http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-kerry-north-korea-20110626,0,4538130.story
U.S. and North Korea: The land of lousy options
Washington's approach to North Korea's bad behavior has been measured, firm — and inadequate. We need to rethink our approach.
The U.S. response to all of this has been measured but firm. It has also been inadequate.
More than three years have passed since the last round of six-party talks on eliminating North Korea's nuclear weapons, and it's no coincidence that this diplomatic hiatus has been marked by dangerous conduct. Our current approach of strong sanctions and intense coordination with South Korea and Japan does not provide sufficient leverage to stabilize the situation, much less bring about a change in North Korean behavior. Left unchecked, Pyongyang will build more nuclear weapons, test them and develop missiles that could directly threaten the United States.
...
We should also resume carefully monitored U.S. food assistance to hungry North Korean children and other vulnerable populations. North Korean human rights envoy Bob King's recent visit to Pyongyang reflects a long and wise American tradition of separating humanitarian concerns from politics. If the North allows strict monitoring, as it did when U.S. nongovernmental organizations delivered food aid in 2008, then the United States should demonstrate our compassion for the famished children of North Korea.
After two years of near-silence, reestablishing contact would demonstrate that cooperation is possible, if only on humanitarian issues at first. Then we can move on to tougher issues, including dismantling North Korea's nuclear program. North Korea is changing, undergoing a leadership transition and increasing exposure to the outside world. If we give Pyongyang a stake in improving its behavior, we increase the odds that our nuclear engagement will be successful in the coming years.
Rebuilding a relationship is essential to unlocking the nuclear puzzle and forging a lasting peace. Let's get on with it.
Interesting editorial, both because it proposes solution, but also because it is the most direct criticism I have seen Kerry made to this point about Obama's foreign policy. Now, I am not sure how I feel about this editorial, added to the Afghanistan one and the Libya bill. I have to think about it, but this is in direct line with Kerry's past ideas.