Monday, October 09, 2006

In his own words

I received an e-mail from someone saying that, gosh darn it, he just didn't believe the report about Bush I quote below. It is, after all from the BBC and he just didn't remember this being reported.

Well, I can't vouch for your memory, fella, but here's Bush's own memo on the subject:
Memorandum to the Secretary of State
Presidential Determination No. 2002-12
April 1, 2002
SUBJECT: U.S. Contribution to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization Determination Regarding Funds Under the Heading "Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs" in Title II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002 (public Law 107-115)
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 565(c) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002 (public Law 107-115) (the "Act"), I hereby determine that it is Vital to the national security interests of the United States to furnish Up to $95 million in funds made available under the heading "Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs" of that Act, for assistance to KEDO, and, therefore, I hereby waive the requirement in section 565(b) to certify that:
(1) the parties to the Agreed Framework have taken and continue to take demonstrable steps to implement the Joint Declaration on Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula;

(2) North Korea is complying with all provisions of the Agreed Framework; and

(3) The United States is continuing to make significant progress on eliminating the North Korean ballistic missile threat, including further missile tests and its ballistic missile exports.
You are hereby authorized and directed to report this determination and the accompanying Memorandum of Justification to the Congress, and to arrange for publication of this determination in the Federal Register.

GEORGE W. BUSH
Again, this was three months after declaring them a member of the "Axis of Evil."

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

i think bush screwed up a lot of diplomacy but PresDeterm 2002-12 isn't my beef and shouldn't be yours either. Non-certification was intended to be notice of noncompliance in 2002. For example:

http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd64/64nr06.htm
On March 30, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer argued that non-certification would send "a strong message to North Korea that they need to comply with their international obligations and agreements. The United States is complying, and this is a message to North Korea that it's important for them to do so as well."

The US's major concern is North Korea's refusal to allow the IAEA to fully verify the amount and status of its fissile materials. While the Agency has been allowed to verify the non-production of fissile materials in the country since 1994, North Korea argues that full inspections are conditional on progress on implementing the Agreed Framework - progress which, in Pyongyang's view, has been seriously and deliberately retarded by Washington. On March 18, Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei noted: "The IAEA continues to be unable to verify the correctness and completeness of the initial declaration by North Korea of nuclear material subject to safeguards in accordance with its NPT safeguards agreement with the IAEA." ElBaradei made clear the scale of the task involved in making up for the lost time: "The work required to verify that all nuclear materials subject to safeguards in North Korea have been declared and placed under safeguards will take three to four years, provided that IAEA receives full cooperation from Pyongyang."

Media reports suggested that important voices in the Bush administration view non-certification as an important step toward withdrawal from the entire Framework. According to an unnamed senior official (March 29): "The battle remains to be fought [on abandoning the Framework] but that's why the shift in the certification question this year is so important... It was a transitional move away from saying, 'everything is fine'." Another anonymous official observed: "It's saying, 'be on notice'. You've got a year to go. ... If they don't allow the IAEA the kind of access they need, then it's clear they have will have broken the Agreed Framework and the responsibility for that is unambiguously theirs... You might as well say flatly, 'you're in breach of the agreement and it's over'.

3:41 PM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...

So, Peatey, you're saying that it's a good idea to decide that a country is cheating, tell them they don't have to prove they're not cheating and still give them $95 million?

Weird.

7:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The principle is that of dotting i's and crossing t's when you suspect the other side of failure to comply with an agreement, so that nobody can claim that we failed first.

I think we are in agreement that Bush royally screwed up NK policy (as well as pretty much anything he touched), but the PD2002-12 pig doesn't fly. My beef with Bush include refusal for bilateral talks, awkward blusters like 'axis of evil,' closed-mindedness on Clinton's Framework, general lack of curiosity about the region (as illustrated by Woodward's new book), and countless other failings, but PD2002-12 is a natural and reasonably logical policy if one makes the determination that NK is noncompliant.

9:02 AM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...

So, Bush is willing to pull out of ABM treaties, the Geneva Convention and take America back to a pre-Magna-Carta era without habeas corpus, but the right thing to do is give $95 million to North Korea so that we can look compliant?

I'm just not buying it.

9:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Be fair. That I am against his unilateral and shortsighted rejection of ABM treaty, Geneva convention, and support for erosion of habeas corpus is consistent with my acknowledgement of the little Bush did in PD2002-12 for the appearance that the US was not the first party to breach.

10:42 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home