On
North Korea, Congress Briefed
by Mattis, Coats &
Tillerson Before His UNSC
Visit Sans Lavrov
By Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS,
April 26 – Two days before US
Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson is slated to appear
in the UN Security Council
about North Korea - Inner City
Press has reported
Russia's Sergey Lavrov will
not attend -- Tillerson joined
this statement after briefing
members of Congress: "Joint
Statement by Secretary of
State Rex Tillerson, Secretary
of Defense James Mattis,
Director of National
Intelligence Dan Coats: Past
efforts have failed to halt
North Korea’s unlawful weapons
programs and nuclear and
ballistic missile tests. With
each provocation, North Korea
jeopardizes stability in
Northeast Asia and poses a
growing threat to our Allies
and the U.S. homeland.
North Korea’s pursuit of
nuclear weapons is an urgent
national security threat and
top foreign policy
priority. Upon assuming
office, President Trump
ordered a thorough review of
U.S. policy pertaining to the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea (DPRK).
Today, along with Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen.
Joe Dunford, we briefed
Members of Congress on the
review. The President’s
approach aims to pressure
North Korea into dismantling
its nuclear, ballistic
missile, and proliferation
programs by tightening
economic sanctions and
pursuing diplomatic measures
with our Allies and regional
partners.
We are engaging responsible
members of the international
community to increase pressure
on the DPRK in order to
convince the regime to
de-escalate and return to the
path of dialogue. We
will maintain our close
coordination and cooperation
with our Allies, especially
the Republic of Korea and
Japan, as we work together to
preserve stability and
prosperity in the region.
The United States seeks
stability and the peaceful
denuclearization of the Korean
peninsula. We remain
open to negotiations towards
that goal. However, we
remain prepared to defend
ourselves and our Allies."
After North
Korea's last missile launch,
on April 20 the UN Security
Council after some back and
forth agreed on a Press
Statement, here: "The members
of the Security Council
strongly condemned the most
recent ballistic missile
launch conducted by the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea on 15 April 2017. The
members of the Security
Council expressed their utmost
concern over the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea’s
highly destabilising behavior
and flagrant and provocative
defiance of the Security
Council by conducting this
ballistic missile launch in
violation of its international
obligations under United
Nations Security Council
resolutions 1718 (2006), 1874
(2009), 2087 (2013), 2094
(2013), 2270 (2016), and 2321
(2016).
The members of the Security
Council demanded that the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea shall immediately
cease further actions in
violation of the relevant
Security Council resolutions
and comply fully with its
obligations under these
resolutions.
The members of the Security
Council agreed that the
Security Council would
continue to closely monitor
the situation and take further
significant measures including
sanctions, in line with the
Council’s previously expressed
determination.
The members of the Security
Council stressed that the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea’s illegal ballistic
missile activities are
contributing to its
development of nuclear weapons
delivery systems and are
greatly increasing tension in
the region and beyond. The
members of the Security
Council further regretted that
the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea is diverting
resources to the pursuit of
ballistic missiles and nuclear
weapons while Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea
citizens have great unmet
needs.
The members of
the Security Council
emphasised the vital
importance of the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea
immediately showing sincere
commitment to denuclearization
and stressed the importance of
working to reduce tensions in
the Korean Peninsula and
beyond. To that end, the
Security Council demanded the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea conduct no further
nuclear tests. The members of
the Security Council strongly
urged all Member States to
significantly accelerate their
efforts to implement fully the
measures imposed on the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea by the Security
Council, particularly the
comprehensive measures
contained in resolutions 2321
(2016) and 2270 (2016).
The members of the Security
Council reiterated the
importance of maintaining
peace and stability on the
Korean Peninsula and in
North-East Asia at large,
expressed their commitment to
a peaceful, diplomatic and
political solution to the
situation, and welcomed
efforts by Council members, as
well as other States, to
facilitate a peaceful and
comprehensive solution through
dialogue. "
With tension
mounting around North Korea,
the nation's founder's 105th
birthday passed with highly
synchronized parade in
Pyongyang, amid news Kim Jong
Un wants at least 600,000
people to evacuate the city.
USS Carl Vinson is in Korean
waters. Now Sunday morning
there comes news of a missile
launch failure, from Sinpo.
But in testing such weapons,
failures are necessary.
Nothing yet from the UN;
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres has nothing on his
public schedule on Monday,
April 17 either. Froms the US:
"The President and his
military team are aware of
North Korea's most recent
unsuccessful missile launch.
The President has no further
comment." We'll have more on
this. Back on March 13 when
North Korea held a press
conference at the UN, they
said they've asked UN
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres to organize an
international forum of legal
experts about what they say is
the illegality of UN Security
Council sanctions on them, but
that Guterres has not replied.
Minutes
later Inner City Press asked
Guterres spokesman Stephane
Dujarric, a holdover from the
UN's Ban Ki-moon era, about
DPRK's request to Guterres.
Dujarric said he wasn't aware
of it but would check. Inner
City Press specifically asked
to be informed one way or
another. From the UN
transcript:
Inner City Press:
just a few minutes ago, the
delegation of the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK) talked about a request
they made to António Guterres
to organize an international
forum of legal experts on the
sanctions against them by the
Security Council, and they say
there's been no answer.
Are you aware of the request?
Spokesman: I mean, I
just… I was listening as I was
preparing for the
briefing. We'll follow
up on what was said.
Inner City Press:
Okay. And can we find
out whether there…?
Spokesman: We will, of
course, find out.
Inner
City
Press:
Okay. But, will you tell
us?
Spokesman: Depends what
we find out.
Four
hours later, nothing from
Dujarric's office except
another announcement of a
meeting of a group to whom
Dujarric "lent" the UN Press
Briefing Room from which for
whom Dujarric evicted Inner
City Press, see this
UN "note verbale" to the
US Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, at Paragraphs 9-10.
In
the press conference before
the day's noon briefing, Inner
City Press asked if North
Korea could foresee any role
for Guterres (as the Securty
Council's president for March
Matthew Rycroft said on March
8) but the duo didn't answer
that question, nor Inner City
Press' request for a comment
on the court ruling in South
Korea finally impeaching
President Park (Ban Ki-moon,
still desperate to be
relevant, did comment.) They
denied killing Kim Jong Nam
and said they will continue
bolstering self-reliance
capability for preemption with
nuclear force. Then they left.
The
UN Security Council met on the
morning of March 8 after North
Korea fired more missiles.
Afterward Council president
Matthew Rycroft of the UK
alluded to a role for UN
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres. But when the
Ambassadors of South Korea,
the US and Japan came out
together, as before under
Samantha Power, they did not
answer the Press question
about a role for the UN
Secretary General. It is
theater, some say, doing these
meetings in the UN. These are
questions we will pursue.
On
the evening of March 7, the UK
and Japan tweeted that a
Council Press Statement had
already been issued. The UN
Spokesperson's Office didn't
send it out until 50 minutes
later, still UNexplained.
On March 7,
the UN deputy spokesman Farhan
Haq denied to Inner City Press
that the UN statement on the
launch labeled "amendment"
was, in fact, an amendment. Video here.
At the March 6
noon briefing, Inner City
Press asked the UN
spokesperson, "I just wanted
to know whether you have a
comment yet on the missile
firings by the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea."
Spokesman Farhan Haq replied,
"we deplore the continued
violation of Security Council
resolutions by the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea,
including the most recent
launches of ballistic
missiles. The DPRK
[Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea] leadership should
refrain from further
provocations and return to
full compliance with
its international
obligations. And if we
have any further reaction or
statement later in the
afternoon, of course, we'll
share that with you as it
happens, but we're evaluating
the situation as of right
now."
But after
this answer to Inner City
Press, apparently there was a
rethink. Later the UN
Spokesperson's Office sent out
an "amendment" which dropped
the word "return," thusly:
"The Secretary-General
reiterates his call for the
DPRK leadership to refrain
from further provocations and
comply fully with its
international obligations." No
more "return." Who complained?
On March 7,
Inner City Press asked Haq
about the change, and got only
denial and obfuscation. From
the UN transcript: Inner City
Press: on DPRK.
Yesterday, I’d asked you about
the missile launches and you
said… I’ll look it up.
You said somehow… there was a
line you said that… that the
call was to return to full
compliance with its
international
obligations. And then,
later, there was a written
statement, sort of amending
that without using the word
“return.” So I just
wanted to understand, what…
what came between the
two? Did somebody
complain about the use of the
word “return”? Is it the
UN’s position… you sent out an
amended statement
yesterday. So I’m
wondering, just what… what
triggered the amendment?
Deputy Spokesman: The
amended statement… if you
compare the two statements,
there’s a very small
difference in the words,
basically because it’s
believed that the wording as
it was amended was somewhat
more precise. It’s not
because of an amendment.
Basically, the wrong draft…
the two drafts were very
similar, and the wrong draft
was posted, and we quickly
caught that and put the right
draft up.
Inner City Press: But I’m
actually going… I’m talking
about the transcript of
yesterday’s briefing, was it
similar to the first one that
was put out? And I just…
there’s a substantive thing
behind it. I wanted to
know, is it the UN amending
itself to say that they were
never in compliance and so to
call to a return to compliance
is wrong…? That’s the word
that’s missing.
[inaudible]
Deputy Spokesman: No,
no. It’s nothing like
that. When I came to the
briefing, I didn’t have a
statement. I knew that a
statement was coming up down
the line, but I didn’t have
that language to go on, and so
the language came later in the
day.
Ironically, later in the
briefing, Haq returned to
using the word "return." Watch
this site.
North Korea
denounced that "U.S.
imperialists and the south
Korean puppet warmongers
kicked off joint military
exercises for aggression
against the DPRK." In the UN
lobby on the morning of March
6, a North Korean diplomat
asked Inner City Press, what
is more threatening, these
four missiles or the US
aircraft carriers?
Now Inner
City Press has published
DPRK's letters to UN Secretary
General Antonio Guterres, on
abductions, here, and to
the UK as UNSC President, here.
On the evening of
March 6, the US Mission to the
UN said that "[f]ollowing the
request by Japan and the
United States, consultations
on Non-Proliferation/DPRK will
take place during the morning
of Wednesday 8 March. At the
request of the SRSG, Syria
consultations will now take
place at 3pm on Wednesday,
rather than at 10 am."
The North
Korea launch and request came
while the UN Security Council,
at least most members, are in
Nigeria. They are set to meet
in New York on Wednesday,
March 8 about Syria - and now,
North Korea. Will a Press
Statement come faster and more
detailed, given the argument
that these launches make China
more angry as they tend to
justify the THAAD deployment
China opposes? As Inner City
Press first reported, the new
North Korea sanctions report
by the UN Panel of Exports,
which Inner City Press puts
online in full here,
lists not only weapons sales
to Egypt and the Democratic
Republic of the Congo and
cites Sudan and Sri Lanka -
but also has this on Nigeria,
which the UN Security Council
is currently visiting:
"Malaysia-Korea Partners Group
of Companies lists as one of
its mainactivities overseas
construction, including of
statues, in Africa. The
company’s promotional video
states that its 'formula for
success is a powerful mix of
Malaysian products and Korean
labour and technology.' One of
the company’s construction
projects is the renovation of
the embassy of the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea in
Nigeria." Note 195.
The
Security Council and the
correspondents invited to
cover its trip didn't in
Cameroon address the abuse of
Anglophones in that country.
Will they be checking in on
this other issues ostensibly
of so much concern?
Sudan was
removed from some UN sanctions
just before January 21. From
Paragraph 106: "the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea
supplied 100 122-mm precision
guided rocket control sections
and 80 air attack satellite
guided missiles (AGP-250, for
ground attack) to Sudan Master
Technology Engineering Company
in two contracts of 29 August
2013, worth €5,144,075 and
signed by reported KOMID
president Mr. Kang Myong Chol
(alias Pak Han Se), using a
reported KOMID front company,
Chosun Keuncheon Technology
Trade Company. The Member
State provided travel
information on KOMID officials
responsible for the contracts.
The Sudan has not responded to
the Panel’s enquiries."
In paragraph 103
of the report is it recounted
that "a diplomat of the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea named Mr. Kim Hyok
Chan, and another Angola-based
diplomat named as a Green Pine
representative, Mr. Jon Chol
Young, traveled together to
Sri Lanka three times (between
2014 and 2016) to discuss
shipbuilding projects.
Described as boat-building
experts, they reportedly met
with the State Minister of
Defence of Sri Lanka on 5
November 2015 to discuss
building naval patrol vessels
at a Sri Lankan shipyard prior
to sale to its navy. The Panel
has yet to receive a reply
from Sri Lanka."
More
than 24 hours after North
Korea's missile launch, and
that government calling it a
success, Japan's Mission to
the UN tweeted that it had
requested an urgent UN
Security Council meeting along
with South Korea and the
United States.
And even
before the meeting a Press
Statement was agreed to.
Sweden tweeted
it first; Inner City Press
asked the Council's president
for February Ukraine to
confirm it was agreed before
the meeting and they did.
Inner City
Press asked Japan's Ambassador
Koro Bessho if any member had
brought up the THAAD missile
deployment by the US in South
Korea. He told Inner City
Press to ask the country it
thinks may have raised it.
Watch this site.
While that
meeting took place, this from
US Ambassador Nikki Haley on
the North Korean Missile
launch: “We call on all
members of the Security
Council to use every available
resource to make it clear to
the North Korean regime – and
its enablers – that these
launches are unacceptable. It
is time to hold North Korea
accountable – not with our
words, but with our actions.”
Under
Samantha Power, the US Mission
was selective in how it doled
out information, and ignored
the UN's eviction and ongoing
restriction on the Press which
reports on UN
corruption. This should
be changing, but hasn't yet.
Watch this site.
After North Korea
conducted its last
nuclear test, the UN Security
Council met on September 9 and
issued a Press Statement.
Inner City Press asked
South Korea's then-Ambassador
Oh Joon (who went on to
support Ban Ki-moon's failed
campaign for South Korea's
presidency) if the THAAD
deployment didn't in some
sense escalate things.
Pressed, Oh Joon said,
“China's nuclear deterrence
doesn't have anything to do
with this issue.”
Now on November 30 a new
resolution passed 15-0 (full
text on Scribd here), after
the US election, with the
Obama administration and US
Power and Mission in lame duck
status.
Both China and Russia spoke
against the deployment of the
THAAD system in South Korea.
But even the word wasn't
mentioned in the three
questions pre-picked by
Samantha Power's spokesman
(Reuters, Kyoto, KBS), much
less in the answers. More was
said of South Korean
Ambassador Oh Joon flying to
Korea tonight - to work on a
Ban Ki-moon presidential
campaign? Inner City Press
asked, but it was not answered
at the end.
Ban Ki-moon came to speak,
which he doesn't do on other
countries - essentially, video
for a run for President of
South Korea. US Samantha
Power, when she mentioned the
ban on monuments sales, cited
only Robert Mugabe and Laurent
Kabila, not those of other US
allies.
Afterward at the stakeout,
asked by KBS what chance these
new “statue” sanctions have of
stopping North Korea, Power
made dubious analogies to
sanctions not only on Iran but
also South Africa and Serbia.
It's a problem from hell,
including these unfettered
journalists who want to ask
non pre-picked questions...
But it'd be
“prohibiting member states
from buying North Korean made
statues. The DPRK has
developed a cottage industry
building statues in numerous
African states, mostly via the
Pyongyang-based Mansundae Art
Studio. Mansudae’s work can be
seen in Cambodia, Angola,
Benin, Chad, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Equatorial
Guinea, Ethiopia, and Togo.”
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Past
(and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047,
Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other,
earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in
the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright
2006-2017 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
for
|
,
