nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Iran Complies With Nuclear Deal says UN monitor, contradicting Trump

Contradicting Trump, U.N. Monitor Says Iran Complies With Nuclear Deal, NYT, By RICK GLADSTONE, AUG. 31, 2017 Iran is adhering to the limits placed on its nuclear activities under the 2015 agreement with six world powers, the United Nations monitor said Thursday in a quarterly report that could further complicate President Trump’s vow to find the Iranians in violation of the accord.

The quarterly report by the monitor, the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, found that Iran’s stockpile and the purity of its uranium fuel were well within the allowed maximums. Iran’s supply of heavy water, used in reactors that can produce plutonium, another nuclear-weapons fuel, also was within the limits, the report stated.

The findings, initially reported by news agencies in Vienna, were not necessarily unexpected. But they could make it more difficult politically for Mr. Trump to justify scrapping the agreement, which was negotiated under the Obama administration. Mr. Trump has repeatedly called the agreement one of the worst deals ever and a giveaway to Iran.

The agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or J.C.P.O.A., relaxed many economic sanctions on Iran in return for its verifiable pledge to engage in only peaceful nuclear activities, which included limits on fuel that could be used in atomic bombs.

Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia, which also are parties to the agreement, have all expressed strong support for it and have warned that if Mr. Trump withdraws, the United States would be isolated on the issue…….https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/world/middleeast/un-nuclear-iran-trump.html

September 1, 2017 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

U.N. nuclear watchdog sees no need to check Iran military sites

U.S. pressure or not, U.N. nuclear watchdog sees no need to check Iran military sites,  http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-inspections-idUSKCN1BB1JC , Francois Murphy, VIENNA , 31 Aug 17, – The United States is pushing U.N. nuclear inspectors to check military sites in Iran to verify it is not breaching its nuclear deal with world powers. But for this to happen, inspectors must believe such checks are necessary and so far they do not, officials say.

Last week, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley visited the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is scrutinizing compliance with the 2015 agreement, as part of a review of the pact by the administration of President Donald Trump. He has called it “the worst deal ever negotiated”.

After her talks with officials of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Haley said: “There are… numerous undeclared sites that have not been inspected. That is a problem.” Iran dismissed her demands as “merely a dream”.

The IAEA has the authority to request access to facilities in Iran, including military ones, if there are new and credible indications of banned nuclear activities there, according to officials from the agency and signatories to the deal.

But they said Washington has not provided such indications to back up its pressure on the IAEA to make such a request.

“We’re not going to visit a military site like Parchin just to send a political signal,” an IAEA official said, mentioning a military site often cited by opponents of the deal including Iran’s arch-adversary Israel and many U.S. Republicans. The deal was struck under Trump’s Democratic predecessor Barack Obama.

IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano frequently describes his Vienna-based agency as a technical rather than a political one, underscoring the need for its work to be based on facts alone.

The accord restricts Iran’s atomic activities with a view to keeping the Islamic Republic a year’s work away from having enough enriched uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb, should it pull out of the accord and sprint towards making a weapon.

September 1, 2017 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

USA government to abolish climate change envoy

US state department to abolish climate change envoy Climate Home  29/08/2017,  Critics say Rex Tillerson’s restructuring will further diminish US’ standing in international affairs, By Karl Mathiesen

Secretary of state Rex Tillerson has informed Congress that the US will no longer have a special envoy for climate change, the official that has led delegations to UN climate talks since 2009.

In a letter (below) addressed to Bob Corker (R-Tenn), the chairman of the Senate committee on foreign relations, Tillerson outlined a plan to abolish 36 out of 66 special envoy positions.

Some of the positions would be entirely scrapped, said Tillerson, or “if an issue no longer requires a special envoy or representative, then an appropriate bureau will manage any legacy responsibilities”. This was the case with climate change, which will now be managed under the Bureau of Oceans and International and Scientific Affairs (OES)……..

Under president Donald Trump, the US administration has announced plans to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, although it remains a party to the accord until it can formally withdraw in 2020……..

In May, in response to budget proposals to cut 32% from his budget, Tillerson agreed to slim down the department. Other state department cuts under Trump include abolishing the Global Climate Change Initiative, which funds the UN climate process. http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/08/29/us-state-department-abolish-climate-change-envoy/

September 1, 2017 Posted by | climate change, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s unwise attitude to Iran and the nuclear agreement

Donald Trump’s nuclear obsession with Iran is misplaced, The US president would be better advised to try defusing tensions with North Korea, Ft.com Roula Khalaf,   30 Aug 17, 

Donald Trump had two nuclear tantrums this summer, though you may know about only one of them. He warned North Korea it would face “fire and fury like the world has never seen” if it made further threats to the US, and set much of the world fretting about nuclear war as a consequence. The former director of national intelligence James Clapper noted that there is nothing to stop Mr Trump from carrying out a first strike, which, as he rightly puts it, is “pretty damn scary”. Also scary is Mr Trump’s determination to reopen another nuclear dispute that was parked in 2015, thanks to deft diplomacy by his predecessor. He doesn’t rage as much about Iran as North Korea but Mr Trump hates the Iran nuclear deal, which rolled back Tehran’s enrichment programme in exchange for a lifting of international sanctions. Every time the state department confirms Iran is in compliance with it (Congress mandates this every 90 days), the president has a fit.

This summer, according to US media, during one such episode, Mr Trump ordered his lieutenants to come up with a reason why Iran is flouting the agreement next time they report back to him. For foreign policy watchers, this brought back memories of George W Bush’s obsession with Saddam Hussein and the resulting politicisation of intelligence on weapons of mass destruction to justify the invasion of Iraq. The consequences of that misguided adventure are still spilling Iraqi and American blood……
With the crisis intensifying in North Korea — which, unlike Iran, does have nuclear weapons — ensuring an Iranian nuclear programme stays inactive for a decade is rather reassuring. Though the circumstances and the nature of the regimes of North Korea and Iran are different, the same painstaking multilateral diplomacy that produced the deal with Tehran will be needed to resolve the stand-off with Pyongyang peacefully….
while it would have been preferable to force Iran into a total surrender, it was not possible. If there had been a better deal to be had, the six world powers involved in the talks would have negotiated it. Mr Trump fancies himself as a master negotiator, but he would meet his match if he sat down with the Iranians. The US administration is under the impression that undermining the nuclear agreement would force Iran into submission to its Sunni Arab neighbours. More likely, quite the opposite would happen. Mr Trump is obsessing about Iran for the wrong reasons. More useful would be to study the nuclear agreement for the lessons it might offer about dealing with North Korea. roula.khalaf@ft.com  https://www.ft.com/content/3534bbf6-8c96-11e7-9084-d0c17942ba93

September 1, 2017 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Trump – “all options on the table”, after North Korea’s missile test, flying over Japan

All options on the table after missile: Trump Sky News ,  30 August 2017 US president Donald Trump has said ‘all options are on the table’ after North Korea launched a ballistic missile over Japan.

Mr Trump spoke as China said tensions on the Korean peninsula were now at ‘tipping point’.

North Korea fired a midrange ballistic missile that flew over Japan on Tuesday, a test considered one of the most provocative ever from the reclusive state.

It came as US and South Korean forces conduct annual military exercises on the peninsula. Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying reiterated Beijing’s call for peace talks, saying ‘pressure and sanctions’ against North Korea ‘cannot fundamentally solve the issue’, and said the country needed to exercise restraint.

‘The UN Security Council has put through several resolutions and sanctions have all along been put in place but everyone can see whether they’ve had actual results,’ she added.

‘On the one hand, sanctions have continued to be put in place via resolutions and on the other hand North Korea’s nuclear and missile launch process is still continuing.’……http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2017/08/30/all-options-on-the-table-after-missile–trump.html

August 30, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

It might be best to learn to live with a nuclear North Korea

Can the world live with a nuclear North Korea?, BBC, Jonathan MarcusDiplomatic correspondent, 30 August 2017,  This is, by any standards, the most provocative of North Korea’s recent missile tests.

Launching a rocket over Japanese territory – with at least the possibility that it could break up and deposit debris on Japanese soil – shows that Pyongyang is intent on maintaining its brinkmanship – this was only the third missile test to over-fly Japan within the past two decades. However, this may perhaps be brinkmanship only to a point.

It is noteworthy that North Korea did not make good on its threat to direct a missile towards the US Pacific territory of Guam – something that might well have precipitated a US military response.

But equally clearly it shows that the Trump administration’s assertions earlier this month – after a round of escalating threats between Washington and Pyongyang – that the North Korean regime was now pausing for thought, were premature.

So here we are again, facing the question of what to do about North Korea as it moves rapidly forward with its linked ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programmes.

Or, to put the question another way, if these programmes cannot be stopped, and Pyongyang eventually gets the ability to target the continental USA with a nuclear-armed missile, can the US and the world live with a nuclear-armed North Korea?

There are five declared nuclear weapons states: Britain, France, the US, China and Russia.

They mostly developed their nuclear weapons arsenals in the aftermath of World War Two, which had seen a frightening demonstration of the power of “the Bomb” with its use by the Americans against two Japanese cities. China was a relative latecomer to the nuclear “club”, joining in the mid-1960s.

Since then, efforts to prevent the spread or proliferation of nuclear weapons have been remarkably successful. The Non-Proliferation Treaty – which entered into force in 1970 – made the clear distinction between the declared nuclear weapons states and everyone else.

The deal was that the declared nuclear states would seek to cut – and eventually eliminate – their arsenals, while the rest would get the benefits of peaceful nuclear technology by agreeing never to seek nuclear weapons.

Either through the Non-Proliferation Treaty, by military threat – as in the case of Iraq and Libya – or by additional agreements – such as the understanding with Iran – very few countries have sought to develop nuclear arsenals.

Some, who had relatively advanced weapons programmes, like South Africa, abandoned them altogether.

Three countries who never signed up to the NPT deal did develop nuclear weapons arsenals: Israel, India and Pakistan.

But, while their programmes remain for some controversial, they are only seen as a threat in a regional context, though Pakistan’s nuclear security and its proliferation activities in the past have rung alarm bells more widely.

So what would it mean if North Korea joined this trio?

Indeed, for practical purposes, it already is a nuclear-armed state. It is its capacity to strike US cities that is still in doubt………

  • A clear diplomatic pathway

Diplomacy under the Trump administration has got a bad rap. Look at his opposition to the nuclear agreement with Iran.

But just imagine if there was a similar deal in place with Pyongyang. That is not really a feasible proposition but the point remains that in a substantially deteriorating situation even an agreement that slows or delays North Korea’s progress might be better than nothing.

Former US diplomats have cautioned that past diplomatic engagement with “the hermit kingdom” is often unfairly written off.

True, the deal that froze North Korea’s nuclear activities in the mid-1990s eventually collapsed. But Pyongyang’s nuclear progress was frozen for several years. Another agreement in 2000, freezing North Korea’s long-range missile programme, similarly collapsed.

But the key takeaway here is that the record shows it was US actions as much as North Korea’s that ended these deals.

The North Korean regime, many analysts argue, is not quite as crazy as it seems. There is a logic behind its behaviour and there are things that it wants. A peace deal on the Korean peninsula; economic development; a commitment by the US not to seek regime change; these are all the potential currency for diplomatic exchanges in the future.

This, as ever, is a problem with few good alternatives on offer. The goal needs to be to avoid the very worst outcomes and to favour the least bad. Diplomacy, coercion, sanctions, deterrence, all have a part to play.

The question remains whether this US administration is capable of rising to the challenge and whether the North Korean regime is prepared genuinely to bargain if it were to receive tangible gains. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41083375

August 30, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international | Leave a comment

Media ignores North Korea’s offers to negotiate, give up nuclear weapons

NORTH KOREA KEEPS SAYING IT MIGHT GIVE UP ITS NUCLEAR WEAPONS — BUT MOST NEWS OUTLETS WON’T TELL YOU THAT, The Intercept Jon Schwarz, August 26 2017 “…….here’s what you don’t know, unless you’re an obsessive North Korea-watcher:

Also starting on July 4, North Korea has been saying over and over again that it might put its nuclear weapons and missiles on the negotiating table if the United States would end its own threatening posture.

This fact has been completely obscured by U.S. and other western media. For the most part, newspapers and television have simply ignored North Korea’s position. When they haven’t ignored it, they’ve usually mispresented it as its opposite – i.e., claiming that North Korea is saying that it will never surrender its nuclear weapons under any circumstances. And on the rare occasions when North Korea’s statements are mentioned accurately, they’re never given the prominence they deserve.

North Korea’s proclamations have been closely tracked by Robert Carlin, currently a visiting scholar at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation and formerly head of the Northeast Asia Division in the State Department’s intelligence arm. Carlin has visited North Korea over 30 times.

Via email, Carlin described how it is difficult but critical to accurately decode North Korean communications. “Observers dismiss as unimportant what the North Koreans say,” Carlin writes, and “therefore don’t read it carefully, except of course if it is colorful, fiery language that makes for lovely headlines. Some of what the North says is simply propaganda and can be read with one eye closed. Other things are written and edited very carefully, and need to be read very carefully. And then, having been read, they need to be compared with past statements, and put in context.”

With that in mind, here’s Kim Jong-un’s statement on July 4:

[T]he DPRK would neither put its nukes and ballistic rockets on the table of negotiations in any case nor flinch even an inch from the road of bolstering the nuclear force chosen by itself unless the U.S. hostile policy and nuclear threat to the DPRK are definitely terminated. [emphasis added]

That formulation again appeared in an August 7 government statement after the United Nations Security Council passed new sanctions on North Korea. The same day, North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho also said it during a speech at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations regional forum in the Philippines.

And on August 22 at the UN Conference on Disarmament in Switzerland, North Korean diplomat Ju Yong Chol made exactly the same point, stating, “As long as the U.S. hostile policy and nuclear threat remains unchallenged, the DPRK will never place its self-defensive nuclear deterrence on the negotiating table.”

In the past North Korea has pledged to renounce its nuclear weapons program. During the so-called Six-Party Talks in 2005, all the nations involved, including North Korea, affirmed that the North Korea was “committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.” Meanwhile, the United States and North Korea agreed to “respect each other’s sovereignty, exist peacefully together, and take steps to normalize their relations.”

Then the situation soured. Carlin writes that more recently “the routine formula in lower level media commentaries was that the nuclear deterrent was ‘not a mere bargaining chip to put on the table for negotiations with the United States.’”

So all of this seems quite clear and straightforward. North Korea is again telling the world that it is willing to consider renouncing its nuclear weapons program. Obviously Kim’s regime may not be telling the truth, especially given the fact that it has violated prior agreements. But the United States has flagrantly violated those agreements as well. The only way to find out whether there’s a path to North Korean disarmament is to honestly engage with them about it.

There are huge roadblocks to that happening, and one of the biggest is the failure of western media simply to inform their audience of the basics of what’s happening.

Since July 4, the New York Times and Washington Post have published hundreds of articles about North Korea. Both papers have informed their readers that Kim has called Americans “bastards.” But they’ve each only published one story quoting Kim’s key caveat, that North Korea will consider giving up its nukes if “the U.S. hostile policy and nuclear threat to the DPRK are definitely terminated.” And in both cases the Post and Times simply reprinted an AP story — in which Kim’s words appear in the 23rd paragraph – rather than running pieces of their own………

Coverage in other publications has tended to be, if anything, shoddier, with television coverage worst of all. The BBC World Service soberly explained on August 15 that “North Korea says its nuclear program can never be on the negotiating table and that’s where the stand-off is.” Other outlets have generally maintained a discreet silence about North Korea’s position.

Taken in total, the media’s performance on North Korea so far is an extremely ominous development. We know because of the Iraq War that newspapers and TV can provide a key assist in launching catastrophic U.S. wars. As things stand now, it’s by no means impossible that they will do it again. https://theintercept.com/2017/08/25/north-korea-keeps-saying-it-might-give-up-its-nuclear-weapons-but-most-news-outlets-wont-tell-you-that/

August 28, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

North Korea ramps up the sabre rattling

North Korea vows to ‘sharpen its nuclear sword’ in WORLD WAR 3 threat to USA, Express UK 27 Aug 17 NORTH Korea has sparked fears of all-out war with the USA after threatening to “sharpen its nuclear sword” as tensions continue to escalate., By JOEY MILLAR, Aug 27, 2017 North Korea has issued yet another sabre-rattling statement to its Western enemies, warning the US it would show “no mercy” in any conflict.

The statement, issued by a Pyongyang-based news agency which acts as a mouthpiece for despot Kim Jong-un, said the hermit state did not fear starting World War 3.

It comes amid ever-rising tensions on the Korean peninsula as Kim and US president Donald Trump both become increasingly determined not to blink first.

The propaganda agency even went so far as to say Kim was accelerating the country’s nuclear missile programme in order to reduce the threat of nuclear war. …..http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/846462/world-war-3-north-korea-latest-news-war-usa-attack

August 28, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Will Trump pay any attention at all, if IAEA report says that Iran is abiding by nuclear agreement?

If Report Says Iran Is Abiding by Nuclear Deal, Will Trump Heed It?, NYT, By GARDINER HARRIS AUG. 27, 2017 WASHINGTON — Within days, international monitors will send an inspection report on Iran’s nuclear facilities to governments around the world, touching off a chain of events that could lead to another clash between President Trump and congressional Republicans, or even his own top advisers.

In dry and highly technical language, the report by the International Atomic Energy Agency is likely to show that Iran — with perhaps minor lapses — is largely complying with the 2015 nuclear accord, experts say. And that is where the problems will begin for the Trump administration.

No matter what the inspection report says, Mr. Trump has declared that he expects by October to determine that Iran is violating the deal, adding in late July that “if it was up to me, I would have had them noncompliant 180 days ago.”

Such a declaration could end the nuclear deal, which imposed strict limits on Iran’s nuclear activities for 15 years in exchange for sanctions relief. Mr. Trump, who has called the pact an egregious giveaway to Iran, has the power by himself to scrap it and reimpose sanctions on Tehran…….

Other parties to the agreement, including Britain, China, France, Russia and Germany, have made clear that they believe it is working, and some have sent diplomats to Capitol Hill in recent weeks to warn against ending it, saying that doing so would isolate the United States……https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/27/world/middleeast/if-report-says-iran-is-abiding-by-nuclear-deal-will-trump-heed-it.html

August 28, 2017 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Trump planning to decertify Iran’s compliance with the international nuclear deal?

Strong indications’ Trump won’t recertify Iranian compliance with nuclear deal

  • There are more signs the Trump administration is preparing a case to decertify Iran’s compliance with the international nuclear deal.
  • Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, this week visited the atomic watchdog agency in charge of monitoring Iran’s compliance.
  • On Thursday, Tehran said it “is abiding by its duties and responsibilities” and accused Washington of using the issue “for ill-wishing political means.” CNBC 
Jeff Daniels | The Trump administration is giving “strong indications” that it is preparing a case to decertify Iran‘s compliance with the international nuclear agreement, an expert says.

If that happens, though, some analysts believe it risks alienating U.S. allies. In addition to the United States and Iran, the 2015 nuclear agreement was signed by Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and the United Nations.

The White House sent Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to Vienna on Wednesday to meet with officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is responsible for monitoring and verifying Iran’s commitments under the 2015 agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

 On Thursday, Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency quoted from a letter sent by Iran’s foreign minister to the U.N. agency saying the country “is abiding by its duties and responsibilities” with regard to nuclear weapons and agreements. He accused Washington of using the issue “for ill-wishing political means.”

During her visit, Haley “discussed the IAEA’s verification and monitoring of Iran’s nuclear-related commitments,” according to a statement by the agency. It provided no additional information, and a statement from Haley’s office discussed her visit but shed no light on imminent action.

Last week, Haley said the Tehran government should be held accountable for “its missile launchers, support for terrorism, disregard for human rights, and violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions. Iran cannot be allowed to use the nuclear deal to hold the world hostage.”

The Trump administration has certified Iran’s compliance twice under a law that requires it to notify Congress of Iran’s compliance every 90 days. The next review ends in October.

Analysts say recent actions by the U.S. demonstrate that President Donald Trump plans to renege on the Iran nuclear agreement. During the election campaign, he threatened to rip up the agreement, calling it “the worst deal ever.”

The actions include new U.S. sanctions imposed on Iran and a comment last week by a U.S. official that Iran is in breach of “the spirit” of the nuclear accord. New sanctions were designed to punish Iran for its human rights record, rocket launches as well as its role in terrorism and arms smuggling.

“He’s given strong indications that he’s just not going to recertify it,” said John Glaser, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, the libertarian think tank.

“If we were to leave the deal or deliberately abrogate it, we’d be isolated internationally and we wouldn’t be able to do anything like reapply sanctions that would do any kind of damage on Iran,” he added. “That’s because the rest of the international community would not sort of play along.”

Glaser said the other parties to the agreement “agree that Iran is compliance with the deal and agree that the deal should be kept in place because it’s a robust, nonproliferation agreement. It has kind of taken military conflict against Iran because of the nuclear program off the table.”

Last week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani threatened to quit the nuclear pact if the White House issues new sanctions. Iran charged those sanctions were a violation of the nuclear accord…..https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/25/strong-indications-trump-wont-recertify-iran-nuclear-deal.html

August 26, 2017 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Clarifying the facts on North Korea

North Korea also has the collective memory of the horror wrought by the US in the three year conflict on a country then with a population of just 9.6 million souls. US General Curtis Lemay in the aftermath stated: “After destroying North Korea’s seventy eight cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians … Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population.”

North Korea, An Aggressor? A Reality Check http://www.globalresearch.ca/north-korea-an-aggressor-a-reality-check/5605534, By Felicity Arbuthnot, Global Research, August 24, 2017

“ … war in our time is always indiscriminate, a war against innocents, a war against children.”(Howard Zinn, 1922-2010.)

“All war represents a failure of diplomacy.” (Tony Benn, MP. 1925-2014.)

“No country too poor, too small, too far away, not to be threat, a threat to the American way of life.” (William Blum, “Rogue State.”)   

   The mention of one tiny country appears to strike at the rationality and sanity of those who should know far better. On Sunday, 6th August, for example, The Guardian headed an editorial: “The Guardian view on sanctions: an essential tool.” Clearly the average of five thousands souls a month, the majority children, dying of “embargo related causes” in Iraq, year after grinding year – genocide in the name of the UN – for over a decade has long been forgotten by the broadsheet of the left.

This time of course, the target is North Korea upon whom the United Nations Security Council has voted unanimously to freeze, strangulate and deny essentials, normality, humanity. Diplomacy as ever, not even a consideration. The Guardian, however, incredibly, declared the decimating sanctions: “A rare triumph of diplomacy …” (Guardian 6th August 2017.)

As US Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, the US’ top “diplomat” and his North Korean counterpart Ri Yong-ho headed for the annual Ministerial meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Manila on 5th August, a State Department spokesperson said of Tillerson:

“The Secretary has no plans to meet the North Korean Foreign Minister in Manila, and I don’t expect to see that happen”

Pathetic. In April, approaching his hundredth day in office, Trump said of North Korea:

“We’d love to solve things diplomatically but it’s very difficult.”

No it is not. Talk, walk in the other’s psychological shoes. Then, there they were at the same venue but the Trump Administration clearly does not alone live in a land of missed opportunities, but of opportunities deliberately buried in landfill miles deep. This in spite of his having said in the same statement:

“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely.”

A bit of perspective: 27th July 2017 marked sixty four years since the armistice agreement that ended the devastating three year Korean war, however there has never been a peace treaty, thus technically the Korean war has never ended. Given that and American’s penchant for wiping out countries with small populations which pose them no threat (think most recently, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya) no wonder North Korea wishes to look as if it has some heavy protective gear behind the front door, so to speak.

Tiny North Korea has a population of just 25.37 million and landmass of 120,540 km² (square kilometres.) The US has a population of 323.1 million and a landmass of 9.834 MILLION km² (square kilometres.) Further, since 1945, the US is believed to have produced some 70,000 nuclear weapons – though now down to a “mere” near 7,000 – but North Korea is a threat?

America has fifteen military bases in South Korea – down from a staggering fifty four – bristling with every kind of weapons of mass destruction. Two bases are right on the North Korean border and another nearly as close. See full details of each, with map at (1.)

North Korea also has the collective memory of the horror wrought by the US in the three year conflict on a country then with a population of just 9.6 million souls. US General Curtis Lemay in the aftermath stated: “After destroying North Korea’s seventy eight cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians … Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population.”

“It is now believed that the population north of the imposed 38th Parallel lost nearly a third its population of 8 – 9 million people during the 37-month long ‘hot’ war, 1950 – 1953, perhaps an unprecedented percentage of mortality suffered by one nation due to the belligerence of another.” (2)

In context:

“During The Second World War the United Kingdom lost 0.94% of its population, France lost 1.35%, China lost 1.89% and the US lost 0.32%. During the Korean war, North Korea lost close to 30 % of its population.” (Emphasis added.)

“We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another …”, boasted Lemay.

Gen. Douglas MacArthur said during a Congressional hearing in 1951 that he had never seen such devastation.

“I shrink with horror that I cannot express in words … at this continuous slaughter of men in Korea,” MacArthur said. “I have seen, I guess, as much blood and disaster as any living man, and it just curdled my stomach, the last time I was there.” (CNN, 28th July 2017.)

Horrified as he was, he did not mention the incinerated women, children, infants in the same breath.

Moreover, as Robert M. Neer wrote in “Napalm, an American Biography”:

‘“Practically every U.S. fighter plane that has flown into Korean air carried at least two napalm bombs,” Chemical Officer Townsend wrote in January 1951. About 21,000 gallons of napalm hit Korea every day in 1950. As combat intensified after China’s intervention, that number more than tripled (…) a total of 32,357 tons of napalm fell on Korea, about double that dropped on Japan in 1945. Not only did the allies drop more bombs on Korea than in the Pacific theater during World War II – 635,000 tons, versus 503,000 tons – more of what fell was napalm …’

In the North Korean capitol, Pyongyang, just two buildings were reported as still standing.

In the unending history of US warmongering, North Korea is surely the smallest population they had ever attacked until their assault on tiny Grenada in October 1983, population then just 91,000 (compulsory silly name: “Operation Urgent Fury.)

North Korea has been taunted by the US since it lay in ruins after the armistice sixty five years ago, yet as ever, the US Administration paints the vast, self appointed “leader of the free world” as the victim.

As Fort-Russ pointed out succinctly (7th August 2017):

“The Korean Peninsula is in a state of crisis not only due to constant US threats towards North Korea, but also due to various provocative actions, such as Washington conducting joint military exercises with Seoul amid tensions, and which Pyongyang considered a threat to its national security.”

This month “massive land, sea and air exercises” involving “tens of thousands of troops” from the US and South Korea began on 21st  of August and continue until 31st.

‘In the past, the practices are believed to have included “decapitation strikes” – trial operations for an attempt to kill Kim Jong-un and his top Generals …’, according to the Guardian (11th August 2017.)

The obligatory stupid name chosen for this dangerous, belligerent, money burning, sabre rattling nonsense is Ulchi-Freedom Guardian. It is an annual occurrence since first initiated back in 1976.

US B-1B bombers flying from Guam recently carried out exercises in South Korea and “practiced attack capabilities by releasing inert weapons at the Pilsung Range.” In a further provocative (and illegal) move, US bombers were again reported to overfly North Korea, another of many such bullying, threatening actions, reportedly eleven just since May this year.

Yet in spite of all, North Korea is the “aggressor.”

“The nuclear warheads of United States of America are stored in some twenty one locations, which include thirteen U.S. states and five European countries … some are on board U.S. submarines. There are some “zombie” nuclear warheads as well, and they are kept in reserve, and as many as 3,000 of these are still awaiting their dismantlement. (The US) also extends its “nuclear umbrella” to such other countries as South Korea, Japan, and Australia.” (worldatlas.com)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov who also attended the ASEAN meeting in Manila, did of course, do what proper diplomats do and talked with his North Korean counterpart Ri Yong-ho. Minister Lavrov’s opinion was summed up by a Fort Russ News observer as:

“The Korean Peninsula is in a state of crisis not only due to constant US threats towards North Korea, but also due to various provocative actions, such as Washington conducting joint military exercises with Seoul amid tensions, and which Pyongyang considered a threat to its national security.”

The “provocative actions” also include the threatening over-flights by US ‘planes flying from Guam. However when North Korea said if this continued they would consider firing missiles in to the ocean near Guam – not as was reported by some hystericals as threatening to bomb Guam – Agent Orange who occasionally pops in to the White House between golf rounds and eating chocolate cake whilst muddling up which country he has dropped fifty nine Tomahawk Cruise missiles on, responded that tiny North Korea will again be: “… met with fire and fury and frankly power, the likes of which the world has never seen before.”

It was barely noticed that North Korea qualified the threat of a shot across the bows by stating pretty reasonably:

(The US) “should immediately stop its reckless military provocation against the State of the DPRK so that the latter would not be forced to make an unavoidable military choice.” (3)

As Cheryl Rofer (see 3) continued, instead of endless threats, US diplomacy could have many routes:

“We could have sent a message to North Korea via the recent Canadian visit to free one of their citizens. We could send a message through the Swedish embassy to North Korea, which often represents US interests. We could arrange some diplomatic action on which China might take the lead. There are many possibilities, any of which might show North Korea that we are willing to back off from practices that scare them if they will consider backing off on some of their actions. That would not include their nuclear program explicitly at this time, but it would leave the way open for later.”

There are in fact, twenty four diplomatic missions in all, in North Korea through which the US could request to communicate – or Trump could even behave like a grown up and pick up the telephone.

Siegfried Hecker is the last known American official to inspect North Korea’s nuclear facilities. He says that treating Kim Jong-un as though he is on the verge of attacking the U.S. is both inaccurate and dangerous.

“Some like to depict Kim as being crazy – a madman – and that makes the public believe that the guy is undeterrable. He’s not crazy and he’s not suicidal. And he’s not even unpredictable. The real threat is we’re going to stumble into a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula.” (5)

Trump made his crass “fire and fury” threat on the eve of the sixty second commemoration of the US nuclear attack on Nagasaki, the nauseating irony seemingly un-noticed by him.

Will some adults pitch up on Capitol Hill before it is too late?

Notes

  1. https://militarybases.com/ south-korea/
  2. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ know-the-facts-north-korea- lost-close-to-30-of-its- population-as-a-result-of-us- bombings-in-the-1950s/22131
  3. https://nucleardiner. wordpress.com/2017/08/11/ north-korea-reaches-out/
  4. https://www.commondreams.org/ news/2017/08/08/sane-voices- urge-diplomacy-after-lunatic- trump-threatens-fire-and-fury

August 25, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, Reference, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Head of the U.S. military’s Pacific Command says diplomacy — not military action, is the answer to North Korea crisis

U.S. Pacific Command chief says diplomacy — not military action — key to North Korea crisis, Japan Times 22 Aug 17 , REUTERS, AP OSAN, SOUTH KOREA – The head of the U.S. military’s Pacific Command said on Tuesday it was more important to use diplomacy to counter North Korea’s missile threat rather than consider what actions by the reclusive North might trigger a pre-emptive strike.

Adm. Harry Harris was in South Korea to observe annual joint military drills with the South Korean military, which the North called a step toward nuclear conflict masterminded by the U.S. and South Korean “war maniacs.”

 “So we hope and we work for diplomatic solutions to the challenge presented by Kim Jong Un,” Harris told reporters at a U.S. air base in South Korea about an hour from the capital, Seoul, referring to the North Korean leader.

He said diplomacy was “the most important starting point” in response to the North’s threat, when asked what actions by North Korea might trigger a pre-emptive U.S. strike against Pyongyang……

The United States and South Korean began long-planned joint military exercises on Monday called the Ulchi Freedom Guardian (UFG), which the allies have said were purely defensive and did not aim to increase tension on the Korean Peninsula.

The drills end on Aug. 31 and involve tens of thousands of troops as well as computer simulations designed to prepare for war with a nuclear-capable North Korea.

A North Korean military spokesman repeated the threat of “merciless retaliation” against the United States for readying a preemptive strike and a war of aggression, using the drills as an excuse to mount such an attack.

“The U.S. will be wholly held accountable for the catastrophic consequences to be entailed by such reckless aggressive war maneuvers, as it chose a military confrontation,” the unnamed spokesman said in comments carried by the North’s official KCNA news agency.

The North claims the drills are an invasion rehearsal, senior U.S. military commanders on Tuesday dismissed calls to pause or downsize exercises they called crucial to countering a clear threat from Pyongyang…….https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/08/22/asia-pacific/u-s-pacific-command-chief-says-diplomacy-not-military-action-key-north-korea-crisis/#.WZykbPgjHGg

August 23, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Clash between USA and North Korea, at United Nations Forum

U.S., North Korea clash at U.N. arms forum on nuclear threat, Stephanie Nebehay, GENEVA (Reuters) 22 Aug 17 – North Korea and the United States accused each other on Tuesday of posing a nuclear threat, with Pyongyang’s envoy declaring it would never put its atomic arsenal up for negotiation.

The debate at the United Nations began when the U.S. envoy said President Donald Trump’s top priority was to protect the United States and its allies against the “growing threat” from North Korea. To do so, he said, the country was ready to use “the full range of capabilities at our disposal”.

U.S. Ambassador Robert Wood told the Conference on Disarmament that the “path to dialogue still remains an option” for Pyongyang, but that Washington was “undeterred in defending against the threat North Korea poses”.

Fears have grown over North Korea’s development of missiles and nuclear weapons since Pyongyang test-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in July. Those fears worsened after Trump warned that North Korea would face “fire and fury” if it threatened the United States.

His remarks led North Korea to say it was considering plans to fire missiles towards the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam. Trump responded by tweeting that the U.S. military was “locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely”.

A few days later, North Korean media reported the country’s leader, Kim Jong Un, had delayed any decision on whether to fire missiles towards Guam while he waited to see what the United States would do. Experts warned Pyongyang could still go ahead with the missile launches…….

China’s disarmament ambassador, Fu Cong, called for support for its proposal to defuse the crisis affecting its Pyongyang ally.

“China has called for ‘dual suspension’, that is of North Korea’s nuclear activities and joint military exercises between the Republic of Korea and United States. This seeks to denuclearize the peninsula and promote a security mechanism.”

Wood rejected Beijing’s “freeze for freeze’ plan.

“This proposal unfortunately creates a false equivalency between states that are engaging in legitimate exercises of self-defense who have done so for many years with a regime that has basically violated countless Security Council resolutions with regard to its proscribed nuclear and ballistic missile programs,” he told the gathering.

“That is a false equivalency that we cannot accept and will not accept,” he said.

Fu retorted: “I just want to say that we’re not creating equivalency between anything. We are just actually making the proposal to facilitate a dialogue and to reduce the tension. We need a starting point to really launch the dialogue.” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-usa-idUSKCN1B20XH

August 23, 2017 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

North Korea’s threats to Australia, as Australia backs USA war games in the Pacific

North Korea warns of Australia’s ‘suicidal act’ as ADF joins in vast US-South Korea war games https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/north-korea-warns-australia-apos-114116583.html, Paul Colgan, Business Insider, 21 August 2017 Prime minister Malcolm Turnbull has called for continued efforts to “bring North Korea to its senses” after the regime warned Australia was “inviting disaster” through its support of US war games in the Pacific.

Around 25 Australian defence personnel are taking part in the Ulchi-Freedom Guardian exercise, a large-scale simulated military operation staged regularly by US and South Korean military forces. The operation started yesterday.

North Korea has noted Australia’s involvement and Turnbull’s recent statement that the nation would “come to the aid” of the US under the provisions of the ANZUS treaty if there was a military confrontation with North Korea.

A spokesman for the regime’s foreign affairs ministry said Australia and other allies could not “avoid counter-measures of justice” from North Korea if they supported the US in a conflict.

The statement said Turnbull had made “reckless remarks that the allies including Australia were together with the U.S. and that ANZUS stood for the mutual defense between the U.S and Australia, should either one of them come under attack, and Australia would back the U.S. in time of emergency.

“Not long after the Australian prime minister had stated that they would join in the aggressive moves of the U.S., even referring to ANZUS which exists in name only, the Australian military announced that they would dispatch their troops to the aggressive nuclear exercises of the U.S.,” the statement said.

“This is a suicidal act of inviting disaster as it is an illustration of political immaturity unaware of the seriousness of the current situation.”

According to a report in The Diplomat, South Korean officials have said this year’s Ulchi-Freedom Guardian exercises will include “a nuclear war game for the first time.”

The exercises may feature simulated use of “counter-weapons-of-mass-destructions (CWMD) operations and sustaining allied maneuvers in the aftermath of a North Korean nuclear attack against core U.S.-South Korea command-and-control nodes”, The Diplomat reported.

Some 50,000 South Korean troops and around 17,500 US military personnel will take part in the exercise, which also involves vast numbers of South Korean government officials.

In response, Turnbull issued a statement saying North Korea had shown no regard for the welfare of its people and no regard for international law.

“We call on all countries to redouble their efforts, including through implementation of agreed UN Security Council resolutions, to bring North Korea to its senses and end its reckless and dangerous threats to the peace of our region and the world.”

The North Korean statement said that “Australia followed the U.S. to the Korean War, the Vietnamese War and the “war on terrorism”, but heavy loss of lives and assets were all that it got in return.”

It added: “The Australian government had better devote time and energy to maintaining peace of its own country, instead of forgetting the lessons learned in the past and joining the U.S. in the moves for nuclear war. Countries like Australia that join the military adventure against the DPRK, blindly following the U.S., will never avoid the counter-measures of justice by the DPRK.”

August 23, 2017 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, North Korea, politics international | Leave a comment

Lessons from Trump’s war of words with Kim Jong Un.

Here are 5 takeaways from Trump’s startling nuclear threats against North Korea, WP. By Mira Rapp-Hooper August 21 “…… some of the most basic tenets of international nuclear signaling were scorched by President Trump’s threats of “fire and fury” toward North Korea. Here are five lessons from his war of words with Kim Jong Un.

1. Trump ignored nuclear policy and strategy

In his “fire and fury” comments, Trump gave a warning to North Korea that had no historical precedent and was a consummate “commitment trap”: a scenario in which a leader stakes his credibility on a promise that leaves him with two bad options. He seemingly threatened a first nuclear strike as the response to any threats from Pyongyang.

From a policy perspective, this was stunning. Even at the height of the Cold War, U.S. leaders did not threaten nuclear use in response to mere threats. From a strategy perspective, Trump’s construct was foolish. It left him with the unhappy choice between backing down when North Korea next provoked or following through and launching a catastrophic conflict.

2. The Trump administration does not have a unitary nuclear declaratory policy

Trump’s secretaries of state and defense attempted to reshape his statements, but the president simply doubled down with another apocalyptic tirade. Four days later, Rex Tillerson and Jim Mattis again offered sound policy in print, but this cycle of presidential bombast and Cabinet mollification carves a credibility chasm……..

3. Trump wasn’t just talking to allies and adversaries

We often think of American nuclear signaling as directed toward two primary audiences: the adversary the United States seeks to deter and the allies it seeks to assure. But Trump’s nuclear bombast may have had two other audiences that ranked ahead of these.

The first audience was Trump’s domestic base, his hardcore supporters. …….The second audience was China, which Trump has long believed would “fix” the North Korea problem for the United States…….

4. Trump played the mad man, while North Korea and China played it cool

One might argue that Trump’s nuclear threats were his version of a “madman” strategy — he cowed his adversaries into submission with punishing words, even though there was little chance he would really act as he says. In response, we would generally expect an adversary to either escalate in brinkmanship or back down.

North Korea and China did neither…….

5. There may be lasting damage to U.S. alliances in Asia

Trump has not disguised his disdain for America’s alliances and has previously rattled Seoul by maligning important trade and missile defense deals. With his nuclear threats, however, he has done more serious damage to the U.S.-South Korea alliance.

The South Korean public’s confidence in the United States has plummeted under Trump. …….

A week on the rhetorical brink leads to a final, startling question: When the United States declares its nuclear intentions, who should be believed? The president or his defense team? Allies, adversaries and Trump’s domestic audience have no easy task as they strain to hear the signal in the fire and fury. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/21/here-are-5-takeaways-from-trumps-startling-nuclear-threats-against-north-korea/?utm_term=.c20d8f66be1a

Mira Rapp-Hooper is a senior research scholar at the Paul Tsai China Center at Yale Law School and an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

August 23, 2017 Posted by | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »