Security Council
Topic B: Peace and Security on the Korean Peninsula
“Making peace is harder than making war.”1 -Adlai E. Stevenson
The creation of two separate States in the late 1940’s, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the Republic of Korea (ROK), continues to be the root cause of much of the tension on the Korean Peninsula. Since that moment and the conflict that followed, the international community seeks to stabilize the peninsula and discourage acts of aggression by both sides. However, there are still recurring instances of direct physical confrontation, continuous aggressive posturing, and, a new series of cyber-attacks. In spite of both sides having a stated goal of peace and international efforts to mediate, such tensions continue to escalate, destabilizing not only the Korean Peninsula, but the broader region as a whole.
Background:
Establishment of Two Koreas
The Korean Peninsula continues to be divided into two separate states following WWII and the end of Japanese occupation, with a continuing presence of the United States in South Korea. Unable to agree on unification, the two halves established separate countries; the north being backed and heavily influenced by the Soviet Union and the south by the United States. In 1950, the DPRK attempted to unify the peninsula by invading the ROK and starting the Korean War, also known as the Fatherland Liberation War. The Security Council immediately adopted S/RES/82 in response, which called for the DPRK to withdraw and cease their invasion of the ROK.2 The United States came to the aid of the ROK, and the war would continue for three years, with neither side claiming victory. The conflict effectively ended with the signing of the Korean Armistice Agreement, which meant to ensure “a complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved,” although there has been no agreement to a final peaceful settlement.3
Following the Korean War, the demilitarized zone (DMZ) stands between the DPRK and ROK, which is now one of the most heavily guarded borders in the world.4 Parallel to the zone on both sides are areas of heavy fortification and arms, which are used in frequent skirmishes at the
1 Brainyquote. “Adlai E. Stenson Quotes”. Available at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/adlaieste176399.html 2 United Nations Security Council. S/RES/82(1950). Available at: http://undocs.org/S/RES/82(1950) . 3 Ibid. 4 The History Channel. “The Demilitarized Zone”. Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/demilitarized-zone .
1
border. In October of 1966 what is now known as the Korean DMZ Conflict began as both sides encroached on the DMZ, and while it was a relatively minor conflict, it lasted for three years during which time tensions were very high.5 While this type of aggression occurs far less since the conflict, but both sides have sought to secure themselves from the other by amassing arms, which are sometimes used for demonstrative and intimidation purposes.
Nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
In 1993 the DPRK notified the Security Council of its intention to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The NPT requires non-nuclear weapon States to discontinue and not to attempt to procure nuclear arms.6 It charges the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with inspecting nuclear facilities.7 The IAEA has the ability to develop safeguards and issue resolutions to ensure compliance with the treaty. The treaty further establishes parameters on the exchange of research and nuclear materials limiting its use to peaceful purposes as well as methods of acceding from it.8 When the DPRK notified the Security Council of its intent to withdraw, it cites Article 10 of the NPT as its reason for withdrawing.9 Article 10 states, “Each party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country.”10
The DPRK states that it has the right to obtain nuclear technology in order to protect itself and provide itself with energy.11 Just short of the three months, the DPRK announced its intention to stay within the NPT framework. Nearly a decade later, in December 2002, the DPRK ordered all International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors out of the country stating that its nuclear capability was not subject to any international agreements.12 The DPRK then declared that it would withdraw from the NPT, effective almost immediately, as they were including the time that passed in their previous announcement of withdrawal as part of the three-month requirement.
5 Lavelle, Moira. “A brief history of border conflict between North and South Korea”. Available at: http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-08-20/brief-history-border-conflict-between-north-and-south-korea . 6 United Nations General Assembly. Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Available at: http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/npt/text . 7 Id. 8 Arms Control Association. “The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) at a Glance”. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nptfact . 9 Id. 10 U.S. Delegation to the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference. “Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.” http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/141503.pdf 11 Bunn, George, Rhinelander, John B. “NPT Withdrawal: Time for the Security Council to Step In”. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005_05/Bunn_Rhinelander . 12 Nuclear Threat Initiative. “North Korea Proclaims Right to Nuclear Weapons”. Available at: http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/north-korea-not-seen-altering-nuclear-weapon-posture/ .
2
In response to the threat to peace and security posed by nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, China, Japan, the DPRK, Russia, the Republic of Korea, and the United States formed the Six Party Talks (SPT) in August of 2003. These groundbreaking multilateral discussions sought out a means to dismantle the DPRK’s nuclear program and establish a path for peace. During the fourth round of the SPT in 2005, a set of six principles existed as a means to successfully disarm the DPRK. Known as the Joint Statements, these principles state that the DPRK will return to the NPT and restore compliance with IAEA regulations with the caveat that all parties to the talks agree to normalize relations. Despite this apparent progress, the DPRK is still under massive international scrutiny for its nuclear program with little to no action to dismantle its ongoing operations.
In 2006, the Security Council adopted S/RES/1718 in response to nuclear testing undertaken by the DPRK in that same year.13 The resolution addresses nuclear proliferation on the peninsula by extending sanctions and creating a committee to specifically monitor and adjust the application of sanctions as necessary. Three years later in 2009, the Security Council passed S/RES/1874, which further extended previous sanctions and established a panel of experts that continues to aide the committee while monitoring the implementation of current sanctions.14 When the Security Council issued a Presidential Statement in 2009 condemning an attempted DPRK satellite launch, the DPRK responded by announcing that it was withdrawing from the NPT and would restore its nuclear program. In the time since, the DPRK conducts multiple nuclear and missile tests. Other resolutions that are enforced by the international community to de-escalate the situation on the peninsula are S/RES/2087 (satellite launch condemnation), S/RES/2094 (condemned third nuclear test), and S/RES/2270, (condemned fourth nuclear test).
Current Situation:
Rising Tensions
The Korean Peninsula continues to experience rising tensions and a buildup of arms. In the last few years, incidents of direct conflict appear to be on the rise and both the DPRK and ROK show little interest in any reconciliation.15 For example, in 2010 the DPRK shelled the Yeonpyeong island near the disputed maritime border in the Yellow Sea, which ended with the death of four ROK citizens.16 The ROK responded by returning fire with fighter jets.17 Drones found in the ROK carrying pictures of government buildings, and the ROK released massive amounts of
13 United Nations Security Council. S/RES/1718. Available at: http://undocs.org/S/RES/1718(2006) . 14 Arms Control Association. “UN Security Council Resolutions on North Korea”. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/UN-Security-Council-Resolutions-on-North-Korea . 15 Id. 16 Id. 17 Id.
3
balloons with anti DPRK propaganda meant to fly over the border.18 Last year, both States began blaring propaganda over the border using massive speakers, which escalated into artillery shelling.19 All of this is incredibly destabilizing for the region, but nowhere near as destabilizing as the nuclearization of the peninsula and the escalating cyber-security threats.
Cyber Warfare
Since 2009, a massive increase in cyber-attacks on the Korean Peninsula, affecting everything from financial institutions to infrastructure departments. In 2009 hackers infiltrated the military internet network used by both the United States and the ROK which was a military strategy developed between the two.20 That same year, hackers also stole information from South Korea’s Chemical Accidents Response Information System.21 In 2011 hackers infiltrated ROK financial, media, joint U.S. military institutions, and systems. This initiated a strategy known as “distributed denial of service” that persisted for ten days.
The period known as the “10 Days of Rain” was an attempt to disrupt communications between the affected entities and the public domains that they use. The attacks abruptly stopped after the ten days and follow-up investigations suspected the attacks came from hackers within the peninsula.22 The turbid nature of cyber-attacks makes it difficult to pinpoint exactly where they are coming from, but it is clear now both the ROK and DPRK have been the subject and source of cyber-attacks. The private sector is the subject of cyber attacks both on the Korean Peninsula and away from the Korean Peninsula.
In the same year, the DPRK experienced its own direct cyber-attack following the days of the Sony hack incident. The attack completely disconnected DPRK internet connections and caused mass outages.23 The attack used the distributed denial of service method to create problems for the DPRK’s networks. This in turn led to tensions on the peninsula as both the DPRK and the ROK suspected each other of being behind the attacks.24
18 Id. 19 Id. 20 Chosun. “North Korea Hacks into South Korea-U.S. Defense Plans”. Available at:
4
Both the DPRK and the ROK suffer from the effects of cyber war which continues to increase tensions between the two states. With the world becoming increasingly connected through cyber networks, it is an evolving situation on the peninsula. Previously, the threat of hostility on the peninsula revolved around nuclear and other arms but cyber-attacks since 2009 have shifted that focus. Even though one country relies more on the World Wide Web than the other, they still both experience the ills that this technology can bring.
Brinkmanship, Regime Survival and Humanitarian Crisis
The majority of the tensions that occurs on the Korean peninsula are a result of Kim Jong-un’s continued insistence on a nuclear program based on the regime’s need to maintain its existence for global legitimacy. The DPRK’s belief that a nuclear program is the only thing that keeps the regime alive as well as deter military action. It continues to increase its nuclear ambitions by restarting its 5 megawatt gas-graphite reactor at its main nuclear reactor facility in Yongbyon.25 Out of commission since late 2007, its restart enables North Korea to be able to produce 6 kilos of plutonium per year.
In addition to heightened tensions, there are continued reports of systematic violations of basic human rights and mass food shortages. Reports continue to indicate that public executions, torture, illegal/arbitrary detention, concentrations camps for political prisoners, punishments of relatives of prisoners, and measures against expressionism are widespread throughout the regime.26 The DPRK continues to reject all claims of violating the rights of its citizens, suggesting that such allegations are a smear campaign against the regime.
But, as reports have come out of the country, the last ten years indicate within data gathered that the DPRK continues to pursue a policy that’s highly exploitative and discriminatory against members of its own population. Of particular concern is the food policy that is in place that result in mass civilian deaths from the mid 1990s to present day. Moreover, Article 2 of the U.N. Genocide Convention and its definition of genocide is being enacted on every level within the regime and or security apparatus of the prison population. More than 250,000 innocent civilians, mostly children, continue to be placed into slave labor with very little rations for sustainability, exposed to brutal acts of torture, and possible death. Lastly, the regime is going through its population and targeting its members for destruction who fall under the protection of the Genocide Convention.
Future Outlook:
25 Sinclair, Paul. Centre for Strategic Studies. “The Korean Peninsula: How much of a problem? < http://www.victoria.ac.nz/hppi/centres/strategic-studies/documents/the-korean-peninsular-how- much-of-a-problem.pdf> 26 Park, Robert. The Diplomat. “Shining a Light on North Korea’s Human Rights Crisis.” < http://thediplomat.com/2012/12/shinning-a-light-on-north-koreas-human-rights-crisis/>
5
Recent events dealing with nuclear and missile testing, cyber-attacks, skirmishes along the DMZ and the humanitarian crisis heighten tensions on the Korean Peninsula. The international community must continue to impose sanctions on the DPRK in an effort to stop aggression, but it seems to have had little effect, and while the ROK is not typically seen as the aggressor, they respond to many cross-border provocations. Both sides are fiercely defensive of their national sovereignty and see the actions of the other as a threat. With the very real possibility that conflict could break out, the international community must take steps to stabilize the peninsula.
Focus Questions:
6
1. What role has your country played throughout the proliferation of nuclear weapons by the DPRK? 2. How has your country helped to promote peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula within the international community? 3. What are some efforts that could be undertaken to reduce the DPRK’s nuclear program as well as escalating tensions? 4. Has your country experienced cyber attacks that were perpetrated by the DPRK? 5. What efforts has your country made to help the humanitarian situation on the ground in North Korea?
7
Works Cited
Arms Control Association. “The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty at a Glance”. April 2005. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nptfact .
Bajoria, Jayshree and Beina Xu. Council on Foreign Relations. "The Six-Party Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program." 30 September 2013. Available at: http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program/p13593 .
Bunn, George and John B. Rhinelander. “NPT Withdrawal: Time for the Security Council to Step In”. 1 May 2005. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005_05/Bunn_Rhinelander .
Chosun. “North Korea Hacks into S.Korea-U.S. Defense Plans”. 18 December 2009. Available at: http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/12/18/2009121800317.html .
Fisher, Max. “North Korea's internet appears to be under mass cyber-attack”. 22 December 2014. Available at: http://www.vox.com/2014/12/22/7433873/north-korea-internet-down .
Fox News. “North Korean websites back online after widespread internet outage”. 23 December 2014. Available at: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/12/23/north-korea-experiencing- widespread-internet-outages.html .
United Nations General Assembly. The Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 12 June 1968. Available at: < http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/npt/text> .
Global Security. “Korea Demilitarized Incidents”. Available at: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/dmz.htm .
Greene, Tim. “Cyberwar test runs yields information about defenses”. 13 May 2011. Available at: http://www.networkworld.com/article/2177555/malware-cybercrime/interop-- cyberwar-test-runs-yield-information-about-defenses.html .
Haggard, Stephan and Jon R. Lindsay. East West Center. "North Korea and the Sony Hack: Exporting Instability Through Cyberspace." Available at: http://www.eastwestcenter.org/system/tdf/private/api117.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=351 64 .
International Atomic Energy Agency. “Relationship with the United Nations”. 7 April 2016. Available at: https://www.iaea.org/technicalcooperation/Partnerships/Relation- UN/index.html .
8
Kshetri, Nir. “Cyberwarfare in the Korean Peninsula: Asymmetries and Strategic Responses”. 2014. Available at: https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/N_Kshetri_Cyberwarfare_2014.pdf .
Lavelle, Moira. “A brief history of border conflict between North and South Korea”. 20 August 2015. Available at: http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-08-20/brief-history-border-conflict- between-north-and-south-korea .
Nuclear Threat Initiative. “North Korea Proclaims Right to Nuclear Weapons”. February 2012. Available at: http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/north-korea-not-seen-altering-nuclear- weapon-posture/ . Park, Robert. The Diplomat. “Shining a Light on North Korea’s Human Rights Crisis.” < http://thediplomat.com/2012/12/shinning-a-light-on-north-koreas-human-rights-crisis/
Raska, Michael. “Cyberwars on the Korean Peninsula”. 22 April 2014. Available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/04/cyberwars-korean-peninsula- 2014422531782925.html .
Security Council Report. “UN Documents for DPRK: Security Council Resolutions”. 2016. Available at: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un- documents/search.php?IncludeBlogs=10&limit=15&tag=%22Security%20Council%20R esolutions%22+AND+%22DPRK%20(North%20Korea)%22&ctype=DPRK%20(North %20Korea)&rtype=Security%20Council%20Resolutions&cbtype=dprk-north-korea .
Sinclair, Paul. Centre for Strategic Studies. “The Korean Peninsula: How much of a problem? < http://www.victoria.ac.nz/hppi/centres/strategic-studies/documents/the-korean- peninsular-how-much-of-a-problem.pdf>
Sudworth, John. “New cyber-attacks hit South Korea”. 9 July 2009. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8142282.stm .
The History Channel. "The Demilitarized Zone." Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/demilitarized-zone .
United Nations Security Council. “Establishment of a Security Council Sanctions Committee”. S/RES/1718. 14 October 2006. Available at: http://undocs.org/S/RES/1718(2006) .
United Nations Security Council. “Non-proliferation Democratic People's Republic of Korea”. S/RES/1874. 12 June 2009. Available at: http://undocs.org/S/RES/1874(2009) .
9
U.S. Delegation to the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference. “Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/141503.pdf
Vann Sant, Shannon. “North Korea Threatens Nuclear Test Over UN Vote”. November 2014. Available at: http://www.voanews.com/content/north-korea-threatens-nuclear-test-over- un-vote/2527333.html .
10