The Value of Talk

There's a good article by Joe Conason about North Korea's nuclear test. He talks a bit about some of the (ludicruous) Republicans way to shif this foreign policy failure to the desk of someone who isn't President Bush. He then goes on to make a key point America should accept going forward.

Decades ago, American policy refused recognition to China and U.S. military planners mulled a nuclear first strike against Beijing when Mao Zedong proclaimed his intention to build atomic weapons. Today, although China remains far from ideal in its progress toward human rights and democracy, we are deeply engaged with that country and seek its assistance in coping with the North Korean problem. Whatever progress we have made in our relations with China -- and whatever progress China has made toward decent government -- has resulted from diplomacy, engagement and endless discussion rather than isolation and belligerence.

Our government and its allies should take measures to discourage the treaty violations of Iran and North Korea. But ultimately we will have to talk with those regimes, too -- and the sooner we face that reality the better

He's right on. I don't know when America got it into it's head that to talk is a sign of weakness. Talking is generally better than violence.