 |  Defying the world, North Korea test-fired missiles on U.S. Independence Day, including a long-range missile that could reach the American continent. South Korea and its neighbors have been on alert.
The North apparently tried to seek direct talks with the United States, using a “brinkmanship tactic.” Its choice of the launching date was intentional. But both the United States and Japan are apparently using this threat for their own political and military purposes.
International opinions are split over this issue. One group advocates sanctions, while the other calls for diplomatic efforts.
Japan and the United States sponsor sanctions. Japan has submitted a draft resolution to the U.N. Security Council, calling for Pyeongyang’s suspension of missile development, an end to financial support to the North, and a ban on the purchase of North Korean missiles. Washington is obviously in favor of sanctions, although President Bush externally pledged to find diplomatic solutions.
The U.S. and Japan contend they have made many concessions to the North, but that their diplomatic efforts have been thwarted by its “brinkmanship tactics.” They want to hold North Korea responsible for having fired missiles, defying the world.
Some countries advocate diplomatic efforts, including the “six-party talks.” South Korea and China support this format. They say experiences show that pressure cannot bring the North into the international community.
China favors “non-official six-party talks.” This is a compromise between the U.S. call for the “North’s unconditional return to the six-party talks” and the North’s request for “direct talks with the United States.” Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. delegate to the six-party talks, supports the compromise format. He has pledged to discuss the financial sanctions against the North within the context of compromise.
The North’s missile development may be interpreted as the exercise of its sovereignty as it so argues. But it is nonsense to say so. It has no right to imperil neighboring countries by firing missiles into the open sea.
All parties concerned should make a coolheaded judgment as to what responses they should make to the North. Their judgment should be based on efforts to discover what is more helpful to removing tension from Northeast Asia, seeking peaceful coexistence, and resolving the North’s nuclear and missile threats. |
|
|
