North Korea's Missile Launch A Violation

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
April 6, 2009

President's Statement | Ambassador Bosworth's BriefingAmbassador Susan Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, said:"The United States expressed its strong view that the launch yesterday constituted a clear cut violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1718, and it is our view that this action merits a clear and strong response from the United Nations Security Council. We will be embarked on additional consultations with partners in the Security Council as well as allies and concerned parties outside of the Security Council towards obtaining that kind of outcome."

Read the full text of Ambassador Rice's remarks here.

Comments

Comments

Sandra
|
Kansas, USA
April 6, 2009

Sandra in Kansas writes:

The NK launch may have constitued a clear violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1718; however, a clear and strong response from the UN Security Council will not hold much sway with Kim Jong Il. It is the resumption of 6 Party Talks that will be essential to preventing future violations. Further, this behavior is indicative of Kim Jong Il when he wants to place himself in a position to acquire concessions from the U.S. and other international actors.

zeng
|
Georgia, USA
April 6, 2009

Zeng in Georgia writes:

North korea's government is the worst one in our world.

joe
|
Tennessee, USA
April 6, 2009

Joe in Tennessee writes:

What did anyone expect when Japan and the U.S.A. made ultimatums? UN constraints never mattered, much less the agreements to President Clinton a decade ago. Kim really had no choice and a win-win situation to be honest by launching.

You empowered him in every way possible to be honest. If no one had made such a big deal out of it, when it failed, he would have lost face. The fact the third stage seemed to fail may not be accurate; but was an attempt to guise the fact China did not provide the gyro for a third stage, given the current economic and political situation.

Alternatively, perhaps China wanted to use this as a lever...As average people, we do not know everything that transpires under the table...

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
April 6, 2009

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Ponder this fellow Dipnote bloggers:

What exactly do you all think would happen if I built a yard-a-pult in my backyard, loaded it with my trash, and launched it over the fence into my neighbor's yard?

a) Do you think a SWAT team might just pay me a visit?

b) An eviction notice on my door perhaps?

c) City council asks me to "please not do that again" every time I ignore them and launch another trash bag?

d) Does my neighbor build one too and send my trash back via airmail?

e) All my neighbors build their own and trash the entire neghborhood, just for something to do this weekend?

(creative comparitive analysis on the far side of perplexity as "multilateral" choice.)

Ole
|
New York, USA
April 7, 2009

Ole in New York writes:

@ Joe, we're not 'average' people, we're people unique and worthy each in their own fashion; and if we write in no less than a State Secretary's blog, it means we have at least some interest and insight into foreign policy. not knowing everything is not an excuse for inaction. now, if only someone could explain to me, why do we have to forever tussle with a demented thug holding an entire world hostage, rather than just finish him off? if he wants attention, make him a circus freak. i'd offer him and whoever puppeteers him a gazillion dollars, on condition that he resign and leave his country forever, perhaps for Moscow, Beijing or Havana; while the two Koreas are allowed to finally reunite, on premises of democracy and freedom, which are non-extant in the North but in full bloom in the South part. it's precisely practicing 'restraint' and 'pragmatism' that has got us nowhere; soon or late time must come to act, and do so swiftly and decisively. Russians and Chinese leaders are Kim's soulmates, they, for all their superficial semi-liberalism, possess philosophy no better that Kim Jon Il's, especially with regard to their own citizens, who are viewed as expendable biomass at the service of the 'beloved leader'. don't forget, it was Stalin and Mao who supported North Korean regime, in the first place-- and Putin and his Chinese counterparts are none other than mini-Stalin and mini-Mao, respectively. perhaps, we should offer them a share of influence in the new, reunited Korea-- that'd be natural-- but Kim must be removed, one way or another, with their approval and help, or without it.

by the way, i wonder why another recent foreign policy crises, such as Macedonian and especially Moldovan elections, are not reflected in this blog. in Moldova, we got another election stolen by Russian-supported Communist party, provoking massive unrest in the nation's capital Chisinau-- and it's a very important place, since Moldova historically is one and same with Romania, but Russian influence even after the collapse of USSR, has prevented them from unification. I've read in rather dubious sources that international observers have recognized these elections as free and fair; well, either that pertains only to Russian, C.I.S. and other mostly authoritarian countries' representatives-- or, if this recognition comes from Western community, it is a big mistake and almost a treason to people of Moldova. I urge Madame Secretary, as well as President Obama to make a principled stand in favor of liberty of Moldova's people, and call these elections what they are: a fraud of unspeakable proportion and audacity, that must not go unnoticed

Ron
|
New York, USA
April 7, 2009

Ron in New York writes:

Kim-Out Game over, no reset button....

1718 is not enough.....cut N. Korea off...black out Kim's media...stop showing him applauding....he is mentally-ill, and a mega-criminal....counterfeiter, kidnapper...get him out; save a nation and a region.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
April 7, 2009

Eric in New Mexico writes:

One thing we do know Joe is that the UN seems to be suffering from "Gimble lock".

Which is what happens to a gyro-stabilizer when one of it's axis' (x) "locks" in sync with another (y) during manuver and affects the third (z) to the point where attitudinal control is not able to be regained easily in flight, if at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrUCBOlJdt4

A very dangerously disorienting experience for both pilots and passengers to be sure.

Rick
|
Michigan, USA
April 7, 2009

Rick in Michigan writes:

I understand the senitive nature of our prior responses to N. Korea, but at what point do we completly cut off aid and any financial benfit (including media repsonse)? I am feeling a little less safe everyday that radical regime is still able to provide the worlds worst with inter-continental weapons. GOD HAVE MERCY ON US ALL.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
April 7, 2009

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ Ole, Joe's speculation started me thinking 'bout possibilities...

Now as we all know, anytime the DOD develops a new toy, the kids are eager to test it in a real world environment to see if it works or not.

NK went to great expense (politically and otherwise) to give DOD just such an opportunity with no great cost to the U.S. (politically or otherwise) if the kids wanted to test out airborn laser missile defense as a viable system.

Nor would anyone be the wiser to it if we had, simply because radar can't track a laser beam, nor would infrared detect it from space as it was activated.

I'm not saying DOD took advantage of the opportunity, but it sure must have been tempting to do so.

Not often that one's adversaries provide such a wonderful opportunity. And what they don't know keeps us that much safer, even though we the public have no "need to know" what our nation's capabilities are.

---
"Our scientists and engineers have succeeded in sending satellite 'Kwangmyongsong-2' into orbit by way of carrier rocket 'Unha-2'," state news agency KCNA reported.

It added that it was transmitting data and the "Song of General Kim Il-sung" and "Song of General Kim Jong-il" -- references to the late founder of North Korea and his son, the current leader. -BBC NEWS

---
To quote U2: "How long...how long... must we sing this song?"

It's not even a catchy melody.

John
|
Greece
April 7, 2009

John in Greece writes:

@ Ole in New York -- QUOTE: we're not 'average' people, we're people unique and worthy each in their own fashion; and if we write in no less than a State Secretary's blog, it means we have at least some interest and insight into foreign policy? END OF QUOTE.

Great phrase Ole!!! I absolutely agree with this. Otherwise we would do sex chatting or political/social "gossiping" in hundreds of silly blogs in the global web. The most important is -- no matter if we have insight or not/I don't -- that WE DO CARE and WE ARE HERE in DipNote!!!

To be honest, however, I somehow understand what Joe in TN sometimes implies: He suggests us to be a little bit more sceptical, concerning intel "games" and data/reports we don't know before we analyze things. I do not think that he's saying this with a "bad purpose". It's a great advice, like the best advice I've heard in my life from a past Eric's in NM post: "Confirm"!

Anyway, I think that our "debates" are extremely healthy! Best regards to all of you guys. I really have a nice and intelligent time being here with all of you!

P.S.: The problem is: what we do now about N Korea issue? 'Cause the story... just begun...

Patricia S.
|
New York, USA
April 7, 2009

Patricia S. in New York writes:

Well said - Sandra in Kansas. KJII can't even count and does not care about UN Resolution 1718. Susan Rice looks weary already.

Ole
|
New York, USA
April 7, 2009

Ole in New York writes:

i'm sceptical about 'intel games', that's exactly why i suggest we take out Kim, as well as say Ahmadinejad. we have every right to do so, and if we do, we won't need intel games at all. strike at the heart of the problem, not at its offshoots -- and you don't need any Anti-missile shields, any 'aid packages', better called ransom paid to the madman in return for vague promises to stop aggressive and illegal activities. oh, and while being sceptical about intel games, I'm not sceptical about human rights, moreover those of entire nations. that's the endgame we should be committed to

Zharkov
|
United States
April 8, 2009

Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:

U.N. resolution 1718 failed to expressly prohibit satellite launches, and North Korea never consented to be bound by the resolution anyway.

The term "ballistic missile" refers to a missile with a high, arcing trajectory that is initially powered and guided but FALLS UNDER GRAVITY ONTO ITS TARGET.

The term expressly excludes a satellite launch missile having a target in space rather than on land. The projectile (satellite) would launch on or near its apogee, not on the perigee of the missle and would not, therefore, be a "ballistic missile".

The resolution's provisions include:

North Korea must "not conduct any further nuclear test or launch of a ballistic missile", "suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile programme" and "abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner".

The DPRK must also "return immediately to the six-party talks without precondition".

Shipments of cargo going to and from North Korea may be stopped and inspected for weapons of mass destruction or associated items (however, there is no obligation placed on member states to perform such inspections).

A ban is placed on imports and exports of "battle tanks, armoured combat vehicles, large calibre artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles or missile systems", "related materiel including spare parts" and any other items identified by the sanctions committee.

UN member states must freeze the overseas assets of individuals and companies involved with the DPRK's weapons programmes. An international travel ban is also placed on programme employees and their families.

UN members are banned from exporting luxury goods to North Korea.

A sovereign state would have to consent to any treaty binding it. A nation can renounce a treaty when the agreement is no longer in its national interest.

Rather than make unilateral resolutions that bind no one, result in no agreement, and violate the very concept of national sovereignty, the U.N. should be a place to facilitate treaty-making between nations, as it was created to do, rather than be a dictatorial oligarchy issuing decrees as it now appears to do.

The prohibition of an act by a nation must be written as a treaty law, not as a decree, because as to a sovereign nation, decrees of foreigners have no legal standing without their consent.

If the British Queen issues a decree to her subjects, they may be bound to obey, but if she issues a decree to American citizens, they are bound to laugh.

The U.N. is of no greater consequence than any other group of people who gather together to decide how others should behave. Within the U.N. building, their power may be that of a monarch, but in Central Park, they have no more legitimacy than any other group of people yelling at the trees.

In North Korea, it is the dictator's decision whether to accept or reject a U.N. request to do or not do a certain thing. We may not like it, but resolutions of the U.N. are not the law of any nation unless that nation consents to it.

Ole
|
New York, USA
April 8, 2009

Ole in New York writes:

it would be fully North Korean dictator's business had it not threatened other countries' interests and security. you cannot just let a madman run amok on a street and do nothing about it. treaty-making at UN, unfortunately, fails repeatedly because the members are not on the same page, especially in case of RF and China, who essentially lobby for this madman's very right to run amok. that itself borders on being openly hostile to fellow UN members, such as U.S.A., South Korea, Japan. and in case of Kim, his regime has a rich history of being outwardly aggressive and domestically genocidal; none of which can be forever just watched by international community, without doing anything.

North Korea is a permanent threat and cause of instability for everyone, including Russia and China, however much they pretend it doesn't bother them. the funny thing is they are in a much worse moral position than we are: we always opposed North Korea, while they bred it and covered up for it, and now have to deal with problem of their own making. as you see, this is not just a UN matter-- this is a matter of direct concern for several key nations, and if UN doesn't act, or North Korea doesn't see itself bound by UN decisions, those nations have a right to act on their own. oh, and somehow, when it comes to extorting money, aid, PR etc. from world community-- suddenly North Korea DOES claim to be a UN member, and demands 'respect' that comes with it. but you cannot forever tell others to treat you with respect and play by the rules, while refusing to do so yourself.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
April 8, 2009

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Until 'lil green men pay us a visit and hand over their "Uber-tech", we'll still be launching things into space with ballistic missiles.

Therefore whether it's a satilite or a nuke, identical delivery systems are involved.

Given Russia's recent concern involving proposed conventionally armed (non nuclear) ICBM's, and the inability for them to tell whether it is nuclear or conventionaly armed after it's launched, the likelyhood of knowing whether the next ballistic missile NK launches has a satelite or a nuke on top is nill.

Russia's statements questioning the wording and semantics involved in the UN resolution in question are without merit, and of questionable value given their stated concerns above.

China has expressed that NK has the right to the peaceful exploration of space.

Nothng peaceful about threatening war in order to defy UN Sec Council resolutions, even if they intend to explore space.

Therefore this is not in any way, shape or form, legal for NK to do so. Regardless of stated purpose which in itself is highly suspect as being truthful.

It won't take a rocket scientist to tell you what's up here.

Basicly Russia and China are concerned that the U.S. will use chapter 7 to drop the hammer on 'lil Kim's illusions of grandure and remove him from power.

Zharkov
|
United States
April 8, 2009

Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:

It is a poor showing for a nation "governed by laws" to claim the law does not apply to madmen in the same way it does to everyone else.

Even presuming, arguendo, that Kim is mad, he leads a sovereign nation, unless we wish to contest whether North Korea is "sovereign" rather than a captive, occupied region of the nation of Korea. That assertion is perhaps a better one than to assert the UN resolution 1718 had been violated by a satellite launch.

The law matters to other nations such as Russia and China which are only recently beginning to accept the idea that laws benefit everyone when they are actually obeyed.

Again, we must set the example by obeying international law, and if we foul up the wording on a resolution, we must accept the blame and do the right thing. It is the least that these nations expect, that we will follow our own rules.

joe
|
Tennessee, USA
April 8, 2009

Joe in Tennessee writes:

QUOTE: we're not 'average' people, we're people unique and worthy each in their own fashion; and if we write in no less than a State Secretary's blog, it means we have at least some interest and insight into foreign policy? END OF QUOTE.

Why personalize? Interest does not mean you have a T level clearance or above, so we simply are average in the scheme of intelligence knowledge. Reactions are premised on intelligence as a whole which would include much more, as actual profiles which include individuals, incoming political structures, new business formations and development and international agreements, which we may never know of it's much more than general knowledge..so we are left with less than many Agencies have privy to. It is great to be an Average American, because that does mean you are an individual. I was hoping someone would say, perhaps we did think of that and simply wanted to see the fallout politically, so we forced the issue knowing Kim would fire it up if pressured. WE won on that account and it goes in hand with the new NATO developments, etc. but it does leave some questions.

The southern area of N. Korea was growing dramatically until the international economic problems and Kim was quiet. We must be concerned with Kim's Military leadership, as it seems Kim is not really running the show -- and we need to see how North Koreas future will be governed and directed. Kim is now in Castro's shoes of not long ago, but his son will not be involved.

There is a lot going on politically in North Korea now politically and the gathering of the International community against the threats may help in redirecting their future.

Russia and China? Simple economy: Russia doesn't care -- they have more work then people, energy rich, natural resource rich and holding a lot of gold and platinum. China makes stuff, we buy most thier stuff, China is not self-sufficient and owns too much US debit, they depend on our economy, which is why they want a new currency. Russia may have started the ball rolling and they got rid of China as a by product. Putin is one smart cookie -- but when the Red Flag went up, our guys got pretty smart too...we got rid of over half the threat.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
April 9, 2009

Eric in New Mexico writes:

"Saving face" North Korean style:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7985154.stm

Seems the NK soccer team got sick, lost the game, and now South Korea is being accused of poisoning them.

Probable reason: More likely the three NK team members affected finally got the chance to eat some decent food for a change after traveling, gorged themselves, and couldn't play well with cramps.

Nothing to indicate food poisoning, intentional or otherwise according to medical exams.

Made the same mistake myself when playing soccer in High School on a road trip.

---

Joe in Tenn. asks, "why personalize?"

Well Joe, my guess is because we are just average people....(chuckle)...We do that on occasion.

If you are going to get into the true nature of why folks blog on Dipnote, which is not your "average" blog by any stretch of the imagination in the first place, you'll simply end up throwing "average" out the window in frustration, because it isn't going to cover all the bases.

Ole has it right on the button.

And it's our unique individual backgrounds and experience that make this blog worth reading.

As it regards one's knowlege base brought to this particular dining table for edible debate, I can only speak for myself in that if the interest is there, security clearances don't mean much if you know how to do the research, and cultivate sources.

Not to get "Rumsfeldian" on you here Joe, but I know I know more than I want to know, and what I know has caused the folks that should already know what I know to get a bit cranky. Because they know they should have known it before they tested my patience for telling me they thought I made it up. My guess is that a certain poor fellow sitting in his cubicle in Langly never heard the end of it.

If you do what you do in order to save lives, ain't nobody going to succesfully question your intent.

You know he old Chinese curse, "May your life be interesting." ????

It continues to be all of that in this individual's case, believe me.

Zharkov
|
United States
April 9, 2009

Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:

No nation is a permanent threat, as China, Libya, Syria, and the former USSR have shown us. All nations evolve.

However, the people of each nation will sooner forget who led them before they will forget how other nations had treated them. Iran still has not gotten over our interference in their politics and the installation of the Shah. They may never forget it.

So before we condemn an entire nation of people as barbarians, we might look to see if other options exist to allow them to progress technologically, yet guarantee our own security. In that regard, why object to North Korea testing its satellite launch missiles if they launched them in the opposite direction, toward China and Russia?

China and Russia can then determine whether they will tolerate missile experiments from the DPRK, and we will see if they wish to "proceed with caution" in condemning those launches.

Ole
|
New York, USA
April 17, 2009

Ole in New York writes:

It is a poor showing for a nation "governed by laws" to claim the law does not apply to madmen in the same way it does to everyone else.--

that is what you advocate, not me. if the person in question were just a mentally ill individual, of course that person should be provided with his full rights. however, we have more of a situation of a madman running amok on the street, in which case any initiative, moreover by official law enforcement, which in this case is UN, would be not only appreciated but mandatory. how about the rights of the two million people starved dead in North Korea in the last couple decades? how about the rights of South Korean, Japanese, American, and not in the last turn, Russian and Chinese population, to live free of harassment and threats to their lives and well-being?

Nations evolve? well, sometimes they evolve in a wrong direction; like Russia in 1917, Germany in 1933, for that matter Iran in 1979. speaking of, I highly doubt Iranians are dwelling much right now, on our 'installation' of the Shah, which by the way I don't know exactly what you mean by-- the last Shah dynasty came into being before USA had any serious influence in the region, while we actually did nothing to keep him in power against the people's will of the time-- the will they so severely question 30 years later. you mention Lybia-- well, the fact is that when Qaddafi saw what happened to Saddam, that was when he 'evolved'; recently, he's kinda trying to raise his ugly head again, little by little, as if to test the resolve of the new US administration. which only shows, that these kind of 'leaders' dare to challenge the international community only when it weakens its pressure on them. as for Russia and China, sadly i wouldn't discount them as threats either, of yet: you see very well all the troubling moves in recent years by their leaders, even as the economic crisis has hit their nations.

that having been said, I still think we should talk to both those nations about allowing Kim's regime to be replaced. as major partners and neighbors of Korea, both Russia and China surely deserve a solid measure on influence on that peninsula; and USA's not as greedy as people often present it, we have no problem sharing that influence. yet, it'd be better if RF and CPR exercise their Korea clout through means other that support of a murderous thug that holds entire world hostage. perhaps, in free elections in unified Korea, there could emerge a reasonably pro-Chinese and/or pro-Russian party, just like there is a pro-American one. this way, Russia and China do not lose anything, but only gain; whereas backing Kim Jon Ill is extremely myopic at best, and criminal, at worst

kim
|
South Korea
April 26, 2009

Kim in South Korea writes:

On April, 5 despite the international community's repeated warnings and attempts to persuade it to do otherwise, North Korea chose the path of a rogue state and launched a long-range ballistic missile. Contrary to Pyongyang's calculations, this incident does not demonstrate North Korea's strength or self-reliance, but should be perceived as an utter failure by North Korea in both tactics and strategy.

North Korea has the ill-considered belief that its hard line stance will always succeed since the U.S. and other Six-Party Talks participants have relentlessly pleaded for the reopening of the talks under even more favorable terms for North Korea despite North Korea's actions and various pressuring attempts. However, considering North Korea's current problems that include political complications in the delayed succession plan and Kim's deteriorating health, diplomatic challenges, economic difficulties, and food supply issues, concerted action by the international community, especially among the members of the Six-Party Talks, will be able to teach North Korea the foolishness of equating confrontation with expanding its opportunistic gains.

Recently the North Korean foreign ministry bluntly stated that it would roll back its process of disabling the Yongbyon nuclear facilities if the UN Security Council starts discussions on the latest missile launch. Now is the time for the U.S. and the ROK to call North Korea's bluff. The U.S. must make it clear that no high level talks with North Korea will resume without North Korea clearly announcing its intent to abandon its nuclear program through the nuclear and missile related dialogues. The greatest sanction against North Korea would be a declaration by the U.S. that it is cutting off high-level bilateral talks with North Korea. For now, the U.S. needs to stop its direct communication with North Korea and instead use the joint counteractions of the UN Security Council, and strengthen the separate "the cooperative network of willing" with like-minded countries like the UK, France, Australia, South Korea, and Japan.

It is my estimation that North Korea will not conduct a second nuclear test. At its first nuclear test on October 9, 2006, the Pyongyang government notified to its friendly nations that it would create an explosion of more than 20MW using 6 kg of plutonium. However, the actual explosion yielded only 0.15-1.5MW. Initially, therefore, some countries were reluctant to define its test as successful. A new nuclear test caused by the failed missile launch will not likely showcase any significant breakthrough in technology. A second test will not be able to produce a result exceeding the practically failed first test, which required North Korea to empty its limited stock of plutonium. The best part of the disablement of the Yongbyon facility was the knock-down of the cooling tower of the 5MWe experimental nuclear reactor. It is difficult for North Korea to rebuild the cooling tower to re-operate its antiquated reactor, and acquire the raw materials for plutonium. North Korea's only option is to restore its radiochemical laboratory to acquire an additional 5~8 kg of plutonium by reprocessing 8,000 remaining spent fuel rods. Such a possibility, however, is remote. No substantial change in bargaining power will occur, and as long as North Korea is really willing to denuclearize, this hypothetically new plutonium must be in the list of declaration of nuclear activities to be verified.

North Korea is neither a nuclear state, nor an ICBM state, but a failed rogue nation with a potentially dangerous nuclear program and the ability to jangle the world's nerves by attempting to demonstrate this program, or proliferate its technology.

I have previously suggested that, because of the probability of failure as in July 2006, North Korea should have rescheduled last weekend's launch and that the U.S. should publicly announce its intention to have high level talks with North Korea While North Korea failed to act as recommended, U.S. officials have patiently and repeatedly over the past few weeks emphasized the U.S.'s willingness talk officially and unofficially. North Korea, however, refused to accept the U.S. proposition.

In the wake of the April 5 missile launch, the greatest sanction against North Korea would be a declaration by Washington of a cut-off of high-level bilateral talks with North Korea unless it clearly promises its intention to abandon its nuclear and missile programs through talks. The North Korean leadership is always thirsty for high level contacts with the U.S. But until it shows an intention to substantially alter its policy direction, all support for North Korea must be stopped. Non-military pressure also must be strengthened through cooperation among all interested parties, while the UN Security Council must continue to impose Resolution 1718 and additional actions. It is time for North Korea to take responsibility for its actions.

S-MIN
|
South Korea
April 27, 2009

S.M. in South Korea writes:

It is reported that six U.S. senators including Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, officially proposed '2009 North Korea Sanctions Bill (S 837)' which highlights re-designation of North Korea as a terrorist sponsor.

The reasons they specified in the bill for North Korea sanctions are nonfulfillment of the agreement reached among the six nations, transfer unclear and missile technologies to Iran, support in the construction of unclear reactor in Syria, kidnapping of South Koreans and Japanese, torture of North Korean defectors repatriated from China, etc.

They said that the US administration should re-designate the North as a terrorist sponsor because the communist regime had stopped disabling its unclear facilities. They added that Washington should strengthen the North Korea Human Rights Act in order to improve human rights conditions in the Stalinist nation and a mechanism should be established in writing that a North Korea's human rights envoy attend any bilateral negotiation between the U.S. and the North.

Following its test-fire of a long-range missile early April, North Korea announced to restart its nuclear programs and not to attend the six-party talks, defying the U.N. Security Council presidential statement. In addition, the spokesman of North Korea's Foreign Ministry also said that Pyongyang had resumed reprocessing of fuel rods in its Yongbyon nuclear complex on April 25. North Korea is still detaining one South Korean and two US reporters illegally. All of these acts are clear evidence that North Korea is now acting like a terrorist regime.

Against this backdrop, it seems necessary to re-dsignate the Stalinist nation as a terrorist sponsor, in a bid to deter its brinkmanship.

Zharkov
|
United States
April 27, 2009

Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:

China is the only country with sufficient influence to get the DPRK to completely end its nuclear program and its missile program.

The DPRK still has the right to develop modern technology, the same as Iran, Syria, or Israel. China is not willing to insist that North Korea must remain an impoverished Marxist relic clinging to its obsolete dogma and its martial arts for comfort.

Regarding Ole's comment on national evolution, the Soviet Union did not spontaneously arise but was a creation financed by Wall Street and German banks, supported by American industrialists who built car and truck factories and armament factories, among other things.

Mr. Rockefeller once wrote a newspaper column praising communist control over China. The CFR and Trilateral Commission are also Rockefeller ideas. Do you understand where some of our foreign policy is coming from?

Russians blame us for their communist revolution, much as the Iranians blame us for the Shah, and the Chinese know it is partly our fault that Mao succeeded. We unexpectedly pulled the plug on the Nationalists and that forced them to flee to Formosa (Taiwan). The Chinese communists under Mao had regularly fired artillery at Formosa for years without much comment from us. Our government has many sins and it is refreshing that Mrs. Clinton is willing to admit some of them.

Sparky
|
United States
June 2, 2009

Sparky in U.S.A. writes:

North Korea, has and will keep getting away scott free with its extortion, our country wont do anything to hold the North Koreas accountable, as they arent like Iraqi's that have to fight with IED's. North Korea has weapons that will kill lots of our soldiers. So even though NK has spread nuke tech across our globe and to who knows how many more counries and organizations, we wont do anything except stand by and cry like little kids until the day comes that our city gets vaporized in the United States. But then, it will be to late, either a terror group or a bomb from NK, it doesnt matter, milions will be dead. So, here we go waiting for the last act!

Harry
July 1, 2009

Harry writes:

IF YOUR HOMETOWN BECAME THE TARGET FOR AN APPROACHING NUCLEAR MISSILE,You would most likely have no advance warning of it's arrival. Your government will not panic it's people who they cannot save anyway. No "special news bulletins" will interupt your television show. The Emergancy Broadcast System will not air on radio. No air raid sireins will sound off. No hysterical neighbors running around in the streets. No one will be running each other over frantically trying to get as far away from town as possible. When the initial flash hits, this life is over in a billionth of a second. And if you are not a born again christian, you will instantly feel the scortching of Hell, and wondering what happened and how you got there so quickly, while back on Earth, the thurmosphere explosion is still scortching away the bare ground where your hometown was only seconds before. And in Hell,"AN EYE FOR AN EYE" will do you no good. However, those of us who are going to Heaven will have no need of, or can care less about taking an eye for an eye.

.

Latest Stories

March 5, 2009

English Access Program a Gem

Interactive Travel Map | Text the Secretary About the Author: Stacy Barrios serves as the Cultural Affairs Officer at the… more

Pages