ź Bidds! | A­alsÝ­a | Fallegir fossar og virkjanir ╗

Nor­ur Kˇrea og leikjafrŠ­i

11. janúar, 2003

╔g veit a­ ┴F er nßnast me­ einkaleyfi ß ■vÝ a­ kvˇta pistlah÷funda NY Times, en Úg Štla ■ˇ a­ hŠtta mÚr innß hans svŠ­i. Auk ■ess ■ß er Úg a­ reyna a­ for­ast ■a­ a­ skrifa langa grein um hversu miki­ mig langi til a­ reka Gerard Houllier og senda Emile Heskey Ý ˙tleg­ til SÝberÝu.

Allavegana, Paul Krugman skrifar skemmtilegan pistil Ý NYT, ■ar sem hann talar um leikjafrŠ­i (game theory) Ý samskiptum landa: Games Nations Play. ╔g er einmitt mikill ßhugama­ur um leikjafrŠ­i, enda hagfrŠ­imennta­ur.

Krugman skrifar eftirfarandi, ■egar hann fjallar um samskipti BandarÝkjamann vi­ ═rak annars vegar og Nor­ur-Kˇreu hins vegar:

During the cold war, the U.S. government employed experts in game theory to analyze strategies of nuclear deterrence. Men with Ph.D.'s in economics, like Daniel Ellsberg, wrote background papers with titles like "The Theory and Practice of Blackmail." The intellectual quality of these analyses was impressive, but their main conclusion was simple: Deterrence requires a credible commitment to punish bad behavior and reward good behavior.

I know, it sounds obvious. Yet the Bush administration's Korea policy has systematically violated that simple principle.

Let's be clear: North Korea's rulers are as nasty as they come. But unless we have a plan to overthrow those rulers, we should ask ourselves what incentives we're giving them.

Krugman setur sig svo Ý spor Kim Jong Il og heldur ßfram:

So Mr. Bush thinks you're a bad guy ? and that makes you a potential target, no matter what you do.

On the other hand, Mr. Bush hasn't gone after you yet, though you are much closer to developing weapons of mass destruction than Iraq. (You probably already have a couple.) And you ask yourself, why is Saddam Hussein first in line? He's no more a supporter of terrorism than you are: the Bush administration hasn't produced any evidence of a Saddam-Al Qaeda connection. Maybe the administration covets Iraq's oil reserves; but it's also notable that of the three members of the axis of evil, Iraq has by far the weakest military.

So you might be tempted to conclude that the Bush administration is big on denouncing evildoers, but that it can be deterred from actually attacking countries it denounces if it expects them to put up a serious fight. What was it Teddy Roosevelt said? Talk trash but carry a small stick?

Hann endar svo greinina ß ■essu:

The Bush administration says you're evil. It won't offer you aid, even if you cancel your nuclear program, because that would be rewarding evil. It won't even promise not to attack you, because it believes it has a mission to destroy evil regimes, whether or not they actually pose any threat to the U.S. But for all its belligerence, the Bush administration seems willing to confront only regimes that are militarily weak.

The incentives for North Korea are clear. There's no point in playing nice ? it will bring neither aid nor security. It needn't worry about American efforts to isolate it economically ? North Korea hardly has any trade except with China, and China isn't cooperating. The best self-preservation strategy for Mr. Kim is to be dangerous. So while America is busy with Iraq, the North Koreans should cook up some plutonium and build themselves some bombs.

Again: What game does the Bush administration think it's playing?

Jß, menn geta lŠrt řmislegt ß ■vÝ a­ st˙dera hagfrŠ­i.

╔g hef oft fur­a­ mig ß ■vÝ hvernig BandarÝkjamenn hafa glÝmt vi­ Nor­ur-Kˇreu. Ůa­ er b˙i­ a­ vera vi­skiptabann ß Nor­ur-Kˇreu, svo Nor­ur-Kˇerub˙ar hafa nßnast engu a­ tapa. BandarÝkjamenn sřndu landinu lÝtinn ßhuga ■anga­ til a­ ■eir fˇru a­ gera sig lÝklega til a­ framlei­a kjarnorkuvopn. Ůß allt Ý einu fˇru ■eir Ý vi­rŠ­ur vi­ Nor­ur-Kˇreumenn. Ůannig a­ BandarÝkjamenn voru Ý raun a­ launa ■eim fyrir slŠma heg­un. SlÝk pˇlÝtÝk er ekki lÝkleg til ßrangurs gegn klikkhausum einsog Kim Jong Il.

Ůa­ er augljˇst a­ eina, sem dugar ß ■jˇ­ir einsog ═rak og Nor­ur-Kˇreu er a­ hˇta valdbeitingu. Til dŠmis sjß menn a­ Saddam Hussein hleypti loksins vopnaeftirlism÷nnum innÝ landi­ ■egar hann vissi ■a­ a­ BandarÝkjamenn voru sta­rß­nir a­ rß­ast ß hann ef hann hlřddi ekki. EinrŠ­isherrar einsog hann hlusta nefnilega ekki, nema ■a­ sÚ skřr og tr˙ver­ug hˇtun um valdbeitingu gegn honum ef hann hlustar ekki.

Einar Írn uppfŠr­i kl. 17:17 | 715 Or­ | Flokkur: HagfrŠ­i & Stjˇrnmßl



UmmŠli (1)


╔g tr˙i ■vÝ ekki a­ Úg hafi slegi­ “Gerard Houllier” Ý Google til a­ kanna hver ■etta vŠri. Fannst ■etta vera nafn sem Úg kanna­ist vi­ (og Štti a­ vita hver vŠri). Var a­ spß Ý hvort ■etta vŠru bla­amenn e­a pˇlitÝkusar :-)

┴g˙st sendi inn - 11.01.03 22:02 - (UmmŠli #1)

UmmŠlum hefur veri­ loka­ fyrir ■essa fŠrslu





EOE.is:

Bla­ur um hagfrŠ­i, stjˇrnmßl, Ý■rˇttir, neti­ og mÝn einkamßl.

┴ ■essum degi ßri­

2005 2002

Leit:

SÝ­ustu ummŠli

  • ┴g˙st: ╔g tr˙i ■vÝ ekki a­ Úg hafi slegi­ "Gerard Houllie ...[Sko­a]


╔g nota MT 3.121

.