Has the Security Council's North Korea resolution merely provoked Pyongyang?

Eyes on conflict? Kim Jong Un inspects North Korea's armed forces.

North Korea has reacted strongly to a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Pyongyang's December 12 satellite launch, stating that it will conduct nuclear and missile tests that will target the Unites States, which it describes as a "sworn enemy".

Tuesday's unanimously approved Resolution 2087 requires Pyongyang to comply with all relevant resolutions and to refrain from using ballistic missile technology for any launches. It suggests seeking a peaceful, diplomatic and political solution for related issues but promises further “significant action” if Pyongyang conducts a nuclear test or launches another rocket.

In an explicit response, a statement from North Korea's National Defense Commission said "We will not hide the fact that a variety of satellites and long-range rockets will be launched and a nuclear test of a higher level will be carried out during the next phase of the anti-US struggle."

North Korea, officially the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), has so far conducted two nuclear tests, the first in 2006 and the second in 2009.

Analysis

One North Korea expert was dismayed by developments and reactions on both sides: "It is regrettable that after the sixty years of confrontation both the UNSC and the DPRK are still locked in the security dilemma and prefer to exchange invectives and threaten the region with prospects of resuming the Korean War," Leonid Petrov said.

"Despite the “generally balanced” tone of the recent UNSC resolution on North Korea, warnings to take “significant action” will only lead to promises “to boost and strengthen defensive military power," Petrov added.

There had been the suggestion that December's launch based on domestic considerations, namely solidifying the leadership of a young Kim Jong Un. The resolution was always likely to elicit a strong response from Pyongyang.

"North Korea obviously didn't appreciate this move...However, that does not mean that North Korea will actually follow through with nuclear tests and further alienate themselves from the rest of the world," on piece in the Atlantic suggests. "They've made empty threats in the past."

Now though there are "few options for responding to this latest development," writes Lucy Williamson for the BBC. "So far, it seems, sanctions haven't worked as a deterrent. And even pressure from Pyongyang's main backer, China, seems to have carried little weight over the past few months."

Chinese, US responses

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei called for calm, caution and restraint, saying; "It is in the common interests of all parties concerned to maintain peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and achieve the denuclearization of the peninsula."

As the closest North Korea comes to having a 'friend', Beijing's response to the matter is crucial, yet it is unclear how China values its neighbor. It is of strategic value - keeping US troops away from Chinese borders, by turmoil in or collapse of North Korea could see millions of refugees flood over the 1,400 km long border.

China has been boosting trade with the DPRK and encouraging it to open its economy, so its decision to back the UNSC resolution poses more questions than it answers.

Regionally this latest development poses a test for the nascent administrations of China's Xi Jinping, Shinzo Abe in Japan, and Park Geun-hye of South Korea. It also tramples on hopes in America of being able to engage with young leader in Pyongyang.

Washington has signalled new sanctions according to the LA Times. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney called the remarks from Pyongyang "needlessly provocative", and promised that, "the United States will be taking additional steps."

For the world the dilemma remains: how to encourage this regime towards greater openness, while not rewarding it for nuclear brinkmanship. Petrov states that, "More sanctions will only lead to less dialogue because sticks work only when carrots are also on offer. In the situation where military action is inconceivable and diplomacy does not work, the usage of soft power might be more useful."

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images) Summary Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations. However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states. Analysis Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria . Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was re

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east. Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies . This has

LONDON POLICE INDIRECTLY ENCOURAGE CRIMINALS TO ATTACK RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE A few days ago an unknown perpetrator trespassed on the territory of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, causing damage to the property and the vehicles belonging to the trade delegation , Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during the September 12 press briefing. The diplomat revealed the response by the London police was discouraging. Police told that the case does not have any prospects and is likely to be closed. This was made despite the fact that the British law enforcement was provided with video surveillance tapes and detailed information shedding light on the incident. By this byehavior, British law inforcements indirectly encourage criminals to continue attacks on Russian diplomatic property in the UK. Zakharova’s statement on “Trespassing on the Russian Trade Mission premises in London” ( source ): During our briefings, we have repeatedly discussed compliance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, specif

ISDEI Instituto de Seguridad, Defensa y Estudios Internacionales

Search This Blog