On the Newstands: TNR on NK Agreement

The New Republic gives W a backhanded compliment by saying he finally got it once it got to N. Korea. They also lean heavily on the NYT account of the negotiations, which means that it should be taken with a grain of salt. According to NYT China leaned on the US hard saying they were isolated on the deal. This counters previous reports that Japan and the US were both holding steady on certain aspects of the deal particularly buying a reactor which technically is not even in the deal. TNR also seems to scoff at W's stated distrust of Kim Jong Il as if there is anything wrong in not trusting weasily tyrant. All you had to do was witness the political machinations after the deal was announced to know that the man cannot be trusted:

Although significant gaps remain between Washington and Pyongyang--most notably over the North's demand for a light-water reactor--even this basic statement of principles represents a sea change for the Bush team. After all, if the North's illegal weapons program is largely responsible for initiating the crisis, the White House's obstinacy has been largely responsible for drawing it out. Remember that, initially, the administration refused to talk to Pyongyang at all. When it finally did agree to meet the North, it was only to "talk," not to "negotiate." Hardliners like Vice President Dick Cheney and John Bolton, then the undersecretary of state for arms control, opposed discussions to end the nuclear program, demanding instead that the North unilaterally disarm and hoping that it would collapse under the weight of its own tyranny before compromise was necessary. Their central argument was that no agreement could secure denuclearization as long as Kim Jong Il retained power, rendering untenable any distinction between negotiation and appeasement. In 2003, Cheney rejected a Chinese plan similar to the deal reached this week, reportedly saying, "We don't negotiate with evil; we defeat it."