By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 12 – After the Security Council on Tuesday morning issued a press statement about North Korea's nuclear test, many predicted a quick and straightforward process toward adopted a full Council resolution.
Inner City Press, as it did on the January resolution, sought the views of the Chinese delegation.
Asked about the comments made by the US' Susan Rice, the response, exclusive to Inner City Press, was that it does not depend on one side, it depends on 15 members. You have some positions, let's adopt a resolution as soon as possible. You can say that, but it depends on many factors: what you propose, what's the content of resolution? How we can conduct our negotiations?
Then a perspective of Pyongyang was proffered: they have their concerns, they feel they are threatened by certain countries.
How does a resolution such as appears is being asked for address that? Have the current sanctions against North Korea been effective? Not enough to stop this third test, that much is clear.
Will South Korea holding the Security Council presidency this month, beyond being seemingly linked to North Korea's test or at least its timing, allow them to better impact a resolution?
They have sent a lot of staff to the Council. But if the last resolution is any guide, it is largely a game between the US and China, with Russia having some say at the end.
The US' Susan Rice was asked about the difference between this time and the past two nuclear tests.
She said, “North Korea continues to violate repeated Security Council resolutions and that in itself makes this different.. they are not acceptable, they will not be tolerated, and they will be met with North Korea's increasing isolation and pressure under United Nations sanctions.”
More than eight hours after the press statement and stakeouts, speeches continued in the Security Council on the topic of the Protection of Civilians. But the Presidential Statement on that had already been adopted, and most of the Permanent Representatives, other than those speaking were long gone. And so it goes at the UN.
