The North Korean nuclear program - Essay Example

The North Korean nuclear programme North Korea has been at loggerhead with UN and some other world bodies for quite some time now. Though there appeared a phase when the two Koreas appeared to follow the ‘forgive and forget’ approach and mend the fences, but somehow that did not last long and again North Korea started openly confronting the rest of the world. Resolution 1718 is one outcome of such confrontationist attitude. While calling for disbanding of the North Korean nuclear programme, this resolution intends to impose financial and weapons sanctions on North Korea. Imposed after the claim of North Korea that it has conducted a nuclear test on 9th October 2006, these sanctions do not call for any military action against the country. Though the initial draft prepared by US did contain the threat of military action, but in view of Chinese and Russian opposition, the final resolution had a milder tone (BBC, 2006). The international community did neither confirm the nuclear tests nor deny it completely, instead US officials reported about an air sampling done after North Korea's claimed nuclear test. These tests detected some radioactive debris consistent with an atomic explosion. It is worthwhile here to mention that the world appears little polarised, as far as the ‘effective say’ of UN and its various organisations is concerned. USA, being the only superpower now, appears to be dictating terms to UN by way of its Veto power and money power. At times, UN appears quite helpless in front of USA’s say in international affairs. The events of Iraq and Afghanistan are a pointer towards the forceful determination of America is concerned. Despite resistance from several countries, USA and some of its allies attacked Iraq and Afghanistan, for reasons which are yet to be ascertained. North Korea has also been involved in a verbal dual with USA for quite a while now, and seems to have annoyed quite a few other nations as well, in the international arena. Therefore, passing of resolution 1718 seems to be somewhat lighter one, as of now. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is an integral part of UN charter having primary responsibility of doing efforts towards maintaining international peace and security. The charter requires that a representative of each of its members must be present all the time at the UN headquarters. These representatives echo the viewpoints of the respective governments and help in smooth functioning of the Security Council. In one such meeting on 14th October 2006, the UNSC passed this resolution asking the North Korean government not to go ahead with its nuclear program. The resolution is in continuation with its previous relevant resolutions, including resolution 825 (1993), resolution 1540 (2004) and, in particular, resolution 1695 (2006), as well as the statement of its President of 6 October 2006 (S/PRST/2006/41) seeks to reaffirm that proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal constitutes grave threat for the safety and security of the world peace. UN security council expressed grave concern on the claim made by Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and expressed apprehension that this development might lead to further tension in the region. While announcing the successful conduct of the nuclear test, North Korean government also announced its withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The resolution expressly demanded that; North Korea must desist from conducting any further nuclear tests or launching any ballistic missile. DPRK must express its return to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, North Korean government must eliminate its nuclear weapons, other weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles program. The government of DPRK must allow the international community and concerned UN organisations to inspect all cargo moving in or out of the country. This is purportedly considered necessary to check illegal transportation of banned items. DPRK must reaffirm its commitment to the six party talks being undertaken to check the proliferation of nuclear warfare. It is worthwhile there to mention that Six-Party Talks were on to engage North Korea in a meaning dialogue so that it’s nuclear and WMD programme could be restrained. The six parties included United States, North Korea, China, Japan, Russia and, South Korea. Though US was the primary player in this arrangement, but US was unwilling to enter into bilateral talks with North Korea citing the breach of the 1994 Framework agreement by North Korea. The resolution, sponsored by US, was passed unanimously by the UN security with just some reservations being expressed by the Chinese envoy (BBC, 2006). That perhaps prompted the North Korean envoy to walk out of the council chamber, vociferously rejecting the resolution and accusing the council of acting in a ‘gangster-like’ action (AP, 2006). But the resolution was very scathing in criticising the action of North Korean government and called upon the international community to; Put a ban on the sale or transfer of materials related to the development of weapons programme of DPRK and other conventional military equipment like tanks, helicopters, missiles, combat aircrafts, large calibre artillery systems, warships etc. To freeze the transfer of funds connected with the nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Put a ban on export of luxury goods to North Korea Stop importing such items from DPRK, which have been banned under the resolution like military equipment, nuclear technology, chemical or biological equipment etc. Put these measures into effect within thirty days of the passing of the resolution. Act according to the spirit of the UN charter in such a manner that diplomatic efforts are made by nations to ease out the tension prevailing in the region and do everything possible to secure compliance of the North Korean government. The resolution 1718 also decides to set up a committee to monitor the progress of implementation of the resolutions and to highlight any case of violation of the provisions by the parties concerned, and to decide the future course of action depending upon the degree of compliance being shown by the North Korean government. The resolution also affirmed that actions of the North Korean government will be under continuous review and if required, the measures could be further reviewed, lifted, modified or strengthened. To ensure that the implantation of this resolution does not affect the civilian life of the country and its citizens do not suffer unduly, United Nations Security Council resolution1718 (2006) clearly spells that these sanctions do not apply to; Financial or other assets or resources that have been determined by relevant States to be necessary for payment of foodstuffs, medicines, medical treatment, taxes, insurance premiums, public utility charges, or for payment of reasonable professional/ legal fees. Travels to and from North Korean region, where the UNSC determines on case by case basis that such travels are necessary on account of humanitarian needs, religious requirements etc. These sanctions are only meant for implementing the UN charter and seeking a responsible action of North Korean government towards the larger interest of the society and world peace. United States, which is aggressively pursuing the matter, on its part expressed the hope that the UNSC will also approve of a military action against North Korea if it does not fall in line soon enough and continues to work against the spirit of the resolution. Though China supported the idea but it has some reservations about the provisions which called for checking of all vessels transporting through the North Korean territory. In addition, China has a political stake in North Korean stability. Economically, North Korea is not a well off nation, but its government considers the nuclear programme as a guarantee against large scale military action against the country. The nuclear program is thus being developed more as a deterrent, because the North Korean government is not in a position to afford preparing a big enough army to safeguard all its establishments against possible outside attacks. The North Korean government on its part says that1, “The DPRK clarified more than once that it would feel no need to possess even a single nuke when it is no longer exposed to the United States' threat, after it has dropped its hostile policy to the DPRK and confidence has been built between the two countries”. This was stated by the North Korean envoy during the deliberations on the resolution. It is worth mentioning here that the resolution invokes Chapter 7 of the United Nation’s Charter, which is considered as a prerequisite to come out with tough resolutions. The US in particular kept pushing for invoking of these provisions. China and Russia tend to view such emphasis as a prelude to US attacks on other nations. These provisions were invoked in case of Iraq and subsequently US invaded Iraq. But this time, in order to secure the consent of China and Russia, US too did not press for the provision of military action, agreeing instead to look for these provisions in future if circumstances demand such an action. China on its part prefers to see a secure and stable North Korea to avoid the influx of people from North Korea to China if the country appears to become unstable. In addition China also wants to maintain a stable buffer state between itself and the South Korea, where American forces have a presence. Therefore, to insulate the American forces from its territory, it is in the interest of China that North Korea does not become unstable and a failed state. But at the same time, like other nations China too desires that the nuclear programme of North Korea does not go out of hand and its rulers are kept in check to avoid any breakdown in the country’s command and control system. That perhaps prompted even the Chinese envoy to support the resolution. To what extent these provision help in improving the behaviour of the North Korean rulers will be known with time. References: 1. AP (2006). ‘Security Council unites on N. Korea sanctions’. Available online at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15246082/ (Dec 22, 2007) 2. BBC (2006). UN slaps sanctions on North Korea. Available online at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6051704.stm (Dec 22, 2007) 3. UNSC (2006). Resolution 1718 (2006)- Adopted by the Security Council at its 5551st meeting, on 14 October 2006. Read More