China Intends to Ignore Key Element of UNSC Resolution on NK

[onedomino]

I would have bet the farm that this would happen. China says it intends to ignore the key aspect of the UNSC resolution designed to control the criminal regime in NK. The most important part of the UNSC resolution specifies that cargo bound for NK must be inspected for materials that could be used for making additional nukes and missiles, and that NK export cargo must be inspected for finished weapons. China and Russia had earlier this week succeeded in stripping the resolution of UN Chapter 7 authority, where participating nations could use military force, if necessary, to inspect NK import and export cargo. Now, according to the news story below, China says it intends to completely ignore the aspect of the UNSC resolution that calls for inspections, even though Beijing voted for the UNSC sanctions. Since almost all cargo to and from NK moves by land across the China-NK border, Beijing's failure to inspect NK cargo will make the most important aspect of the UNSC resolution meaningless. This toothless UNSC outcome should surprise no student of the NE Asian political and military struggle for power between Beijing and Washington. As pointed out in other posts on this board, NK seeks a security guarantee from America. Every US administration since the Korean armistice has rightly refused. NK has, with China’s acquiescence, developed nukes as a substitute for a security guarantee from America. China has succeeded in getting everything it wanted from the NK nuke detonation: the reunification of Korea has been pushed far into the future; it obtains excellent world media PR because it voted for the UNSC resolution; and NK, the Chinese proxy in the NE Asian power struggle with America, remains dependent, weak, and armed to the teeth.

U.N. Condemns North Korea
In Unanimous Vote, Security Council Imposes Stiff Sanctions

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06288/730157-82.stm

UNITED NATIONS -- The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously yesterday to condemn North Korea and impose stiff sanctions on the communist government in response to its suspected nuclear test.

North Korea's ambassador immediately rejected the council's demand to dismantle its nuclear weapons program and threatened to respond to the escalating pressure on the reclusive government with unspecified "physical countermeasures."

The 15-nation council's action highlighted the outrage that followed North Korea's claim of having tested a nuclear bomb Oct. 9. It also marked a rare willingness by North's Korea council allies, China and Russia, to impose sanctions on Pyongyang.

But to secure their support, the United States was compelled to water down key measures designed to ensure that the sanctions could be enforced. And China -- which shares an 880-mile border with North Korea -- said after the vote that it would ignore a critical provision that calls on governments to inspect goods entering or leaving North Korea.
Still, President Bush issued a statement welcoming the decision, saying the United Nations has sent a clear message to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il that the world is "united in our opposition to his nuclear weapons plans."

"There's a better way forward for the people of North Korea," Mr. Bush said. "If the leader of North Korea were to verifiably end his weapons programs, the United States and other nations would be willing to help the nation recover economically."

John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, meanwhile, warned that the United States would pursue additional penalties against North Korea if it fails to abide by the council's demand that it agree to destroy its weapons of mass destruction.

Resolution 1718 bans North Korean trade in materials linked to its weapons of mass destruction program, ballistic missiles, high-end conventional weapons -- including war planes and battle tanks -- and luxury goods.

It will create a U.N. committee to monitor the sanctions' effectiveness and to draw up a list of individuals and institutions linked to North Korea's weapons programs. They will be prohibited from traveling abroad, and most of their financial assets will be frozen.

But the resolution stops far short of imposing the kind of sweeping trade embargo initially proposed by Japan. It no longer contains a U.S.-proposed provision to give North Korea 30 days to suspend its nuclear program or face "further action."

The text also provides no additional authority to allow inspections of North Korean vessels suspected of transporting illicit weapons. The United States claims it already possesses that power, but China maintains such actions violate international law.

Addressing the council chamber in English, North Korea's U.N. ambassador Pak Gil Yon told the council his government "totally rejects" the council's "unjustifiable" resolution. He said it was "gangsterlike" for the council to impose such "coercive" measures. He walked out of the U.N. chamber before the session ended.

After Mr. Pak's speech, Mr. Bolton directed the council's attention to the North Korean diplomat's empty chair and suggested his right to address the council be suspended.

"That is the second time in three months that the representative of the DPRK (The Democratic Republic of Korea), having asked to participate in our meetings, has rejected a unanimous resolution of the Security Council and walked out of this chamber," Bolton said. "It's the contemporary equivalent of Nikita Khrushchev's pounding his shoe on the desk of the General Assembly."

Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, took offense at the reference to the former Soviet leader. He appealed to council president Kenzo Oshima of Japan "to use your influence" to discourage the use of such an "inappropriate analogy."

U.S. officials believe the resolution will give them the international tools to begin to put the squeeze on North Korea. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will travel to Japan, South Korea and China later this week to discuss implementation of the resolution as well as possible actions by countries to punish Pyongyang, U.S. officials said.

The Japanese government, the closest ally of the United States on the North Korean issue, has already imposed sweeping economic sanctions on North Korea in response to the nuclear test. Ms. Rice will seek to convince South Korea and China -- which have deep economic ties with North Korea and have supported the country even during the nuclear impasse -- to also tighten the vise, officials said.

"There is such a political backlash against North Korea that people are more willing to consider unilateral actions," said a senior State Department official. "The net effect is that the North Koreans find themselves in a substantially different place," even with China.

China is critical to the success of Security Council provisions calling for restrictions on North Korea's trade in illicit items because most of Pyongyang's trade crosses the Chinese border. China, however, might be resistant to suggestions that it cut off or reduce North Korea's economic lifeline because it has long valued the stability of having North Korea as a buffer state between China's border and South Korea, which has 25,000 U.S. troops.

For the moment, U.S. officials are focused on implementing this resolution and are not contemplating more resolutions, officials said. When Mr. Bush travels to Hanoi next month for an Asian economic summit, there is the possibility he and the leaders from China, South Korea, Japan, Russia and possibly other countries will meet on North Korea and "take stock" of the resolution's effectiveness.

 

[Annie]

I agree with the sanctions being toothless is China and SK will not enforce. From what I gathered from reading and Sunday programs, it seems many think NK will conduct a second test or more missiles, then China may feel compelled to 'come on board', for now getting them just to go along with the unanimous vote was a 'win.' Personally I think this the height of cynacism, but heh I doubt I'd make it as a diplomat.

 

[onedomino]

I agree with the sanctions being toothless is China and SK will not enforce. From what I gathered from reading and Sunday programs, it seems many think NK will conduct a second test or more missiles, then China may feel compelled to 'come on board', for now getting them just to go along with the unanimous vote was a 'win.' Personally I think this the height of cynacism, but heh I doubt I'd make it as a diplomat.

I do not understand how a toothless UNSC resolution is anything but a face saving publicity stunt that gives political cover to those nations, i.e., China and Russia, that seek to maintain the fractured status quo on the Korean Peninsula. China’s rational for supporting NK will not change after a second nuke test. It will still be calling for talks with its NK proxy in an attempt to extort a US security guarantee for the outlaw regime. The NK nuke problem will not resolve favorably until China uses it economic leverage to change Pyongyang’s behavior. If America is going to eliminate NK nukes, then it must ultimately place pressure in the correct place: Beijing. America has the economic leverage do this, but currently we do not have the political determination for the job.

 

[Annie]

I do not understand how a toothless UNSC resolution is anything but a face saving publicity stunt that gives political cover to those nations, i.e., China and Russia, that seek to maintain the fractured status quo on the Korean Peninsula. China’s rational for supporting NK will not change after a second nuke test. It will still be calling for talks with its NK proxy in an attempt to extort a US security guarantee for the outlaw regime. The NK nuke problem will not resolve favorably until China uses it economic leverage to change Pyongyang’s behavior. If America is going to eliminate NK nukes, then it must ultimately place pressure in the correct place: Beijing. America has the economic leverage do this, but currently we do not have the political determination for the job.

I do not disagree, it really is China's problem, with a readily available solution. Problem is, they don't want the probable repercussions of those solutions. As for the US, I think we have what we need to help Japan, as for SK, I think we've done enough. I'd like to get our 30k troops out of there.

 

[onedomino]

as for SK, I think we've done enough. I'd like to get our 30k troops out of there.

But this is precisely what China, NK, and the political left in SK, are trying to achieve. Our departure from SK will dramatically reduce the security of both Seoul and Tokyo, while simultaneously ensuring the virtual impossibility of a democratic reunified Korea. While it would be helpful to mitigate our involvement with more direct military support from Japan, and Tokyo under PM Abe would probably be willing, SK would never allow it. Especially under nuclear pressure from China’s NK proxy, America’s departure from SK before Korean reunification would mean that Beijing defeated the US in the 50 year struggle for political, economic, and military, primacy in NE Asia.

 

[Annie]

But this is precisely what China, NK, and the political left in SK, are trying to achieve. Our departure from SK will dramatically reduce the security of both Seoul and Tokyo, while simultaneously ensuring the virtual impossibility of a democratic reunified Korea. While it would be helpful to mitigate our involvement with more direct military support from Japan, and Tokyo under PM Abe would probably be willing, SK would never allow it. Especially under nuclear pressure from China’s NK proxy, America’s departure from SK before Korean reunification would mean that Beijing defeated the US in the 50 year struggle for political, economic, and military, primacy in NE Asia.

We've been bucking up Japanese defenses for a few years now, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/kongo.htm

My guess, it will speed up, with Japan rewriting their constitution.

http://www.antara.co.id/en/seenws/?id=21420

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20061009-094038-6884r.htm

http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=050000&biid=2006101167238

As for SK, unless we start getting some apologies for the past 20 years, get our guys out of DMZ.

 

[onedomino]

US Presses China on Korea Enforcement

2006/10
By FOSTER KLUG, Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The U.S. on Sunday pressed China to enforce the U.N. punishment against North Korea and use economic leverage to persuade the communist ally to renounce its nuclear weapons program and rejoin international disarmament talks.

Already, sharp divisions have arisen over enforcing the resolution, approved unanimously on Saturday. China, which voted for the penalties, is balking at cargo inspections to prevent trafficking of certain banned weapons and technology.

"I‘m quite certain that China is going to live up to its responsibilities," said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice , adding she was willing to have "conversations" during her trip on how best to enforce the resolution.

If China were to cut that support, John Bolton said, it "would be powerfully persuasive in Pyongyang," the North‘s capital. "They‘ve not yet been willing to do it. I think that China has a heavy responsibility here."

Rice, who joined Bolton in making the rounds of the Sunday talk shows in Washington, leaves Tuesday to consult with Asian allies about the resolution. "I understand that people are concerned about how it might work so it doesn‘t enhance tensions in the region, and we‘re perfectly willing to have those conversations," Rice said.

Japan and Australia have pledged immediate enforcement of the penalties and said they were considering harsher measures on their own. South Korea , which has taken a conciliatory approach to the North and has provided its neighbor with aid, said it would abide by the resolution‘s terms but did not say how.

After the resolution passed, North Korea‘s U.N. ambassador accused council members of a "gangster-like" action that neglects the nuclear threat posed by the United States. Pak Gil Yon also said that if the U.S. keeps up the pressure, North Korea "will continue to take physical countermeasures considering it as a declaration of war."

Rest of article: http://www.onelocalnews.com/pioneertimesjournal/ViewArticle.aspx?id=15502&source=2

-

 

[Annie]

-

Again, I agree that China is not helping the situation in a way meaningful to the situation-they are trying to buy time. Not only that, while currently 'working' with them, it could well be analogous to working with Soviets in WWII. Needless to say, there is no love loss between Japan and China either.

At least during the war, the Soviets were committed; if only Chiang Kai-shek had been the same in China, what a different scenario we might be facing today?

 

[USMCDevilDog]

We've been bucking up Japanese defenses for a few years now, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/kongo.htm

My guess, it will speed up, with Japan rewriting their constitution.

http://www.antara.co.id/en/seenws/?id=21420

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20061009-094038-6884r.htm

http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=050000&biid=2006101167238

As for SK, unless we start getting some apologies for the past 20 years, get our guys out of DMZ.

Is Japan really rewriting it's constitution? I wouldn't be surprised and honestly, I want them to.

 

[trobinett]

Come on people, we couldn't have set up a better platform for China.

They will act "the fool", until someone calls them on it. Will it be us, I doubt it.

Will Japan, or maybe even one of our best allies, Australia, call their bluff? Again, not likely.

Until a "dirty" bomb is set off in their backyard, China will do nothing. The stakes are high, and the players are many, and very powerful, but we must stay the course.

This WILL turn in our favor, these idiot nations are their own worst enemy's.

China is on a "roll", they have NEVER seen the kind of economic growth, that they are going through right now, can't say as I blame them, for wanting to walk softly, but once they are CROSSED, Katie bar the door, they'll be hell to pay.

I can hardly wait....:fifty:

 

[Redhots]

Meh, I'm more worried about Pakistan + nukes than North Korea's bargin bin nukes myself.

So far it seems a 50/50 shot that they'll end up blowing themselves up during a test.

As pointed out in other posts on this board, NK seeks a security guarantee from America. Every US administration since the Korean armistice has rightly refused.

You say that, but you don't seem very happy with the results to date.

***edited to fix quote***

 

[onedomino]

Meh, I'm more worried about Pakistan + nukes than North Korea's bargin bin nukes myself.

So far it seems a 50/50 shot that they'll end up blowing themselves up during a test.



You say that, but you don't seem very happy with the results to date.

***edited to fix quote***

You should read my posts on this topic more carefully.

 

[onedomino]

U.S. Expects China to Lead on Sanctions

Top U.S. diplomats yesterday said they expected China to enforce sanctions unanimously passed by the U.N. Security Council to curtail North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

In an appearance on CBS' "Face the Nation," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said China, which shares an 880-mile border with North Korea and is Pyongyang's principal trading partner, would shoulder the major responsibility of stopping trade with the isolated communist state. Without China's cooperation on enforcement, sanctions likely would be ineffective.

Rest of the article: http://washingtontimes.com/national/20061016-122855-5508r.htm

-

 

[akiboy]

TELL CHINA TO GO TO HELL!!!!


LETS NUKE CHINA and N.KOREA BOTH!!!!:dev1:


I know I sound mad but any options left???




Akshay