UN sanctions against North Korea prompts nuclear strike threat

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Mar 7, 10:52 AM EST — The U.N. Secu­rity Coun­cil voted unan­i­mously Thurs­day for tough new sanc­tions to pun­ish North Korea for its lat­est nuclear test, a move that sparked a furi­ous Pyongyang to threaten a nuclear strike against the United States.

The vote by the U.N.‘s most pow­er­ful body on a res­o­lu­tion drafted by North Korea’s clos­est ally, China, and the United States sends a pow­er­ful mes­sage that the inter­na­tional com­mu­nity con­demns the bal­lis­tic mis­sile and nuclear tests — and repeated vio­la­tion of Secu­rity Coun­cil resolutions.

Imme­di­ately before the vote, an uniden­ti­fied spokesman for Pyongyang’s For­eign Min­istry said the North will exer­cise its right for “a pre­emp­tive nuclear attack to destroy the strong­holds of the aggres­sors” because Wash­ing­ton is push­ing to start a nuclear war against the North.

It appeared to be the most spe­cific open threat of a nuclear strike by any coun­try against another.

After the 15–0 vote, U.S. Ambas­sador Susan Rice told reporters that “taken together, these sanc­tions will bite and bite hard.”

Respond­ing to Pyongyang’s nuclear strike threat, she said, “North Korea will achieve noth­ing by con­tin­ued threats and provocation.”

She urged North Korea’s lead­ers to heed Pres­i­dent Barack Obama’s call to fol­low the path of peace. If it doesn’t, she said, the Secu­rity Coun­cil is com­mit­ted in the res­o­lu­tion to take fur­ther measures.

China’s U.N. Ambas­sador Li Bao Dong said the top pri­or­ity now is to “bring down the heat” and focus on diplo­macy and restart­ing the six-party talks aimed at denu­cleariz­ing the Korean peninsula.

In North Korea, Army Gen. Kang Pyo Yong told a crowd of tens of thou­sands that North Korea is ready to fire long-range nuclear-armed mis­siles at Washington.

“Inter­con­ti­nen­tal bal­lis­tic mis­siles and var­i­ous other mis­siles, which have already set their strik­ing tar­gets, are now armed with lighter, smaller and diver­si­fied nuclear war­heads and are placed on a standby sta­tus,” Kang said. “When we shell (the mis­siles), Wash­ing­ton, which is the strong­hold of evils, .… will be engulfed in a sea of fire.”

The state­ment by the North Korean For­eign Min­istry spokesman was car­ried by the North’s offi­cial Korean Cen­tral News Agency.

It accused the U.S. of lead­ing efforts to slap sanc­tions on North Korea. The state­ment said the new sanc­tions would only advance the tim­ing for North Korea to ful­fill pre­vi­ous vows to take “pow­er­ful sec­ond and third coun­ter­mea­sures” against its ene­mies. It hasn’t elab­o­rated on those measures.

The state­ment said North Korea “strongly warns the U.N. Secu­rity Coun­cil not to make another big blun­der like the one in the past when it earned the invet­er­ate grudge of the Korean nation by act­ing as a war ser­vant for the U.S. in 1950.”

Although North Korea boasts of nuclear bombs and pre-emptive strikes, it is not thought to have mas­tered the abil­ity to pro­duce a war­head small enough to put on a mis­sile capa­ble of reach­ing the U.S. It is believed to have enough nuclear fuel, how­ever, for sev­eral crude nuclear devices.

The new sanc­tions are aimed at rein­ing in North Korea’s nuclear and mis­sile pro­grams by mak­ing it more dif­fi­cult for Pyongyang to finance and obtain mate­r­ial for these pro­grams, track­ing ille­gal diplo­matic activ­ity and inten­si­fy­ing inspec­tions of cargo to and from the coun­try. In a mea­sure tar­geted at the reclu­sive nation’s rul­ing elite, the res­o­lu­tion bans all nations from export­ing expen­sive jew­elry, yachts, lux­ury auto­mo­biles and rac­ing cars to the North.

North Korea demanded the Secu­rity Coun­cil imme­di­ately dis­man­tle the American-led U.N. Com­mand that’s based in Seoul and move to end the state of war that exists on the Korean Penin­sula, which con­tin­ues six decades after fight­ing stopped because an armistice, not a peace treaty, ended the war.

In antic­i­pa­tion of the resolution’s adop­tion, North Korea ear­lier in the week threat­ened to can­cel the 1953 cease-fire that ended the Korean War.

North Korean threats have become more com­mon as ten­sions have esca­lated fol­low­ing a rocket launch by Pyongyang in Decem­ber and its third nuclear test on Feb. 12. Both acts defied three Secu­rity Coun­cil res­o­lu­tions that bar North Korea from test­ing or using nuclear or bal­lis­tic mis­sile tech­nol­ogy and from import­ing or export­ing mate­r­ial for these programs.

The United States and other nations worry that North Korea’s third nuclear test pushed it closer to its goal of gain­ing nuclear mis­siles that can reach the U.S. The inter­na­tional com­mu­nity has con­demned the regime’s nuclear and mis­sile efforts as threats to regional secu­rity and a drain on the resources that could go to North Korea’s largely des­ti­tute people.

The U.N. res­o­lu­tion iden­ti­fies three indi­vid­u­als, one cor­po­ra­tion and one orga­ni­za­tion that will be added to the U.N. sanc­tions list. The tar­gets include top offi­cials at a com­pany that is the country’s pri­mary arms dealer and main exporter of bal­lis­tic missile-related equip­ment, and a national orga­ni­za­tion respon­si­ble for research and devel­op­ment of mis­siles and prob­a­bly nuclear weapons.

The suc­cess of a new round of sanc­tions could depend on enforce­ment by China, where most of the com­pa­nies and banks that North Korea is believed to work with are based.

The U.N. res­o­lu­tion con­demns the lat­est nuclear test “in the strongest terms” for vio­lat­ing and fla­grantly dis­re­gard­ing coun­cil res­o­lu­tions, bans fur­ther bal­lis­tic mis­sile launches, nuclear tests “or any other provo­ca­tion,” and demands that North Korea return to the Nuclear Non­pro­lif­er­a­tion Treaty. It also con­demns all of North Korea’s ongo­ing nuclear activ­i­ties, includ­ing its ura­nium enrichment.

But the res­o­lu­tion stresses the council’s com­mit­ment “to a peace­ful, diplo­matic and polit­i­cal solu­tion” and urged a resump­tion of six-party talks.

Accord­ing to the res­o­lu­tion, all coun­tries would now be required to freeze finan­cial trans­ac­tions or ser­vices that could con­tribute to North Korea’s nuclear or mis­sile programs.

To get around finan­cial sanc­tions, North Kore­ans have been car­ry­ing around large suit­cases filled with cash to move illicit funds. The res­o­lu­tion expresses con­cern that these bulk cash trans­fers may be used to evade sanc­tions. It clar­i­fies that the freeze on finan­cial trans­ac­tions and ser­vices that could vio­late sanc­tions applies to all cash trans­fers as well as the cash couriers.

The res­o­lu­tion also bans all coun­tries from pro­vid­ing pub­lic finan­cial sup­port for trade deals, such as grant­ing export cred­its, guar­an­tees or insur­ance, if the assis­tance could con­tribute to the North’s nuclear or mis­sile programs.

It includes what a senior diplo­mat called unprece­dented new travel sanc­tions that would require coun­tries to expel agents work­ing for sanc­tioned North Korean companies.

The res­o­lu­tion also requires states to inspect sus­pect cargo on their ter­ri­tory and pre­vent any ves­sel that refuses an inspec­tion from enter­ing their ports. And a new avi­a­tion mea­sure calls on states to deny air­craft per­mis­sion to take off, land or fly over their ter­ri­tory if illicit cargo is sus­pected to be aboard.

Posted by Randa Wagner on Mar 7 2013. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS Feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.