The Norks Aren't Going To Be Happy: Sanctions Vote Coming Tomorrow
Yesterday, my brilliant better half reported that both China and Russia were hedging on the talk of sanctions. They wanted any reference to Chapter VII removed from the sanctions. Chapter VII, for those who don't understand it, would open the door up for the use of military force to enforce the sanctions. Neither wanted this move, obviously. But Bryan at Hot Air is reporting that a vote for the new sanctions will be coming up tomorrow, as reported by Bloomberg News:
The United Nations Security Council will vote tomorrow morning on a draft resolution sanctioning North Korea, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said.
``We do have unanimous agreement,'' Bolton said. North Korea announced Oct. 8 that it had it carried out its first nuclear test, drawing condemnation from around the world. The UN Security Council began emergency consultations the next day.
The Security Council will meet for consultations on North Korea at 9:45 a.m. New York time tomorrow and then will vote, according to the office of UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric.
In a concession to China, the U.S. dropped explicit reference to a part of the UN Charter that would make sanctions militarily enforceable, changing it to Article 41 of Chapter 7, which only authorizes diplomatic and economic sanctions. Agreement on a draft Security Council resolution circulated by the U.S. on North Korea sanctions had been held up because of opposition from China and Russia.
The resolution would bar the sale or transfer of missiles, warships, tanks, attack helicopters and combat aircraft, as well as missile- and nuclear-related goods to the North Korean regime. So-called ``luxury goods'' would also be banned, though there hasn't been any specific mention of which items would fall into this category.
I guess right now that diplomatic and economic pressure is the best we can hope for. And while Ambassador Bolton is touting unanimity, tomorrow's a long way's off. What if Russia and China pull back from the vote? What if another nation--one of the permanent members--issues a veto? You can only buy comedy this good at the exclusive clubs (and I had no idea that had put one in at Turtle Bay), but the UN is doing it's best to compete. In that case, I nominate Mark Steyn to take over Kofi's position. He's Canadian, not American, and he's funnier than the twits at Turtle Bay. But, that's only if their goal is to compete against the comedy clubs across America.
Seriously though, while we do applaud Ambassador Bolton's moves to get these sanctions pushed through the UNSC, we both know that without the teeth of force to back them up, Pyongyang is going to thumb it's nose at the world. What will the UNSC do IF the Norks DO detonate a nuclear weapon? More harsh language and economic sanctions, or will there be a concerted effort to disarm them? We're not trying to be a pain on this issue, but there is no threat of force. If there is no consequence for continuing this endeavor, then the Norks will simply maintain the status quo, and keep working on their nukes.
And does anyone really believe that China and Russia will abide by the sanctions? Come on, seriously? We don't. In fact we believe that they will just revert back to the tactics that Russia, Germany, and France did when Saddam was under similar sanctions. And what's worse is when Kim Jong-Il starts appealing to the UN that his people are starving and dying under the sanctions, what sort of Oil-For-Food offshoot will the UN offer up to appease him? The signs that we're about to go through another twelve years of BS are right in front of us. And on that note, I'll cite the wisdom of Captain Ed today in closing:
We can't wait twelve years for Russia and China to perhaps change their mind on North Korea. No one wants to fight another war on the Korean Peninsula; it would likely kill more than a million people. Neither can we just wash our hands of the situation and walk away, leaving allies in the lurch. If the UN cannot provide a clear, unambiguous, and strong response to a rogue state conducting nuclear tests -- then why would we need a UN at all?
Publius II
Yesterday, my brilliant better half reported that both China and Russia were hedging on the talk of sanctions. They wanted any reference to Chapter VII removed from the sanctions. Chapter VII, for those who don't understand it, would open the door up for the use of military force to enforce the sanctions. Neither wanted this move, obviously. But Bryan at Hot Air is reporting that a vote for the new sanctions will be coming up tomorrow, as reported by Bloomberg News:
The United Nations Security Council will vote tomorrow morning on a draft resolution sanctioning North Korea, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said.
``We do have unanimous agreement,'' Bolton said. North Korea announced Oct. 8 that it had it carried out its first nuclear test, drawing condemnation from around the world. The UN Security Council began emergency consultations the next day.
The Security Council will meet for consultations on North Korea at 9:45 a.m. New York time tomorrow and then will vote, according to the office of UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric.
In a concession to China, the U.S. dropped explicit reference to a part of the UN Charter that would make sanctions militarily enforceable, changing it to Article 41 of Chapter 7, which only authorizes diplomatic and economic sanctions. Agreement on a draft Security Council resolution circulated by the U.S. on North Korea sanctions had been held up because of opposition from China and Russia.
The resolution would bar the sale or transfer of missiles, warships, tanks, attack helicopters and combat aircraft, as well as missile- and nuclear-related goods to the North Korean regime. So-called ``luxury goods'' would also be banned, though there hasn't been any specific mention of which items would fall into this category.
I guess right now that diplomatic and economic pressure is the best we can hope for. And while Ambassador Bolton is touting unanimity, tomorrow's a long way's off. What if Russia and China pull back from the vote? What if another nation--one of the permanent members--issues a veto? You can only buy comedy this good at the exclusive clubs (and I had no idea that had put one in at Turtle Bay), but the UN is doing it's best to compete. In that case, I nominate Mark Steyn to take over Kofi's position. He's Canadian, not American, and he's funnier than the twits at Turtle Bay. But, that's only if their goal is to compete against the comedy clubs across America.
Seriously though, while we do applaud Ambassador Bolton's moves to get these sanctions pushed through the UNSC, we both know that without the teeth of force to back them up, Pyongyang is going to thumb it's nose at the world. What will the UNSC do IF the Norks DO detonate a nuclear weapon? More harsh language and economic sanctions, or will there be a concerted effort to disarm them? We're not trying to be a pain on this issue, but there is no threat of force. If there is no consequence for continuing this endeavor, then the Norks will simply maintain the status quo, and keep working on their nukes.
And does anyone really believe that China and Russia will abide by the sanctions? Come on, seriously? We don't. In fact we believe that they will just revert back to the tactics that Russia, Germany, and France did when Saddam was under similar sanctions. And what's worse is when Kim Jong-Il starts appealing to the UN that his people are starving and dying under the sanctions, what sort of Oil-For-Food offshoot will the UN offer up to appease him? The signs that we're about to go through another twelve years of BS are right in front of us. And on that note, I'll cite the wisdom of Captain Ed today in closing:
We can't wait twelve years for Russia and China to perhaps change their mind on North Korea. No one wants to fight another war on the Korean Peninsula; it would likely kill more than a million people. Neither can we just wash our hands of the situation and walk away, leaving allies in the lurch. If the UN cannot provide a clear, unambiguous, and strong response to a rogue state conducting nuclear tests -- then why would we need a UN at all?
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 1:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home