Annex 5: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1874 (2009)

However, Japan has been confronted twice with North Korean missiles flying over its
territory, and landing into the Pacific. Japan’s defence forces are increasingly viewing these
missile launches as a ‘clear and present danger’ to the security of the country. In many
respects, Japan is looking to the United States of America whether the Obama
Administration is ready to uphold its promise to solving the North Korean Crisis. The
statement by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that the US would not tolerate a nuclear
North Korea resonated very positively in Tokyo. The Japanese Government is also
appreciative of Washington’s continued assurance to Japan that if there would be a return to
the Six Party Negotiations, Washington was willing to fully take into account Tokyo’s
concerns. However, the National Defense Outline of Japan is currently under review in Japan.
There are increasingly voices within the ruling elite in Japan which state that North Korea’s
missile tests demand a response from Japan; developing the capabilities for a counter-strike
or even for a pre-emptive strike. This could entail a Japanese missile programme or a new
type of Japanese bomber, or even both. This in itself already entails a dangerous potential
escalation as a result of the North Korean crisis, with further potential consequences for the
peace and security in the rest of the region. An additional, even bigger question is whether
Japan would decide to go nuclear, although the chances for that are slim; for the moment
Japan is looking towards the United States of America for leadership so as to avoid further
nuclear proliferation in the region. The nuclear option does however remain on the table for
Japan. There are even those analysts who suggest that Japan at any time is only two
“screwdriver”-weeks away from acquiring atomic bomb-capabilities. Japan wants to find a
political solution to this continuing crisis, but at the same time its elites have changed and
have become more open to the idea of their military offering Japan extra options should
things turn out badly.
South Korea (ROK): no longer on speaking terms with the DPRK?
Of all the countries involved in this crisis, South Korea (aka, the Republic of Korea or ROK)
has the most to loose. The ruling elite in Seoul is very much aware of the dangerous situation
in which it finds itself in today. Technically speaking, North and South Korea are still at war
with each other since the 1950’s.
South Korea’s foreign relations are largely dominated by
governing and, during the last decade, by overcoming the
nation’s division. Successive South Korean governments
have been keenly aware that rapprochement and
reconciliation with the North cannot be achieved in
isolation but demand a permanent balancing act on both
domestic and international tightropes. For South Korea,
the nuclear crisis impedes swift progress in inter-Korean
relations. The Six-Party Talks are an important and
necessary international phase in a multifaceted peace
process for the Korean Peninsula (De Ceuster and
Melissen, 2008: 94).
The final three months of 2008 saw relations between the two Koreas continue to worsen, as
they had since South Korean voters in December 2007 elected the conservative Lee Myungbak
as their next president, ending a decade of rule by liberals. Official ties remained frozen
as Pyongyang media continued to heap childish insults on Lee. Upping the ante from words
to deeds, but also shooting itself in the foot, from December the North placed restrictions on
cross-border traffic and expelled most Southerners from the joint Kaesong Industrial
Complex (KIC), just north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) (Foster-Carter, 2009).
© 2009 – Dr. D. Criekemans – Negotiations in UNSC on the continuing security provocations by North Korea 22