1. Which elements within the Previous UN Security Council Resolution 1874(2009) should be adapted to the current situation? Should certain provisions be strengthen,, or do the Council members think that too severe restrictions are ‘backfiring”- in which case the provisions as written in UNSC 1874 should be softened.
Colombia is a non permanent member of the Security Council with its tenure ending in 2012 expressed its position on North Korea according to UN Charter, the Council must only intervene when international peace and security are at stake. Colombia[1] has traditionally rallied behind the principle of non intervention and the non use of force in international relations, the intervention of North Korea by force will constitute a flagrant violation of international law and independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States. Colombia[2] consider that there can be no reason, not even on a temporary basis for a State to be the object of military occupation or other measures based on force by another State unless the state actions cause a threat to international peace and stability.
The adoption of the 1874 resolution strengthening Arms Embargo, Call for inspection of Cargo, Vessels if the States have Reasonable Grounds’ to believe the contain Prohibited Items fully is endorsed by the Colombian Government. According to ambassador Nicolas Rivas Deputy Permanent representative of Colombia[3], 58th Session of United Nations Colombia is party to the main treaties and conventions on disarmament and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. As part of the Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries, Colombia defends the importance that nuclear disarmament deserves in the world and supports the basic treaty concerning this, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Moreover, Colombia is on the ratification process of the Comprehensive Nuclear-test-ban Treaty (CTBT).
The Resolution 1874 statute[4] of implementing the assets freeze and travel ban imposed in paragraphs 8(d) and (e) of the resolution 1718 (2006), for member states to prevent the provision of financial serves or the transfer to, through, or from their territory of any financial or other assets or resources that might contribute to the DPPK’s nuclear related, ballistic missile- related or other weapons of mass destructions must be adopted and strengthened with resolution of punishment to any country that may be found co-operating with DDPK in it’s nuclear programme either in providing financial aid or providing uranium enrichment. In November last year the Foreign Minister of North Korea in search uranium enrichment visited Zimbabwe, the compliances of any state to the North Korea interests of Nuclear enrichment must be subjected to inter national condemnation and sanctions must be applied especially economic sanctions.
The requirement of the of the Resolution 1874 for weapon export ban on the Democratic People’s Korea with resolution 1718 which included armoured combat vehicles , large calibre artillery systems, attack helicopters, warships and missiles and spare part s by calling on States to inspect, seize and dispose of the items and by denying fuel or supplies to the service the vessels by the local authorities must be adopted but depriving a sovereign state not to acquire any from of militarily capability will result in the Democratic People’s Korea state security compromised. This statute must be softened and give restrictions only to Nuclear related military equipment that may cause international instability. However, since Colombia has been a victim of illicit traffic of small arms and light weapons, which are used by illegal groups with terrorist or criminal purposes, Lfonso Valdivieso the Premanent Representative of Colombia in the 5th session of the Preparatory Committee to the2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on theNon Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – NPT[5] specified that country has played a crucial role in the introduction of the production and trade of small arms and light weapons in the Disarmament International agenda the fear of rogue states like Korea causing international instability must be taken a serious threat to the foreign policy of Korea hence the statute must be enforced severely.
The element of the previous UN Security Council Resolution 1874 (2009) which regarded all member States, International financial assistance and Credit institutions not to enter into new commitment for grants, financial assistance or concessional loans to that country except for humanitarian assistance and developmental purposes directly addressing civilian need and all countries to provide public financial support for trade with the country where such support could contribute WMD or ballistic related programmes must be adopted in realisation that financial assistance to the DDPK government can be used for nuclear enrichment. The Republic of Colombia within the principles and mandate of the UN[6] to maintain peace and security it calls for the parties in the Six party talks to settle the dispute by peaceful means or recommending appropriate procedures or methods of adjusting such disputes. Although the North Korean development of its nuclear weapons was a challenge to the nuclear non proliferation regime the international community must not impose resolutions but work out solutions with the DDPK no how it can attain energy without relying on nuclear power generation.
Stiff solutions to the North Korean nuclear proliferation will further fuel threats by North Korea to show its independence and sovereignty as well as military power to the rest of the world. Colombia will support of the Resolution to be peaceful, through dialogue and negotiations. Commitment to the treaty of NPT must be strengthened in all aspects and global efforts towards nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament it is within the Colombian National interest to protect its citizens against any country that many attack or cause disability in international relations hence the Resolution 1874 (2009) must have other statutes revised and strengthened to protect DPRK nuclear possession and ballistic testing. The UNSC Resolution 1874(2009) emphasised the need of any state that undertook an inspection or seized and disposed of such cargo was required to promptly submit reports containing the details to the Committee monitoring sanction and to report on any lack of cooperation of a flag state this resolution of in line with the Colombian interest of combating to war against drug trafficking. During the 80's, Colombia sponsored this issue in the General Assembly. In 2001, Colombia led the first United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects. The same year, during the Colombian presidency of the Security Council, the country obtained the approval for a Presidential Declaration about small weapons. According to Colombian Policy on disbarment and international Security [7]In this fundamental issue for the country's international agenda, as it is the case of the drug world problem, the money laundering, and the fight against terrorism, Colombia has raises on high the importance of shared responsibility with the international community and the distribution of loads amongst all nations in the world in order to succeed in the fight against these issues.
2. In light of recent developments, should certain ‘incentives’ or ‘penalties’ be imposed on North Korea? If yes, what kind of incentives/penalties, and what kind of time-framework should be envisioned?
The ambitious and dangerous nuclear programs that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea embarked on in recent years have attracted massive attention of the United Nations Security Council, which view this as a threat to global security. Whilst relations between Pyongyang and the international community had been tense for a long period of time, the situation was worsened by DPRK’s conduction of an underground nuclear test which was followed by the launch of several weapons[8]. The United Nations Security Council, of which Columbia is a non-permanent member, strongly condemned North Korea’s actions. The rapid increase in military activity and movement of North Korean armaments around the world is not only a threat to global security, but also a threat to Colombia’s security in light of massive illegal drug trafficking. It is common knowledge that trade in illegal drugs goes hand in hand with trade in illegal firearms therefore it is in the best interests of the Republic of Colombia to ensure that strict arms controls are imposed on North Korea.
To this end, Colombia therefore supports the United Nations Security Council’s 2009 resolution which condemned DPRK’s actions. It is imperative for the global community to take drastic, stringent and punitive measures against Pyongyang before the situation culminates in a global crisis. These measures should be in the form of military and economic sanctions. The United Nations sanctions imposed on North Korea in June 2009 must be revised and made tougher. These sanctions included the expansion of the existing arms embargo[9]. This would ensure that DPRK will not be able to acquire military equipment from any country thus limiting its capability to amass arms of war. It is highly essential for strict inspection of all cargo ships, planes and submarines destined for, or leaving North Korea so as to ensure that there is no transportation of arms of war and weapons of mass destruction. Cutting of trade ties and loan agreements with North Korea will be crucial in halting production of weapons since the country will not be in a position to acquire materials necessary for the production of, nor get access to much needed foreign currency to buy these materials.
Since the United Nations Security Council considers DPRK as a threat to global peace and security, it is of utmost importance that the country be forced to abandon its Uranium Enrichment Program. Whilst Pyongyang argues that their uranium enrichment program is solely for the purposes of electricity generation[10], the country’s history with materials that can be used for the production of weapons of war and/or of mass destruction shows that they are capable of producing arms. The Republic of Colombia therefore suggests that the international community, through such institutions as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to avail “Special Loans” to North Korea for the construction of Hydro and Thermal Electricity power stations, that would help ease their shortages of electricity.
Colombia also supports the Atlantic Council of the United States’ policy recommendation on a new diplomatic strategy towards North Korea[11]. It is deemed highly essential that a lasting peace solution that will ensure stability in the Korean peninsula be found. Its is Colombia’s firm belief that if North Korea and South Korea reach an agreement on peace, an arms race, war and/or a humanitarian crisis can be averted. Not only can such a bilateral agreement help avert the possibility of a crisis, but will also help to increase trade and greater economic cooperation. The onus is therefore on the United States to facilitate this dialogue and ensure that both parties cooperate. It is also in the best interests of the United States to ensure that there is stability in the Korean peninsula since this would help its relationship with China, thus help stabilise North-East Asia[12]. Colombia also believes that the situation can be improved if the international community can exert pressure on North Korea to move away from a centrally planned economy to a market oriented one by introducing economic reforms and loosening its grip on its population[13]. This will also go a long way in attracting foreign investment from big multi national corporations who have shunning the country. It is imperative to point out that these suggested measures be executed and maintained for as long as possible, or until such a time when the United Nations Security Council deems it necessary to lift them.
3.Colombia’s stance on if the “Six Party talks” are necessary and what framework can be set for them to commence
It is essential for the international community to set up a framework for the restart of the “Six Party Talks”. It is within the interests of peace both regionally and internationally, if the situation in North Korea is not dealt with there might be a chance of war breaking out. It is also in the interest of the bigger picture for the talks to be held by the six countries rather than the North Korea and the United States of America alone.
The six party talks are key to all the six parties involved that is; America, South Korea, North Korea, Japan, China and Russia. In terms of America the talks are important because if they succeed that will mean American troops in South Korea can be called back home and that would generally improve the tensions between the America and the North Koreans. For Russia, North Korea’s presence in the North Eastern Asia is a security threat and they will be keen to have a stable North Korea. China would also want there to be stability in North Korea because there is a lot of North Koreans are crossing over to China to find greener pastures because of the current sanctions that have left North Korea impoverished. Also for China having American troops in South Korea does not do justice to their own security.[14]
North Korea on the other hand would like to have the talks because of the economic damage the sanctions put forward by the United Nations have on them and also for the sack of having peace with the bigger powers. On the other hand it would however be in its interests to have USA troops in the region because they are surrounded by some big powers and therefore this would neutralise the power of these countries on the smaller regional countries. South Korea on the other hand would really want the talks to commence so that North Korea can be forced to denuclearise as soon as possible for their own security. Also to ensure that there will be no further attacks both on land and on sea by the North Koreans who have indicated they have the means to destroy the South Korean capital in a matter of half an hour.
It is within our interests as Colombia to see democracy and peace internationally. It is well within our interests therefore that North Korea stops their nuclear empowerment programme because it is a threat to international peace. We have also established important trade relations with South Korea; the instability of North Korea and its attacks on our trade partners becomes a threat to our economy as well. We have also had in the past terrorist groups emerge from our country but due to the help of America and other allies we have managed to stop the drug activities they used to finance their wars. So it is within our interests to have all countries co-operate in terms of maintaining peace and subtracting any risk of security threats from any country or organisation.
Framework
The previous talks in 1994 saw America promise to build power stations in North Korea as the North Koreans argued that they needed the nuclear power for electrical power. If America and the United Nations can work on facilitating these power stations then we feel that the North Korea will not have a legitimate reason to continue with their nuclear empowerment programmes.[15]
North Korea should show that they are sincere in wanting these talks to commence by showing signs and drafting their plan to stop nuclear production and how they will replace this effort to ensure that they are not cheating everyone. So there should be an effort to show how they will go about without the nuclear technology they consider a need. What they will do replace this need is also going to be an issue.
Economic sanctions on North Korea can be slowing withdrawn if they show signs of withdrawing their nuclear programme.
There should be willingness from the two Koreas to co-operate with each other in the future and solve their problems as neighbours and therefore eradicate all future chances of attacks on one another.
Most importantly they should agree on the types of penalties that will be issued on whoever breaks the agreement that are arrived at during the talks.
4. Colombia’s stance on additional measures that the United Nations Security Council can take to de-escalate the current dangerous situation on the ground, and on high seas
It is important that we understand that in all our efforts, it is key not to provoke the North Koreans to go out of control in anger. The North Koreans will definitely use the fact that they have these dangerous weapons in their possession as their negotiating tramp card. So it will not be a case of the United Nations Security Council bulling the North Koreans into submission.
Therefore in light of all this, North Korea to be stubborn, military intervention would be an option but yet very risky because of the nuclear power that North Korea possess.[16] However if North Korea show any intentions not to stop the nuclear programme and signs to use them against anyone then the United Nations Security Council will have to intervene with military force. Therefore the United Nations Security Council will have to make it clear that if the North Korean government refuses to have the talks or uses such weapons again they will have no option but to intervene to protect both regional and international security. There might be a humanitarian problem after that but we are not attacking the people of Korea but rather the regime and like the Iraq situation civilians are affected. However in the greater interests of the region and international community it is better for North Korea to be forced to stop its programme even if it will end up forcing some military intervening.
So it is definitely up to the United Nations Security Council to stay on high alert towards the situation in North Korea. The arms embargo is definitely a way of keeping things under control and it should not be withdrawn until the council is sure that North Korea is no longer a threat to international and regional security. It is also key is that no country involved in the United Nations Security Council should deal with or form any alliances with North Korea so as to force them to adder to the resolutions that are set forward for them. The United Nations Security Council should be prompt on its members and therefore make sure that they is pure isolation of North Korea in terms of powerful alliances or any war materials such as arms. The key behind doing so is that even if North Korea remains stubborn they will have no real power to act in terms of war and reduce their attacking capability to what they have. Also for them knowing that they have no key major powers in their support would also stop or limit any danger of them attacking with nuclear weapons.
5. What preventive measures can be taken so as to limit potential proliferation by North Korea and also to ensure all powers in the region that an arms race is not a viable option for the peace and security of the region, and the world?
Colombia in line of the functions of the Security Council[17] endorse investigating any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, in order to determine whether the continuance of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security; calling on the parties to settle the dispute by peaceful means or recommending appropriate procedures or methods of adjusting such disputes;- taking enforcement measures, including a mandatory call for Member States to apply economic sanctions and other measures against the aggressor. Calling for military action, should it consider the above measures inadequate; recommending the admission of new Members to the United Nations.
Increasing diplomatic ties with North Korea is very important in limiting the proliferation by North Korea Colombia initiates that all countries with nuclear capability must be automatically governed by the IAEA without seeking membership, the IAEA should by granted international control over all nuclear operations in nation states to prevent the nuclear capabilities of states causing instability in international relations. According Lfonso Valdivieso the Permanent Representative of Colombia in the 5th session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – NPT[18] to the decision by one of the nuclear states to withdraw from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missiles (ABM) in order to develop a national anti-ballistic missile defence system, which may trigger an armaments race in outer space, as well as the possible formulation of a nuclear posture review that expands the circumstances under which nuclear weapons could be used and the countries that they could be used against, are clear proofs of an international deterioration on the issue. With regard to countries withdrawing form the NPT Colombia advocates for intense pressure to be put on the state to return its membership to the NPT as a way to avoid an arms race international states.
Russia and China should align with other countries in condemning the nuclear developments in North Korea. According to Criekemans[19] China must be an integral component of any strategy with a chance of reducing the threat of nuclear North Korea, no other country has the interest and political position in North Korea to facilitate and mediate negotiations. Realistically only China can pressure North Korea since it provides some 90% of its fuel and most essential goods. Colombia in the First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
Recommendations to avoid the lapse ensure all powers in the region that an arms race is not a viable option for the peace and security of the region, and the world.
Integral Action
The solution to the nuclear threat problem requires an integral approach. Actions should be taken in every link of the chain including offer, demand and other associated activities. Likewise all authorities should be involved, and when necessary civil society itself should take part as well.
Consensus
The approach to the nuclear problem should be based on an institutional consensus. In such scenario, the policies and measures to be implemented take into account all the relevant institutions involved.
Multilateral
Within a context of cooperation, reciprocity, balance and respect for the sovereignty of the nations, the Colombian government pleads in favour of the adjustment and implementation of an international policy in which involved states confront the different manifestations of the nuclear world problem and the activities that support it.
Shared responsibility
Due to the fact that the nuclear world problem has a transnational character, all the nations involved are responsible to undertake actions towards the reduction of the internal consumption, production, trade and all the other problems connected to this world issue.
The above mention related solutions are also an integral part to the Colombian government war against drug trafficking. Colombia[20], as a country committed with the efforts of the international community oriented towards the non proliferation and the nuclear disarmament, reiterates that the Non Proliferation Treaty has played an important role along these years. Thus, we are convinced of the necessity to guarantee its preservation, its strengthening and its universality. In this context, we are convinced that it is through a successful review process that the Treaty keeps its validity. Colombia[21] insist on the fulfilment of the unequivocal undertaking with the total elimination of nuclear arms given by the Nuclear Weapon States.
Bibliography
Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
Dr.D. Criekemans – Negotiations in the UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea -2009
Explanation of vote after the vote by the Representative of Colombia to the First Committee of the 58th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, on regard To Draft Resolution A/C.1/58/L.52 "Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty" – CTBT http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF COLOMBIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[1] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[2] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[3] Explanation of vote after the vote by the Representative of Colombia to the First Committee of the 58th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, on regard To Draft Resolution A/C.1/58/L.52 "Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty" – CTBT http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[4] United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
[5] STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF OLOMBIATO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[6] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[7] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[8] Dr. D Criekemans. Negotiations in UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea. Page 1
[9] ibid.
[10] ibid page 3.
[11] Ibid page 23
[12] Ibid page 23
[13] Ibid page 23
[14] 2009-Dr.D.Criekemans- Negotiations in UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea
[15] http://www.colombiaun.org/english/colombia_onu.htm
[16] http://www.colombiaun.org/english/colombia_onu.htm
[17] United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
[18] STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF COLOMBIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[19] Dr.D. Criekemans – Negotiations in the UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea -2009
[20] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[21] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
Colombia is a non permanent member of the Security Council with its tenure ending in 2012 expressed its position on North Korea according to UN Charter, the Council must only intervene when international peace and security are at stake. Colombia[1] has traditionally rallied behind the principle of non intervention and the non use of force in international relations, the intervention of North Korea by force will constitute a flagrant violation of international law and independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States. Colombia[2] consider that there can be no reason, not even on a temporary basis for a State to be the object of military occupation or other measures based on force by another State unless the state actions cause a threat to international peace and stability.
The adoption of the 1874 resolution strengthening Arms Embargo, Call for inspection of Cargo, Vessels if the States have Reasonable Grounds’ to believe the contain Prohibited Items fully is endorsed by the Colombian Government. According to ambassador Nicolas Rivas Deputy Permanent representative of Colombia[3], 58th Session of United Nations Colombia is party to the main treaties and conventions on disarmament and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. As part of the Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries, Colombia defends the importance that nuclear disarmament deserves in the world and supports the basic treaty concerning this, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Moreover, Colombia is on the ratification process of the Comprehensive Nuclear-test-ban Treaty (CTBT).
The Resolution 1874 statute[4] of implementing the assets freeze and travel ban imposed in paragraphs 8(d) and (e) of the resolution 1718 (2006), for member states to prevent the provision of financial serves or the transfer to, through, or from their territory of any financial or other assets or resources that might contribute to the DPPK’s nuclear related, ballistic missile- related or other weapons of mass destructions must be adopted and strengthened with resolution of punishment to any country that may be found co-operating with DDPK in it’s nuclear programme either in providing financial aid or providing uranium enrichment. In November last year the Foreign Minister of North Korea in search uranium enrichment visited Zimbabwe, the compliances of any state to the North Korea interests of Nuclear enrichment must be subjected to inter national condemnation and sanctions must be applied especially economic sanctions.
The requirement of the of the Resolution 1874 for weapon export ban on the Democratic People’s Korea with resolution 1718 which included armoured combat vehicles , large calibre artillery systems, attack helicopters, warships and missiles and spare part s by calling on States to inspect, seize and dispose of the items and by denying fuel or supplies to the service the vessels by the local authorities must be adopted but depriving a sovereign state not to acquire any from of militarily capability will result in the Democratic People’s Korea state security compromised. This statute must be softened and give restrictions only to Nuclear related military equipment that may cause international instability. However, since Colombia has been a victim of illicit traffic of small arms and light weapons, which are used by illegal groups with terrorist or criminal purposes, Lfonso Valdivieso the Premanent Representative of Colombia in the 5th session of the Preparatory Committee to the2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on theNon Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – NPT[5] specified that country has played a crucial role in the introduction of the production and trade of small arms and light weapons in the Disarmament International agenda the fear of rogue states like Korea causing international instability must be taken a serious threat to the foreign policy of Korea hence the statute must be enforced severely.
The element of the previous UN Security Council Resolution 1874 (2009) which regarded all member States, International financial assistance and Credit institutions not to enter into new commitment for grants, financial assistance or concessional loans to that country except for humanitarian assistance and developmental purposes directly addressing civilian need and all countries to provide public financial support for trade with the country where such support could contribute WMD or ballistic related programmes must be adopted in realisation that financial assistance to the DDPK government can be used for nuclear enrichment. The Republic of Colombia within the principles and mandate of the UN[6] to maintain peace and security it calls for the parties in the Six party talks to settle the dispute by peaceful means or recommending appropriate procedures or methods of adjusting such disputes. Although the North Korean development of its nuclear weapons was a challenge to the nuclear non proliferation regime the international community must not impose resolutions but work out solutions with the DDPK no how it can attain energy without relying on nuclear power generation.
Stiff solutions to the North Korean nuclear proliferation will further fuel threats by North Korea to show its independence and sovereignty as well as military power to the rest of the world. Colombia will support of the Resolution to be peaceful, through dialogue and negotiations. Commitment to the treaty of NPT must be strengthened in all aspects and global efforts towards nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament it is within the Colombian National interest to protect its citizens against any country that many attack or cause disability in international relations hence the Resolution 1874 (2009) must have other statutes revised and strengthened to protect DPRK nuclear possession and ballistic testing. The UNSC Resolution 1874(2009) emphasised the need of any state that undertook an inspection or seized and disposed of such cargo was required to promptly submit reports containing the details to the Committee monitoring sanction and to report on any lack of cooperation of a flag state this resolution of in line with the Colombian interest of combating to war against drug trafficking. During the 80's, Colombia sponsored this issue in the General Assembly. In 2001, Colombia led the first United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects. The same year, during the Colombian presidency of the Security Council, the country obtained the approval for a Presidential Declaration about small weapons. According to Colombian Policy on disbarment and international Security [7]In this fundamental issue for the country's international agenda, as it is the case of the drug world problem, the money laundering, and the fight against terrorism, Colombia has raises on high the importance of shared responsibility with the international community and the distribution of loads amongst all nations in the world in order to succeed in the fight against these issues.
2. In light of recent developments, should certain ‘incentives’ or ‘penalties’ be imposed on North Korea? If yes, what kind of incentives/penalties, and what kind of time-framework should be envisioned?
The ambitious and dangerous nuclear programs that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea embarked on in recent years have attracted massive attention of the United Nations Security Council, which view this as a threat to global security. Whilst relations between Pyongyang and the international community had been tense for a long period of time, the situation was worsened by DPRK’s conduction of an underground nuclear test which was followed by the launch of several weapons[8]. The United Nations Security Council, of which Columbia is a non-permanent member, strongly condemned North Korea’s actions. The rapid increase in military activity and movement of North Korean armaments around the world is not only a threat to global security, but also a threat to Colombia’s security in light of massive illegal drug trafficking. It is common knowledge that trade in illegal drugs goes hand in hand with trade in illegal firearms therefore it is in the best interests of the Republic of Colombia to ensure that strict arms controls are imposed on North Korea.
To this end, Colombia therefore supports the United Nations Security Council’s 2009 resolution which condemned DPRK’s actions. It is imperative for the global community to take drastic, stringent and punitive measures against Pyongyang before the situation culminates in a global crisis. These measures should be in the form of military and economic sanctions. The United Nations sanctions imposed on North Korea in June 2009 must be revised and made tougher. These sanctions included the expansion of the existing arms embargo[9]. This would ensure that DPRK will not be able to acquire military equipment from any country thus limiting its capability to amass arms of war. It is highly essential for strict inspection of all cargo ships, planes and submarines destined for, or leaving North Korea so as to ensure that there is no transportation of arms of war and weapons of mass destruction. Cutting of trade ties and loan agreements with North Korea will be crucial in halting production of weapons since the country will not be in a position to acquire materials necessary for the production of, nor get access to much needed foreign currency to buy these materials.
Since the United Nations Security Council considers DPRK as a threat to global peace and security, it is of utmost importance that the country be forced to abandon its Uranium Enrichment Program. Whilst Pyongyang argues that their uranium enrichment program is solely for the purposes of electricity generation[10], the country’s history with materials that can be used for the production of weapons of war and/or of mass destruction shows that they are capable of producing arms. The Republic of Colombia therefore suggests that the international community, through such institutions as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to avail “Special Loans” to North Korea for the construction of Hydro and Thermal Electricity power stations, that would help ease their shortages of electricity.
Colombia also supports the Atlantic Council of the United States’ policy recommendation on a new diplomatic strategy towards North Korea[11]. It is deemed highly essential that a lasting peace solution that will ensure stability in the Korean peninsula be found. Its is Colombia’s firm belief that if North Korea and South Korea reach an agreement on peace, an arms race, war and/or a humanitarian crisis can be averted. Not only can such a bilateral agreement help avert the possibility of a crisis, but will also help to increase trade and greater economic cooperation. The onus is therefore on the United States to facilitate this dialogue and ensure that both parties cooperate. It is also in the best interests of the United States to ensure that there is stability in the Korean peninsula since this would help its relationship with China, thus help stabilise North-East Asia[12]. Colombia also believes that the situation can be improved if the international community can exert pressure on North Korea to move away from a centrally planned economy to a market oriented one by introducing economic reforms and loosening its grip on its population[13]. This will also go a long way in attracting foreign investment from big multi national corporations who have shunning the country. It is imperative to point out that these suggested measures be executed and maintained for as long as possible, or until such a time when the United Nations Security Council deems it necessary to lift them.
3.Colombia’s stance on if the “Six Party talks” are necessary and what framework can be set for them to commence
It is essential for the international community to set up a framework for the restart of the “Six Party Talks”. It is within the interests of peace both regionally and internationally, if the situation in North Korea is not dealt with there might be a chance of war breaking out. It is also in the interest of the bigger picture for the talks to be held by the six countries rather than the North Korea and the United States of America alone.
The six party talks are key to all the six parties involved that is; America, South Korea, North Korea, Japan, China and Russia. In terms of America the talks are important because if they succeed that will mean American troops in South Korea can be called back home and that would generally improve the tensions between the America and the North Koreans. For Russia, North Korea’s presence in the North Eastern Asia is a security threat and they will be keen to have a stable North Korea. China would also want there to be stability in North Korea because there is a lot of North Koreans are crossing over to China to find greener pastures because of the current sanctions that have left North Korea impoverished. Also for China having American troops in South Korea does not do justice to their own security.[14]
North Korea on the other hand would like to have the talks because of the economic damage the sanctions put forward by the United Nations have on them and also for the sack of having peace with the bigger powers. On the other hand it would however be in its interests to have USA troops in the region because they are surrounded by some big powers and therefore this would neutralise the power of these countries on the smaller regional countries. South Korea on the other hand would really want the talks to commence so that North Korea can be forced to denuclearise as soon as possible for their own security. Also to ensure that there will be no further attacks both on land and on sea by the North Koreans who have indicated they have the means to destroy the South Korean capital in a matter of half an hour.
It is within our interests as Colombia to see democracy and peace internationally. It is well within our interests therefore that North Korea stops their nuclear empowerment programme because it is a threat to international peace. We have also established important trade relations with South Korea; the instability of North Korea and its attacks on our trade partners becomes a threat to our economy as well. We have also had in the past terrorist groups emerge from our country but due to the help of America and other allies we have managed to stop the drug activities they used to finance their wars. So it is within our interests to have all countries co-operate in terms of maintaining peace and subtracting any risk of security threats from any country or organisation.
Framework
The previous talks in 1994 saw America promise to build power stations in North Korea as the North Koreans argued that they needed the nuclear power for electrical power. If America and the United Nations can work on facilitating these power stations then we feel that the North Korea will not have a legitimate reason to continue with their nuclear empowerment programmes.[15]
North Korea should show that they are sincere in wanting these talks to commence by showing signs and drafting their plan to stop nuclear production and how they will replace this effort to ensure that they are not cheating everyone. So there should be an effort to show how they will go about without the nuclear technology they consider a need. What they will do replace this need is also going to be an issue.
Economic sanctions on North Korea can be slowing withdrawn if they show signs of withdrawing their nuclear programme.
There should be willingness from the two Koreas to co-operate with each other in the future and solve their problems as neighbours and therefore eradicate all future chances of attacks on one another.
Most importantly they should agree on the types of penalties that will be issued on whoever breaks the agreement that are arrived at during the talks.
4. Colombia’s stance on additional measures that the United Nations Security Council can take to de-escalate the current dangerous situation on the ground, and on high seas
It is important that we understand that in all our efforts, it is key not to provoke the North Koreans to go out of control in anger. The North Koreans will definitely use the fact that they have these dangerous weapons in their possession as their negotiating tramp card. So it will not be a case of the United Nations Security Council bulling the North Koreans into submission.
Therefore in light of all this, North Korea to be stubborn, military intervention would be an option but yet very risky because of the nuclear power that North Korea possess.[16] However if North Korea show any intentions not to stop the nuclear programme and signs to use them against anyone then the United Nations Security Council will have to intervene with military force. Therefore the United Nations Security Council will have to make it clear that if the North Korean government refuses to have the talks or uses such weapons again they will have no option but to intervene to protect both regional and international security. There might be a humanitarian problem after that but we are not attacking the people of Korea but rather the regime and like the Iraq situation civilians are affected. However in the greater interests of the region and international community it is better for North Korea to be forced to stop its programme even if it will end up forcing some military intervening.
So it is definitely up to the United Nations Security Council to stay on high alert towards the situation in North Korea. The arms embargo is definitely a way of keeping things under control and it should not be withdrawn until the council is sure that North Korea is no longer a threat to international and regional security. It is also key is that no country involved in the United Nations Security Council should deal with or form any alliances with North Korea so as to force them to adder to the resolutions that are set forward for them. The United Nations Security Council should be prompt on its members and therefore make sure that they is pure isolation of North Korea in terms of powerful alliances or any war materials such as arms. The key behind doing so is that even if North Korea remains stubborn they will have no real power to act in terms of war and reduce their attacking capability to what they have. Also for them knowing that they have no key major powers in their support would also stop or limit any danger of them attacking with nuclear weapons.
5. What preventive measures can be taken so as to limit potential proliferation by North Korea and also to ensure all powers in the region that an arms race is not a viable option for the peace and security of the region, and the world?
Colombia in line of the functions of the Security Council[17] endorse investigating any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, in order to determine whether the continuance of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security; calling on the parties to settle the dispute by peaceful means or recommending appropriate procedures or methods of adjusting such disputes;- taking enforcement measures, including a mandatory call for Member States to apply economic sanctions and other measures against the aggressor. Calling for military action, should it consider the above measures inadequate; recommending the admission of new Members to the United Nations.
Increasing diplomatic ties with North Korea is very important in limiting the proliferation by North Korea Colombia initiates that all countries with nuclear capability must be automatically governed by the IAEA without seeking membership, the IAEA should by granted international control over all nuclear operations in nation states to prevent the nuclear capabilities of states causing instability in international relations. According Lfonso Valdivieso the Permanent Representative of Colombia in the 5th session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – NPT[18] to the decision by one of the nuclear states to withdraw from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missiles (ABM) in order to develop a national anti-ballistic missile defence system, which may trigger an armaments race in outer space, as well as the possible formulation of a nuclear posture review that expands the circumstances under which nuclear weapons could be used and the countries that they could be used against, are clear proofs of an international deterioration on the issue. With regard to countries withdrawing form the NPT Colombia advocates for intense pressure to be put on the state to return its membership to the NPT as a way to avoid an arms race international states.
Russia and China should align with other countries in condemning the nuclear developments in North Korea. According to Criekemans[19] China must be an integral component of any strategy with a chance of reducing the threat of nuclear North Korea, no other country has the interest and political position in North Korea to facilitate and mediate negotiations. Realistically only China can pressure North Korea since it provides some 90% of its fuel and most essential goods. Colombia in the First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
Recommendations to avoid the lapse ensure all powers in the region that an arms race is not a viable option for the peace and security of the region, and the world.
Integral Action
The solution to the nuclear threat problem requires an integral approach. Actions should be taken in every link of the chain including offer, demand and other associated activities. Likewise all authorities should be involved, and when necessary civil society itself should take part as well.
Consensus
The approach to the nuclear problem should be based on an institutional consensus. In such scenario, the policies and measures to be implemented take into account all the relevant institutions involved.
Multilateral
Within a context of cooperation, reciprocity, balance and respect for the sovereignty of the nations, the Colombian government pleads in favour of the adjustment and implementation of an international policy in which involved states confront the different manifestations of the nuclear world problem and the activities that support it.
Shared responsibility
Due to the fact that the nuclear world problem has a transnational character, all the nations involved are responsible to undertake actions towards the reduction of the internal consumption, production, trade and all the other problems connected to this world issue.
The above mention related solutions are also an integral part to the Colombian government war against drug trafficking. Colombia[20], as a country committed with the efforts of the international community oriented towards the non proliferation and the nuclear disarmament, reiterates that the Non Proliferation Treaty has played an important role along these years. Thus, we are convinced of the necessity to guarantee its preservation, its strengthening and its universality. In this context, we are convinced that it is through a successful review process that the Treaty keeps its validity. Colombia[21] insist on the fulfilment of the unequivocal undertaking with the total elimination of nuclear arms given by the Nuclear Weapon States.
Bibliography
Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
Dr.D. Criekemans – Negotiations in the UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea -2009
Explanation of vote after the vote by the Representative of Colombia to the First Committee of the 58th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, on regard To Draft Resolution A/C.1/58/L.52 "Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty" – CTBT http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF COLOMBIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[1] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[2] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[3] Explanation of vote after the vote by the Representative of Colombia to the First Committee of the 58th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, on regard To Draft Resolution A/C.1/58/L.52 "Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty" – CTBT http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[4] United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
[5] STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF OLOMBIATO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[6] Colombia http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[7] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[8] Dr. D Criekemans. Negotiations in UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea. Page 1
[9] ibid.
[10] ibid page 3.
[11] Ibid page 23
[12] Ibid page 23
[13] Ibid page 23
[14] 2009-Dr.D.Criekemans- Negotiations in UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea
[15] http://www.colombiaun.org/english/colombia_onu.htm
[16] http://www.colombiaun.org/english/colombia_onu.htm
[17] United Security Council www.un.org/Docs/sc/
[18] STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALFONSO VALDIVIESO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF COLOMBIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS First Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - NPT - New York, April 08, 2002
[19] Dr.D. Criekemans – Negotiations in the UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea -2009
[20] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
[21] COLOMBIAN POLICY ON DISARMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY http://www.colombiaun.org/english/info_general.htm
