Issuu on Google+

TEIMUN 2010-2011 Security Council Background Paper Conflict in the Korean Peninsula Chair: Babak Mohammadzadeh Chair: Yiqun Wang


List of Acronyms DPRK IAEA KEDO NPT ROK UN US

Democratic Peopleâ€&#x;s Republic of Korea International Atomic Energy Agency Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Republic of Korea United Nations United States of America

2


Foreword Dear Delegates, Welcome to the Security Council of the thirteenth session of The European International Model United Nations (TEIMUN). It is our distinguished pleasure to be your Chairs on this conference. Allow us to present you with a short introduction: Babak Mohammadzadeh – Chair Babak is 22 years old and has been involved in Model UN conferences ever since he started his studies at University College Utrecht in the Netherlands. Currently, he is studying for his MSc in International Relations at the London School of Economics with a particular emphasis on the history and politics of the Middle East. His academic background includes a focus on foreign policy analysis, international human rights and discourses of social movements in the Middle East. Babak had the privilege to participate and chair conferences in Nijmegen, Amsterdam, London, Utrecht and Groningen. His TEIMUN curriculum includes representing the Great Republic of Estonia in the North Atlantic Council in 2009 and co-chairing the Human rights Council in 2010, a totally awesome and fun experience that will definitely be part of the Security Council of TEIMUN 2011. Aside from appreciating the MUN philosophy, Babak heartily enjoys the social atmosphere and events at TEIMUN and the enduring friendships that it will result in. Yiqun Wang – Chair Born in China, and having lived in Budapest and Amsterdam, Yiqun is currently reading a BA in International Relations and International Organizations at the University of Groningen. Her hobbies include: travelling, reading, playing the piano, and spending time with family and friends. Yiqun was introduced to the concept of MUN in 2008, where she ended up participating twice as a delegate at TEIMUN: in 2008 representing Argentina in the General Assembly and in 2009 representing the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the Security Council. In 2010, Yiqun cochaired the Security Council at GrunnMUN and co-chaired the General Assembly at TEIMUN. This year, Yiqun has also been selected as Director of UNEP at LIMUN and as Chair of UN Women in GIMUN. This topic was chosen under the circumstances when the situation of the Korean Peninsula was dominating the international agenda. At the time of writing, this position seemed to have been replaced by the developments in the Middle East; however, the expression “silence before the storm” might not seem too inapplicable

3


after having analysed North Korea‟s internal transitions and the effect it had on the international affairs. The visit of Kim Jong Il to China on May 20, 2011 has been kept in secret; nonetheless, various sources confirmed that this visit has indeed taken place.1 It is still a mystery what the future might unfold; however, there are still many issues left unsolved. As the delegate of the Security Council, you have the privilege to concern yourselves with the responsibility to maintain and to ensure the peace and security of the world. We look forward to finally meeting you and to experience this magnificent adventure called TEIMUN with you. Babak Mohammadzadeh Yiqun Wang Security Council Chairs

1. Introduction Since the 1953 Armistice Treaty finalised the division of the Korean Peninsula on the 38th Parallel North, the relationship between both Koreas has been unstable. This has been further strained since the development of the North Korean nuclear program, the sinking of the South Korean corvette Cheonan in March 2010, and the firing on Yeonpyeong Island in November 2010. After the Yeonpyeong incident, South Korea began its joint military exercises with Japan and the United States. The US military presence in the South China Sea led to tensions between the United States and China, who also happens to be North Korea‟s main ally. Additionally, as a response to the joint military drills between South Korea and the United States, North Korea threatened to enlarge its nuclear arsenal to attack South Korea and its Allies.2 In fact, North Korea has also mentioned a “holy war” should South Korea continue with its activities. Meanwhile, South Korea has taken a more provocative approach in dealing with North Korea. The situation in the South China Sea area has worsened to such an extent, that many international actors have become involved. This has led to tensions outside the region and given the nuclear programme perpetuated by North Korea, the matter has become a grave concern. The UN Security Council has tried to address this issue with great urgency. Unfortunately, the individual interests and politics of many states have so far

1

Christopher Bodeen, “U.S. Team in N. Korea as Kim Visits China,” Time, May 24, 2011, accessed May 25, 2011, http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2073744,00.html. David Wivell, “Kim Jong-Il Visits China For Third Time In Just Over One Year: Report,” Huffington Post, May 20, 2011, accessed May 25, 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/20/kim-jongil-visits-chinaf_n_864647.html. Jeremy Laurence, “North Korea Leader Kim Jong-il Visits China, Not His Son – Report,” Reuters, May 20, 2011, accessed May 25, 2011, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/uk-korea-north-jongilidUKTRE74J1L420110520. 2 “The Korean War Armistice,” BBC News, May 26, 2010, accessed February 28, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10165796. Hyung-Jin Kim, “N. Korea Threatens to Attack South, US,” Arab News, February 27, 2011, accessed February 28, 2011, http://arabnews.com/world/article289190.ece.

4


prevented an effective resolution to this increasing threat to international peace and security. This background paper will aim to provide you with a rudimentary understanding of the historical background of the conflict, whilst offering you the required analysis of recent developments. It is meant as a guideline for the delegates to gain sufficient insight on the challenges encompassed within this topic in order to come up with a resolution. Additionally, a list of recommendation on further readings has been provided in support of researching your country‟s position.

2. Historical Background 2.1 Before World War II The ancient history of Korea, derived from the Korean name Koryô, is characterised by fragments of unification and division. Korea has been ruled under the Three Kingdoms of Silla, Koguryô, and Paekche, before as well as between the unification in 676, in 936 and in 1392.3 During these unified periods, the ruling power has been shifted between the military and the civilian, until the Mongolian invasion in 1258. In spite of the Mongolian rule, Korea managed to retain its political and cultural identity. In fact, it is during this period that Korea strengthened its national history and cultural heritage. This development proceeded under the Chosŏn dynasty from 1392, until the Japanese annexation of Korea in 1910.4 Since its reunification in 1592, Japan had made several attempts to occupy Korea – mostly as a strategy to invade China, who preoccupied an influential position in Korea. Despite the presence of China and Japan, Korea – then known as the Hermit Kingdom – has tried to prevent the opening of the country until the 19th Century, when foreign countries forced Korea to sign trade agreements with them.5 Moreover, as a strategically important zone, Korea had been forced several times to give up its neutrality during periods of conflict. For example, Korea permitted Japan to base its military operations on Korean soil during the RussoJapanese War (1904-05). Furthermore, Korea has been a disputed territory even before the Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895). Under Japanese military rule, Japan tried to assimilate Korea by banning the Korean language and the teaching of Korean history from the education system, whilst putting emphasis on Japanese being taught instead. Koreans were also deprived of 3

Encyclopaedia Britannica, s.v. “Korea,” accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/693609/Korea. th “Pre-20 Century,” Life in Korea (website), accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.lifeinkorea.com/information/history1.cfm. 4 Ibid. 5 th “Pre-20 Century,” op. cit. Encyclopaedia Britannica, op. cit.

5


the freedom of assembly, association, press and speech, and the possibility to commerce. Many farmers were removed from their land, which in turn was sold cheaply to Japanese migrants. The Korean resistance movement began on March 1, 1919, which led to the formation of a Korean provisional government based in Shanghai. During the Japanese rule, the Korean population became inspired by the ideals of patriotism and created a strong aversion against foreign occupation, which led to anti-Japanese mass rallies and student uprisings to be held in the 1920s. Although Japan lost its “iron grip” in 1919, military rule was resumed in 1931 after the outbreak of the second Sino-Japanese War (1937) and the Second World War in the Pacific (1941). Meanwhile, Japan also tried to incorporate Korea within the Japanese nation – assimilating the Korean culture to the Japanese.6 2.2 After the Japanese Occupation and the North-South Division The division of Korea into a northern and a southern zone was finalised in August 11, 1945, under the General Order No. 1 – Japanese surrender terms in Korea – drafted by the United States, to which the Soviet Union did not object. Under this document, it was agreed for Japan to surrender the northern territories above the 38th parallel North to the Soviet Union, and the southern territories to the United States (US). The US policy was to prevent any single power‟s domination of Korea. 7 This division caused political confusion in both Koreas; nonetheless, they had the same objective (i.e. self-governance). South Korea proclaimed independence on August 13, 1948 and North Korea followed on the 9th of September.8 In North Korea, officially known as the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Kim Il Sung proved himself to be an excellent national leader during World War II. It was therefore little surprise that the Soviet Union appointed him as one of the leaders for the northern part of Korea. Undoubtedly, he had the majority of the support from the population. Consequently, Kim Il Sung became the only leader of North Korea after the Korean War (1950-1953).9 It is for his great leadership and the popularity that he enjoyed amongst the people that Kim Il Sung was proclaimed as the “Great Leader” and the “Eternal President.” As a result, his son and successor Kim Jung Il has never officially taken upon the formal role as the President of North Korea, even though he is the head of state.10 Nevertheless, under the title of “Dear Leader,” Kim Jong Il also enjoys the personal worshiping from its people.”11 It is for this reason, together with the national propaganda, military discipline, amongst others, that North Korea has been able to maintain its regime as “the last Stalinist

6

Ibid. Ibid. 8 “Independence Day of South Korea,” IndependenceDay.com (website), Compare Infobase Limited, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.123independenceday.com/south-korea/. “Independence Day of North Korea,” IndependenceDay.com (website), Compare Infobase Limited, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.123independenceday.com/north-korea/. 9 “Kim Il Sung in The Korean War,” Shmoop (website), Shmoop University, Inc., accessed March 30, 2011, http://www.shmoop.com/korean-war/kim-il-sung.html. 10 “Biography of Kim Jong-il,” About.com (website), The New York Times Company, accessed March 30, 2011, http://asianhistory.about.com/od/profilesofasianleaders/p/BioKimJongil.htm. 11 “‟Dear Leader‟ Worship as the One Religion,” Asia News, February 16, 2005, accessed March 30, 2011, http://www.asianews.it/index.php?art=2585&l=en. 7

6


state on earth” and “the most secluded state”, while maintaining the personal worshiping of the Kim dynasty by its people.12 South Korea, officially known as the Republic of Korea (ROK), was established with the support of the United States of America and the United Nations. After the rapid economic growth in the 1950s-1960s and the establishments of democratic institutions in the 1970s-1980s, South Korea has become a modern and democratic country, with connection to the international capitalist model as its prevailing ideology.13 2.3 The Korean War The Korean War began after North Korean troops invaded South Korea on June 25, 1950. Since the Soviet Union was boycotting the United Nations and China being seated by the nationalist groups, the UN Security Council passed a resolution under leadership of the United States, condemning the North Korean invasion as an act of aggression, while demanding the withdrawal of North Korean troops from the South, and calling upon UNmembers to assist South Korea.14 In spite of this resolution, the war carried on with both Koreas being backed by strong Allies. After the Soviet Union assisted the North Korean troops in driving the South Korean and American troops to the southern tip of the peninsula, the tide turned with the involvement of the UN troops and moved the front line near the border of North Korea and China. It was then that China entered the war, and together with the Soviet air force, the border was returned to the 38 th Parallel. Negotiation talks were opened between the United States, South Korea, North Korea, China, and the Soviet Union on July 8, 1951. However, the fighting continued, as both parties and their Allies were “battling for position,” until the armistice agreement was signed on July 27, 1953.15 A stalemate was reached, and both sides gave up their attempt to unify Korea by force. Since an official peace treaty was never signed, the two Koreas remain technically at war, even to this day.16 The Korean War cost the lives of an estimated 2,000,000 Koreans, 600,000 Chinese, 37,000 Americans, and 3,000 other nationals in the UN forces (i.e. according to the encyclopaedia Britannica. The exact number, however, varies with the sources. BBC 12

“North Korea,” New York Times, January 21, 2011, accessed April 27, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/northkorea/index.html?scp=2&sq=korean %20peninsula&st=cse. 13 “Background Note: South Korea,” U.S. Department of State (website), accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2800.htm. 14 “Korean War,” Infoplease (website), Family Education Network, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/korean+war. 15 Encyclopaedia Britannica, s.v. “Korean War,” accessed May 22, 2011, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/322419/Korean-War. 16 Michael Hickey, “The Korean War: An Overview,” BBC History, March 21, 2011, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/korea_hickey_01.shtml. “The Korean War,” op. cit.

7


History admitted that: “No one knows exactly how many people died in this war”). 17 The number of casualties, and the fact that until the day of today, the citizens are still not permitted to cross the border between the two Korea‟s, are the main reasons to the lasting impact of the war on the people. Attempts of reconciliation have been made throughout the years, with the Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-Aggression, and Exchanges and Cooperation Between South and North Korea (Basic Agreement) signed on February 19, 1992 as the highlight. However, this progress has been halted with the development of North Korea‟s nuclear programme.18

3. Recent Developments 3.1 Nuclear Programme According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), North Korea joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) on December 12, 1985. The Safeguards Agreement entered into force on April 10, 1992. However, soon after the first inspection had taken place, inconsistencies emerged between the initial declaration of North Korea and the findings of the IAEA (such as the amount of nuclear waste resulting from the existence of undeclared plutonium). The IAEA requested further information as well as inspection in order to go into detail about these findings. In response, North Korea refused the IAEA the access to the sites.19 As this was in violation to the Safeguards Agreement, the IAEA bought the case to the UN Security Council, who called on North Korea to comply with the Agreement, to which North Korea responded by announcing its withdrawal from the NPT. Although this remained as a threat, North Korea did withdraw its membership from the IAEA on June 13, 1994, stating that “it was no longer obliged to allow the inspectors to carry out their work under the Safeguards Agreement.”20 Nevertheless, North Korea signed the Agreed Framework with the United States on October 21, 1994. This requires North Korea to “freeze” and dismantle its graphite17

Encyclopaedia Britannica, s.v. op. cit. “Korean War Casualty Statistics,” Century China (website), accessed May 22, 2011, http://www.centurychina.com/history/krwarcost.html. “Korean War Casualty Summary,” rt66.com (website), Kortegaard Engineering, accessed May 22, 2011, http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/casualty.htm. “Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century,” Necrometrics (website), accessed May 22, 2011, http://necrometrics.com/. Michael Hickey, op. cit. 18 “Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-Aggression, and Exchanges and Cooperation Between South and North Korea (Basic Agreement),” Council on Foreign Relations (website), The Council on Foreign Relations, Inc., accessed May 24, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/conflict-prevention/agreement-reconciliation-non-aggressionexchanges-cooperation-between-south-north-korea-basic-agreement/p8474. 19 “Fact Sheet on DPRK Nuclear Safeguards,” International Atomic Energy Agency (website), International Atomic Energy Agency, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iaeadprk/fact_sheet_may2003.shtml. 20 Ibid.

8


moderated reactors and related facilities in exchange for the creation of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO). The Agreed Framework also assigned the IAEA to monitor the freeze. Unfortunately, no real progress has been achieved. In fact, on October 16, 2002, the US stated that North Korea had acknowledged that it had a "programme to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons". 21 The United States, Japan and the Republic of Korea considered the North Korean programme as a violation of the Agreed Framework, the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the DPRK-IAEA Safeguards Agreement and the North-South Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. In response, the KEDO Board decided to suspend heavy oil deliveries to North Korea.22 On December 12, 2002, North Korea shared its decision to lift the freeze on the nuclear facilities in response to the US suspension of the heavy fuel oil supply, which was part of the Agreed Framework. Against the advice of IAEA‟s Director General, North Korea cut the seals and disabled the surveillance cameras on December 22, followed by ordering the IAEA inspectors to leave the country on December 27. DPRK also gave notice about its withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to come into force on January 11, 2003. This officially terminated the effectiveness of IAEA‟s Safeguards Agreement. As IAEA referred the issue to the UN Security Council, who showed its concern about these developments, the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a Special Advisor to North Korea, who returned announcing that: “North Korea was prepared to go to war if they believe the security and the integrity of their nation is really threatened.”23 In August 2003, the Six-Party Talks began between North Korea, South Korea, China, the United States, Russia, and Japan, with the purpose of ending North Korea‟s nuclear programme.24 During the Fourth Round of the SixParty Talks in September 2005, a Joint Statement declared that: “the DPRK would abandon its nuclear program in exchange for economic aid and security guarantees.”25 However, on October 9, 2006, North Korea tested a nuclear device. This led to the UN Security Council to adopt a resolution imposing sanctions on DPRK, demanding it to cease pursuing weapons of mass destructions and to return to the NPT, whilst accepting the safeguards of IAEA. North Korea eventually agreed to the shutdown of its plant at Yangbyon under IAEA inspection, in return for 21

Ibid. Ibid. 23 “UN envoy Strong warns of war in Korea,” CP 24, April 2, 2003, accessed May 21, 2010, http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20030403/korea_war_strong_030403?hub=CP24Sports956. 24 For further information on the actions taken, please refer to: “The Six-Party Talks on North Korea‟s Nuclear Program,” Council on Foreign Relations (website), Council on Foreign Relations, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program/p13593 as well as “Fact Sheet on DPRK Nuclear Safeguards,” International Atomic Energy Agency (website), International Atomic Energy Agency, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iaeadprk/fact_sheet_may2003.shtml. 25 Ibid. 22

9


shipments of fuel oil and the return of its funds from frozen international bank accounts.26 As IAEA inspectors confirmed the shutdown of five nuclear facilities in Yongbyon on July 2007, North Korea requested the IAEA to remove seals and surveillance as their work was done and no longer required at the reprocessing facility. In fact, North Korea stated that IAEA would have no further access to the reprocessing plant. In April 2009, North Korea decided to cease all cooperation with IAEA.27 In November 2010, the international community became aware of the new facility that North Korea had built to enrich uranium. The technology used for the nuclear enrichment has been described by the Obama administration as “significantly more advanced than what Iran has struggled over two decades to assemble.”28 The United States called upon China to take a firmer stand toward North Korea. However, China‟s policy towards North Korea remains unchanged.29 3.2 Conflict Escalations As mentioned earlier, North Korea‟s nuclear programme has led to further tensions with South Korea, who has been taking a harder stance in pushing North Korea to give up its nuclear programme. This tension, together with the South Korean refusal to continue providing North Korea with economic as well as food aid, led to an escalation of conflict when South Korea‟s warship Cheonan was torpedoed on March 26, 2010. South Korea claimed that the torpedoes were fired from North Korean vessels, but North Korea denied all accusations. The situation further deteriorated as South Korea expanded its joint military exercises with the United States and Japan to the South China Sea – started initially in the Sea of Japan as a security measure in reaction to North Korea‟s nuclear programme. This move led to tensions between the United States and China, who demanded the United States to put an end to these military activities on their backyard. On November 23, 2010, North Korea responded to what South Korea called as a test of weapons with the artillery barrage of Yeonpyeong, leading to the death of four people, including two civilians. The United States and its allies condemned the North Korean aggression. North Korea stated that as South Korea had opened the fire, their response was merely an act of selfdefence.

26

“North Korea,” op. cit. Fact Sheet on DPRK Nuclear Safeguards,” op. cit. 28 “North Korea,” op. cit. 29 Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt, “Despite Reports, China‟s North Korea Policy Stays the Same,” International Crisis Group, January 21, 2011, accessed March 30, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/asia/north-eastasia/china/ahlbrandt-north-korea-despite-reports-chinas-north-korea-policy-stays-the-same.aspx. 27

10


Almost immediately after the events of Yeonpyeong, South Korea started live-fire artillery exercises, whilst insisting on its rights to go through the drills in disputed waters around Yeonpyeong Island.30 The South has taken a forceful stance in its policies toward the North by continuing its military exercises, in spite of North Korea‟s threats of retaliation, and stated that it was “ready to strike back forcefully if provoked again”.31 The North, on the other hand, declared that they are “fully prepared to launch a sacred war”.32 Together with its joint military exercises with Japan and the United States, South Korea‟s new policy is seen as a military provocation “aimed at the start of another Korean War”.33 The President of South Korea, Lee Myung-bak, affirmed that war can only be prevented and peace be assured when such provocations are met with a strong response.34 Nevertheless, its strong response to the Yeonpyeong event has provoked further aggression from the North. Kim Jong Il had stated unmistakably that they will be fully prepared to use a nuclear deterrent at anytime necessary to cope with the enemies‟ actions.35 North Korea, who considers the United States-South Korean military exercises as a preparation of future attacks, threatened again on April 2011 to destroy both should they enter into war with North Korea.36

30

David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, “U.S. Concludes N. Korea Has More Nuclear Sites,” New York Times, December 14, 2010, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/world/asia/15nukes.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=globasasa2. 31 Martin Fackler, “South Korea Leader Sends North a Message,” New York Times, December 27, 2010, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/world/asia/28korea.html?scp=30&sq=Yeonpyeong&st=cse. 32 Kevin Drew, “North Korea Resumes War Threats,” New York Times, December 23, 2010, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/24/world/asia/24korea.html?scp=19&sq=Yeonpyeong&st=cse. 33 “North Korea „ready for sacred war‟ with the South,” BBC News, December 23, 2010, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12067735. 34 Martin Fackler, op. cit. 35 “North Korea „ready for sacred war‟ with the South,” op. cit. 36 Marije Willems, “Noord Korea dreigt VS en Zuid-Korea te vernietigen,” NRC Handelsblad, April 24, 2011, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/04/24/noord-korea-dreigt-vs-en-zuid-korea-tevernietigen/?utm_campaign=nieuwsbrief&utm_source=email.

11


3.3 (Possible) Unification With the immense political difference between the two Koreas, one tends to forget that the people used to belong to one Korea. In addition to the fact that these people would like to be reunited with their neighbour and separated family members, the respective Governments of both Korea‟s have also been considering possible unification. North Korea believes that as long as American military troops are stationed in “south Korea,” the unification of North and South Korea will never be allowed to take place.37 Needless to say, North Korea dreams about a united Korea under communist regime, but this scenario will never be accepted by the South Korean people. South Korea, with its own Unification Ministry, prefers to see a united Korea under South Korea‟s governance. While North Korea is further isolating itself from the rest of the world, South Korea has initiated the preparation for a possible reunification. President Lee is encouraging discussions about “realistic policies to prepare for that day, such as a reunification tax.”38 South Korea expects that Kim Jong Il might die before his successor gains sufficient control. Moreover, according to the US diplomatic cables exposed by WikiLeaks, China, North Korea‟s major ally, would accept a unified Korea under Seoul.39 Some Chinese leaders have been unhappy with North Korea since its nuclear test in 2006 and do not welcome an uncontrollable, nuclear North Korea right next to its borders. However, the official policy of China has remained unchanged for various reasons. Some believe that those in power in China still consider North Korea as the communist little brother, whose presence will prevent the capitalist system from reaching the borders. Others assume that with the eye on the stability on and inside the border, China believes that by pushing too hard on North Korea it might collapse sooner, resulting into a flood of refugees that “would overstress the economic and social welfare systems”.40 “Given its succession crisis, an unhealthy Kim Jong Il, possible fractures between the military and Kim, a dire economic situation, and international isolation, pushing too hard might drive Kim to raise the stakes by provoking armed conflict with South Korea, almost certainly the United States, and possibly Japan, a worst-case scenario for China.”41 However, although China‟s policy is crucial to North Korea, a possible reunification between the two Korea‟s has become less and less impossible.

4. Conclusion “Our nation honors her sons and daughters who answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met.” – Korean War Veterans Memorial

37

“Reunification,” Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (website), The Korean Friendship Association, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.korea-dpr.com/reunification.htm. 38 Choe Sang Hun, “South Korean Leader Proposes a Tax to Finance Reunification,” New York Times, August 15, 2010, accessed May 24, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/world/asia/16korea.html?ref=koreanwar. 39 Christian Oliver and Geoff Dyer, “China Could Accept Korean Unification,” Financial Times, November 30, 2010, accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a674cb64-fc45-11df-a9c500144feab49a.html#axzz1KfCS4Mte. 40 Nicole E. Lewis, “Reassessing China‟s Role in North Korea,” Council on Foreign Relations (website), Council on Foreign Relations, Inc., accessed May 25, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/china/reassessing-chinas-role-northkorea/p22482. 41 Ibid.

12


As a delegate of the Security Council, you are requested to draw your own conclusions based on the information provided from this background paper. As your Chairs, we hope to have presented you with an objective image of the historical background of Korea in order for you to gain a perspicuous understanding about the strategically important role that Korea has been playing, the establishment of a culture against foreign occupation, and the existence of two independent Korea‟s. Moreover, we hope to have contributed to your research about the ongoing issues, such as nuclear threat as well as possible Korean War II, in order to draft a resolution that will incorporate all these challenges.

5. Questions to Ponder 1. What measures could the Security Council take in preventing a possible war between DPRK and ROK? 2. What are the underlying reasons of North Korea‟s actions? 3. Why is South Korea responding so forcefully? 4. Which actors are closely involved with the situation in the Korean Peninsula and how is the Korean Peninsula of interest to them? 5. In what way should the Security Council ensure the peace and security threatened by a nuclear North Korea?

6. Further Reading About.com (website), The New York Times Company. http://asianhistory.about.com/od/profilesofasianleaders/p/BioKimJongil.htm. Century China (website). http://www.centurychina.com/history/krwarcost.html. Bodeen, Christopher. “U.S. Team in N. Korea as Kim Visits China.” Time, May 24, 2011. Accessed May 25, 2011, http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2073744,00.html. “China Could Accept Korean Unification.” Financial Times, November 30, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a674cb64-fc45-11df-a9c500144feab49a.html#axzz1KfCS4Mte. Coghlan, David. “Prospects From Korean Reunification.” Strategic Studies Institute, April 2008. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=859. Council on Foreign Relations (website). Council on Foreign Relations. http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program/p13593. “‟Dear Leader‟ Worship as the One Religion.” Asia News, February 16, 2005. Accessed March 30, 2011, http://www.asianews.it/index.php?art=2585&l=en. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (website). The Korean Friendship Association. http://www.korea-dpr.com/reunification.htm. Drew, Kevin. “North Korea Resumes War Threats.” New York Times, December 23, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/24/world/asia/24korea.html?scp=19&sq=Yeonpyeong &st=cse. Encyclopaedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/693609/Korea. Fackler, Martin. “South Korea Leader Sends North a Message.” New York Times, December 27, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/world/asia/28korea.html?scp=30&sq=Yeonpyeong &st=cse.

13


Hikey, Michael. “The Korean War: An Overview.” BBC History, March 21, 2011. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/korea_hickey_01.shtml. Hun, Choe Sang Hun. “South Korean Leader Proposes a Tax to Finance Reunification.” New York Times, August 15, 2010. Accessed May 24, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/world/asia/16korea.html?ref=koreanwar. IndependenceDay.com (website). Compare Infobase Limited. http://www.123independenceday.com/south-korea/. Infoplease (website). Family Education Network. http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/korean+war. International Atomic Energy Agency (website). International Atomic Energy Agency. http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iaeadprk/fact_sheet_may2003.shtml. Kim, Hyung-Jin. “N. Korea Threatens to Attack South, US.” Arab News, February 27, 2011. Accessed February 28, 2011, http://arabnews.com/world/article289190.ece. Kleine-Ahlbrandt, Stephanie. “Despite Reports, China‟s North Korea Policy Stays the Same.” International Crisis Group, January 21, 2011. Accessed March 30, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/asia/north-east-asia/china/ahlbrandt-north-koreadespite-reports-chinas-north-korea-policy-stays-the-same.aspx. Laurence, Jeremy. “North Korea Leader Kim Jong-il Visits China, Not His Son – Report.” Reuters, May 20, 2011. Accessed May 25, 2011, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/uk-korea-north-jongilidUKTRE74J1L420110520. Life in Korea (website). http://www.lifeinkorea.com/information/history1.cfm. Necrometrics (website). http://necrometrics.com/. “North Korea.” New York Times, January 21, 2011. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/northkorea/inde x.html?scp=2&sq=korean%20peninsula&st=cse. “North Korea „ready for sacred war‟ with the South.” BBC News, December 23, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific12067735.Oliver, Christian, and Geoff Dyer. “North Korea‟s Nuclear Program.” New York Times, December 14, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/northkorea/nucl ear_program/index.html. “Q&A: North Korea Nuclear Talks.” BBC News, December 20, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11813699. Rt66.com (website). Kortegaard Engineering. http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/casualty.htm. Sanger, David E., and William J. Broad. “U.S. Concludes N. Korea Has More Nuclear Sites.” New York Times, December 14, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/world/asia/15nukes.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadline s&emc=globasasa2. Shmoop (website). Shmoop University, Inc. http://www.shmoop.com/korean-war/kim-ilsung.html. “South Korea.” New York Times, December 29, 2010. Accessed April 27, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/southkorea/inde x.html?scp=10&sq=korean%20peninsula&st=cse. “The Korean War Armistice.” BBC News, May 26, 2010. Accessed February 28, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10165796. “UN envoy Strong warns of war in Korea.” CP 24, April 2, 2003. Accessed May 21, 2010, http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20030403/korea_war_strong_030403? hub=CP24Sports956. U.S. Department of State (website). U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2800.htm. Willems, Marije. “Noord Korea dreigt VS en Zuid-Korea te vernietigen.” NRC Handelsblad, April 24, 2011 Accessed April 27, 2011, http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/04/24/noord-

14


korea-dreigt-vs-en-zuid-korea-tevernietigen/?utm_campaign=nieuwsbrief&utm_source=email. Wivell, David. “Kim Jong-Il Visits China For Third Time In Just Over One Year: Report.� Huffington Post, May 20, 2011. Accessed May 25, 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/20/kim-jongil-visits-china-f_n_864647.html.

15


SC 2 - Conflict in the Korean Peninsula