Would be a homonym with “un-logic,” if such a noun actually existed:
Seoul went to the Security Council to seek the global rebuke of the North, but China objected to a resolution that specifically blamed its clients in Pyongyang. Thus the Security Council retreated to writing a resolution that condemned the act of aggression but named no aggressor…
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice tried to make the best of this embarrassment by saying the message to the North was “crystal clear” and that “The Security Council condemns and deplores this attack. It warns against any further attacks. And insists on full adherence to the Korean Armistice Agreement.”
The torpedo couldn’t be reached for comment, but the North Koreans quickly claimed what a spokesman called a “great diplomatic victory” because the U.N. had failed to back up South Korea’s allegations against the North. “We have made it clear that this incident had nothing to do with us,” he said.
More amazing still, the resolution that didn’t bark is being hailed as a deft way to lure North Korea back to the six party talks over its nuclear program. Follow the logic: Since the North wasn’t condemned for doing what everyone knows it did, the North’s leaders might now be appeased enough to return to the nuclear talks they walked out of last year. Sink a ship, and gain new diplomatic respect. If former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton had predicted this scenario, the New York Times would have accused him of trying to undermine the credibility of the U.N.
It would scarcely be possible for Bolton to improve on the work of Turtle Bay’s own diplomats here.