1905년 주권이 야금야금 일본으로
넘어가고 있었을 때 대다수의 국민은 태평하였다. 지금 매국노 노무현이 대한민국 주권을 야금야금 김정일 손에 넘기고
있는데도 대다수의 국민은 태평하다.
어제(2007년 2월 12일) 북경6자회담에서 남침용 핵폭탄은 남겨두고 영변 원자로만 6개월 내 폐쇄한다는
합의가 있었다. 그 합의의 의미를 살피려면 먼저 당사국들의 목적을 살펴 보아야 한다. 북한의 목적은 남침이요,
노무현 독재정권의 목적은 빗장을 열어 북한의 남침을 도와주겠다는 것이다.
남침 목적을 위해 북한은 무엇을 전제하고 6자회담에 나오는가? 그것은 한반도의 주인은 김정일이요, 남한은
국가가 아니며 남한 국가원수는 한반도의 운명을 결정짓는 일에 대하여 외교적 대표권이 없다는 것이다. 좌익 노무현이
이런 김정일의 전제를 받아들이는 만큼 한국의 주권은 약해진다.
이번 6자회담은 사실상 북미양자회담으로 결정되었기에 그만큼 한국의 주권은 약해졌으며 북한에 넘어가고 있는
것이다. 북한이 북미관계의 정상화를 따낼 경우 그만큼 남한의 민주주의 국가로서의 정체성이 흔들릴 뿐만 아니라,
김정일으 손을 뻗어 남한을 집어삼킬 수 있는 자리에 가까이 오게 된다.
무엇이 합의되었는가? 남침용 핵폭탄은 그대로 남겨두며 일본과 미국에 발사할 핵폭탄 생산을 중단하는 댓가로
남한이 북한에 막대한 중유와 식량 지원을 해주는 것이 합의되었다. 이로써 이제 묵한은 남침용 핵무기 보유를
국제사회에서 합법화한 셈이니 도대체 지금 노무현 독재정권은 외교를 어떻게 하고 있는 것인가?
>> This is bbc world. The main news this hour: A deal to end
North Korea's nuclear weapons programme was reached at six-party
talks in Beijing. Explosions have thorn through two buss in
Lebanon. At least four people have been reported killed. Our
correspondent Daniel Griffis has been following events in
Beijing. Charles Scanlon is in Seoul. I ask them both what they
make of today's announcement on North Korea's nuclear programme
and the chances of the agreement lasting.
>> I think we've got a long way to go yet, Mike. Certainly
what this is a very important first step. There's no doubt about
that. Bear in mind we've had more than three years of talks
without any major progress. Now for the first time the North
Koreans and the other countries have signed on the dotted line.
The North Koreans have committed themselves to shutting down
their main nuclear facilities. They've committed themselves to
opening up those facilities to international inspectors, as
well. So these are pretty big steps. But we still have a long
way to go, a lot of unresolved questions because, of course, the
North Koreans are talking about shutting down their nuclear
reactor. What happens to those weapons that most intelligence
agencies believe the North Koreans already have in their nuclear
arsenal? No mention of those in any final agreement. So this is
an important step forward, but there's stale long way to go,
>> Let's head to Charles Scanlon in the South Korean capital.
Are you getting any sense about what happens just for one
question to the weapons that North Korea allegedly already has?
>> Well, I think that's the whole point really. What we're
looking at now is a containment exercise of North Korea. That
plant at Yongbyon is churning out enough plutonium for about one
weapon a year. When the possibility of a freeze was raised last
year, the United States wasn't interested in the freeze. They
wanted to roll back the whole North Korea nuclear programme, but
they've considerably softened their position now. They've
decided that a freeze of that plant is better than nothing and
hopefully a first step to something more substantial. But as far
as North Korea is concerned, this is a very big diplomatic
victory because they're in a much stronger position than they
were a few years ago, and, of course, it's only a few months
since they tested that nuclear device.
>> Charles, what do you think makes this deal different? In a
sense we've been here before in 1994 with the Clinton
administration in Washington. Very similar deal in some respects
but it's foundered because most people feel Pyongyang was using
it as a cover to pursue its programme.
>> A lot of people in this region will be asking lots of hard
questions to the United States because they'll be saying that
you through away the agreed framework back in 2002. People here
would say it wasn't perfect, but at least it did contain the
North Korean nuclear programme. There was some ambiguity about
North Korea's nuclear capabilities. What they've done is used
the last four years of confrontation to push ahead with the
extraction of plutonium. They've tested a bomb. They now may
have eight or nine nuclear weapons, and now we're going back to
a freeze. People in the region will say it's been wasted four
years and the United States' policy really hasn't helped.
>> Daniel, in Beijing, if it is for real, do you get a sense
of what it was that plead the
-- that made the difference?
>> I think certainly the Chinese have played an important
role after the test at the end of 2006 that Charles was talking
about. The Chinese went to Pyongyang and really read the riot
act to the North Koreans, pretty much demanding that they return
to the negotiating table. So that has certainly been an
important factor. And the Chinese will be happy that at least
some sort of agreement has been reached, but as Charles was
pointing out; there really is still a long way to go, and the
Chinese will feel that really they want to see much more of a
commitment from the North Koreans, as well, because as we
already discussing really in that sense, it's a victory for the
North Koreans more than anything else. At the moment they get to
hang on to the nuclear weapons they already have in their
arsenal, and really in that sense it is a real victory for the
North Koreans. Certainly the Chinese will want to see more from
them in that regard, as well.