|
Banned: Cheating
|
IP:
Quote:
-
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As he campaigns on a platform of having made America safer, President Bush usually does not talk about nuclear disputes with North Korea and Iran that show no sign of resolution.
Bush did not mention the two countries, once branded by him as part of an "axis of evil," in his recent Republican Convention address and he has not made them a campaign staple.
Jonathan Pollack, chairman of the Strategic Research Department at the Naval War College, said even though Vice President Dick Cheney and others have admitted time is running out for curbing the North's ambitions, Bush has displayed no sense of urgency and set no deadlines for acting.
"After years of wheels spinning on this issue in this administration, you don't get a sense that there is a clear executive level decision or understanding about what we should do," he told Reuters.
Henry Sokolski of the Non-proliferation Policy Education Center said "a clock is also ticking with Iran and it may have moved to the point where we have a nuclear ready nation."
But while faulting some aspects of Bush's policy, Sokolski said "at least he's moved off dead center" and is pushing the International Atomic Energy Agency to send Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible punitive action.
Sokolski is more critical of Democratic White House contender John Kerry for wanting to negotiate with Tehran, saying "we've passed the point of talking to Iran as equals" and a tougher approach, holding Iran responsible for its international obligations, is needed.
Bush focused on the issue in his first state of the union speech in January 2002, branding Iran and North Korea along with pre-war Iraq as members of the "axis of evil" in no small measure because of their nuclear ambitions.
Recent developments underscore the potential dangers as both Tehran and Pyongyang persist in moving forward with nuclear weapons-related activities that some say are more advanced than Iraq's program before the U.S. invasion.
On Monday, Iran said it was losing patience with U.N. inspections of its nuclear program and announced an agreement with the Europeans to halt uranium enrichment would soon end.
Washington accuses Iran of aggressively pursuing a nuclear program that could produce a weapon in three to five years. Tehran denies this, claiming it just wants to produce peaceful nuclear energy.
As for North Korea, senior U.S. officials at the weekend acknowledged they had seen suspicious activities possibly associated with nuclear test preparations. This came as a huge explosion was reported on the North's border with China.
SUSPICIOUS EXPLOSION
U.S. and other officials discounted initial suggestions of a nuclear test. But there was no definitive explanation, causing speculation about a possible military accident.
While Pyongyang is estimated to have produced one or two weapons and maybe enough nuclear fuel for a half dozen more, an actual test would add an ominous new dynamic to the region.
Kerry said "the mere fact that we are even contemplating a nuclear weapons test by North Korea highlights a massive national security failure by President Bush."
He added in a statement that during Bush's term, Pyongyang has advanced its program "and a potential route to a nuclear 9/11 is clearly visible ... (T)he president took his eye off the ball, wrongly ignoring this growing danger."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan accused Kerry of wanting to "return to the failed Clinton administration policy (which) allowed North Korea to dupe the United States. It would be the wrong approach to go down that road again."
After rejecting former President Bill Clinton's strategy of direct negotiations, Bush held Pyongyang at arms length. As with Iran, his administration was often internally at odds over North Korea, paralyzing policy.
Aiming to persuade Pyongyang to end its programs, Bush eventually agreed to six-party talks with China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea, but he only put a detailed proposal on the table last June.
Kerry told the New York Times Bush failed to put a viable proposal forward and was using the talks as political "cover."
|
yea jus read it i dont need to say anything else today |