Edited by Christie Chu
Hollow Threats
I have not been able to find a good reason for America, South Korea and Japan to threaten North Korea if they can’t do anything about the latter’s missile test. Why all the anger, protesting and condemnation if they are unable to deter its irresponsible actions?
Does Pyongyang care that the world is accusing it of threatening international security and peace and violating the Security Council’s resolutions?
In fact, this is not the first time that Pyongyang has turned a deaf ear to international calls and warnings; North Korea has long history of defiance, procrastination and disdain for the efforts taken to dissuade it from continuing its nuclear program.
In 1993, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and started hoarding plutonium. In 1998, it tested its first ballistic rocket over Japan. In 1999 and 2002, North Korean forces clashed with the South Korean Navy. And in 2006, North Korea tested its first nuclear weapons.
Each time, Washington and Seoul have been willing to hand over incentives and aid in return for Pyongyang’s promise to stop its nuclear activities, but North Korea always goes back on its word. Even if the Security Council tries over and over again to impose more sanctions, Pyongyang’s allies, China and Russia, will veto any new sanctions. Moreover, North Korea has shown that it’s ready to retaliate if anyone makes even the smallest move to intercept its rocket.
Although America, South Korea and Japan have every right to be suspicious of North Korea’s intentions, they can do nothing but monitor the test. The U.S., for its part, has admitted its unwillingness to hinder the test for fear of failure. And Japan has declared that it can only counterattack the rocket if it trespasses into its territory. South Korea can’t do anything except slow down its business transactions with its stubborn neighbor.
No one can deny that Bush’s carrot and stick diplomacy did not work with North Korea or Iran. Will Obama’s peaceful and rational diplomacy prove more successful? Or will he have to adopt an attitude that’s somewhere in the middle?
Does Pyongyang care that the world is accusing it of threatening international security and peace and violating the Security Council’s resolutions?
In fact, this is not the first time that Pyongyang has turned a deaf ear to international calls and warnings; North Korea has long history of defiance, procrastination and disdain for the efforts taken to dissuade it from continuing its nuclear program.
In 1993, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and started hoarding plutonium. In 1998, it tested its first ballistic rocket over Japan. In 1999 and 2002, North Korean forces clashed with the South Korean Navy. And in 2006, North Korea tested its first nuclear weapons.
Each time, Washington and Seoul have been willing to hand over incentives and aid in return for Pyongyang’s promise to stop its nuclear activities, but North Korea always goes back on its word. Even if the Security Council tries over and over again to impose more sanctions, Pyongyang’s allies, China and Russia, will veto any new sanctions. Moreover, North Korea has shown that it’s ready to retaliate if anyone makes even the smallest move to intercept its rocket.
Although America, South Korea and Japan have every right to be suspicious of North Korea’s intentions, they can do nothing but monitor the test. The U.S., for its part, has admitted its unwillingness to hinder the test for fear of failure. And Japan has declared that it can only counterattack the rocket if it trespasses into its territory. South Korea can’t do anything except slow down its business transactions with its stubborn neighbor.
No one can deny that Bush’s carrot and stick diplomacy did not work with North Korea or Iran. Will Obama’s peaceful and rational diplomacy prove more successful? Or will he have to adopt an attitude that’s somewhere in the middle?