The Tenacious Threat of North Korea and the Establishment of an Operational US Response - Example

The Tenacious Threat of North Korea and the Establishment of an Operational U.S. Response Date: October 2016 To: John Kerry From: Michael Hamzick The US Secretary of State The US State Department Official The Situation North Korea is continuously investing a lot of resources in the development more ballistic and nuclear missile programs which are incessantly increasing the security of the United States and the entire world. Significance The continuous development of nuclear and airborne missile programs by North Korea poses a significant menace to the homeland of the United States, our associates, our peace, security, and stability of the entire nation (Fox News, 2016; Fattah, 2016). Currently, the aggressive North Korea is set to launch two different nuclear tests and successful series of a ballistic missile by the end of this year. More importantly to note is that these consecutive attempts deliberately to go against the United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs). Besides, North Korea has frequently threatened to use these nuclear weapons to attack us and our associates. As Fattah (2016) ascertains, the North Korean menaces have become more regular and more dangerous. Pyongyang apparently warned of preventive nuclear strikes championed against the United States and our associates as a direct reaction to the announcement of the plans to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Aerial Defense (THAAD) system. Pyongyang speech was delivered during the annual military exercise with the Republic of Korea (R.O.K.) in August (The Economist, 2016). The significant threats of North Korea through the development of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons program supports bellicosity. Surprisingly, most of these programs receive funding at the cost of the North Korean people welfare. Most of these citizens are economically deprived and suffer from the horrific abuse of their human rights. Analysis As the eNews Park Forest ascertain, the United States comprehensive North Korea Policy aims to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful way. The North Korea committed to this objective on September 19, 2005, Joint Statement that involved talks between different parties. However, the incumbent abandoned the Six-Party Talks after making that pledge and rejected any form of negotiations and agreements targeting to implement the denuclearization program. North Korea carried out a string of ballistic missile launches and five continuous nuclear tests implying a flagrant violation of the national, international obligations and commitments (Fox News, 2016). Our policy is embedded in three different tracks: prevention, pressure, and diplomacy. This system aims to persuade Pyongyang to come back to the table of negotiation table and agree to complete the need for verifiable and irreversible denuclearization. The United States maintains a strong defensive military stance rooted in our ironclad alliances with Japan and R.O.K a strategy towards national prevention of the North Korean attack. We publicly and reliably reaffirm our national obligation to our Associates with a continuous cordial working relationship with both R.O.K. and Japan. This link is aimed to establish a comprehensive set of alliance capabilities to address the constant threats, including in specific the ballistic missile menace of North Korean(The Economist, 2016). We have implemented a broad and sustained pressure campaign where sanctions are a major component. This continuous pressure targets to raise the Korean cost for its violation of international regulations and to obstruct Korea’s capacity of being involved illegal activities. For instance, we are continuously strengthening sanctions in an effort to compel the current regime in North Korea to resume to reliable negotiations on denuclearization by aiming the administration’s reputation and revenue. We have also implemented continuous diplomatic overtures to North Korea as a signal of our commitment to the 2005 Joint Statement (Fox News, 2016; Fattah, 2016). Our readiness to take part in authentic and credible discussions targeted at restarting denuclearization negotiations. Moreover, we are also involved in diplomatic efforts to establish an increased universal and rigorous enforcement of critical sanction measures. These measures will help in hindering the illicit North Korean WMD as well as actions associated with proliferation. As Fattah (2016) affirms, North Korea perceives diplomatic visits and meetings as significant markers of its international legitimacy. A total of 25, 75 countries issued different statements condemning North Korea’s nuclear tests. The Sanctions Associate with the Foreign Policy Tool We acknowledge sanctions as essential elements of our approach towards limiting the North Korea’s illegal plans as well as restricting it from negotiating a rollback, freeze, and the exclusion of its nuclear program. These sanctions have established important problems associated with Kim’s regime. North Korea stances various issues from a sanctions point of view, considering its relative economic deprivation (The Economist, 2016; eNews Park Forest, 2016). North Korea is one of the East economically developed countries that pride its ideological value of self-reliance. The demonstrated isolation and economic immaturity prevent a sanctions response based on our national authorities. Our analysis reveals that the North Korea’s economy over-depends on China. We are increasingly engaging Beijing to source for enhanced Chinese cooperation. However, these efforts are imposing increased costs on incumbent country as a result of its intimidating behavior. Different Multilateral Sanctions Facilitated by the UN Security Council Resolutions As Fattah (2016) hypotheses, the UN initiatives helped in our campaign initiatives against North Korea due to their potential to execute universally binding sanctions. The five sanctions were adapted from 2006 to 2013 and include 1695, 171h 8, 1874, 2087, and 2094 and target to hinder the incumbent country’s missile and nuclear initiatives. Despite the positive impact associated with the above resolutions, there was a narrow focus on their objectives. Nevertheless, the UNSCR 2270 imposed measures addressing economic activities that seek to back up Kim’s regime broadly in March 2016. These rules covered more issues not limited to revenue that have a direct link with the ballistic missile and nuclear programs. UNSCR 2270 action encompasses financial provisions and exceptional inspection comprising of the mandatory North Korean cargo examinations combined with the requirements of ending the accounting business with financial institutions from North Korean (Fox News, 2016). Our administration is continuously stabilizing the efforts to provide access to adequate and reliable information to the sanctions put imposed on North Korea. These measures are undertaken to increase global execution of the UNSCR 2270. An Overview of the U.S. National Sanctions The national administration in collaboration with the Congress has expressed joint commitment to adopt comprehensive domestic authorities operating with the principle of going after all revenue streams that support the leadership of President Kim (The Economist, 2016). President Obama signed into action the NKSPEA plan in February 2016. Challenges Associated with Measures to Hinder North Korea’s Illicit Acts It's hard to control the development and testing of ballistic and nuclear missiles since North Korea relies on it as the primary source of its revenues. The national shipping lines limp are persistent although long years of sanctions as the country’s labor exports continue to provide a large source of income for Kim regime. China is a significant threat to the success of measures to limit North Korea ballistic and nuclear missile as it continues to open grounds for the weapon tests (eNews Park Forest, 2016).Despite China’s claims to be supporting the sanctions levied against North Korea, evidence shows that it's hard to disintegrate from Korea due to their long-term established business ventures. China remains a significant challenge as it still insists that putting pressure on North Korea will precipitate more crises to their survival. Conclusion This hearing gives us a chance to not only warn but also hold North Korea responsible and for its illegal acts. As research has affirmed, each and every state has a role to take effective measures that can hold North Korea accountable for its illegal engagements. There are more changes to be implemented despite the interplay of our associates and the UN. Below are the Recommendations that should be undertaken to detect, deter, manage and efficiently control North Korean harmful efforts: We should target the active engagement of our Allies including North Korea to generate practical solutions regarding the control of their ballistic and nuclear missile programs. We also need to engage in more diverse and dynamic outreach to member states to highlight international requirements, strengthen global capacity and bring more attention to the implementation gaps. Our national Administration should continue showing more vested efforts in the implementation of the Act since its inception in January. Despite acknowledging China’s steps towards the implementation of the current UN sanctions, we should compel it to enhance its restrictions on North Korea’s illegal businesses. Countries such as China should be motivated to increase their efforts to bar North Korea from utilizing their national based companies, which promotes their illegal activities We should also take several actions in association with different partners all over the world to limit all the North Korean revenue streams from outside China. Lastly, we should execute continuous campaign against North Korea and pushing our allies to support our efforts. Bibliography eNews Park Forest 2016. White House Press Briefing by Josh Earnest, October 3, 2016. Washington, DC. Retrieved from: http://www.einnews.com/pr_news/348225095/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-josh-earnest-10-3-2016. The Economist. 2016. North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons. Another bombshell After Pyongyang’s Fourth Nuclear Test, China Must Change Its Tune Towards Its Outrageous Ally. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21685451-after-pyongyangs-fourth-nuclear-test-china-must-change-its-tune-towards-its-outrageous Fattah, Z. 2016. Missiles Fired From Yemen Miss U.S. Navy Ship in Escalation. Bloomberg. Retrieved from:http://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/2016/10/10/missiles-fired-from-yemen-target-u-s-navy-ship-in-failed-attack. Fox News. 2016. North Korea: Kim says missile launch gives North Korea 'capability' to attack US in Pacific. Retrieved from: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/06/23/kim-says-missile-launch-gives-north-korea-capability-to-attack-us-in-pacific.html Read More