Opinion - Editorials   

Pyongyang demands attention

The United States is not likely to succeed in its efforts to persuade the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on North Korea for carrying out missile tests on July 5. A draft resolution tabled by Japan condemns the tests; calls on Pyongyang to desist from missile development and to recommit to a moratorium on launches; and, urges member-countries to prevent it from acquiring or supplying missiles and missile-related items. The resolution also wants it to resume the six-party negotiations aimed at capping its nuclear weapon programme. China, which believes that the imposition of sanctions would destabilise the region, has indicated that it might veto such a solution. Beijing and Moscow are of the view that a non-binding presidential statement condemning the tests would be a more appropriate response. A sanctions regime would not be effective if these two countries and South Korea do not choose to enforce it. Although North Korea's neighbours have suspended supplies of fuel, fertilizer and food, the embargo is not expected to last very long. While the U.S. has thus far maintained that it would at most agree to a toning down of the condemnatory language, it may have to change its approach altogether. Soon after the seven missiles (including the long-range Taepodong-2, which could fly as far as Alaska when fully developed) were launched, U.S. officials expressed the hope that the rest of the Security Council would come on board. They miscalculated that Beijing, which had urged Pyongyang to desist from testing, would react strongly to the display of defiance.

A month ago, the Kim Jong Il regime had urged the Bush administration to enter into direct talks on the missiles and nuclear weapons issues. Negotiations of this sort are not likely to take place any time soon as Washington believes that it will be held responsible if no headway is made. But it might be forced by circumstances to agree to a resumption of the six-party negotiations that led to an agreement in principle in September 2005. This agreement, according to which North Korea was to wind up its nuclear weapons programme in return for security guarantees and promises of future aid, was not implemented for two reasons. It did not set a timetable for taking reciprocal steps and there were differences about the interpretation of its terms. China, which has been trying to arrange informal talks for the past few months, might be now tempted to redouble its efforts. Beijing and Seoul are extremely keen on a peaceful resolution of the dispute as they have real reason to be concerned about having to cope with the aftermath should any resort to tough measures cause the collapse of the North Korean regime. While the Bush administration has been used to throwing its weight around, it is at last showing signs of having realised the value of multilateralism, and the issue might be peacefully resolved.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Reclaiming the traditional base
Pyongyang demands attention
Half way to getting it right
The nuclear deal and `minimum deterrence'
Remembering Raja Rao
Traditions, values - and modernity
Violent Islamic radicals know they are heretical
Polish President's twin joins him in a double act
Divestment on hold
Unfortunate
Reservation in jobs

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu