News / Middle East

Column: Iran Deal Won't Be a North Korea Report

A screen grab of the Nuclear Test Facility site in North Korea via Google Maps satellite view.A screen grab of the Nuclear Test Facility site in North Korea via Google Maps satellite view.
x
A screen grab of the Nuclear Test Facility site in North Korea via Google Maps satellite view.
A screen grab of the Nuclear Test Facility site in North Korea via Google Maps satellite view.
In the aftermath of the Geneva accords constraining Iran’s nuclear program, some critics of the deal have compared it to the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea that fell apart in 2002 and ended with the North building and testing nuclear weapons.
 
The criticism ignores major differences between Iran – a large, influential country that relies on exporting oil and pays at least some attention to popular sentiment – and North Korea – a small, hereditary totalitarian dictatorship kept afloat by neighboring China.
 
It also ignores key differences in how various U.S. administrations have crafted foreign policy.  While the Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations have all had to deal with an at times obstreperous Congress, the Agreed Framework collapsed in large part because of internecine warfare within the executive branch of the Bush administration.
 
Under Bush “I never felt as though there was a coherent plan to solve the problem,” Charles “Jack” Pritchard, a former senior official dealing with North Korea in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, said in a recent interview.
 
Infighting between professional diplomats in the State Department and hawkish political appointees in the department, as well as in the vice president’s office, National Security Council (NSC) and Pentagon, complicated the U.S. response to reports that North Korea was importing components for a uranium enrichment program – a potential second path to a bomb – while keeping a plutonium reactor mothballed under the terms of the Agreed Framework. When an inter-agency U.S. delegation confronted the North Koreans with this information in October 2002 and the North Koreans admitted it, the Bush administration had not gamed how North Korea would react or what to do.
 
U.S. diplomats wanted to keep negotiating, but among the hawks – many of whom had opposed the Agreed Framework before they came into office – “there was a desire to punish North Korea and publicize how bad it was and that it couldn’t be trusted,” Pritchard said.
 
The White House decided to stop supplying North Korea with heavy fuel oil – a significant carrot in the Agreed Framework – and refused North Korean overtures to continue to talk, arguing that to do so would “reward bad behavior.”  The Pyongyang government responded by throwing out international arms inspectors and quitting the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In 2006, months after the U.S. blacklisted a Macau bank where North Korea had $24 million in deposits, North Korea staged the first of three nuclear tests, using plutonium reprocessed from its reactor at Yongbyon.
 
Bush administration officials such as Vice President Dick Cheney and Undersecretary of State and later UN Ambassador John Bolton argued that there was no option but to confront North Korea with evidence of its cheating. Both men and their supporters also doubted that North Korea could be trusted to keep any nonproliferation agreement. According to Washington Post reporter Glenn Kessler, Cheney in late 2003 is said to have told participants in a high-level White House meeting on North Korea that “We don’t negotiate with evil. We defeat it.” Bolton focused on creating a proliferation security initiative to interdict North Korean contraband and decried the Pyongyang regime for its infamous abuses of human rights – a view that Bush shared.
 
In the Bush administration, particularly its first term, “there was a lack of trust and collegiality” in the foreign policy apparatus, Pritchard said. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s opponents in the bureaucracy used backdoor channels to undermine him, reduce flexibility and leak negative information when multilateral negotiations finally took place.
 
In the Obama administration, in contrast, the NSC, State Department, Treasury Department and Pentagon, as well as the vice president’s office, appear to have worked harmoniously to produce the November 24 agreement with Iran. The Treasury Department has been particularly important as the agency responsible for implementing sanctions against Iran and crafting sanctions relief in return for a deal.
 
President Obama set the tone from the start, beginning his first term in office by reaching out to Iran – a step that helped unify the international community behind unprecedented sanctions when Iran backed out of a 2009 confidence-building deal. In the second term, says Trita Parsi, head of the National Iranian American Council and author of two books on Iran, “personnel changes in the last year have made the ideological cohesion in the administration even greater.” There have been no reports of dissension about Iran policy from the NSC, Pentagon or Treasury Department.
 
To the extent that the comparisons between the North Korea and Iran cases have merit, it mostly has to do with Congress. A Republican-led House of Representatives was repeatedly late in appropriating money in the mid-late 1990s to pay for the fuel oil shipments to North Korea. The U.S. and its partners also lagged in constructing two light-water nuclear reactors that were supposed to replace the more proliferation-prone facility at Yongbyon. “The implementation was messed up,” said Joel Wit, a former U.S. official dealing with North Korea.
 
Congress could now try to blow up the Geneva agreement with Iran by imposing new sanctions, which would violate the accords. The Obama administration is trying to convince Congress to hold off on any new sanctions, at least until the interim agreement runs its course in six months.
 
It remains unclear whether the Iran deal will have any impact on North Korea, which seems to have become even more unpredictable since the death two years ago of leader Kim Jong-il and the succession of his son, Kim Jong-un. Kim’s uncle, Jang Song-thaek, the apparent power behind the throne, has reportedly just been deposed. “Now I don’t know who’s running the show,” Pritchard said.
 
Pritchard complained that the Obama administration has put North Korea on the back burner, perhaps because “the toothpaste is out of the tube” and North Korea already has nuclear weapons. Plus China is there to prevent the North Koreans from going too far “across the line,” he said.
 
Still, a nuclear deal that sticks with Iran might give even the North Koreans reason to recalculate. As Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, has noted: “Iran and North Korea are the last ripples of the nuclear wave that began with Hiroshima.”
 
If Iran can be persuaded not to build nuclear weapons and North Korea to give them up, there are no other countries likely to take their place in the nuclear wannabe line anytime soon.

Barbara Slavin

Barbara Slavin is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center and a correspondent for Al-Monitor.com, a website specializing in the Middle East. She is the author of a 2007 book, Bitter Friends, Bosom Enemies: Iran, the US and the Twisted Path to Confrontation, and is a regular commentator on U.S. foreign policy and Iran on NPR, PBS, C-SPAN and the Voice of America.

You May Like

Pundits Split Over Long-Term US Role in Afghanistan

Security pact remains condition for American presence beyond 2014; deadline criticized More

US Eyes Islamic State Threat

Officials warn that IS could pose a threat to US homeland More

Video Ukraine: Captured Troops Proof of Russian Role in Separatist Fight

Moscow says Russian troops crossed into Ukrainian territory by mistake More

This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Change Iran Now from: USA
December 06, 2013 4:28 PM
Iran saw how North Korea fooled the world about its nuclear ambitions (and got away with it). And Iran's just repeating what works.


by: JKF from: Great North (Canada)
December 06, 2013 1:20 PM
The arguments presented are collateral in nature, and do not directly address the fact that- in all these type of agreements the parties to such could/have/may withdraw and continue their negative activities. They can continue because their capabilities, hardware and software, remain in place.
It is not in the nature of absolute governments to stick to agreements, that negate their perceptions, strategic ambitions and self image. The central issue is that depending who the next dictator is, all may change once again, even if the current dictator signs his life away. The best that can be achieved is a roll-back and control of hardware, with clear benefits if the country sustains its committments, and the extreme measures that will be taken if the country transgresses in its committments, need to be enunciated.

Given the current position of Iran = a nuclear threashold state, how far back the capability is rolled, under the agreement, will be the most clear indicator of committment by the Iranian gvmt. At the same time the rolling back of delivery systems, ICBM capability, will be needed. All of it can easily be restarted; so the need exists to deal with the long term security issues, including such as human rights and well beyond just cosmetic changes- and that will be the key to some reasonable confidence in a better future. Lastly there are the regional strategic issues that Iran faces, especially with an unstable nuclear power right on its borders, in which the Sunni/Shia conflict is ongoing.


by: Steve
December 06, 2013 10:43 AM
A rewrite of history we know where his politics lie


by: Godwin from: Nigeria
December 06, 2013 9:45 AM
If you bank on Iran's purported attention to plurality of opinion, I will tell you that Iran is averse to dissidence. 2009 re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a case in point. If North Korea can renege on agreement for any reason, there is no guarantee that Iran, under the same conditions and opportunities, will not take advantage of same to fool both the US and the UN. Already every condition has been present for Iran to make a nuclear bomb. Whatever anyone does or says to make Iran temporarily suspend work on the program does not guarantee a reversal within the shortest time possible. No one should be deceived, if Iran is to be disarmed of nuclear power, enrichment capability should be withdrawn completely under a comprehensive agreement - if it were possible - that will ensure a non-return to prohibited steps.

Nothing should be taken for granted, and nothing should be left on trust. Everything should be done on concrete, verifiable and binding conditions. The six months should be period of courtship during which both parties should find out whether they will live out their parts of the agreement. But it seems the fear of nuclear capability has become the beginning of wisdom so that when a nation wants to pose a stranglehold on the West, it simply goes to launch nuclear program. A way must be found round this to ensure that rogue regimes do not continue to threaten world peace through the possession of nuclear programs. To say it is the right of every nation and country that desires it, seeing its importance or otherwise to peace, security, health and well being of the world does not augur well for the world as presently constituted. In the interim, a total ban on further keying into nuclear possession should be the answer, until there is a way of controlling its usage worldwide. That should be part of the functions of the UN.


by: Change Iran Now from: USA
December 05, 2013 8:41 PM
Oh really? Iran saw how North Korea fooled the world about its nuclear ambitions (and got away with it). And Iran's just repeating what works.

Featured Videos

Your JavaScript is turned off or you have an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.
Scientists Unlock Mystery of Bird Flocksi
X
George Putic
August 25, 2014 4:00 PM
How can flocks of birds, schools of fish or herds of antelope suddenly change direction -- all the individuals adjusting their movement in concert, at seemingly the same time? British researchers now have some insights into this behavior, which has puzzled scientists for a long time. VOA's George Putic has more.
Video

Video Scientists Unlock Mystery of Bird Flocks

How can flocks of birds, schools of fish or herds of antelope suddenly change direction -- all the individuals adjusting their movement in concert, at seemingly the same time? British researchers now have some insights into this behavior, which has puzzled scientists for a long time. VOA's George Putic has more.
Video

Video Ukraine: Captured Troops Proof of Russian Role in Separatist Fight

Ukrainian officials say they have captured Russian soldiers on Ukrainian territory -- the latest accusation of Moscow's involvement in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. VOA's Gabe Joselow reports from the Ukrainian side of the battle, where soldiers are convinced of Russia's role.
Video

Video Rubber May Soon Come From Dandelions

Synthetic rubber has been around for more than a century, but quality tires for cars, trucks and aircraft still need up to 40 percent or more natural rubber content. As the source of natural rubber, the rubber tree, is prone to disease and can be affected by bad weather. So scientists are looking for replacements. And as VOA’s George Putic reports, they may have found one in a ubiquitous weed.
Video

Video Jewish Life in Argentina Reflected in Yiddish Tango

Jewish people from across Europe and Russia have been immigrating to Argentina for hundreds of years. They brought with them dance music that was eventually mixed with Argentine tango. The result is Yiddish tango -- a fusion of melodies and cultural experiences that is still evolving today. Elizabeth Lee reports on how one band is bringing Yiddish tango to Los Angeles.
Video

Video Peace Returns to Ferguson as Community Tries to Heal

Thousands of people nationwide are expected to attend funeral services Monday in the U.S. Midwestern city of St. Louis, Missouri, for Michael Brown, the unarmed African-American teenager who was fatally shot by a white police officer August 9 in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson. The shooting touched off days of violent demonstrations there, resulting in more than 100 arrests. VOA's Chris Simkins reports from Ferguson where the community is trying to move on after weeks of racial tension.
Video

Video Meeting in Minsk May Hinge on Putin Story

The presidents of Russia and Ukraine are expected to meet face-to-face Tuesday in Minsk, along with European leaders, for talks on the situation in Ukraine. Political analysts say the much welcomed dialogue could help bring an end to months of deadly clashes between pro-Russia separatists and Ukrainian forces in the country's southeast. But much depends on the actions of one man, Russian President Vladimir Putin. VOA's Daniel Schearf reports from Moscow.
Video

Video Artists Shun Russia's Profanity Law

Russia in July enacted a law threatening fines for publicly displayed profanity in media, films, literature, music and theater. The restriction, the toughest since the Soviet era, aims to protect the Russian language and culture and has been welcomed by those who say cursing is getting out of control. But many artists reject the move as a patronizing and ineffective act of censorship in line with a string of conservative morality laws. VOA's Daniel Schearf reports from Moscow.
Video

Video British Fighters on Frontline of ISIS Information War

Security services are racing to identify the Islamic State militant who beheaded U.S. journalist James Foley in Syria. The murderer spoke English on camera with a British accent. It’s estimated that several hundred British citizens are fighting for the Islamic State, also called ISIL or ISIS, alongside thousands of other foreign jihadists. Henry Ridgwell reports for VOA from the center of the investigation in London.

AppleAndroid