Chris Hill Resignation Watch: National Review on Agreed Framework 2.0
Our long national slumber is ending with a very cranky awakening, and editorialists are starting to transform Chris Hill into a political liability for the Bush Administration:
We still have no idea whether North Korea engaged in or is engaging in surreptitious uranium enrichment to complement the plutonium processed at Yongbyon. And we have not even asked Kim to dismantle his existing nuclear arsenal. Exactly what is it about this picture that has convinced Christopher Hill, the State Department’s top negotiator with Dear Leader, to keep pushing for a normalization of relations? John Bolton, the former U.N. ambassador, provided a window into State’s soul when, writing in the Wall Street Journal last week, he reported that Hill was set to offer North Korea a deal whereby it would simply acknowledge U.S. “concern” with proliferation activities. In other words: Don’t bother telling us what you’ve done or proving that you’ve stopped doing it — just listen while we tell you we’re miffed. No one could deny the exquisite nuance of this approach, but effective diplomacy it is not. At this writing, the declaration dispute is still unresolved, and President Bush would do well to keep Hill from resolving it. [Editorial, National Review]
Michelle Malkin is calling it “faith-based diplomacy.” Her Bolton photographs alone makes her postings worth a visit, although I don’t see much support for either (a) a decision by the Administration to really push for verification — it’s all pretty much for public consumption — or (b) a CIA plot to disrupt the deal.
Again, the theory that fits with other known evidence is that key committee chairs and ranking members in Congress threatened not to fund this deal unless the Administration finally provided answers to questions that they’ve been asking since last September’s strike. The Administration found itself boxed in by Congress and internally divided, so it was forced to deliver the goods. This information was just too damning to keep quiet about for long.
U.S. News is also reporting the Hill resignation rumors.
Hi Josh, you may just be really busy, but otherwise I think your spam filter must be working overtime. I’ve put up a bunch of photos from Sunday’s protests. Anyway, please check your email spam folder for a few messages over the last several days (and go ahead and delete this). thanks
Dan, I found your messages and am putting up a post. Your pictures are amazing.
Dunno if you’ve seen this, but Hani’s new editor in chief, recently back from a year in Washington, has a fun theory about the Syrian-connection.
I knew I’d regret following that link. Most editorials and columns in Korean papers make you marvel for what sort of crap people can be paid to write. That goes double for the Hanky. The piece is predictably groundless, unsupported, and contradicted by most of the available reliable evidence, which suggests that the disclosure was all about North Korea. It begins with a pantheon of villiany (one which excludes Kim Jong Il, naturally) and fills in its accusations later. Never mind that there’s no actual evidence to support this theory.
Oh, and Treasury’s BDA sanctions were announced on September 15th, and North Korea signed that deal four days later, on September 19th. Of course, North Korea creatively reinterpreted the deal later that day, demanding a light water reactor up front. In fact, behind the bluster, North Korea is most likely to make concessions when under pressure.
Is anyone else gobsmacked by the fact that the Administration keeps a story like this secret for 7 months, and people theorize conspiracies not about the coverup but about the disclosure? I certainly smell a rat, but it’s the coverup — which was dissolving rapidly under a stream of leaks — that upsets me.
By the way, good to hear from you again.