The US and North Korea are “Legally” Still at War. Another Failed UNSC Resolution against the DPRK

Region:
In-depth Report:
KiyulChung

The UNSC resolution directed against DPRK on January 22, 2013 reminds us of  two identical previous resolutions (UNSCR: 1718, 1874) in 2006 and 2009.

It is also reminiscent of the so-called “No-Fly Zone” Resolution the UNSC passed in March 17, 2011 directed against Libya, which “justified” relentless bombings for almost 8 months with almost 40,000 sorties and attacks.

In the “spirit” of the UN, the US-led NATO power implemented one of their most recent deceptive concepts, namely the “R2P” (so-called “Responsibility To Protect”), also called “Humanitarian Intervention.”

However, in essence, what they carried out was a criminal and indiscriminate bombings of a sovereign country, which effectively destroyed the once-affluent oil-rich Libya.

In the case of Libya, as well documented now, those US-led Western powers, in order to deceive the whole world again, they disguised or camouflaged themselves once more by wearing the UNSC hat as their typical cover for the sake of their hypocritical justification.

The Korean War

Starting with Korea in June 1950, throughout UN history, under the UN umbrella, the US-led “Western colonial” NATO powers illegally invaded or destroyed  numerous sovereign nations.

As well-known, their first use of the “UN hat” as their most convenient cover to justify their numerous war crimes took place during the Korean War which still continues in the form of  a “Semi-War-State” due to the absence of  a “Peace Treaty”, solely dependent upon the fragile “Armistice Agreement” which was signed in July 27, 1953.

In the absence of a “Peace Treaty”, this is the 60th year the DPRK and the US are STILL legally at WAR!

This extremely abnormal semi-war state, however, has justified the US which still wears the 60 year old UN hat, in order to justify continued military occupation over the “southern territory” of the Korean peninsula.

It’s called “South Korea” which is still occupied by more than 25,000 US troops, with the deployment of sophisticated deadly WMDs, headed by a unknown number of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons.

To make a long story short, those three UNSCRs (2 against DPRK, 1 against Libya) are, in essence, all almost identical:

  • They reveal a largely hypocritical discourse.
  • They reflect US  double standards.
  • They violate the UN Charter, specifically the Preamble;
  • They are basically hegemonic in their deliberations;
  • They reflect a colonial-imperial agenda which contradicts the spirit of the UN.
  • They are a result of ongoing power struggles between the US, China and Russia;
  • They are predicated on the self proclaimed “rights” of the permanent members of the UN Security Council, in violation of  the “Preamble of the UN Charter” which says: “… in the Equal Rights of … and of Nations LARGE and SMALL, and …”;
  • Starting with Korea, the UNSC resolutions essentially allow the US to wear the “UN hat” in their imperial wars waged in the wake of WWII against Cuba, Panama, Nicaragua, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan,  Syria, Libya, …
  • China fought back together with the DPRK to stop US aggression in the 1950-53 Korean War.

Those three so-called “Resolutions” by the UNSC are similar. They reflect a geopolitical and ongoing global power struggle:

  • Again, in those UNSC resolutions, the US/WEST/NATO power’s Imperialist Law of the Jungle WON AGAIN;
  • China and Russia have supported the initiative, subservient to Western colonialist powers AGAIN;
  • The decision by those “two big powers” who joined the US/Western colonial powers AGAIN suggested that they were again subdued by the US/Western imperial forces. In the words of Chinese UN Ambassador Li, the resolution is “an outcome of many rounds of consultations by all parties concerned” and ” generally balanced”;
  • Also what a disappointing statement when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that “Moscow fully agreed with the UN resolution and urged the DPRK to ‘listen to the voice of the international community’,” It is worth noting that Russia has not been able to do anything significant to end the crimes committed by the US-led NATO powers around the world,  for example right now in Syria, specifically with regard to their numerous Human Rights violations, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity;
  • What prevails is a conflict between big and small nations, where small nations are slated by the US NATO alliance for destabilization and destruction;
  • -As a result, the UNSC decision is another severely “imbalanced, unfair and unjust” COMPROMISE by the BIG powers and for their “national interests” at the expense of “national sovereignty” of small nations
  • -In the case of Libya, the UNSCR 1973 in March 2011 robbed Libya’s national sovereignty together with its national wealth and resources; Tens of thousands of lives were lost as a result of NATO bombings .
  • -As a result, like the past, the immeasurable and immense human sufferings still continue this very day not only in DPRK, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, but also many other SMALL nations around the world.

Then what?

The Six Party Talk?

The 2005 September 19 Agreement?

The peace and security talk in the region?

Alas!

Those official statements regarding the “generally balanced” UNSC Resolution against DPRK constitute another EMPTY claim.  Let’s listen to the following arguments a little bit more attentively:

-Most of all, throughout UN history, the UNSC has NEVER been able to do anything real against military actions which violate the UN Charter, committed by the US, Britain, France, Japan and  Israel

-Moreover, the UNSC has NEVER been able to do anything real to deal with ongoing crimes, committed by the above-mentioned “former” colonial powers, while they’ve been repeatedly neglecting or disregarding almost everything deemed as those “Universal Human Values” such as human rights, freedom, naton’s fundamental right to self-determination, independence, most importantly the national self-defense, survival, dignity, and so on;

-The UNSC has NEVER been able to do anything real to address US’, British, French and Israeli War Crimes, not to mention their ongoing illegal military colonial invasions, occupations and covert operations including military coups: Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, Columbia, Nicaragua, South Korea, Cuba (Guantanamo), Egypt, Tunisia, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and so on, for more than half a century since the inception of the UN organization which has served as an instrument of the US/Western colonial powers’

-The UNSC has addressed the numerous crimes committed. E.g. the late General MacArthur and many others in the Truman Administration during the Korean War, late Defense Secretary McNamara and many others in the Nixon, Kennedy, Johnson administrations for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity committed during the Vietnam War, G. W. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc: for their War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, etc: for crimes committed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, now Yemen, Syria and Iran

-However, ironically, the UNSC seems to have very often if not all the time, allowed the SMALL nations, particularly the nations who’ve endlessly fought for their Right to Independence, and Self-Determination, from being Subjected to the US/West-ruled UNSC regime in the name of the so-called “International Community,”

-In sum, the UNSC has NEVER, been able to have brought the countless number of crimes repeatedly committed by the United States of America to any sort of international “JUSTICE”

What makes many in the world deeply troubled and disappointed is the following fact. This fact must be probably most important one I believe.

Both China and Russia do EVERYTHING possible, –like what China does now in their conflicts with Japan on their territorial dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands– in order to protect their own national territory and other fundamental, sovereignty-related issues.

With regard to another UNSCR against the DPRK,  China supported again in January 22, 2013, however, the following argument might be helpful for some of our Chinese readers to understand a little better why there is a widespread and strong sense of resentment among many Koreans from all sides, particularly in the North:

Here is another example from the history when China became a nuclear power in mid 1960s.

Facing nonstop and numerous war threats from US and Britain on the one hand, and, as a surprise, from the most important socialist neighbor the Soviet Union on the other hand, in 1964, the CPC national leadership had to decide to build their own independent nuclear power as their “last resort” to deter a nuclear war and defend their national sovereignty, but most importantly it naitonal dignity.

As a result, China, as a socialist but “poor” and then still very much “developing” nation, had to pay such a high price, i.e., immeasurable sufferings.

However, this historic decision made in the 60s might help many Chinese readers critically and retrospectively reflect of their own hard past with regard to China’s s repeated support of UNSC resolutions against their socialist neighbor DPRK which had to make the very same decision regarding nuclear weapons as the Chinese national leadership had to make in the 60s.

As mentioned above, facing numerous war threats including a nuclear war, the then “anti-imperialist revolutionary China” had to make a decision to develop its own independent nuclear power to defend themselves.

With that “historic decision,” however, China had to fight to overcome the US/West’s relentless demonization, international isolation, economic sanctions not to mention military encirclement, together with US threats to even “Bomb Beijing.” while their most important socialist neighbor the Soviet Union joined the US/Western imperialist powers.

According to late Chairman Mao Zedung, that very fact made the Chinese people and the entire CPC leadership this was a tremendous challenge in that they felt a sense of deep betrayal,  as well as threats of war threats from the West.

Anyhow China successfully built their own independent nuclear power in mid 1960s.

Once China became a nuclear power, the arrogant imperialistic threats and overtures from the US, the West, and the Soviet toned down.

That [i.e., becoming an independent nuclear power] was the only reason,”  as late President Mao noted then, why the US/West who’d repeatedly refused to open the doors to PRC since the Founding of New China in 1949, however, immediately began to normalize their bilateral relationship with China.

It’s disheartening to see once more China and Russia support the US-led Western colonial powers’ hypocritical accusations against the DPRK.

It seems the only “crime” DPRK might have ever committed is that, like China and Russia they’ve done everything possible to protect its nation’s dignity and survival from almost 70 years of ongoing military threats including nuclear war, strangulation by the US-led global economic blockade, sanctions, isolation and demonization.

 Dr. Kiyul Chung, Editor in Chief at The 4th Media, is a Visiting Professor at the School of Journalism and Communication, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.

Articles by: Dr. Kiyul Chung

Related content:

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]