A leader who have just celebrated his birthday yesterday, a governmenet who rely on nothing but propaganda to push through its aims, a stubborn foreign minister who is incompetent at the 6 nation talk, a foregin regime trying to stop it from unleashing its "nuclear weapons" and a country full of starving people who would rather find their 3 meals rather than be filled with music proclaiming the country's goodness and a nation run by communism.
That's North Korea.
Is it the fault of Kim Jong II or the world at large? We have an incompetent, disiullusioned leader who wish to unify North and South Korea on one hand, and an equally inept foregin regime who after years of negotiation still not able to resolve a single issue with regards to North Korea. At the end of the day, who suffers? The deprived and starving citizens of North Korea.
Let's talk about Kim Jong II. His ideology of unifying the two Koreas into one failing terribly yet he is unwavering in his belief. Withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in January 2003 caused another big hoo haa in the world with the US accusing it of creating nuclear bombs. His people are starving and dying, all he does is to inject more songs at train station into the deprived minds of his citizens. Being a leader, does it mean we continue in what we believe in even though our people tells us otherwise? I believe that a leader, however hard it may be, must back down, eat the humble pie when the people he is serving are constantly giving him hints that he is wrong. On a seperate matter, what is he thinking when he set up the Uranium programme when the country is poor and pleading. He would rather spend millions to create nuclear bombs for "self defence" rather than getting his people their 3 meals a day.
Talk about being a great leader and comrade.
What about the world at large then? After years of negotiation, from one-to-one talks to 6 party talks, nothing have been solved at all. The question at large therefore is : Are the world leaders incompetent or diplomacy cannot solve problems? Indeed, years of compromise with North Korea has yielded little results and stained the names of the different countries involved for not being able to resolve a thorn on the world map. Again, I would like to talk about the leaders again. George W.Bush, since his assumption of the office, have stricten restrictions on North Korea and even put in place sanctions. What is have done to North Koreans is essentially make them detest America more, no yielding of stance was seen. However, this does not stop Mr Bush from carrying on with his iron first approach. Again, drawing parallels to Kim Jong II, this is another leader who does not yield even though his method has been met with resistance and rejection, both from the world and from the victim. Is it really that hard, for a great leader, to sometimes eat the humble pie, admit his mistake and move on with life? By pushing North Korea to its end, what will happen will be that one day, North Korea will retaliate. Is that the world that we want? One filled be catastrophe and chaos everyday.
Talk about the righteous vs the bad.
That's North Korea.
Is it the fault of Kim Jong II or the world at large? We have an incompetent, disiullusioned leader who wish to unify North and South Korea on one hand, and an equally inept foregin regime who after years of negotiation still not able to resolve a single issue with regards to North Korea. At the end of the day, who suffers? The deprived and starving citizens of North Korea.
Let's talk about Kim Jong II. His ideology of unifying the two Koreas into one failing terribly yet he is unwavering in his belief. Withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in January 2003 caused another big hoo haa in the world with the US accusing it of creating nuclear bombs. His people are starving and dying, all he does is to inject more songs at train station into the deprived minds of his citizens. Being a leader, does it mean we continue in what we believe in even though our people tells us otherwise? I believe that a leader, however hard it may be, must back down, eat the humble pie when the people he is serving are constantly giving him hints that he is wrong. On a seperate matter, what is he thinking when he set up the Uranium programme when the country is poor and pleading. He would rather spend millions to create nuclear bombs for "self defence" rather than getting his people their 3 meals a day.
Talk about being a great leader and comrade.
What about the world at large then? After years of negotiation, from one-to-one talks to 6 party talks, nothing have been solved at all. The question at large therefore is : Are the world leaders incompetent or diplomacy cannot solve problems? Indeed, years of compromise with North Korea has yielded little results and stained the names of the different countries involved for not being able to resolve a thorn on the world map. Again, I would like to talk about the leaders again. George W.Bush, since his assumption of the office, have stricten restrictions on North Korea and even put in place sanctions. What is have done to North Koreans is essentially make them detest America more, no yielding of stance was seen. However, this does not stop Mr Bush from carrying on with his iron first approach. Again, drawing parallels to Kim Jong II, this is another leader who does not yield even though his method has been met with resistance and rejection, both from the world and from the victim. Is it really that hard, for a great leader, to sometimes eat the humble pie, admit his mistake and move on with life? By pushing North Korea to its end, what will happen will be that one day, North Korea will retaliate. Is that the world that we want? One filled be catastrophe and chaos everyday.
Talk about the righteous vs the bad.
posted by m.c.h.i.a. at 1:03 AM
1 Comments:
Matthias, watch out for typos (eg. English ASSIGNMENT, iron FIST etc)
Some issues raised but only briefly discussed. FOr example, you could have focused on Kim Jong II as a leader, discussed the nature of leadership and evaluate him as a leader.
perspectives on Kim Jong II and on the communist regime is also quite one-sided. Could there be another pov? how much of what we know comes from liberal left-wing jounrnalists? consider the other perspectives and be more circumspect in your comments to show maturity and depth in thought.
Post a Comment
<< Home