- Jonathan Watts in Seoul
Thursday January 23, 2003
The United States' top arms control envoy said a military strike on North Korea was definately a real possibility, he add all options remained on the table to secure Pyongyang's compliance with nuclear nonproliferation accords.
Raising the stakes in the four-month standoff, John Bolton, a US deputy under-secretary of state, accused the North of "driving a stake through the heart" of the existing energy-for-compliance agreement, and said he expected the issue to be taken up by the United Nations security council by the end of this week.
"North Korea has been going through its blackmail handbook, but we're not going to play," said Mr Bolton after meetings in Seoul.
"We are not in the marketplace to buy off North Korea's acquisition of weapons of mass destruction."
North Korea is reportedly planning to resume tests of ballistic missiles if the security council begins discussions on the crisis.
"Pyongyang will never cave in to threats and will respond with an even harder line," said a North Korean source quoted by Reuters.
Mr Bolton emphasised that the US remained focused on the pursuit of a diplomatic resolution to the crisis at this point, but, that could change at any time. He restated Washington's willingness to talk directly to Pyongyang, its offer of aid in return for the scrapping of the North's nuclear programme, and an assurance that America had no invasion plans.
However, when asked whether this ruled out a surgical strike on reactors and military facilities, Mr Bolton answered: "For us, all options are currently on the table."
The tough talk highlights growing US impatience with the softly-softly diplomatic approach favoured by the North's neighbours - South Korea, China, Russia and Japan - to resolve the crisis.
North Korean diplomats, who are in Seoul for ministerial talks, insisted yesterday that their country had no intention of developing nuclear weapons.
However, suspicion has grown in recent weeks as Pyongyang kicked out international inspectors, reactivated a plutonium-producing reactor in Yongbyon, and announced its withdrawal from the international treaty to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
The North's energy ministry said yesterday that the reopened plant would start producing electricity within weeks, but it denied that it would be used to build bombs.
Mr Bolton said all projects would be scrapped, because Washington could never again trust the North with fissile material in any form.
He blamed the North for killing off the Agreed Framework more than five years ago, by secretly putting together a uranium enrichment programme which, he said, could produce weapons in the very near future.
"The North has committed such a fundamental breach that you can't put Humpty Dumpty together again," he said. "Whatever happens in the future will not involve the Agreed Framework."
South Korean officials said any new compromise on energy was likely to involve the provision of a gas pipeline from Siberia through the North to Seoul and Tokyo, which could be a source of energy and funds for Pyongyang.
Despite its dovish stance, Seoul gladly accepted American demands that the North's non-compliance should be referred to the UN security council.
At the council's first meeting on the issue, which could come as early as Friday, Japan and South Korea are expected to join the five permanent members - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - to discuss warnings and punitive measures.
The council has the authority to impose economic sanctions, which the North has said would be an act of war. South Korean officials, however, said the international body was likely to move incrementally.
"Referring the issue to the council does not mean we will rush into sanctions," said Chun Yong-wo, the director general of the international organisations division at the South Korea foreign ministry. "That is only an option when all else fails."
"The first step is likely to be a presidential statement calling on Pyongyang to comply. We must remain focused on diplomatic efforts."
· Japan is drawing up a plan for a mass evacuation of its citizens in South Korea, in case the crisis on the peninsula boils over into war. According to the Yomiuri newspaper, Tokyo will seek US and South Korean support for an airlift of about 35,000 Japanese residents and visitors.
US warns North Korea strike is possible
- Thread starter EndGame
- Start date
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
No, but they know we can't just go in there without risking them nuking South Korea. What is going on in Korea right now is the best example of why we must take out Iraq before they develop nukes. If Iraq had nukes we would be in the same spot we are with North Korea right now except Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait would be the substitute for South Korea. It's dangerous enough with Iraq having chemical weapons, can you imagine what that region would be like if they had nukes?
But, but, we have nukes. Doesn't every country have the right to have nukes to protect themselves from U.S. expansionism?
Tell me, what's the last country the US took over through military defeat or otherwise and expanded into? From what I can tell, the flag has had 50 stars for quite a few years and had 48 for a long time brfore that!
You said the magic "c" word, Elledan will now appear in a couple soconds
edit: forgot to add the
Whoa, people. Can't you recognize a little sarcasm?
Let me reiterate what I have said several times in the last few weeks:
Many of you are too young to have been cognizent of the "Persian Gulf War."
Most of you are too young to have even been alive for the "Viet Nam War.
Damn few of you were even a thought during the "Korean War."
North Korea has been pulling this same bullshit since the papers were signed at Pyong Yang calling for an end to hostilities. They have pushed and shoved constantly ever since then. I recall an American soldier being shot in cold blood by a North Korean over the cutting down of a tree in the neutral zone. NK has pushed and shoved the West for years because they knew, or at least believed, that China would back them up, again.
Times have changed. China has entered the 20th Century and has an economic interest in maintaining good relations with the West. The U.S. has a huge trade deficit with China. That means that we owe them a lot of money. Do you think that China would back NK in a war against the very people they are trying to promote economic relations with?
China will work hand in hand with the U.S. to subdue NK.
The last thing I would worry about is NK.
Let me reiterate what I have said several times in the last few weeks:
Many of you are too young to have been cognizent of the "Persian Gulf War."
Most of you are too young to have even been alive for the "Viet Nam War.
Damn few of you were even a thought during the "Korean War."
North Korea has been pulling this same bullshit since the papers were signed at Pyong Yang calling for an end to hostilities. They have pushed and shoved constantly ever since then. I recall an American soldier being shot in cold blood by a North Korean over the cutting down of a tree in the neutral zone. NK has pushed and shoved the West for years because they knew, or at least believed, that China would back them up, again.
Times have changed. China has entered the 20th Century and has an economic interest in maintaining good relations with the West. The U.S. has a huge trade deficit with China. That means that we owe them a lot of money. Do you think that China would back NK in a war against the very people they are trying to promote economic relations with?
China will work hand in hand with the U.S. to subdue NK.
The last thing I would worry about is NK.
OUr trade deficit with China does not mean we owe them money, It just means we buy more from them, than they buy from us. For that reason, China is very dependant on US consumers.
When we buy more from them than they do from us, it means that we owe them money. What do you think "trade deficit" means?
No we do not owe them anything, we just buy more. IF I buy something from you and pay you, do I still owe you?
We don't owe them anything, it's a flow of money towards China. There is no debt involved. In theory it means that China's economy grows at the expense of US jobs, of course the trade deficit doesn't count service or software trade.
Is it even a loss of jobs? We have better trained and educated workforce, why waste those talents making shoes?
It's the catch-22 of consumerism: We want to be paid top wages but we want to buy cheap goods.
People will complain about low wages, loss of jobs to overseas, and high prices of goods all in the same breath.
also do not forget China is better educated than the US...I forget my source, but there are like 260,000 graduate degrees earned in China every year and here it is approx. 30,000.
no this means we are very dependent on Chinese producers, where the hell else are we gonna gonna find a cheap 1.3 billion labor force? Mexico just aint gonna cut it.
DanTMWTMP
Lifer
- Oct 7, 2001
- 15,906
- 13
- 81
they stole all the jobs from US....manufacturers in US? forget about it.....made in USA is a luxury item.........someone go over to china and initiate some labor unions.....but then again, expensive stuff eh?..but then again, u save jobs for the US....my dad's business is now crap because mexico and china make stuff lots cheaper.....minimum wage is just way too much eh?....;sldjk
ALSO REGARDING THE ATTACK.....i really really hope it doesn't boil down to a war...i still have friends and family in South Korea....And i intend to visit korea soon as well...sigh this sucks....just pray that this will be resolved peacefully
I would not be inclined to beleive those numbers. If that was the case, there would not be nearly as many manufacturing jobs there.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter