Featured Post

Say Pangasinensen ngalngalin nanmaliw ya pangolo na bansa: Si Carlos Peña Romulo (1898-1985)

Nipaakar ed sayan talintao. Say inpansamba nen Carlos P. Romulo ed arap nen Pangolon Manuel Roxas nen 1946. Walad kawanan si Speaker of th...

Oct 24, 2007

NK Nuke Crisis

Erwin S. Fernandez

Having stayed only for three weeks in Gwangju City, news about the nuke crisis is somewhat making me a little nervous. Back home, in the Philippines, though I haven’t received any call from my parents or emails from my friends, I am pretty sure they, having heard or read about it, might be feeling a bit alarmed. Nonetheless, I still believe there is nothing to worry about.

I don’t only have sympathy but also respect for North Korean people. Sympathy and respect because they have suffered a lot from the brutal depredations of two previous wars with the memories and scars still fresh but managed to withstand the massive pressures from the outside and the calamities that resulted in miseries ranging from hunger to famine. Yet, until when can they maintain the same composure in the face of serious challenges at present?

North Korea in Western press is always painted in bad light. Whether Kim Jong-Il, popularly portrayed as “communist dictator,” was the apparent culprit for the suffering of millions of North Koreans is not for me or anyone, any government or any nation to judge. I reserve this sacred right to the North Korean people who had capably demonstrated their capacity for self-determination in the midst of foreign intervention during the past half-century. This brings us to the raging issue of the moment.

Last week, North Korea publicly claimed having conducted its first nuclear test provoking a storm of protests, denunciations from all corners of the globe wary of an impending war. Others look for whom to blame. Kim Dae Jung, former South Korean president, in a special lecture at Chonnam National University, host of the Asia Culture Academy Youth Workshop, singled out the United States “hostile” foreign policy towards North Korea as having precipitated the crisis. Some called for punitive actions against North Korea. The United Nations Security Council particularly the U.S. and Japan demanded severe economic sanctions. Conservatives issued a declaration supporting the latter’s move and even challenged the Roh government to resign from office and take the alleged responsibility for the current critical situation. The crisis, however, demanded a closer examination than what is being presented.

North Korea, equally valid for other states, has every right to develop its own nuclear program as a defensive mechanism as long as any nation on earth continues to have its own nuclear capability undisturbed and unmitigated. The nuclear non-proliferation treaty has been in existence for many years now but the nuclear arms race is not yet over. Far from it, it paved the way for the rise of new nuclear powers such as China, India and Pakistan. These countries, beneficiaries of a leaked technology either from Russia or the U.S., supposedly built their nuclear arsenals as powerful deterrent to any military threat by a foreign power. The same holds true for North Korea if one believes Ri Jong-hyok, member of North Korea’s Supreme People’s Assembly in his address before European parliamentarians in Brussels. Right to defend itself from external aggression is a crucial factor for national survival not only for North Korea but to all besieged governments around the world.

For the past sixty years, the U.S., according to Ri, carried out “severe sanctions and threats” to his country. The latest, as of last year, four days after the denuclearization agreement in Beijing was signed on September 19, the United States Treasury Department cut off North Korea’s financial access to international money-lending and credit institutions affecting even legitimate business transactions. Few years prior to this, the United States invaded Iraq on the pretext of harboring weapons of mass destruction (WMD); arrested Saddam Hussein and effected “regime change.” It was therefore a tactical move on the part of the Kim regime to pursue its nuclear program to stave off U.S. invasion as the war freak Bush administration although having denied such intention was half-secretly known to be mulling over this not-so-remote possibility.

Seoul’s engagement policy toward Pyongyang became a convenient scapegoat to clamor for a change in policy especially the move toward strengthening military alliance with the United States. Rather than defusing the tense situation between the two countries, bringing more troops to Korea might send a wrong signal to the other side putting in jeopardy the hard-earned diplomatic gains and the peace and stability of Northeast Asia. Also, the hurry to “punish” Pyongyang rather than the solution is contributory to the already volatile environment.

The North-South divide in the peninsula, a curious relic from the Cold War, is still a contested object in international power relations. Thus, the struggle for a united Korea is a continuing project to get out from the imperialist game.

[Reedited with the original unedited draft, which was severely mutilated and first published as "Filipino View on NK Nuke Crisis" under the "Student Corner" The Korea Times 7 December 2006 with the full text shown below:

Since I’ve been in Kwangju for only three weeks, the news about the nuke crisis is making me a little nervous. North Korea is always portrayed in the Western press in a bad light.

Whether Kim Jongil, commonly portrayed as a communist dictator, is responsible for the suffering of millions of North Koreans is not for me to judge, or for anyone else, any government or any nation, to judge either.

North Korea publicly declared that it had conducted its first nuclear test in October, provoking a storm of protests and denunciations from all corners of the globe.

Everyone seems to be looking for someone to blame. Kim Dae-jung, a former South Korean president, in a special lecture at Chonnam National University, the host of the Asia Culture Academy Youth Workshop, singled out the United States’ “hostile” foreign policy as having precipitated the crisis.

Some people called for punitive actions against North Korea. The United Nations Security Council and Japan put in place economic sanctions.

Conservatives in Korea issued a declaration supporting the latter’s move and even challenged members of the Roh Moo-hyun government to resign from office to take responsibility for the current critical situation.

The crisis, however, demands closer examination. North Korea has every right to develop a nuclear program for its defense as long as other nations continue to have their nuclear capabilities undisturbed and unmitigated.

The Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons has been in existence for many years now, but the nuclear arms race is not over.

The treaty paved the way for the rise of new nuclear powers such as China, India and Pakistan. These countries, beneficiaries of leaked technology from Russia or the U.S., supposedly built their nuclear arsenals to deter military attacks.

The same holds true for North Korea, if one believes Ri Jong-hyok, a member of North Korea’s Supreme People’s Assembly, in his address to European parliamentarians in Brussels.

The right to defend itself from external aggression is important for national survival not only for North Korea, but also for other besieged governments.

For the past 60 years, the U.S., according to Ri, directed “severe sanctions and threats” toward his country.

Four days after the denuclearization agreement in Beijing was signed on Sept. 19, 2005, the United States Treasury Department cut off North Korea’s financial access to international money-lending and credit institutions, affecting even legitimate business transactions.

Few years before this, the U.S. invaded Iraq under the pretext that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

It arrested Saddam Hussein and effected “regime change.”

It was a tactical move on the part of the Kim regime to pursue a nuclear program to stave off an invasion from the U.S.

Although the warmongering George W. Bush administration has denied having such an intention, it was known to be mulling this not-so-remote possibility.

Seoul’s engagement policy toward Pyongyang became a convenient scapegoat amid the clamor for policy change and moves to strengthen the military alliance with the U.S.

The rush to punish Pyongyang rather than to find a solution is contributing to the already volatile environment. The struggle for a united Korea is a continuing project to escape from the imperialist game.]

No comments:

Bantog Iran Post