During his first State of the Union address on Tuesday, Donald Trump pledged the United States would continue its “campaign of maximum pressure” against North Korea. Meanwhile, the Washington Post ran an opinion piece written by the man who was, until recently, set to become the U.S. ambassador to South Korea.
Victor Cha, a professor at Georgetown University and senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, had reportedly passed all U.S. security checks, and South Korea had signed off on him.
It was expected — and for the government in Seoul, hoped — that Trump would soon formally nominate Cha for Senate approval. But over the weekend, it was reported that the White house informed Cha he was no longer being considered for the post.
Sources say the move was motivated by Cha’s disagreement with the Trump administration’s policy on North Korea. In particular, these sources say, the would-be ambassador took issue with the White House considering a preemptive strike against the Hermit Kingdom.
Writing for the Washington Post on Tuesday, Cha stated that the answer to the North Korean question “is not, as some Trump administration officials have suggested, a preventive military strike.”
Rather, Cha wrote, there are options available to address the threat “without escalating into a war that would likely kill tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans.”
Cha, who previously served in the administration of George W. Bush, wrote that he expressed his concerns over North Korea policy while he was being considered for the Seoul ambassadorship.
The Georgetown professor went on to question the logic of the “bloody nose” strategy, meant to shock leader Kim Jong-un and make him think twice about his nuclear ambitions:
If we believe that Kim is undeterrable without such a strike, how can we also believe that a strike will deter him from responding in kind? And if Kim is unpredictable, impulsive and bordering on irrational, how can we control the escalation ladder, which is premised on an adversary’s rational understanding of signals and deterrence?
Cha noted that on any given day, there are around 230,000 Americans in South Korea and another 90,000 in neighboring Japan. He pointed out that if North Korea were to retaliate against a preemptive strike, those citizens “would most likely have to hunker down until the war was over.”
He also noted that unlike Japan, South Korea lacks sufficient missile defense systems to counter a barrage of artillery from the North, meaning Americans there, as well as millions of South Koreans, would be vulnerable:
To be clear: The president would be putting at risk an American population the size of a medium-size U.S. city — Pittsburgh, say, or Cincinnati — on the assumption that a crazy and undeterrable dictator will be rationally cowed by a demonstration of U.S. kinetic power.
Regardless of such warnings, Trump remained adamant that the Kim regime poses a substantial threat to the U.S. while speaking before Congress on Tuesday. After claiming his administration has been tough on authoritarian nations, Trump zeroed in on North Korea in his State of the Union Address:
But no regime has oppressed its own citizens more totally or brutally than the cruel dictatorship in North Korea. North Korea’s reckless pursuit of nuclear missiles could very soon threaten our homeland. We are waging a campaign of maximum pressure to prevent that from ever happening.
Continuing, the president suggested the U.S. “need only look at the depraved character of the North Korean regime to understand the nature of the nuclear threat it could pose to America and to our allies.”
This aspect of the president’s State of the Union Address — Trump’s focus on the character of North Korea as opposed to the country’s nuclear weapons program — already has some speculating that the White House may be preparing for actual war.
Writing for The Atlantic, Peter Beinart noted that Trump’s telling of the story of Otto Warmbier, the American arrested in North Korea who died shortly after his return to the U.S., as well as that of North Korean defector Ji Seong Ho, may have been an attempt to “rouse moral indignation” ahead of the outbreak of war.
Writing for The Intercept on Wednesday, Jon Schwarz made a different connection. He pointed out that in Trump’s speech, many of his stated justifications for war with North Korea were “frighteningly familiar” to those given by President George W. Bush during the lead-up to war with Iraq in 2003.
Further, a source speaking to Anti-Media on the condition of anonymity with knowledge of U.S. Naval activities told us preparations have begun for military conflict in East Asia over the coming months.
Is this not enough?
The indiscriminate use of bombs by the US, usually outside a declared war
situation, for wanton destruction, for no military objectives, whose
targets and victims are civilian populations, or what we now call
“collateral damage.”
Japan (1945)
China (1945-46)
Korea & China (1950-53)
Guatemala (1954, 1960, 1967-69)
Indonesia (1958)
Cuba (1959-61)
Congo (1964)
Peru (1965)
Laos (1964-70)
Vietnam (1961-1973)
Cambodia (1969-70)
Grenada (1983)
Lebanon (1983-84)
Libya (1986)
El Salvador (1980s)
Nicaragua (1980s)
Iran (1987)
Panama (1989)
Iraq (1991-2000)
Kuwait (1991)
Somalia (1993)
Bosnia (1994-95)
Sudan (1998)
Afghanistan (1998)
Pakistan (1998)
Yugoslavia (1999)
Bulgaria (1999)
Macedonia (1999)
US Use of Chemical & Biological Weapons
The US has refused to sign Conventions against the development and use of
chemical and biological weapons, and has either used or tested (without
informing the civilian populations) these weapons in the following
locations abroad:
Bahamas (late 1940s-mid-1950s)
Canada (1953)
China and Korea (1950-53)
Korea (1967-69)
Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia (1961-1970)
Panama (1940s-1990s)
Cuba (1962, 69, 70, 71, 81, 96)
And the US has tested such weapons on US civilian populations, without
their knowledge, in the following locations:
Watertown, NY and US Virgin Islands (1950)
SF Bay Area (1950, 1957-67)
Minneapolis (1953)
St. Louis (1953)
Washington, DC Area (1953, 1967)
Florida (1955)
Savannah GA/Avon Park, FL (1956-58)
New York City (1956, 1966)
Chicago (1960)
And the US has encouraged the use of such weapons, and provided the
technology to develop such weapons in various nations abroad, including:
Egypt
South Africa
Iraq
US Political and Military Interventions since 1945
The US has launched a series of military and political interventions since
1945, often to install puppet regimes, or alternatively to engage in
political actions such as smear campaigns, sponsoring or targeting
opposition political groups (depending on how they served US interests),
undermining political parties, sabotage and terror campaigns, and so forth.
It has done so in nations such as
China (1945-51)
South Africa (1960s-1980s)
France (1947)
Bolivia (1964-75)
Marshall Islands (1946-58)
Australia (1972-75)
Italy (1947-1975)
Iraq (1972-75)
Greece (1947-49)
Portugal (1974-76)
Philippines (1945-53)
East Timor (1975-99)
Korea (1945-53)
Ecuador (1975)
Albania (1949-53)
Argentina (1976)
Eastern Europe (1948-56)
Pakistan (1977)
Germany (1950s)
Angola (1975-1980s)
Iran (1953)
Jamaica (1976)
Guatemala (1953-1990s)
Honduras (1980s)
Costa Rica (mid-1950s, 1970-71)
Nicaragua (1980s)
Middle East (1956-58)
Philippines (1970s-90s)
Indonesia (1957-58)
Seychelles (1979-81)
Haiti (1959)
South Yemen (1979-84)
Western Europe (1950s-1960s)
South Korea (1980)
Guyana (1953-64)
Chad (1981-82)
Iraq (1958-63)
Grenada (1979-83)
Vietnam (1945-53)
Suriname (1982-84)
Cambodia (1955-73)
Libya (1981-89)
Laos (1957-73)
Fiji (1987)
Thailand (1965-73)
Panama (1989)
Ecuador (1960-63)
Afghanistan (1979-92)
Congo (1960-65, 1977-78)
El Salvador (1980-92)
Algeria (1960s)
Haiti (1987-94)
Brazil (1961-64)
Bulgaria (1990-91)
Peru (1965)
Albania (1991-92)
Dominican Republic (1963-65)
Somalia (1993)
Cuba (1959-present)
Iraq (1990s)
Indonesia (1965)
Peru (1990-present)
Ghana (1966)
Mexico (1990-present)
Uruguay (1969-72)
Colombia (1990-present)
Chile (1964-73)
Yugoslavia (1995-99)
Greece (1967-74)
US Perversions of Foreign Elections
The US has specifically intervened to rig or distort the outcome of foreign
elections, and sometimes engineered sham “demonstration” elections to ward
off accusations of government repression in allied nations in the US sphere
of influence. These sham elections have often installed or maintained in
power repressive dictators who have victimized their populations. Such
practices have occurred in nations such as:
Philippines (1950s)
Italy (1948-1970s)
Lebanon (1950s)
Indonesia (1955)
Vietnam (1955)
Guyana (1953-64)
Japan (1958-1970s)
Nepal (1959)
Laos (1960)
Brazil (1962)
Dominican Republic (1962)
Guatemala (1963)
Bolivia (1966)
Chile (1964-70)
Portugal (1974-75)
Australia (1974-75)
Jamaica (1976)
El Salvador (1984)
Panama (1984, 89)
Nicaragua (1984, 90)
Haiti (1987, 88)
Bulgaria (1990-91)
Albania (1991-92)
Russia (1996)
Mongolia (1996)
Bosnia (1998)
US Versus World at the United Nations
The US has repeatedly acted to undermine peace and human rights initiatives
at the United Nations, routinely voting against hundreds of UN resolutions
and treaties. The US easily has the worst record of any nation on not
supporting UN treaties. In almost all of its hundreds of “no” votes, the US
was the “sole” nation to vote no (among the 100-130 nations that usually
vote), and among only 1 or 2 other nations voting no the rest of the time.
Here’s a representative sample of US votes from 1978-1987:
US Is the Sole “No” Vote on Resolutions or Treaties
For aid to underdeveloped nations
For the promotion of developing nation exports
For UN promotion of human rights
For protecting developing nations in trade agreements
For New International Economic Order for underdeveloped nations
For development as a human right
Versus multinational corporate operations in South Africa
For cooperative models in developing nations
For right of nations to economic system of their choice
Versus chemical and biological weapons (at least 3 times)
Versus Namibian apartheid
For economic/standard of living rights as human rights
Versus apartheid South African aggression vs. neighboring states (2 times)
Versus foreign investments in apartheid South Africa
For world charter to protect ecology
For anti-apartheid convention
For anti-apartheid convention in international sports
For nuclear test ban treaty (at least 2 times)
For prevention of arms race in outer space
For UNESCO-sponsored new world information order (at least 2 times)
For international law to protect economic rights
For Transport & Communications Decade in Africa
Versus manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction
Versus naval arms race
For Independent Commission on Disarmament & Security Issues
For UN response mechanism for natural disasters
For the Right to Food
For Report of Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination
For UN study on military development
For Commemoration of 25th anniversary of Independence for Colonial Countries
For Industrial Development Decade in Africa
For interdependence of economic and political rights
For improved UN response to human rights abuses
For protection of rights of migrant workers
For protection against products harmful to health and the environment
For a Convention on the Rights of the Child
For training journalists in the developing world
For international cooperation on third world debt
For a UN Conference on Trade & Development
US Is 1 of Only 2 “No” Votes on Resolutions or Treaties
For Palestinian living conditions/rights (at least 8 times)
Versus foreign intervention into other nations
For a UN Conference on Women
Versus nuclear test explosions (at least 2 times)
For the non-use of nuclear weapons vs. non-nuclear states
For a Middle East nuclear free zone
Versus Israeli nuclear weapons (at least 2 times)
For a new world international economic order
For a trade union conference on sanctions vs. South Africa
For the Law of the Sea Treaty
For economic assistance to Palestinians
For UN measures against fascist activities and groups
For international cooperation on money/finance/debt/trade/development
For a Zone of Peace in the South Atlantic
For compliance with Intl Court of Justice decision for Nicaragua vs. US.
**For a conference and measures to prevent international terrorism
(including its underlying causes)
For ending the trade embargo vs. Nicaragua
US Is 1 of Only 3 “No” Votes on Resolutions and Treaties
Versus Israeli human rights abuses (at least 6 times)
Versus South African apartheid (at least 4 times)
Versus return of refugees to Israel
For ending nuclear arms race (at least 2 times)
For an embargo on apartheid South Africa
For South African liberation from apartheid (at least 3 times)
For the independence of colonial nations
For the UN Decade for Women
Versus harmful foreign economic practices in colonial territories
For a Middle East Peace Conference
For ending the embargo of Cuba (at least 10 times)
In addition, the US has:
Repeatedly withheld its dues from the UN
Twice left UNESCO because of its human rights initiatives
Twice left the International Labor Organization for its workers rights
initiatives
Refused to renew the Antiballistic Missile Treaty
Refused to sign the Kyoto Treaty on global warming
Refused to back the World Health Organization’s ban on infant formula abuses
Refused to sign the Anti-Biological Weapons Convention
Refused to sign the Convention against the use of land mines
Refused to participate in the UN Conference Against Racism in Durban
Been one of the last nations in the world to sign the UN Covenant on
Political &
Civil Rights (30 years after its creation)
Refused to sign the UN Covenant on Economic & Social Rights
Opposed the emerging new UN Covenant on the Rights to Peace, Development &
Environmental Protection
Sampling of Deaths >From US Military Interventions & Propping Up Corrupt
Dictators (using the most conservative estimates)
Nicaragua
30,000 dead
Brazil
100,000 dead
Korea
4 million dead
Guatemala
200,000 dead
Honduras
20,000 dead
El Salvador
63,000 dead
Argentina
40,000 dead
Bolivia
10,000 dead
Uruguay
10,000 dead
Ecuador
10,000 dead
Peru
10,000 dead
Iraq
1.3 million dead
Iran
30,000 dead
Sudan
8-10,000 dead
Colombia
50,000 dead
Panama
5,000 dead
Japan
140,000 dead
Afghanistan
10,000 dead
Somalia
5000 dead
Philippines
150,000 dead
Haiti
100,000 dead
Dominican Republic
10,000 dead
Libya
500 dead
Macedonia
1000 dead
South Africa
10,000 dead
Pakistan
10,000 dead
Palestine
40,000 dead
Indonesia
1 million dead
East Timor
1/3-1/2 of total population
Greece
10,000 dead
Laos
600,000 dead
Cambodia
1 million dead
Angola
300,000 dead
Grenada
500 dead
Congo
2 million dead
Egypt
10,000 dead
Vietnam
1.5 million dead
Chile
50,000 dead
Other Lethal US Interventions
CIA Terror Training Manuals
Development and distribution of training manuals for foreign military
personnel or foreign nationals, including instructions on assassination,
subversion, sabotage, population control, torture, repression,
psychological torture, death squads, etc.
Specific Torture Campaigns
Creation and launching of direct US campaigns to support torture as an
instrument of terror and social control for governments in Greece, Iran,
Vietnam, Bolivia, Uruguay, Brazil, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Panama
Supporting and Harboring Terrorists
The promotion, protection, arming or equiping of terrorists such as:
. Klaus Barbie and other German Nazis, and Italian and Japanese fascists,
after WW II
. Manual Noriega (Panama), Saddam Hussein (Iraq), Rafael Trujillo
(Dominican Republic), Osama bin Laden (Afghanistan), and others whose
terrorism has come back to haunt us
. Running the Higher War College (Brazil) and first School of the Americas
(Panama), which gave US training to repressors, death squad members, and
torturers (the second School of the Americas is still running at Ft.
Benning GA)
. Providing asylum for Cuban, Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Haitian, Chilean,
Argentinian, Iranian, South Vietnamese and other terrorists, dictators, and
torturers
Assassinating World Leaders
Using assassination as a tool of foreign policy, wherein the CIA has
initiated assassination attempts against at least 40 foreign heads of state
(some several times) in the last 50 years, a number of which have been
successful, such as: Patrice Lumumba (Congo), Rafael Trujillo (Dominican
Republic), Ngo Dihn Diem (Vietnam) Salvador Allende (Chile)
Arms Trade & US Military Presence
. The US is the world’s largest seller of weapons abroad, arming
dictators, militaries, and terrorists that repress or victimize their
populations, and fueling scores of violent conflicts around the globe
. The US is the world’s largest provider of live land mines which, even in
peacetime, kill or injure at least several people around the world each day
. The US has military bases in at least 50 nations around the world, which
have led to frequent victimization of local populations.
. The US military has been bombing one Middle Eastern or Muslim nation or
another almost continuously since 1983, including Lebanon, Libya, Syria,
Iran, the Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq (almost daily bombings since 1991)
This, then, is a sampling of American foreign policies over the last 50
years. The FBI uses the following definition for Terrorism: “The unlawful
use of force or violence committed by a group or individual, who has some
connection to a foreign power or whose activities transcend national
boundaries, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a
government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance
of political or social objectives.” This sounds like the terrorism we just
experienced. It also sounds a lot like the US policies and actions since
1945 that I’ve just described.
Your comment just gave me a migraine! What an horrific history of evil.
Please, copy and spread – USA people must be informed to act!
North Korea is a “Hermit Kingdom???” (what kingdom? is this official?) because…
since 1953, they have been treated as the pariahs of the world, they have been whipped, put in chains
how do they come into the greater community of nations (i am definitely not in favour of globalisation) if they keep getting their noses shoved in ..it?
the United States is as guilty (if not more) of making Kim the man that he is, than any other outside influence
the United Nations is as guilty (if not more) of making Kim the man that he is, than any other outside influence
people suffering starvation, and eating fecal matter is not an indication of the evil empire, it is an indication that your evil empire has been too good at its own lies
Who is going to make huge frofits and how much??
There is no such thing as a preventive strike, which is actually a war crime. US has no business attacking nations without being attacked. USA is world’s greatest, most criminal rogue state. The Pentagon will continue to eat our economy until somebody in Congress learns to say no to The Generals.