Former Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld would have been astounded to find a new unknown unknown if he had seen Kamala Harris near the 38th parallel on the Korean Peninsula. Rumsfeld distinguished between “known knowns,” “known unknowns,” and “unknown unknowns” when describing global concerns. Knowing what Harris knows and, perhaps more significantly, doesn’t know has been made difficult.
She stated, “The United States enjoys a very significant connection, which is an alliance, with the Republic of North Korea. It is an alliance that is robust and durable,” at the demilitarized zone dividing the democracy of South Korea from the oppressive hermit kingdom of North Korea.
Some view this as merely a language error because “north” was used while “south” was the intended word. However, “North Korea” is more than simply a geographical designation or a nation’s name; it has a host of connotations that have a significant impact on the consciousness of all active politicians. The veep should have instantly became alarmed upon connecting “alliance” with “North Korea,” and you would anticipate her to swiftly clarify, “Excuse me, I mean, South Korea.” Instead, the howler hung there as though Vice President Harry Truman had praised America’s “association with the Axis powers,” which was an unthinkable statement.
Due to very suspicious explosions at several locations along the Nord Stream pipelines, which Europe formerly relied on for Russian gas supply, the question of what we know and don’t know also surfaced around the same time. In international seas near the Danish island of Bornholm, the Baltic Sea between Sweden, Denmark, Germany, and Poland experienced three abrupt eruptions of brackish geysers.
Asking “Who benefits?” is typically a good starting point for identifying offenders. However, the answer is unclear in the initial shock of what seems to be a bizarre act of sabotage. Despite rumors that it was committed by Russia’s adversaries, such as the United States, suspicion is naturally directed at Russia and its capricious dictator Vladimir Putin.
As an explanation, Russia accused state-sponsored terrorism. Russian denials, however, are useless. Putin, as usual, has ships and submarines in the region. He may have wished to convey his readiness to strike pipelines at the same time as a new underwater pipeline was beginning to transport Norwegian gas to Poland. Having already turned off gas supply to Europe, he wouldn’t lose any sales. An explosion is considerably more enticing than turning off a faucet, and pipes can be readily repaired. What did Putin stand to gain, though, outside entertainment value?
But in Rumsfeldian words, the true offender is unquestionably a known known. With the conflict in Europe, the US has satellites over the Baltic. Analysts have undoubtedly reviewed the footage to determine who was present. NATO’s underwater listening devices will have picked up on movement approaching the targets, and this movement might also be linked to the offending party.
The complexity of world politics may occasionally be breathtaking. We’ll find out within a few days who launched a covert, seemingly futile strike at the bottom of the sea, and we also now know that Washington maintains a solid, long-lasting partnership with North Korea.
