Category Archives: United Nations

Foreign Affairs, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, United Nations, United States

Restraining Pyongyang has become problematic

NORTH KOREA

North Korea’s fifth nuclear test: The seismic activity amounted to a total of 5.3 on the Richter scale.

North Korea’s fifth nuclear test: The seismic activity amounted to a total of 5.3 on the Richter scale.

Intro: North Korea’s increasingly forceful stance is making the international community extremely nervous

Some said it was just a matter of time until North Korea carried out another nuclear test. Kim Jong Un, who inherited power from his father in 2011, has accelerated the pace of nuclear bomb testing and the firing of ballistic missiles. Pyongyang would not have been pleased earlier this year with the imposition of new sanctions and would have been agitated with stern talks last week at the ASEAN summit. On September 9th, a national holiday that celebrates the founding of North Korea’s communist regime by Mr Kim’s grandfather, the country announced it had carried out its fifth test.

Troubling. Not least because of the force of the test. The explosion appeared to be at least 10 kilotons, and perhaps as many as 30, making it by far the most powerful device North Korea has yet tested. It triggered an earthquake with a magnitude of 5.3, alerting South Korea of the event before its troublesome neighbour confirmed it.

North Korea’s increasingly forceful stance is making the international community extremely nervous. Intelligence suggests the country has a stockpile of some 20 devices to which one is being added every six weeks. The earlier underground detonation carried out in January almost certainly was not the hydrogen bomb that North Korea had claimed, but that was followed by a series of missile tests. The claim in Pyongyang that it can now send a missile to America may be bluster, but it could almost certainly strike targets in both South Korea and Japan.

Of more concern is the question of whether North Korea can miniaturise a nuclear warhead that could be attached to one of those missiles, and robust enough to endure a trajectory that would take it into space and back. The North boasts that this is now possible, although analysts and observers are sceptical of this claim. But there is no doubt that North Korea is making rapid progress in the development of its nuclear programme. It has clearly become a priority for Mr Kim, who seems to be devoting even more of his country’s relatively meagre resources to it than his father did.

Japan and those in other neighbouring states have become increasingly anxious. They are concerned that the young Mr Kim is far less predictable than his father. While the strength of his grip on the regime is unknown, three of North Korea’s five nuclear tests have been carried out during his five-year rule. This suggests he remains adamant in projecting strength domestically. That might be because he feels insecure, but might equally reflect self-confidence.

The United States, Japan and South Korea have responded with predictably harsh statements. Even China, North Korea’s closest ally, said it ‘resolutely’ condemned the test. Despite Barack Obama having made nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament a personal priority, having pushed for a nuclear deal with Iran and visiting Hiroshima (one of the two Japanese cities on which America dropped nuclear bombs during the second world war), there is worrying little that America and its allies can do to restrain Mr Kim.

In response to the test in January, the United Nations tightened sanctions on North Korea in March. New measures include a somewhat leaky ban on exports of coal and other minerals, one of North Korea’s main sources of foreign exchange. The U.S. added further sanctions of its own in July, specifically naming and citing Mr Kim. Yet, none of these measures have appeared to change Mr Kim’s behaviour for the better, and is quite likely to have infuriated him still further.

Exhorting China to put more pressure on North Korea will be the main strategy of the triumvirate (America, Japan and South Korea), since the North Korean regime relies on China for its economic survival.

The Chinese government has become increasingly frustrated by Mr Kim – it voted in favour of the UN sanctions this year, though it has not always applied them rigorously. It is concerned that the collapse of Mr Kim’s regime might bring American troops to its frontier on the South Korean peninsula, along with a flood of refugees. China’s relations with America and its allies in Asia are also not at their best at the moment. It is disgruntled over the agreement between South Korea and America to host THAAD, a missile defence system, and has been unsettled over issues in the South and East China Seas. The West’s best hope of restraining North Korea is not only proving to be a slender one but hugely problematic.

Standard
China, Foreign Affairs, Philippines, United Nations

China refuses to accept findings impinging on its sovereignty

CHINA AND ISLANDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA

Intro: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has no jurisdiction on territorial sovereignty, which, in China’s view, makes the court’s award illegal and invalid

China South China Sea China Air Patrol

Two Chinese Su-30 fighter jets take off from an unspecified location to fly a patrol over the South China Sea.

On July 19, an article appeared on this site entitled, China: An international ruling over the South China Sea.

Unilaterally initiated by the Philippines, the Arbitral Tribunal for the South China Sea announced its decree in July. China immediately responded by rejecting the court’s findings and the narrative here relates to why China has done so.

Firstly, Beijing insists that the Tribunal abused its authority by meddling in territorial issues. The disputes between China and the Philippines are about territorial sovereignty. China has held historical rights over the islands for some 2000 years without any disputes until the 1970s when the Philippines started to occupy China’s islands following reported discoveries of oil and natural gas in the region. According to its own rules, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has no jurisdiction on territorial sovereignty, which, in China’s view, makes the court’s award illegal and invalid.

Secondly, China decries that the ruling violated China’s legal rights. Beijing says that in light of international law, any country has rights to not accept dispute settlement imposed upon it on issues concerning territorial disputes. What is more, in 2006 China made a declaration excluding from arbitration matters concerning maritime delimitation. Over 30 countries (including the UK) have also made similar moves. In doing so, the award violated China’s rights.

Thirdly, Beijing claims that the court’s decree has harmed the international practice of peaceful settlement of disputes. China says it adheres to a peaceful foreign policy, one which seeks to settle disputes through negotiation and consultations. China has signed boundary treaties with 12 of its 14 land neighbours through bilateral negotiations in a spirit of equality and understanding. China has also been at pains to point out that it has reached consensus with the Philippines on settling their regional disputes through negotiation. However, the Tribunal turned a blind eye to it, damaging China’s goodwill.

And fourthly, China argues that the arbitration has intensified tensions in the region. Despite the disputes, the region remains peaceful with freedom of navigation unaffected. Beijing insists that the arbitration’s ruling will now accelerate tensions with countries outside the region and will be using it as an excuse for further interference and muddying the waters for their own interests.

Standard
Russia, Syria, United Nations, United States

Aleppo is on the brink of annihilation…

SYRIA

Intro: The Syrian government has demonstrated time and again how little it cares for international humanitarian laws

Aleppo is now more at a critical juncture that it has ever been since the start of Syria’s internecine civil war five years ago. Aleppo’s worsening situation comes at a bad moment when western attention has been turned sharply on terrorism in Europe and the impending US presidential election. Syria, however, is now demanding immediate attention too. What has been happening recently in Aleppo could be a decisive turning point in the conflict; any diplomatic hopes of whatever remain in negotiating a solution is fast deteriorating. An estimated 200,000 to 300,000 people are trapped in Aleppo’s eastern neighbourhoods, which are now entirely surrounded by Syrian government forces of Bashar al-Assad.  These troops are being assisted in their offensive by Russian air power and Iranian-controlled militias. Alarmingly, no food, no medical aid, nor any humanitarian assistance has been able to reach the population of Aleppo’s rebel-held territory for several weeks, because of the magnitude and intensity of the ongoing military onslaught.

Aleppo is of historical significance. It was once Syria’s second largest city, and it has become one of the key symbols of rebel resistance to the Assad regime since 2012. It has been a long-held objective of government forces to crush and obliterate Aleppo, and, if nothing is done to stop Assad’s forces advancing such a disaster seems imminent. That would not just be a defeat for the rebels, many of whom which have received western support, but perhaps an irreversible defeat for the uprising. Aleppo is staring into the abyss with the prospect of a new, humanitarian catastrophe of unprecedented proportions unfurling in Syria.

Aleppo

Map depicting Aleppo in Syria and surrounding countries.

With Aleppo encircled, the tragedy is being exasperated following the tightening of the knot in recent days by government forces whose aim has been to starve or empty it. Aleppo has been so ruthlessly shelled and bombed that it has become an inferno for those desperate people struggling among the ruins. There are hardly any doctors left in the city, and the last remaining hospital has been destroyed. UN agencies say food stocks are barely sufficient to last for more than three weeks.

The Syrian government and its Russian allies have resorted to a tactic of siege and starvation that has been used previously in Syria, but they are now doing it on a much larger and openly deliberate and provocative way. Their announcement of “humanitarian corridors” for civilians and rebels who would want to flee the area must be exposed as a cynical ruse. No one should be surprised that Aleppo’s population has not rushed towards these exit corridors, which have not in any case materialised on the ground. The Syrian government has demonstrated time and again how little it cares for international humanitarian laws. Assad’s machine of repression makes no distinction whatsoever between armed combatants and civilians. Tens of thousands of civilians have died while being held in detention centres. The announcement by Syrian and Russian officials without consulting or even warning UN agencies in advance is implicit proof that they want no external witnesses to their misdeeds.

Aleppo is on the brink of annihilation and the siege must be urgently lifted. International pressure is void of any credibility and its responses to a dire and stricken situation has been pitifully pathetic. It must put proper pressure on Russia to force Syrian troops to retreat, so that lives can be saved. The fate of Aleppo’s inhabitants, however, may now depend to a large degree on how global public opinion can now be mobilised. Saving Aleppo from utter destruction is not only a humanitarian imperative, but also central to any thin chance of a settlement in Syria ever being salvaged.

Standard