N. Korea: Bi-lateral v. Multi-lateral

There are many ways to settle differences. Two of them are bi-lateral and multi-lateral. Throughout history we have learned that what works in one place may not work in another. To look at North Korea and the best way to deal with them diplomatically, let's do that one idea at a time.

Bi-lateral=North Korea + USA. The NK would like to rattle their sabers at the USA without the rest of the world involved. This was tried in 1994 with a treaty between the NK and the USA. The NK were to stop all efforts to create a nuclear bomb in exchange for food and, get this, a nuclear plant! This is also known as blackmail. In the meantime, the NK broke the treaty before the ink was dry. I see.

Multi-lateral=NK, Japan, SK, Russia, China, and the USA. In this situation, since what happens on that little piece of land affects it's surrounding neighbors, it is better to listen to the concerns of others. This way we not only hear their concerns, but they are also included instead of feeling left out. After all, IT AFFECTS THEM TOO. They must stand up and be prepared to defend themselves against the unknown future.

When possible, it is better to include others because there are more eyes, more intelligence, more pressure, etc. Bi-lateral is when you are dealing with a party who is on the same footing as you are. My father never had bi-lateral talks with me. What he said, that was the law! What a dictator! I love you dad, just kidding! :-) He had multi-lateral talks with his employees. He had bi-lateral talks with my mom! See? Each case by case should be handled as time permits and progress produces fruit.

Frankly, I don't trust Communist China, "new" Russia, or the NK's to tell the truth. I do believe that if something is not done soon (and I do NOT mean with the IAEA!!) then there will be a serious crisis. Let us pray we have time.