Mike Chinoy, formerly CNN’s senior Asia correspondent, has a new book, Meltdown: The Inside Story of the North Korean Nuclear Crisis, which attempts to tell the story of North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons and America’s attempts to stop their program. Chinoy is currently a visiting professor at the Annenberg School of Journalism at the University of Southern California.

I have not purchased his book and do not plan to after listening to his interview on NPR’s “Fresh Air” yesterday. It was the author’s chance to sell me his book, complete with plenty of softballs from the NPR interviewer, but his omission of key details contrary to his point of view (or attempts to unconvincingly speak around them) ensured there will be no sale here.

An argument Chinoy consistently made was that North Korea has nearly always been ready to talk and negotiate, but not so the U.S., perhaps giving those that don’t know better the impression that North Korea is almost amiable and willing to negotiate, if only the U.S. would come to the table. If that were true, and it is not, it assumes that talking could actually achieve something worthwhile, which history has so far shown false.

Chinoy noted that the 1994 Agreed Framework, the product of “talking,” froze plutonium reprocessing successfully; but he failed to mention, at least on the radio, that North Korea started it’s HEU program just a couple of years later, under Clinton (i.e., an administration that dealt with North Korea). Oh he noted the program, or the “acquisition” of “parts” for a program, but could never admit the extreme likelihood of the existence of the program, or mention the fact that it occurred despite all the “talking” that went on.

He also suggested North Korea didn’t admit to the program in October 2002. Tong Kim was there, heard what the North Koreans said in both Korean and English, and disagrees.

As Joshua notes (in a comment at the Marmot’s), the HEU found on the documents was completely skipped over, at least for the portions of the radio interview I heard as I was away from the radio for a few minutes. It seems unlikely it was addressed in a thorough manner since it tends to contradict the other points he was trying to make.

Chinoy also faulted the Bush administration for sometimes acting as if talking to North Korea was to give up something in and of itself. Talking, no. But this also conveniently omits the North Korean pattern of having conditions for talks, which often does mean that getting to the point of talking includes giving up something.

Apparently this interview was part of NPR’s crusade against Bush, Republicans, and conservatives, which has so far every day this week presented blatantly biased interviews, with plenty of softballs and nary a critical word for the interviewees. NPR’s uncritical interviewing is ridiculous.

Like so many other areas with North Korea where conventional wisdoms do not necessarily apply (e.g., any other country likely would have collapsed by now, certainly Western ones), it’s not a given that talking to your enemy is better than not talking to them.