Sometimes it’s better to look at the big picture and make a concession or two so that your long-term goal will get accomplished. And if you’re an international diplomat dealing with an unprovoked sinking of a warship in the midst of major international nuclear negotiations, well, there is plenty of room to make things go as smoothly as possible. And if it just so happens that the country you are negotiating with is the same as the country that probably sunk the warship, well, you have to decide whether you want to blame them for what you are pretty sure they did or try to get them to agree with you on the nuclear thing.

The way the U.S. and the UN has decided to deal with this is to adopt a statement that essentially says the sinking of the South Korean warship was bad, but doesn’t blame North Korea. Looking at it objectively, that’s totally ridiculous. We know it’s bad that this warship went down, but we’re not going to take the time to figure out who did it. We’ll just say it’s bad.

But it’s a political move. The idea is to get North Korea to a place where the rest of Asia and the U.S. can negotiate with them around the nuclear arms treaty. And this statement comes from a diplomacy effort led by the U.S. and South Korea, so you don’t get the impression that it is being stuffed down anyone’s throat.

But after North Korea essentially threatened war over being blamed for the sinking, I have to wonder if they are going to take this seriously. Is it really that big of a deal for them to be blamed or not on this? Is it the kind of save-face maneuver that is important because they are not publicly shamed? Is this how diplomacy works? Apparently it is:

"This bodes well for the six-party talks, in the way the wording stresses peace and security in Northeast Asia," said Baek Seung-joo, Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (Seoul).

South Korea says a North Korean submarine in disputed waters launched a torpedo and sank their warship. North Korea says they were not there, were not involved at all, and that the accusation is made-up by South Korea to attack the North politically.

The UN statement will see China and Russia signing on to the same document as the U.S. in a high-profile document, which is a break in the normal division of power and influence in the area. Hopefully the spirit of comrade-ship will spill over into the nuclear negotiations.

"As long as Kim Jong-il's 'military-first policy' is in place, we can't rule out the possibility of a second and third Cheonan incident," said Ha Young-sun, international relations professor at the Seoul National University.

And that’s the fear that hangs over everyone’s head: they essentially got away with it this time, sow what will keep them from doing it again? And what will be our reaction that second time?

Photo Credit: yeowatzup