The former’s leadership is much more likely to go for the Libya option than the latter. Now that the signal has been given, and ole Kim Jong-il has heard it, the diplomatic barrage is about to begin. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has made a statement urging the North to follow Libya’s lead. South Korea has also gone along with this plan, with its foreign minister saying, “It is a good example of the brighter future that awaits when you give up the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.”

Libya is not typical of what one would think of when imagining a “brighter future”, but it is also strange to think of it and the United States in bed together. Or maybe not. The greatest threat to established democracies and to the development of new democracies is the proliferation of nuclear weapons to rogue regimes. Since one of America’s main objectives it promoting democracy, it must sometimes make decisions like this — resuming diplomatic relations and making peace treaties — that piss people off in the short-term in order to for democracy to ever be achieved in the long-term.

North Korea will collapse one day no matter what. The difference is if it collapses with nuclear wepaons. If that’s the case, we really have no idea where those weapons could end up. Our best guess is right in our own cities. It’s a possibility that must be taken into consideration. As for democracy in North Korea, it will never open up if its leadership feels that it lives housed within a nuclear wall. A decade from now, Libya might just not be as screwed up as it is now. It will hopefully even have new leadership and the groundwork of civil society laid in place. North Korea could be the same way if this goes through. Nothing else has worked so far, so why not?