You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
China-Japan-Koreas
Tough sanctions stun North Korea
2006-10-16
THE UN Security Council has shocked North Korea with a series of harsh economic and arms sanctions that punish the Stalinist dictatorship for its provocative nuclear test last week. The council's historic Resolution 1718 will deprive North Korea of military hardware such as tanks, missiles, artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters and warships; freeze the financial assets of entities and individuals involved in weapons programs; impose travel and financial bans on key figures in the Pyongyang regime; and ban all trade in luxury goods, including the lobster and fine French wine cherished by supreme leader Kim Jong-il.

The US-drafted resolution also authorises UN member states to interdict and search cargo ships going to and from North Korean ports for weapons and weapons material. And it demands that North Korea return to the table for talks on its military agenda and immediately abandon all its nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction programs in a "complete, verifiable and irreversible manner".

But the resolution carries no mention of follow-up military action if North Korea refuses to comply, although the US has warned that it will seek further measures in the council if Pyongyang continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons. The resolution, the toughest passed by the Security Council for many years, was branded "gangster-like" by Pyongyang's UN ambassador Pak Gil-yon before he angrily stormed from the council chamber, the second time he has done so this year. Mr Pak accused the council of double standards and said Pyongyang would regard any further US pressure as a "declaration of war".
Posted by:Fred

#6  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Bobby   2006-10-16 16:02  

#5  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Fred   2006-10-16 13:45  

#4  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Mitch H.   2006-10-16 10:51  

#3  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: RD   2006-10-16 03:57  

#2  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: .com   2006-10-16 02:55  

#1  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: .com   2006-10-16 00:37  

00:00