North Korea's defiance: its implications

5 June 2009, 18:00 PM

Barrister Harun ur Rashid

Philippe Lopez/AFP

NORTH Korea demonstrated its anger towards the US and neighbouring countries by conducting a nuclear test on 25th May for the second time. On 29th May 2009, North Korea fired a ground to air missile which has an estimated range of 260 kilometres. The North Korea's Korean Central News Agency said the test was conducted as part of the measures to bolster up its nuclear deterrent for self-defense in every way. The UN Security Council condemned the nuclear test. This was the second such test and said to be much more powerful than the first. The confirmation came little more than an hour after the US Geological Survey reported a magnitude 4.7 seismic disturbance at the site of North Korea's first nuclear test in October 2006. The modern nuclear weapon is not just a product of physics, but of decades of design work and full-scale nuclear testing. It combines expertise not just in nuclear physics, but materials science, rocketry, missile guidance and the like. A nuclear device does not come easy. A nuclear weapon is one of the most advanced syntheses of complex technologies ever achieved by human beings. Nuclear arms are better understood as an insurance policy, one that no potential aggressor has any intention of steering afoul of. Without practical military or political use, they remain held in reserve -- where in all likelihood they will remain for the foreseeable future. Details continue to emerge through the analysis of seismographic and other data, and speculation about the precise nature of the atomic device that Pyongyang may now posses carries on, making this a good moment to examine the reasons for conducting such tests. The Bush administration concluded a deal with North Korea. On March 17, 2007, North Korea told delegates at international nuclear talks that it is preparing to shut down its main nuclear facility-Yongbyon plutonium plant. The agreement was reached following a series of six-party talks involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and the US that begun in 2003. According to the agreement, a list of its nuclear programs will be submitted and the nuclear facility will be disabled in exchange for fuel aid and normalisation talks with the US and Japan. This had been delayed from April due to a dispute with the United States on freezing North Korea's account in Macao. But on July 14, International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors confirm the shutdown of North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear reactor. Later the US was not satisfied with North Korea's response whether it had closed all the nuclear plants. Accordingly $500,000 worth heavy fuel was not delivered to North Korea as per agreement. North Korea took a tough stance and on April 25, 2009 resumed the operation of Yongbyon nuclear plant. Many analysts believe that North Korea conducts nuclear tests and fires missiles for a number of purposes and some of them deserve mentioning below: i. As a kind of shop window for its military prowess, allowing it to boost sales of its nuclear technology to other countries. ii. After having built nuclear weapons, North Korea wants to demonstrate that it has the ability to deliver the warheads for a long distance with a fair amount of accuracy as well as its ability to proliferate such technology. iii. North Korea wants to show to the international community that it needs to be counted as one of the key states for peace in the Far East by demonstrating its ability to conduct nuclear tests, launch missiles and multi-stage rockets for a satellite. On 29th May North Korea stated that it would take "further self-defence measures" if the UN Security Council would impose penalties for its recent nuclear test. North Korea's Foreign Ministry reportedly did not specify what "self-defence" the country might take in response to the UN action. But in recent weeks, it has said it would regard any Security Council sanctions as a "declaration of war" and would conduct additional nuclear and missile tests. The statement called the Security Council's permanent members "hypocrites" who own most of the world's nuclear arms but want "small countries" like North Korea not to have nuclear bombs but to "obey big countries". The right wing government of South Korea led by President Lee Myung-bak came to power in February 2008 and its policy towards North Korea has worsened the situation in the Korean peninsula. The "sunshine policy" of previous governments led by Democratic Party has been abandoned and dialogue between the two Koreas has totally stopped. Furthermore, supporters of President Roh who committed suicide blame President Lee for his suicide on 23rd May 2009. With the death of former President Roh, President Lee faces the difficult task of uniting his people towards North Korea. There appears to be a conviction in Washington that present strategy pursued by the West does not deter North Korea in the pursuit of nuclear status. Beijing has traditionally tolerated the erratic behaviour of North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-il: worrying more about a collapse of his government than about his nuclear ambitions. The reason is that if Kim's government falls, hardliner military generals of North Korea would take over and the consequences could be more calamitous. Washington is reportedly seeking cooperation from China in a global effort to disrupt the flow of money to North Korea. Some of that money is thought to be held in Chinese-owned banks, making such an effort diplomatically sensitive. The US Deputy Secretary of State James B. Steinberg might discuss soon the matter with the Chinese. President Obama confronts a different set of calculations than President Bush or President Clinton faced. Both the Presidents wanted North Korea a non-nuclear state but Pyongyang's attitude seems to have changed because it is determined to remain a nuclear weapon state. Brent Scowcroft, a national security adviser to President Ford reportedly said that "We now have a new situation that has not appeared before." Political observers say that the genuine concerns of North Korea must be addressed by the neighbouring powers and North Korea must be on board to stabilise the Korean peninsula. Pragmatism and dialogue must guide the policy of the US and neighbouring countries toward nuclear-weapons state of North Korea. Some say the more criticisms the neighbouring counries make, the more defiant North Korea will be. The author is former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.