TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | South Korea

North Korea’s ‘Dear Leader’ is Dead

By on 19 December 2011

The North kept news of the death of its leader secret for roughly two days, perhaps a sign that the leadership was struggling to position itself for what many believe could be a particularly perilous transition. Kim Jong-il’s death came after a long illness, dating to 2008, that American intelligence agencies believed involved some form of a stroke. The North has indicated he was 69 years old, but scholars have said he could have been a year older. – Choe Sang Hun and David Sanger

The tyrant with a fetish for cigars, cognac and extravagant foods is dead. But during his reign he was able to touch off nuclear weapons that put the Korean Peninsula on alert and rattle the cages of the free world.

South Korea put its military on alert.

More from Sang-Hun and Sanger’s report:

Mr. Kim’s death poses a moment of peril for both Washington, the North’s nemesis, and Beijing, its last protector. “We’re entering a period that is especially dangerous,” said Jim Walsh, a professor at M.I.T.’s security studies programs who has met in recent months with several North Korean delegations as part of the behind-the-scenes, unofficial contacts from which the United States has gleaned some understanding of the power plays in Pyongyang. “Here is a young leader who may be distrusted by the military, and he has to prove himself,” he said of Kim Jong-un. “And that can lead to miscalculation and inadvertent war.”

[...] “There are a whole range of scenarios for when Kim dies,” one former American military commander in South Korea said recently, insisting on anonymity because he was discussing classified American response plans. “Anyone who tells you they understand what is going to happen is either lying or deceiving himself.”

The Atlantic’s J.J. Gould posted a link to B.R. Myers’ post on “After Kim Jong Il” that you might find instructive, especially if North Korea isn’t on your reading list, which it isn’t for most Americans.

His son Kim Jong Un is in his late twenties, with the tradition of passing leadership to him not seen by experts as certain. So, what kind of relationships he has or more likely doesn’t have with the military will play a part in whether he rises.

There are also reports that his uncle, Chang Sung-Task, could be the one to take over power, because he’s reportedly stepped into this position after Kim Jong Il’s stroke and further health demise.

But no one really knows what’s next.

Blogs of War has an interesting and sometimes unintentionally amusing Twitter feed section on North and South Korea.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Bush Tax Cuts, and the Woman in a Mink

By on 04 December 2010

Senate Republicans blocked two Democratic measures Saturday that would have eliminated the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, forcing both parties back to the negotiating table if they want to avert a tax hike next year for all Americans. The doomed votes mean Democrats may ultimately need to agree to a deal that runs contrary to their campaign promises over the past 10 years. Rather than eliminating the upper-end tax cuts, Democrats will likely cede to Republican demands to renew all of the Bush tax cuts for several years – a move that many in the party view as a major defeat. – POLITICO

Woman in a Mink

This is a terrific photo to go with the latest round of economic insanity in Congress.

It’s a great broad in a mink ringing the Salvation Army bell in bitter cold in Alexandria, Virginia. We had a chat and a cackle over the ironic dichotomy, with me also telling her I’m anything but a fur fan.

It’s quite fitting that POLITICO is adopting the “tax hike” jargon, when the Bush tax cuts were sunset, because none of them were paid for. We still can’t pay for them, which should bring to bear the stark reality that they expire, but instead the politicians see great wisdom in haggling over tax cuts for the super wealthy that adds to the debt, as will the middle class, but at least the latter comes with the practicality that they desperately need them and will spend them differently.

If Republicans win the latest tax stand off it will be because Pres. Obama and Democrats chose to punt on the tax debate before the election and now can’t seem to find the will to hang the Right’s bad math around their neck while championing financial aid for the unemployed and the middle class.

It will be a huge defeat for Pres. Obama who is continuing down an anti Democratic Party ramp that now also includes an insultingly bad free trade agreement with South Korea that the White House is blackmailing all sorts of varied Democratic groups to support. The talking points from Pres. Obama is absolute rubbish.

Sen. Sherrod Brown is exactly correct:

“I continue to believe it is a dangerous mistake to pursue the same kind of trade deals that ballooned our deficit and led to massive job loss. We simply cannot keep barking up this tree as American companies fold and American workers face prolonged unemployment. Until we address China’s manipulation and make decisions to reduce our trade deficit, I see no reason to pursue more NAFTA-style free trade agreements. …”

Former Pres. Bill Clinton was wrong about NAFTA in the ’90s and Obama is wrong now, too, especially since he could have gone to school on the mistakes of Clinton’s deal.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

New ‘No Labels’ Group Focuses on ‘Centrist Voters’

By on 24 November 2010

The story that’s all the talk today I’m not interested in. The Sarah Palin kerfuffle over her verbal slip on North Korea, which everyone is jumping on as some monumental gaffe. I just don’t hear that in the clip, so I’ll let others get all wee-wee’d up about it. Though I will note that John Kerry got scuttled for saying less, so Sarah should police her patter post haste, because she doesn’t have the foreign policy chops to make any mistakes at all. What I’m fascinated about comes complete with counter intuitive partnering.

It’s the group former Bushie Mark McKinnon talked about launching in December, the official date of the roll out and is called “No Labels.” Nancy Jacobson, the boffo Democratic fundraiser who’s married to Mark Penn, is partners with McKinnon.

From the Wall Street Journal:

An alliance of centrist Republicans and Democrats is seeking to organize a grassroots movement aimed at the “middle” of American politics, a political sphere depopulated by the midterm elections and a vital tool for any potential third-party presidential candidate.

The group, called “No Labels,” has drawn support from advisers to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the country’s most powerful independent politician, raising tantalizing questions about his national political ambitions. Mr. Bloomberg has been invited to attend the group’s Dec. 13 launch.

Political analysts see a potential Bloomberg bid if Washington’s divided government turns into gridlock, if the economy doesn’t improve, and if former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and President Obama are the likely nominees. But so far, Mr. Bloomberg has said that he wouldn’t consider running in 2012. “I have the best job in the world,” he said.

No Labels is led by Democratic powerhouse fundraiser Nancy Jacobson and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon, who were introduced to each other by Kevin Sheekey, Mr. Bloomberg’s political adviser.

The group has raised more than $1 million to seed its effort against what it calls “hyper-partisanship.” Backers include co-chairman of Loews Corp. Andrew Tisch, Panera Bread founder Ron Shaich and ex-Facebook executive Dave Morin. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as well as U.S. senators Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and Michigan’s Debbie Stabenow, will attend the New York launch.[..]

Quoted in the article is one of Bloomberg’s “top advisers” saying “These efforts aren’t important; they’re invaluable,” referring to a possible Bloomberg run in ’12. Another quote comes from Howard Wolfson, speaking for Mayor Bloomberg who quoted quoted Fiorello La Guardia: “there’s no Democratic or Republican way to clean up the streets,” adding, “The same is true on a lot of other big issues, but partisan gamesmanship keeps the two parties from working together.”

I’m not very interested in “centrist” organizations, which don’t have a compass on policy accept to make deals. Obama’s done that and look what a mess it has been.

Maybe McKinnon and Jacobson, et al. hope to serve up non-partisan types who are more committed to real solutions instead of any deal in order to name it an accomplishment.

The whole thing sounds like the Non Screamers Club.

All that being true, I am for ripping the political entrenchment of the two party system to smithereens. The time is ripe.

Contrary to others I also don’t see Michael Bloomberg as any worse than Barack Obama. Right now, across the political spectrum, no matter who might run and win, better choices do not exist.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

Midterm Weakness Dogs Obama Overseas

By on 11 November 2010
P101110PS-0991

There’s political blood in the water. It’s deadly for Democrats, with the obituaries already being written for Barack Obama. I don’t do predictions, but as I said last week, the electoral map in 2012 is very ugly, with Republicans taking power in Florida, Ohio, PA, Wisconsin, which is a much bigger deal than people think, and Virginia and Indiana looking very unfriendly to Obama, as is Iowa. Nothing remains of what Obama put together in 2008. The mood right now is very similar to what began before the 1980 elections, especially the exodus of working-class voters. So unless Pres. Obama rediscovers the politician who knee-capped Alice Palmer things are only going to go from bad to worse.

The overseas trip that was supposed to show him triumphant on the world stage, where he was welcomed and hailed in 2008, reveals the dangers of what happens when a president’s power is severely damaged and as a politician looks weak.

The quote heard round the world this week that brought the critics out:

“This kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations and I’m concerned that we’re not seeing each side make the extra effort involved to get a breakthrough that could finally create a framework for a secure Israel living side by side in peace with a sovereign Palestine.” – The Hill

Joe Scarborough accused Pres. Obama of attacking Israel in a Muslim country yesterday on “Morning Joe.” The headlines on what Obama said ricocheted around the media. Prime Minister Netanyahu calling the criticism “overblown.” Sect. Clinton continued today to emphasize the Administration’s stance, meeting with PM Netanyahu, refusing questions, but also announcing $150 million in financial aid for the Palestinian Authority.

Scarborough went on to talk about the political ramifications, never once getting the practical reality of Pres. Obama’s statement.

Israel is not going to attack the United States.

Pres. Obama making it clear to the most populist and cosmopolitan Muslim country in the world that radical jihad doesn’t represent the way the majority of Muslims practice their faith and experience their own inner revolution is what Obama’s statement was all about.

But the Right doesn’t get the complexities of what’s happening within these regions. They only see the Middle East through Israel’s eyes. They don’t understand the double nuclear standards or transparency failings of Israel as anything worth discussing or challenging.

Unfortunately for Mr. Obama, Joe Scarborough represents diplomacy ground zero on the Middle East now that the midterm shellacking has brought his presidency to its lowest ebb, with the Right feeling they’ve got him where they want him, which is beatable in 2012. It’s something I’ve been warning about for months, with Netanyahu playing for time, which has now paid off for him and his contingent, no matter that it doesn’t help anyone move forward in the region.

Whatever Pres. Obama hoped to do before in the Middle East, the leverage he once had to challenge Netanyahu on settlements, that ship has sunk.

On top of the settlement flap, headlines like “Failed Talks” on WashingtonPost.com, and “President Obama can’t close deals at G-20 summit” on Politico are about to bounce around, too.

Pres. Obama’s trip to India was critically important. His Republican free trade deals nothing anyone should champion, but the failure and weakness seen through his inability to have a success on the trip isn’t good for anyone either.

It’s been a very, very bad couple of weeks for Pres. Obama. It’s not going to get easier any time soon.

Read full story · Comments { 22 }

Free Trade Deals for Everyone!

By on 05 November 2010



You get a free trade deal. ….and you get a free trade deal… And you get a free trade deal! That should be the banner accompanying Pres. Obama on his trip today.

This video is why I used to look forward to watching “Hardball.” Before Chris Matthews was taken ill with a permanent case of Clinton derangement syndrome, his blue collar, working-class sensibilities, minus his overly pious religiosity, made his show must see TV. What he’s talking about here is what I mentioned yesterday about what splitting the union vote cost Democrats. It cost us Joe Sestak. The job losses in what is called the “rust belt,” which Matthews refers to as “Scranton to Oshkosh,” have been decimated by the decline of American building power. It’s these people that Barack Obama just might have lost for the duration.

Ironically, one of the Left’s arch nemeses Patrick J. Buchanan was on this case over 16 years ago, talking about the decline in the manufacturing base and what it would eventually do to this country.

No one will ever be able to sufficiently explain to me why Pres. Obama’s first action as president wasn’t to begin a green energy jobs moon shot to match J.F.K.’s target to get to the moon. Or better yet, why “Bullet America” wasn’t launched, with the goal of constructing a coast-to-coast bullet train to connect fly-over country with everyone else. I’ll simply never understand the puny priorities of Mr. Obama, which led the only place it could on Tuesday given the needs of this country.

Pres. Obama has no vision. He’s transactional all the way.

Ducking out as quickly as he could after the midterm carnage and beginning his to Asia, planned long before reality landed because someone in the White House showed a political pulse after it was too late, Pres. Obama has a plan. It’s not a good plan, but he’s on a roll of disastrous consequences so doubling down shouldn’t surprise anyone.

It proves Mr. Obama hasn’t learned squat.

From The Hill:

Ford has launched an aggressive advertising campaign against the South Korea free trade agreement (FTA), which it argues would lock in unfair trade between the countries. In newspaper advertisements running within and outside the Beltway, Ford argues that for every 52 cars Korea ships to the U.S., the U.S. “can only export one there.” The ad states: “We believe in free trade, and this isn’t it. In fact, Ford has supported every trade agreement approved by Congress since 1965 — until this one.” [...]

While the GOP is seen as reflexively more free-trade, Ford Vice President for International Governmental Affairs Steve Biegun said the company has received strong support from Republicans in Congress on the trade deal. The company is the only U.S. automaker that did not accept a bailout from the government in the aftermath of the financial recession, and is seen as having clout on Capitol Hill.

South Korean auto producers sold 552,000 cars and light trucks in the U.S. in 2009, many of them made at U.S. plants, but Ford sold fewer than 3,000 cars in South Korea that year. Ford argues the reason is non-tariff barriers and other unfair rules. ..

I swear to God, it’s hard to be surprised anymore. The economic policies and priorities of Pres. Obama and his administration couldn’t be much worse. After his “shellacking” all we’re going to get is a more drastic right-ward tilt, something that never cured anything and only exacerbated our challenges.

Read full story · Comments { 34 }

Ask a Stupid Question…

By on 06 April 2009

Get a stupid answer. Rasmussen and Politico doing a tag team on North Korea. Rasmussen asks the question (h/t Democracy Arsenal), with Politico setting up Newt Gingrich pretty well in their “Voters back force in N. Korea” headline on the polling.

In what seemed to be a swipe at the Obama administration’s response, he warned, “One morning, just like 9/11, there’s going to be a disaster,” adding, “I have yet to see the United Nations do anything effective with either Iran or North Korea.”

Okay, so let’s play it out. We take out North Korea’s missile on the launch pad. Now tell the international story.

North Korea’s Taepodong-2 missile went around 1,984 miles miles then made a splash landing, though the government is saying otherwise. That’s around twice the range of the first launch in ’98.

No matter how you look at it, North Korea is a long way from hitting Alaska or anywhere else in the U.S. So what Mr. Gingrich is suggesting is to do exactly what Pyongyang wants and that is to give them the wrong kind of attention they so desperately seek, with Gingrich’s solution helping them a lot more than the U.S. Typical foreign policy strategy of conservatives of Gingrich’s ilk.

Steve Clemons has a potentially powerful, if provocative, suggestion on how to respond to North Korea’s “pin-pricks.”

At the same time, we simply need more alternatives and allies — and the best I can think of is to work with Japan, South Korea, and China in not calling for withdrawing engagement and toughening sanctions but rather crafting how to strategically enhance engagement with particular forces inside North Korea that we want to cultivate.

It’s time for a Nixonian approach that would enrich some of North Korea’s potential robber barons against the interests of others inside the regime. We need to try to unleash opportunities for some and not others. [...]

Utilizing North Korea’s neighbors, Japan, South Korea, and even China is a much smarter play. We don’t have to do everything ourselves. In fact, we shouldn’t.

Read full story · Comments are closed