New York Times January 3, 2003
Games Nations Play
By PAUL KRUGMAN
W hat game does the Bush administration think it's playing in Korea?
That's not a rhetorical question. During the cold war, the U.S.
government employed experts in game theory to analyze strategies of
nuclear deterrence. Men with Ph.D.'s in economics, like Daniel
Ellsberg, wrote background papers with titles like "The Theory and
Practice of Blackmail." The intellectual quality of these analyses was
impressive, but their main conclusion was simple: Deterrence requires
a credible commitment to punish bad behavior and reward good behavior.
I know, it sounds obvious. Yet the Bush administration's Korea policy
has systematically violated that simple principle.
Let's be clear: North Korea's rulers are as nasty as they come. But
unless we have a plan to overthrow those rulers, we should ask
ourselves what incentives we're giving them.
So put yourself in Kim Jong Il's shoes. The Bush administration has
denounced you. It broke off negotiations as soon as it came into
office. Last year, though you were no nastier than you had been the
year before, George W. Bush declared you part of the "axis of evil." A
few months later Mr. Bush called you a "pygmy," saying: "I loathe Kim
Jong Il I've got a visceral reaction to this guy. . . . They tell me,
well we may not need to move too fast, because the financial burdens
on people will be so immense if this guy were to topple -- I just
don't buy that."
Moreover, there's every reason to take Mr. Bush's viscera seriously.
Under his doctrine of pre-emption, the U.S. can attack countries it
thinks might support terrorism, whether or not they have actually done
so. And who decides whether we attack? Here's what Mr. Bush says: "You
said we're headed to war in Iraq. I don't know why you say that. I'm
the person who gets to decide, not you." L'état, c'est moi.
So Mr. Bush thinks you're a bad guy and that makes you a potential
target, no matter what you do.
On the other hand, Mr. Bush hasn't gone after you yet, though you are
much closer to developing weapons of mass destruction than Iraq. (You
probably already have a couple.) And you ask yourself, why is Saddam
Hussein first in line? He's no more a supporter of terrorism than you
are: the Bush administration hasn't produced any evidence of a
Saddam-Al Qaeda connection. Maybe the administration covets Iraq's oil
reserves; but it's also notable that of the three members of the axis
of evil, Iraq has by far the weakest military.
So you might be tempted to conclude that the Bush administration is
big on denouncing evildoers, but that it can be deterred from actually
attacking countries it denounces if it expects them to put up a
serious fight. What was it Teddy Roosevelt said? Talk trash but carry
a small stick?
Your own experience seems to confirm that conclusion. Last summer you
were caught enriching uranium, which violates the spirit of your 1994
agreement with the Clinton administration. But the Bush
administration, though ready to invade Iraq at the slightest hint of a
nuclear weapons program, tried to play down the story, and its
response cutting off shipments of fuel oil was no more than a rap on
the knuckles. In fact, even now the Bush administration hasn't done
what its predecessor did in 1994: send troops to the region and
prepare for a military confrontation.
So here's how it probably looks from Pyongyang:
The Bush administration says you're evil. It won't offer you aid, even
if you cancel your nuclear program, because that would be rewarding
evil. It won't even promise not to attack you, because it believes it
has a mission to destroy evil regimes, whether or not they actually
pose any threat to the U.S. But for all its belligerence, the Bush
administration seems willing to confront only regimes that are
militarily weak.
The incentives for North Korea are clear. There's no point in playing
nice -- it will bring neither aid nor security. It needn't worry about
American efforts to isolate it economically -- North Korea hardly has
any trade except with China, and China isn't cooperating. The best
self-preservation strategy for Mr. Kim is to be dangerous. So while
America is busy with Iraq, the North Koreans should cook up some
plutonium and build themselves some bombs.
Again: What game does the Bush administration think it's playing?
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company