North Korean Ships

There have been various reports about the North Korean ship heading toward Burma. It's been followed by a U.S. destroyer, and is suspected of carrying weapons intended for the Burmese government, another international pariah. But under the pointless U.N. sanctions, the ship can only be inspected if North Korea agrees. 

This situation brings a couple of things to mind. Why are we so concerned about a cargo of small arms getting to Burma? If we are going to force a confrontation with North Korea it should be over something that actually matters. There is no reason for U.S. sanctions on Myanmar. The country doesn't affect U.S. strategic interests, and doesn't threaten the U.S. in any way. If the North Koreans want to sell weapons to the junta, let them. What should concern us are North Korean transfers of ballistic missile or nuclear technology to states hostile to the U.S. or its allies.

How about some real "sanctions"? Any North Korean ship suspected of carrying nuclear materials or missile technology could simply be made to disappear with no survivors. Don't take responsibility, don't say anything. Just sink the ships in a deniable way and claim to be baffled about what might have happened. That course of action could be put into place at any time, and would be infinitely more effective than any U.N. sanctions.

Why Do We Need A Burma Policy?

That was my first thought when I read the title, "Burma: Time for a New Approach by Ralph A. Cossa," an article posted yesterday at Globalsecurity.org. The author, Ralph Cossa, describes U.S. policy toward Burma, or Myanmar -- whatever you want to call it -- as "one of total isolation and strict sanctions." He laments that our policy hasn't worked to bring democratic reform, and that the military junta is still firmly in charge. So what does he think we should we do? 

According to Cossa,

U.S. sanctions need to be more targeted against the government and its leaders and not against the people themselves...The bans on Burmese garments, agriculture and fishery products and restrictions on tourism should be lifted.

Along with a reduction in sanctions he argues for greater diplomatic engagement with the junta, and more humanitarian aid.  I have no problem with removing sanctions on Burma. But the last thing we need right now is to get more involved in a situation that is none of our business, not to mention spending more money on aid. Why is it our problem what type of government rules Burma? Other than in World War Two, the country has never really been of strategic concern to the U.S. True, they grow many opium poppies. But we can't even stop opium production in a country, Afghanistan, where we have  large military presence, let alone in Burma. As long as it isn't hostile, and doesn't pose a threat to U.S. interests, how about we just deal with it like any other state?