Some Russian observers agree with this view. The head of the Korean Studies Center of the Far East Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexander Zhebin, told RIA Novosti that the United States is trying "not to spoil the opportunity for progress at the Beijing talks."

But Bush might have had a covert reason not to mention North Korea. He might have sent a signal not to North Korea but to the critics of his policy in the United States. His logic was that if you ignore a problem, it will go away.

The head of the Chinese and Japanese branch at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations and associate member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vasily Mikheyev, told RIA Novosti that "on the one hand, the United States cannot afford to again adopt a tough attitude toward North Korea, but on the other hand, further concessions to Pyongyang will evoke criticism." So, Bush preferred not to mention North Korea in order not to irritate his opponents.

But there may be one more reason for Bush's restraint regarding North Korea -- the inauguration of South Korean President Lee Myung-bak on Feb. 25. President-elect Lee does not favor rapprochement with North Korea but wants to consolidate his country's alliance with the United States. His conduct is being closely watched in North Korea and the local press does not even mention the change of administration in South Korea.

At the same time Lee Myung-bak has not said anything negative about North Korea. To the contrary, he has promised to develop relations with it, but made this dependent on the resolution of the nuclear problem and economic advantages. Probably, Bush abstained from criticizing Pyongyang in order not to do any harm to its ally in Asia -- South Korea, which has the third largest number of troops in Iraq after the United States and Britain.

In any event, North Korea will certainly pay attention to Bush's gesture. It is obviously not enough to stop the enmity, but now the ball is in Pyongyang's court.

Since the end of the Korean War -- 1950-1953 -- North Korea and the United States are formally in a state of armed conflict because they have not signed a peace treaty. To this day, the United States has refused even to discuss a possibility of signing it and has more than 30,000 soldiers in the southern part of the Korean peninsula.

(Ivan Zakharchenko is a political commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

-- (United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Community
Email This Article
Comment On This Article

Related Links
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com
Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com
All about missiles at SpaceWar.com
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News