American Duties 5 of 11

Bush on North Korea

QUESTION: You spent a good deal of time before the Iraq war, some in this room, explaining to us why the combination of Saddam Hussein as a dictator and the weapons that you thought at the time he had assembled made a case for regime change. In the case of North Korea and Iran, you have not declared yourself on the question of regime change. Though North Korea, your intelligence agencies believe, may have added six or seven nuclear weapons in the past two years, and Iran seems to have a covert program, or at least your government believes it does.

Where do you stand on regime change? And how would it be accomplished?

BUSH: I'll tell you where I stand. I stand on continuing the six-party talks with North Korea to convince Kim Jong Il to give up his weapons systems.

As you might remember, our country has tried a strategy of bilateral relationships in hopes that we can convince Kim Jong Il. It didn't work.

As a matter of fact, when we thought we had, in good faith, agreed to an agreement -- agreed to a plan that would work, he himself was enriching uranium or saw to it that the uranium was enriched. In other words, he broke the agreement.

I think it's an important lesson for this administration to learn. And that the best way to convince him to disarm is to get others to weigh in as well. With the Iranian situation as well, we're relying upon others, because we've sanctioned ourselves out of influence with Iran, to send a message that we expect them to -- in other words, we don't have much leverage with the Iranians right now and we expect them to listen to those voices who are a part of the universal acclaim.

I believe that -- and so therefore we're dealing -- this is how we're dealing with the issue. And it's much different between the situation in Iraq and Iran because of this. Diplomacy had failed for 13 years in Iraq. As you might remember -- I'm sure you do -- all the U.N. resolutions that were passed out of the United Nations, totally ignored by Saddam Hussein.

And so diplomacy must be the first choice, always the first choice of an administration trying to solve an issue of, in this case, nuclear armament. And we'll continue to press on diplomacy.

Now, in terms of, you know, my vision for the future of the world, I believe everybody ought to be free. I believe the world is more peaceful as liberty takes hold. Free societies don't fight each other.

And so we'll work to continue to send a message to reformers around the world that America stands strong in our belief that freedom is universal and that we hope at some point in time everybody is free.

OPINION

I have watched and read about Bush and the one thing about him is that he's focused on the one thing he wants. He wants everyone to be free. He'll stand up for it and he will do anything so that people who being hurt or who are suffering in other countries can be freed. He may free them unconventionally by preemptively striking, but in some cases, he feels that is what it takes. He is right about one thing. And if you look at the typed lines, you sort of get the feeling that he is shaky on the situation with Iran. He doesn't want it to be another Iraq. America failed to employ diplomacy to the fullest when dealing with Iraq. That is why he also wants to stick to a six-party strategy in talks with North Korea. Diplomacy is a key for freedom. The fact that you won't attack and will just talk things out creates a comfort zone. I don't think attacking North Korea would be good because it hurts a much needed comfort zone in an area where China could take over and turn against us. Should we live in fear? No. But we shouldn't doubt the possibility.