North Korea’s H-bomb and global thermo-nuclear strategic balance

When the North Koreans boast of successful test of H-bomb, we, the peace-loving civilised people, can hardly welcome it

Right from its establishment as a communist state under the leadership of Kim Ill- Sung with the direct military and political back-up of the then Soviet Union in 1948, North Korea or the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea all through has been a strictly reclusive one. Its relation with other countries is not our headache because affairs of foreign relations are their internal ones and absolutely worked out by the people and the leadership of the country in question. It is our gravest concern that one more country happens to possess hitherto the super highest power of destruction and thus contributes to the proliferation of the thermonuclear device or the H-bomb technology. As votaries of peace, security and humanity, we protest and condemn in the strongest terms the proliferation of nuclear energy under any circumstances. When a new country owns the technology of manufacturing thermonuclear device, chances and possibilities are automatically created to spill it over further. So, as the sixth nation of the world, when the North Koreans boasts of successful test of H-bomb, we, the peace-loving civilized people, can hardly welcome it.

When all international diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions fail to deter North Korea to back down from its nuclear test plan, other nations are naturally encouraged to embark upon the over-ambitious scheme of owning nuclear power. Of course, North Korea has its own version of making H-bomb as a full-proof deterrent to possible US aggression, nevertheless, the whole scheme of things overtly demonstrate the aggressive mindset of this Stalinist country that in turn poses a threat to world peace, stability and security.

Studying the long track records of North Korea, we conspicuously observe an innate strain of militaristic ambitions. After the end of the World War-II in 1945, Korean Peninsula was almost equally divided into two parts. The North was taken over by the then Soviet Union while the USA captured the southern part of the Korean Peninsula. When several rounds of reunification initiatives failed, both of the divided parts came to exist as two separate states. The North became a communist country and the South after some military coups was gradually upgraded to a democratic republic. In 1950 when North Korea invaded the South Korea, the Korean War began and the North occupied most parts of the South and wanted to impose communism on South Korea. In this situation, the UN sent troops to Korea under US general Douglus McArthur and the troops making up of different countries didn’t want communism and most of the lost parts of the South were regained. The war ended in 1953 with an armistice but not with a peace treaty. Both of the superpowers were involved in the Korean War in favour of their respective parties. However, from the Korean War the potentially aggressive military ambition of the North came to the surface.

Right from the end of the Korean War, Korea began to follow a strong Stalinist line rapidly plunging into a totalitarian absolute dictatorship with the introduction of an elaborate personality cult around the founder of the state Kim Ill-sung and subsequently around his son Kim Jong-Ill and his grandson, the current leader, Kim Jong-Un. State’s real character of military adventurism came to the limelight when Kim Jong-Ill declared ‘Songun’ or ‘military first’ as state policy in 2011.

The ongoing standoff between the USA and North Korea has its seeds deeply rooted in the unfinished result of the Korean War. Korean War, in fact, hatched up an excuse for the USA to intervene in the affairs of Korean Peninsula. In the wake of the Korean War, the USA sent troops to South Korea in the name of safeguarding the national security of South Korea and since then has been maintaining a strong military presence in South Korea. Impartially speaking, we cannot, in principle, approve of military presence of any state in another sovereign state. Moreover, South Korea lags far too behind in the race of military fire power especially in terms of nuclear-strategic technology. So the question automatically leaves itself to be answered as to who will bell the North Korean cat? Of course, the USA is not the sole agent of security to any state. But if the South Koreans themselves welcome the US military presence in their country from their bitter experience of Korean War we have nothing to do with it. In all the surveys conducted till to date concerning the popular support behind the US military presence, 75% to 85% people on average favorably see the US military presence.

In human rights violations index, both North Korea and the USA go neck and neck. In the North, people don’t have freedom of speech. Their right to practice religious rituals and ceremonies is either discouraged or denied. Any criticism or even opposition is taken with zero tolerance. Whoever dares to express any dissident views beyond the ruling party line eventually ends up in the ruthless labour camp along with the family. Most of the inmates of the labour camps die due to absolute inhuman treatment of these torture cells while only a fortunate few can flee with their lives. Though people look high-seriously loyal to their leader, they actually want freedom since it is an irresistible human urge. However, people can hardly express it because an aorta of disloyalty or non-compliance simply means death.

On the contrary, the people of the USA enjoy almost absolutely the fundamental human rights with the barest exceptions of discrimination. But the countries where the USA has militarily intervened and maintain military presence, we clearly see record violations of human rights. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan the US army has committed outrageous atrocities against civilian population unparalleled in contemporary history. In Guantenamo Bay concentration camp the US army has ruthlessly tortured the prisoners applying all possible brute means. Each and every inch of land in Afghanistan has been burnt by thousands of US bombs dropped since its military intervention. It is unquestionably proved that the US military intervention in Iraq was totally a blunder. Alarmingly, the US army has dropped ‘mother of all bombs’ in Afghanistan killing thousands of civilian people.

 In fact, neither the USA nor North Korea is the promoter of humanity and human rights. They are solely serving their own expansionist interests in their individual ways. Our point at issue is the new equation of nuclear-strategic balance in the changed scenario of North Korea’s possessing thermo-nuclear device. Before North Korea’s possessing H-bomb, the global thermonuclear energy was confined to only five permanent members of the UN and therefore the global fire power was securely balanced and distributed. By balance, I categorically mean that these veto-wielding countries are not placed in a unipolar position from geo-political perspective. Nor any lone individual was vested with the absolute executive authority of the state. So, none can exercise his/her absolute power at his/her own sweet will. In the case of applying power of mass destruction, there are some sort of check and balance and that is obviously a plus for global security and peace. More importantly, each of these five countries evidently has centuries-old institutional traditions and practices which provide a shield against any misuse of thermo-nuclear power. But it is a matter of gravest concern when a questionably sane young man of only 35 or 37 years with absolute executive authority owns thermonuclear power there is an every possibility of its slipping into the hands of other insane and militarily adventurist countries with minimum democratic traditions.  

The writer is Assistant Professor of English, Bogra Cantonment Public School & College.

E-mail:[email protected]

 

North Koreas H-bomb and global thermo-nuclear strategic balance

When the North Koreans boast of successful test of H-bomb, we, the peace-loving civilised people, can hardly welcome it

Right from its establishment as a communist state under the leadership of Kim Ill- Sung with the direct military and political back-up of the then Soviet Union in 1948, North Korea or the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea all through has been a strictly reclusive one. Its relation with other countries is not our headache because affairs of foreign relations are their internal ones and absolutely worked out by the people and the leadership of the country in question. It is our gravest concern that one more country happens to possess hitherto the super highest power of destruction and thus contributes to the proliferation of the thermonuclear device or the H-bomb technology. As votaries of peace, security and humanity, we protest and condemn in the strongest terms the proliferation of nuclear energy under any circumstances. When a new country owns the technology of manufacturing thermonuclear device, chances and possibilities are automatically created to spill it over further. So, as the sixth nation of the world, when the North Koreans boasts of successful test of H-bomb, we, the peace-loving civilized people, can hardly welcome it. When all international diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions fail to deter North Korea to back down from its nuclear test plan, other nations are naturally encouraged to embark upon the over-ambitious scheme of owning nuclear power. Of course, North Korea has its own version of making H-bomb as a full-proof deterrent to possible US aggression, nevertheless, the whole scheme of things overtly demonstrate the aggressive mindset of this Stalinist country that in turn poses a threat to world peace, stability and security. Studying the long track records of North Korea, we conspicuously observe an innate strain of militaristic ambitions. After the end of the World War-II in 1945, Korean Peninsula was almost equally divided into two parts. The North was taken over by the then Soviet Union while the USA captured the southern part of the Korean Peninsula. When several rounds of reunification initiatives failed, both of the divided parts came to exist as two separate states. The North became a communist country and the South after some military coups was gradually upgraded to a democratic republic. In 1950 when North Korea invaded the South Korea, the Korean War began and the North occupied most parts of the South and wanted to impose communism on South Korea. In this situation, the UN sent troops to Korea under US general Douglus McArthur and the troops making up of different countries didnt want communism and most of the lost parts of the South were regained. The war ended in 1953 with an armistice but not with a peace treaty. Both of the superpowers were involved in the Korean War in favour of their respective parties. However, from the Korean War the potentially aggressive military ambition of the North came to the surface. Right from the end of the Korean War, Korea began to follow a strong Stalinist line rapidly plunging into a totalitarian absolute dictatorship with the introduction of an elaborate personality cult around the founder of the state Kim Ill-sung and subsequently around his son Kim Jong-Ill and his grandson, the current leader, Kim Jong-Un. States real character of military adventurism came to the limelight when Kim Jong-Ill declared Songun or military first as state policy in 2011. The ongoing standoff between the USA and North Korea has its seeds deeply rooted in the unfinished result of the Korean War. Korean War, in fact, hatched up an excuse for the USA to intervene in the affairs of Korean Peninsula. In the wake of the Korean War, the USA sent troops to South Korea in the name of safeguarding the national security of South Korea and since then has been maintaining a strong military presence in South Korea. Impartially speaking, we cannot, in principle, approve of military presence of any state in another sovereign state. Moreover, South Korea lags far too behind in the race of military fire power especially in terms of nuclear-strategic technology. So the question automatically leaves itself to be answered as to who will bell the North Korean cat? Of course, the USA is not the sole agent of security to any state. But if the South Koreans themselves welcome the US military presence in their country from their bitter experience of Korean War we have nothing to do with it. In all the surveys conducted till to date concerning the popular support behind the US military presence, 75% to 85% people on average favorably see the US military presence. In human rights violations index, both North Korea and the USA go neck and neck. In the North, people dont have freedom of speech. Their right to practice religious rituals and ceremonies is either discouraged or denied. Any criticism or even opposition is taken with zero tolerance. Whoever dares to express any dissident views beyond the ruling party line eventually ends up in the ruthless labour camp along with the family. Most of the inmates of the labour camps die due to absolute inhuman treatment of these torture cells while only a fortunate few can flee with their lives. Though people look high-seriously loyal to their leader, they actually want freedom since it is an irresistible human urge. However, people can hardly express it because an aorta of disloyalty or non-compliance simply means death. On the contrary, the people of the USA enjoy almost absolutely the fundamental human rights with the barest exceptions of discrimination. But the countries where the USA has militarily intervened and maintain military presence, we clearly see record violations of human rights. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan the US army has committed outrageous atrocities against civilian population unparalleled in contemporary history. In Guantenamo Bay concentration camp the US army has ruthlessly tortured the prisoners applying all possible brute means. Each and every inch of land in Afghanistan has been burnt by thousands of US bombs dropped since its military intervention. It is unquestionably proved that the US military intervention in Iraq was totally a blunder. Alarmingly, the US army has dropped mother of all bombs in Afghanistan killing thousands of civilian people. In fact, neither the USA nor North Korea is the promoter of humanity and human rights. They are solely serving their own expansionist interests in their individual ways. Our point at issue is the new equation of nuclear-strategic balance in the changed scenario of North Koreas possessing thermo-nuclear device. Before North Koreas possessing H-bomb, the global thermonuclear energy was confined to only five permanent members of the UN and therefore the global fire power was securely balanced and distributed. By balance, I categorically mean that these veto-wielding countries are not placed in a unipolar position from geo-political perspective. Nor any lone individual was vested with the absolute executive authority of the state. So, none can exercise his/her absolute power at his/her own sweet will. In the case of applying power of mass destruction, there are some sort of check and balance and that is obviously a plus for global security and peace. More importantly, each of these five countries evidently has centuries-old institutional traditions and practices which provide a shield against any misuse of thermo-nuclear power. But it is a matter of gravest concern when a questionably sane young man of only 35 or 37 years with absolute executive authority owns thermonuclear power there is an every possibility of its slipping into the hands of other insane and militarily adventurist countries with minimum democratic traditions. The writer is Assistant Professor of English, Bogra Cantonment Public School College. E-mail:[email protected]