Some time ago a friend described the process by which the criminal law administers justice by likening it to a physician attempting to perform delicate surgery with a meat cleaver. This week, it would seem this analogy might also apply well to international political affairs, considering that North Korea has now proclaimed it possesses a nuclear bomb. Bush and other global leaders have had much to say about it, but it is glaringly evident that they don’t know any more about what to do about it now that it has become a reality than they knew about how to prevent it from coming to pass. Beyond all the verbiage, I am left with the reality that today we live in a world that is greatly different than the one in which we lived just one week ago. All that seems to remain available to us is to consider its implications.

On one level, the fact that we are presented with an enemy in possession of nuclear weapons that could be used against us is nothing new. Certainly, this is a situation that we have lived with for many decades. Just ask James Bond about all the Russian and Chinese evildoers he has successfully kept at bay for years, all the while enabling the British homeland security alert system to remain safely between the range of from “somewhat miffed” to “slightly peeved.” So, what makes North Korea different?

One reason could be because when it comes to psychopathic nut bars with delusions of global grandeur, Kim Jong Il seems like he could very well be the real thing … you know … like a real Dr. Evil sitting in a secret lair somewhere deciding the fate of people like us while stroking a pussy cat on his lap. Add to that, his diminutive stature and the neurosis typically associated with that circumstance, and that would seem to suggest that what we really have on our hands now is a person who is more comparable to a “mini-Me” with a Napoleonic complex whose finger has now been enabled to reach the Big Red Button. And, if this potential threat to our existence were not scary enough, let us not forget that we’re soon to have a second mini-Me in Iran with his finger also on a Red Button of his own. You do remember Mr. “Israel should be wiped of the face of the map”, don’t you? So all-in-all, isn’t that just “ducky” for those like you and me who just want to “get along”?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch we have a President who, under the present particular circumstances, could be likened to James Bond when he was strapped to a gurney in one of his movies as a laser beam was literally burning the table in two on its way up to his “gentles”. In short (no pun intended), suffice it to say the President’s options appear to be limited. After all, how do you undo something like this once it has already occurred? Especially when you have both China and Russia (and, for that matter, many other countries around the world) telling him he should do nothing to further aggravate an already tense situation. In my view, however, this may not be bad advice. At minimum, perhaps our President would do well at this moment in history to not react at least until he has taken some time to reflect upon the role he has played in bringing all the rest of us to this point.

Is it a coincidence, I wonder, that the two nations that we now find feverishly working to perfect a nuclear bomb are the same two that the President specifically identified, along with Iraq, as the three countries constituting an “axis of evil.” Without getting into the merits of the point he was trying to make back then, I have to think that when Iran and North Korea watched what we did to Iraq, they had to wonder if they could be next on the President’s agenda. If they concluded that was a very real possibility, can they really be blamed for doing what they are doing now? Were we in their shoes, wouldn’t we be doing exactly what they are as a practical matter of self-defense? In fact, was not the urgency of the Manhattan Project during World War II motivated by identical concerns? Sure it was. But even understanding that does not seem to go far towards allaying our concerns. So, what is the real problem? When all the dust settles, isn’t it the fact that now we have at least one third world country, and soon two, that will have the ability to deploy the bomb and that also just happen to consider us to be their enemy? And, in light of the fact that we are currently at war with several such countries and hated by even more (if their behavior at the U.N. is any indication), isn’t that what we presently find to be so disturbing?

Well, we should. After all, as we have all witnessed repeatedly in the last several years, many of these are people inclined to favor the strategy of suicide missions. Speaking generally, nuclear equipped kamikazes are never a good thing, but when we are the most likely targets of such missions they most certainly are an especially bad thing. So, the real issue to be dealt with now would seem to be what can be done to stop the bombs Kim Jong Il produces (not to mention those soon to be produced by Iran) from finding their way into the hands of such murderers? And that, my friends, may very well be a problem for which there is no sure-fire answer. Thus, could it be that our present discomfort stems from our being unwillingly drawn to conclude that the Jong Ils of this world may now be holding the rest of us by the throat? Some might say, such are the vicissitudes of international affairs. But, even if that is true, of one thing we can be certain. We have now all been brought to a point where we may soon look back fondly upon the days when only a meat cleaver was available to our world’s leaders.

© 2006 Clifford C. Nichols, Esq.

Cliff Nichols is an attorney practicing criminal defense in Santa Monica, California. He may be contacted regarding this editorial at either (310) 917-1083, cliff@cliffnicholslaw.com or www.cliffnicholslaw.com and you may join his blog at www.thedailystand.com.