U.N. Security Council Postponing Vote on North Korea Resolution
11 July 2006
Council to await results of Chinese mission to Pyongyang, U.S. ambassador says
United Nations -- The U.N. Security Council is taking a day-to-day approach in deciding whether to vote on a strongly worded Japanese draft resolution on North Korea, council diplomats said July 11. The spotlight is now on a Chinese diplomatic mission to Pyongyang.
After an early morning meeting of the draft resolution's co-sponsors, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said that, "in an effort to be fully fair and reasonable to the Chinese diplomatic initiative," the sponsors decided not to ask for a vote on the measure. (See related article.)
At China's request, the co-sponsors -- Denmark, France, Greece, Slovakia, the United Kingdom and the United States -- decided July 10 to assess the situation each day "to provide maximum support for and leverage on the Chinese mission," he explained.
North Korea's threats have not figured in the council's decision to postpone action, the U.S. ambassador added.
The council's aim is to get the Six-Party Talks back on track and persuade the North Koreans to implement the September 2005 moratorium on ballistic missile launches on the Korean Peninsula, Bolton said. (See related article.)
The ambassador said neither the Security Council nor U.N. member governments should be "intimidated by threats from North Korea."
"Historical experience tells us that succumbing to those kinds of threats only gives acquiescence and produces more such threats and more such behavior. In this case, we have to try and do what we think is right in order to protect international peace and security," he said.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the United States has every expectation that the countries in the region and "will come together to face what they see as a common problem: North Korea developing nuclear weapons, lobbing missiles, testing missiles."
"That's a problem for regional security and stability," McCormack said.
"All the countries in the region -- Russia, South Korea, China, Japan, as well as others -- have an interest in trying to grapple with this problem and use whatever leverage they or others might have to get North Korea back to the table," he said.
DRAFT RESOLUTION WOULD IMPOSE SANCTIONS UNDER CHAPTER VII
The Japanese draft resolution would impose sanctions and would be enacted under Chapter VII of the U.N. charter, making compliance mandatory on all U.N. member states. North Korea immediately should end development, testing, deployment and proliferation of ballistic missiles, according to the resolution. If passed, the resolution would require all U.N. members to take the steps necessary to prevent missiles and missile-related items, material, goods and technology from being sent to or brought out of North Korea. The resolution also strongly would urge Pyongyang to return to the Six-Party Talks with South Korea, Russia, Japan, China and the United States.
China and Russia, both of which have veto power in the Security Council, object to the resolution. China has presented a draft presidential statement for the Security Council to consider. However, all 15 council members must agree on a presidential statement, and diplomats have said most members feel the draft statement is not strong enough or action-oriented.
British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said China's draft statement does not recognize that North Korea's missile launches represent a threat to international peace and security or reaffirm that proliferation of weapons of mass destruction constitutes a threat to international peace and security.
Those issues are "basic" for the co-sponsors of Japan's draft resolution, Jones Parry said. The co-sponsors also want "a really tough presidential statement and a clear understanding that if nothing happens within so many days" Japan's sanctions resolution would be passed.
The Chinese proposal was "nowhere near that stage," the ambassador said.
Nevertheless, Jones Parry said, there is no disagreement in the Security Council on the goal.
"Indeed, the whole process of the Six-Party Talks is to produce a solution on the Korean peninsula which would take away the prospect of any nuclear weapons. That is a common objective shared by all of us," he said. "Where we don't agree is in the degree of robustness that we should now show to North Korea given what happened." (See related article.)
For further information on U.S. policies, see The U.S. and the Korean Peninsula and Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.
(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
