Isnt this essentially the model that toppled Castro? Oh... The idea that somehow the NKs dont realize what miserable lives they lead and how much better they could have it seems fantastic to me.

So 'containment' doesnt work- fine. How about the old tried and true siege? We dont even need to impose sanctions- how about just stop say... i dont know, _propping up the regime_ with gifts of cash and food and energy? If ourselves, Japan, and SK alone just stopped trading and sending aid to NK, the nation would collapse within a couple of years. Messy? Sure. Lot of lives lost? Sure. But better than seeing NK become the world supplier of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles while we feed his people? I think so!

And btw, isnt this kinda like having a rabid wolf prowling in your back yard and wondering why he wont go away even though you feed him a pound of meat every day?

Apples, oranges, and kumquats. You are talking about multilateral sanctions as a way to overthrow the NK regime. The sanctions just put on by the UNSC are both designed and stated to be a coercive measure related directly to the North's nuclear and missile programs only. And the FT correspondant is talking about both the sunshine policy and containment as policies designed to change behavior when only the first has that as its stated goal. The FT article then talks with a South Korean official who talks about the sunshine policy as having an unstated goal of regime change. This, in my opinion, is part of the problem with US and multilateral policy towards North Korea -- we (call it the U.S. and the others in the 6 party talks minus the NKs) can't agree on the goals, or what we'd be willing to pay/risk to achieve them, so fuzzy debates about tools are all that is left.

This made sense during the Cold War when Soviets would see the bounty of American supermarkets, but the USSR of the Cold War was not even close, as bad as it was, to the totalitarian nightmare of the North Korean regime. Is it possible that the average North Korean doesn't already realize the moral and economic poverty of his country? Do those lies need to be debunked, and is it worth the price of giving the regime an economic crutch? I say no.

This has obvious drawbacks, including its ramifications for Japanese security, but it seems to me to be at least worth considering alongside the other bad options we have: why not conclude a deal with China agreeing to eventually remove American troops from the Korean peninsula in exchange for Chinese help destabilizing the Kim Jong-Il regime? Only joint cooperation between the U.S. and China with shared goals can end the DPRK regime.

It is difficult to see what purpose our military presence in South Korea still serves given a nuclear-armed North Korea, and we should recognize that the Korean peninsula is in China's sphere of influence. The strength of American defense ties with South Korea has been fraying for years, and our troop presence there acts primarily as a tripwire to guarantee American involvement in any new Korean war.

Containment or flourishing business do not change regime. Look at China, it is around 30 years their economy is doing well and how far the Party rule has lessened? It will not help in N. Korea's case too. The only way it would work is:
- on one hand USA talks with N. Korea and if needed gives guarantee that USA will not topple the regime explicitly; provided USA conditions are met (mothballing Nuclear activities and no force enlargement including missiles) and
- on the other hand continue to play hard ball with any foreign trade and currency for N. Korea (this way Kim is on his knees).

Foreign currency is the key to choke DPKR unless China wants to feed them all the time. As long as foreign currency and goods do not reach DPKR, rest of the world has a chance to get down DPKR. While this is happening, there is no harm for USA to promise mother too!

I understand your doubts, and they are well founded, but really what other options are left? China will not cut their aid nor impose sanctions. Kim has at lest a few fat men and a little boy, so an old fashion siege seems far fetched, since he is the one guy that might actually push the button. Furthermore, even if he didn't and the regime fell, what would we do with those people? For that matter what is going to happen to those people if Kim where to unexpectedly die? Bringing them, the NK people, into the light a little bit at a time seems to me, not the best nor only option, but certainly the most prudent.