[Marxism] The DPRK (north Korea) ends truce with ROK (south) over southern threats to shipping

Michael Friedman mikedf at amnh.org
Fri May 29 10:34:12 MDT 2009


> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 01:09:30 -0400
> From: "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net>
> Subject: [Marxism] The DPRK (north Korea) ends truce with ROK (south)
> 	over southern threats to shipping

This...

> But the fact that the USSR, China, Pakistan, and India, and now North
> Korea
> have developed nuclear weapons, the fact that Iran has approached
> nuclear-weapons capacity while not projecting producing them, has become
> an
> obstacle to their use by imperialism, and even threatens to make their use
> by the imperialists impossible. Without this development, there would be

...and this

> Frankly, I see no sign that the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea
> (north
> Korea) is an irrational or suicidal state, and no sign that it plans to
> launch its handful of nuclear weapons against the Republic of Korea(south
> Korea) or Japan. The evidence that the DPRK is more likely to take
> irrational military action than is, for example, the United States
> government is completely nonexistent.

Are implicitly contradictory.

First you need to distinguish between a nuclear superpower, with definite
deterrent capability, like the then USSR (and now, Russia) and China, and
impoverished and oppressed nations like Pakistan, Iran or the DPRK, which
may possess a few warheads, no intercontinental capability and, perhaps
some few projectiles capable of hitting their neighbors with questionable
accuracy. I completely disagree that possession of nuclear weapons by such
nations represents *any* obstacle to their use by imperialists, and
challenge you to produce direct evidence that it has ever constituted such
an obstacle. You are correct in noting that it would be "suicidal" for
North Korea to use a nuclear weapon. Do you think that only you and the
North Koreans know this? It is at least as plausible that N. Korean
nuclear weaponry testing constitutes an invitation for an imperialist
aggression, even a nuclear confrontation that would not work out well at
all for the DPRK. No, the only deterrence to nuclear weapon use by
imperialism is political mobilization. And N. Korean nuclear testing is
counterproductive from this point of view. Think: would we have been able
to build the big mass mobilizations we did at the beginning of the Iraq
war, or would public opinion have turned drastically against said war, if
Iraq HAD possessed "weapons of mass destruction"? Of course, even if
Saddam Hussein had a couple of nuclear warheads or chemical weapons, that
would not have evened the playing-field against Washington's onslaught,
nor justified its invasion. Such weapons would not have saved Iraq, nor
aided us in building a movement. However, even if we acknowledge N.
Korea's right to possess such weapons, as long as its aggressor does, one
must question its brinkmanship and braggadocio. Contrast this with Cuban
or Nicaraguan (back in the day) or even Ecuadoran (vis Colombia)
diplomacy, which strip imperialism of its excuses for aggression, rather
than putting them on a silver platter. "El perro flaco atrae las pulgas".






More information about the Marxism mailing list