Category Archives: Government

Government, History, North Korea, Politics, South Korea, United Nations, United States

North Korea: Can Kim Jong-un really be trusted?

KOREAN PENINSULA

WHEN Ronald Reagan was locked in crucial talks with the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War, the former US president liked to rely on a favourite adage of his: ‘Trust, but verify.’

In the wake of North Korean president Kim Jong-un’s extraordinary peace overtures, the Western world is being asked to trust a tyrant who has murdered his people in their thousands.

As of now, though, we have no way to verify whether he is acting in good faith.

It is, after all, only a few months since Kim’s reckless missile tests, which included firing one rocket capable of bearing a military payload over Japan and into the sea on the other side.

That single reckless act brought us as close to a new Korean War as we have been for some time.

Such relentless belligerence makes his sudden grinning overtures to South Korea’s leader all the more astonishing. The events of the past few days – the hand-holding, the warm speeches, and the language of peace – were all intended to dazzle us. But we cannot afford to be naïve.

Yet, if it is impossible to trust Kim, we should at least attempt to understand his aims. That will help us gauge whether this attempt at rapprochement between North Korea and South Korea is more than superficial. It is claimed by the North Korean leader to be the end of the conflict that stems back to 1950.

The enmity that has riven the Korean peninsula dates to the end of the Second World War, when America and the Soviet Union agreed to split control of the former Japanese colony.

That quickly led to a power grab by North Korea, which invaded the South. American troops led the UN fightback and, although the war ended in 1953, no peace treaty was officially signed.

Since then, North Korea has become ever more isolated, as the Kim dynastic line tightened their grip as dictators. Whatever Kim Jong-un said about peace in the last few days, he has no intention of giving up power now.

 

HIS grandfather, Kim Il-sung, and his father, Kim Jong-Il, dominated their people, but the latest in the family line has shown himself more ruthless – and, some would say, dangerous – than either.

Family rivals have been brutally disposed of. His uncle was savagely executed. He had one cousin burnt alive with a flame thrower, according to South Korean reports. His half-brother, Kim Jong-nam, was assassinated with a nerve agent in February last year.

Many in the West would say we should not deal with such a man, and that any attempt at diplomacy would be immoral. Yet there are historical precedents which suggest otherwise. In 1972, US President Richard Nixon amazed the world by opening diplomatic discussions with China, whose leader Mao Tse-tung was responsible for at least 60million deaths.

Mao was a monster, but by negotiating with him Nixon laid the groundwork for an end to the Vietnam War, and usher in economic changes in China that eventually saw the introduction of capitalism there.

Today, President Donald Trump regards Nixon as a role model, a president who was willing to think the unthinkable. And like Nixon before him, Trump finds it easier than a Democratic president might to engage with Communists, because he will not be suspected of naïve Left-leaning sympathies.

There’s little doubt that Trump’s bombastic dealings with North Korea in recent months have had a part to play in the events of recent days.

His brand of ‘diplomacy’ might have been comical if it were not so inflammatory. His outbursts on Twitter, dubbing Kim the ‘little rocket man’, used the language of the playground. Some might suggest that if there is one thing that unsettles a lunatic, it’s being confronted by an even more powerful lunatic.

The US President’s rationale was that calmly reasoned rhetoric had got his predecessors in the White House precisely nowhere with Pyongyang. The only way of getting through, he felt, was to stick a megaphone against his opponent’s ear, and shout insults. After months of knockabout threats on both sides, Trump suddenly announced last month that he would be willing to meet Kim in May or June to discuss ‘de-nuking’ the Korean peninsula.

That was not the only indication that change was afoot. Mike Pompeo, at the time CIA director, made a secret visit to North Korea over the Easter period when he met Kim, a few days after the North Korean leader visited China for talks.

So, while Kim’s startling proclamations came as a genuine surprise, there have certainly been clues it was becoming a possibility.

In the short term, no doubt, the reduction of tension in the region must be a good thing.

 

THE Japanese will be watching with concern, however, because both North and South Korea view some of Japan’s islands as disputed territory and might wish to reclaim them.

The American have worries, too. Like Trump the Korean leaders talked about ‘denuclearisation’ of the peninsula. But that would also mean the removal of any nuclear weapons the US may have in the region, or even America being asked to dismantle its military bases in the South altogether.

And while Kim might be willing to allow American inspectors in to check that work at his known nuclear facilities has been shut down, it’s ludicrous to suppose he would welcome US oversight across his entire, vast military machine.

As long as some of his Army, comprising more than one million troops, is unseen, we cannot be certain that he is not hiding another atomic weapons programme, as was the case after a similar deal was struck in 1994.

And what about the question of reuniting the two nations, as we saw with East and West Germany in 1990.

The South Koreans want reunification – but not yet. They could certainly never accept Kim as ruler of both countries. And though they are a wealthy nation, the cost of absorbing the destitute North could be economically crippling. Before the two halves of the peninsula are joined up, the South will want to see the establishment of a successful capitalist economy in the North. Can Kim accept an opening up of his backward nation to Western influences, including the internet – which would allow his repressed people to understand for the first time how appallingly they have been treated?

At present, the unrelenting hardship and constant conditions of near-starvation help keep Kim Jong-un’s populace under control. And while he will hope to see Western sanctions on his regime lifted, that doesn’t mean he plans or intends to make his people’s lives any easier.

The West should make an offer to lift sanctions in return for a cast-iron promise to stop his nuclear programme. (In fact, his reckless nuclear testing has made it unsafe for him to detonate another H-bomb at his northern underground test site because it could collapse.)

If Kim Jong-un agrees, then his regime will be allowed to survive – however arduous and horrific that may be for his people.

What the North Korean leader will want to do is welcome President Trump to his capital with a glorious cultural and military spectacle. The American leader will be received by cheering crowds, just as China’s Chairman Mao made sure Richard Nixon was treated like a megastar. We can trust Kim to do that much. The question is, can he be trusted to keep the peace?

Standard
Britain, Economic, Government, National Security, Russia, Society, United States

Russia’s ‘tremendous weapon’

CYBER WARFARE

SECURITY CHIEFS have warned that tens of thousands of British families’ computers have been targeted by Russia – potentially paving the way for a devastating cyber-attack.

. You might also like to read The terrifying era of internet warfare

They fear the Kremlin is trying to identify vulnerabilities allowing it to “lay a foundation for offensive future operations” that could cripple Britain.

The concern is that Russia could take control of these devices then use them to overload vital infrastructure systems such as banks, water supplies, energy networks, emergency services and even the Armed Forces.

A so-called “man-in-the-middle” attack could be carried out anonymously because the Government would not know who had hacked into these systems in UK homes.

Security chiefs said they feared Moscow-backed hackers were trying to create a “tremendous weapon” to unleash in “times of tension”. Britain’s eavesdropping agency GCHQ, the White House and the FBI have launched an unprecedented joint alert about “malicious cyber activity” carried out across the globe by the Kremlin.

They warned that Moscow was mounting a campaign to exploit vulnerable devices and threaten “our respective safety, security, and economic well-being”. It followed a recent warning that Vladimir Putin was ready to retaliate for the Western air strikes on Syria, where Bashar al-Assad’s regime is backed by Russia.

Britain has been tracking the online activity for more than a year, a spokesperson for the National Cyber-Security Centre (NCSC) said.

Kremlin-sponsored actors were said to be using “compromised routers” to conduct “spoofing” – when the attacker hides their identity – to “support espionage… and potentially lay a foundation for future offensive operations”.

In an unusual transatlantic briefing the NCSC said there are millions of machines being globally targeted, with the intent of trying to seize control over connectivity.

“In the case of targeting providers of internet services, it’s about gaining access to their customers to try to gain control over the devices.

“The purpose of these attacks could be espionage, it could be the theft of intellectual property, it could be positioning or use in times of tension. All of the attacks have directly affected the UK.”

The FBI says that US government experts had found themselves “unwittingly on the frontline of the battle” against Moscow’s cyber-attacks. The Bureau said that, if Russia were able to hack into a wireless router then “own it”, hackers could monitor all the traffic going through it. “It is a tremendous weapon”.

A White House cyber security co-ordinator warned the Kremlin that the US and Britain would respond to any attack. The UK has previously carried out a huge cyber offensive against Islamic State, and the US attacked the Iranian nuclear programme by launching the Stuxnet cyber- attack in 2010 which wholly deactivated the programme’s centrifuges.

The US and UK insist they are pushing back hard and say that cyber activity must be stopped and opposed at every turn. They are confident, however, that Russia has already carried out a co-ordinated campaign to gain access to enterprise, small office routers and residential routers – the kind of things that everyone has in their homes.

The NCSC, FBI and US department of homeland security warned that Russian state-sponsored actors were trying to spy on individuals, industries and the Government.

A joint UK-US statement said “multiple sources” – including private and public sector cyber security research organisations and allies – had reported such activity to governments. The communique said: “Russia is our most capable hostile adversary in cyberspace so dealing with their attacks is a major priority.”

A UK Government spokesperson said: “This is yet another example of Russia’s disregard for international norms and global order – this time through a campaign of cyber espionage and aggression, which attempts to disrupt governments and destabilise business. The attribution of this malicious activity sends a clear message to Russia – we know what you are doing, and you will not succeed.”

 

THE warning from intelligence agencies that Russia is launching a cyber offensive against our Government, infrastructure, companies and even families, with the intention of spreading chaos and panic, is hugely significant.

It is a chilling reminder for everyone – if one were needed – that for Vladimir Putin, bombs, missiles and poison gas aren’t the only weapons of war.

Standard
Britain, Government, Politics, Society

The Windrush generation

BRITAIN

West Indian residents arrived in Britain after the Second World War.

Intro: The Windrush scandal has humiliated many of our citizens and is a bad stain on the UK

MANY immigrants from Commonwealth countries have lived in the UK for decades. A vast number of them have now been told by the Home Office that they are in the UK illegally and have been ordered to either prove their status or leave. British citizens welcomed here as children have been treated as mere numbers in a bureaucratic exercise flawed by the fact the British Government itself failed to retain the necessary records relating to the citizenship of many of these people. Most came from the Caribbean between 1948 and 1971. The first that many became aware of their questioned status was when they received official government letters informing them they were illegal immigrants. What an utter humiliating thing to happen to people who have every right to consider themselves British.

The fact that this bureaucratic mess isn’t scandal enough, the adjoining political response to it has been woeful and pitifully lacking. By the time Home Secretary Amber Rudd got to her feet in the House of Commons earlier this week, scores of British citizens had suffered the crass indignity of being treated as unwanted strangers in their home country. Labour MP David Lammy was quite right to describe this as a matter of national shame. The Home Secretary has promised the establishment of a task force in the Home Office which will help members of the Windrush generation, ensuring none lose access to public services and other entitlements. Given the way many have been treated this is the least they should expect.

It is impossible to consider the plight of the Windrush generation without considering that their race may have had something to do with the careless way their citizenship and naturalisation status was dealt with. It is perfectly reasonable to question that, if those affected had been white, any such problems would have arisen. Amber Rudd was right to offer an unreserved apology to those treated so disgracefully by a Home Office and Government that loses sight of individuals. She must, however, go much further.

Those who have suffered due to bureaucratic incompetence should have the right to claim compensation for the indignity and injury they have suffered. At the very minimum, anyone forced out of pocket because they had to hire legal counsel or apply again for citizenship should have all costs reimbursed. The Windrush scandal is a stain on the UK and the sooner it’s cleared up, the better.

 

THE Home Office couldn’t have made a more humiliating hash of dealing with the toxic row over the Windrush generation.

As soon as it became clear that Caribbean migrants who have lived, worked, paid taxes and raised families here for 50 years or more were being stripped of their residency rights, ministers should have acted immediately and without prevarication to address this cruel and inhumane injustice.

Instead, they stalled and vacillated, giving the impression of callous indifference to the plight of decent people who have lost their jobs, been denied state benefits and NHS care and even forced out of Britain. Access to UK bank accounts were also denied.

The utter fiasco continued as Amber Rudd and Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes admitted that many may already have been deported and, astonishingly, didn’t know how many, or who they were.

The Windrush generation from countries such as Jamaica were invited here to help post-war reconstruction and have hugely enriched our cultural life. To even consider deporting them – especially when countless foreign criminals are allowed to live here with impunity – is a grotesque betrayal.

 

UNDER the 1971 Immigration Act, all Commonwealth citizens already living in the UK were given indefinite leave to remain. But the Home Office did not keep records of those given to stay or issue any documents confirming this. Many people never applied for passports or became naturalised, so it became virtually impossible to prove that they were in the UK legally.

Changes to immigration law – introduced under Labour in 2006, then toughened by the Coalition in 2014 – was aimed primarily to weed out visa over-stayers.

Thousands of landing card slips recording the arrival of migrants, including those of the Windrush generation, were destroyed in 2010. It is these slips that would have proven important to establish citizenship. Instead, people would be sent a standard government letter which said: ‘We have searched our records, we can find no trace of you.’ Many were then deported.

David Lammy who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on race and community, said: ‘This reveals that the problems being faced by the Windrush generation are not down to one-off bureaucratic errors but as a direct result of systemic incompetence, callousness and cruelty.’

Standard