He said they were still working to confirm the test. He said the test was "unacceptable" and that the US would regard any transfer of nuclear technology or weapons as a direct threat to the US and that the US would hold NK responsible.

IOW, more bluster from the US while we have few, if any, levers to do anything about it. It sounded to me like it was a restatement of earlier policy. A policy that manifestly has not worked thus far.

The Washington Post has a [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/08/AR2006100801169_pf.html|story] about the situation this morning that mentions something that I think is getting too little notice:

"The North Koreans are making a statement that 'you guys can gang up on us, but you can't change us,' " said Lho Kyong Soo, international relations professor at Seoul National University. "Now, they're hoping they could get away with this like Pakistan. They're saying treat us with respect and accept us this way because we are not going to change."

James A. Kelly, a former U.S. assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs who previously handled the Bush administration's dealings with North Korea, said last week that Pyongyang's timing may have been prompted in part by the imminent selection of Ban as U.N. Secretary General. The North has smarted in the past at having to deal with the South Koreans, rather than directly with the Americans, in any type of diplomatic conflict.

"It's possible this threat of the tests is as much aimed at Ban Ki Moon as otherwise," Kelly said. "It's a big part of North Korea's obsessions with direct dealings with Americans is to avoid giving direct legitimacy to South Korea."

But U.S. officials said early this morning that the Security Council planned to go ahead with Ban's election as the first order of business before turning to North Korea, in an effort to show that North Korea's action will not deter his selection.

The NK regime has been desperate to be seen as a player in the region for ages, and to be seen as more important than the South. I have little doubt that the timing was influenced by the prospect of a SK diplomat taking over as head of the UN.

I sincerely hope that people in the Administration recognize that in addition to the obvious security implications there are psychological aspects to this conflict that need to be carefully addressed. Empty, or unilateral, threats aren't going improve the situation.

Cheers,
Scott.