As the year winds up, there have been several news items outside the country that have made heads turn. One of them is the nuclear testing of the DPRK (that's Democratic People's Republic of Korea) last October 19, 2006. The media of course have repeated the US line of the supposed threat of WMDs that the DPRK testing signalled and that the testing itself was contrary to international law, so much so that it merited a UN resolution on the country.
What wasn't said in the papers is that the DPRK is not anymore a signatory to the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty and more importantly that it is the US who has already nuclear arms pointed at the DPRK in South Korea and Japan. Its two largest concentration of bases outside of Germany is in South Korea and Japan which it can saber-rattle every time it feels "threatened" by the DPRK. This coming from a country with the largest arsenal of nuclear weapon, the largest army and biggest deployment of bases overseas and despite the clear policy of non-aggression by the DPRK.
To know more about US bases and military access agreements read the following paper at AGHAM's website. My favorite line inside that paper: (On US bases) Its mere presence intimidates and gives coercive power for the US to gain concessions from the host and allows it to interfere, in most cases with impunity, in internal affairs, commit crimes and violence on local people, wreak grave social costs and environmental destruction.
What wasn't said in the papers is that the DPRK is not anymore a signatory to the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty and more importantly that it is the US who has already nuclear arms pointed at the DPRK in South Korea and Japan. Its two largest concentration of bases outside of Germany is in South Korea and Japan which it can saber-rattle every time it feels "threatened" by the DPRK. This coming from a country with the largest arsenal of nuclear weapon, the largest army and biggest deployment of bases overseas and despite the clear policy of non-aggression by the DPRK.
To know more about US bases and military access agreements read the following paper at AGHAM's website. My favorite line inside that paper: (On US bases) Its mere presence intimidates and gives coercive power for the US to gain concessions from the host and allows it to interfere, in most cases with impunity, in internal affairs, commit crimes and violence on local people, wreak grave social costs and environmental destruction.
No comments:
Post a Comment