Today, many countries are marveling at the reality of the DPRK. They admire the country for its manufacture and launch of artificial satellites, its powerful nuclear deterrent, and its energy in pushing the building of a socialist power. However, only the US is neglecting such a reality with constitutional antipathy toward Pyongyang, making a desperate attempt to stifle it while clinging to the policy of sanctions, isolation and suffocation.
Sanctions, Isolation and Suffocation After False Charge
Whenever the DPRK launched a satellite the United States doggedly claimed it as “launch of a ballistic missile,” applying sanctions against the country. When Korea launched its first satellite, the US clamoured about “military countermeasure,” ignoring agreements between the DPRK and the USA in which it commits itself to no hostility but respect for Pyongyang. It went so far as to forge “sanctions resolutions” and “presidential statements” one after another in the name of the UN, enumerating all sorts of sanctions items to isolate Korea. Moreover, it abused the UN arena to instigate its vassal nations
What makes matters worse is that the US is seeking such a mean policy while it recognizes Korea’s success in the satellite launches. When Korea launched Kwangmyongsong 3-2, the North American Aerospace Defense Command recognized it wholly. Nevertheless, Washington fabricated a “sanctions resolution” at the UNSC. Regarding the launch of earth observation satellite Kwangmyongsong 4 early this year the US strategic forces command acknowledged the satellite’s entering into orbit, and similar voices of acknowledgement were heard across the world. Nevertheless, the US cooked up another sinister “sanctions resolution” with its vassal forces in the name of the UNSC.
Commenting that the Americans’ concern is not what is done but who does it, the Western media judged that to determine legality and illegality by the difference in systems is obviously double standard.
Result of Inherent Antagonism
Over the past decades the United States has seriously violated international laws and neglected the DPRK’s strenuous effort to keep peace and security in the Korean peninsula and the region.
Immediately after the armistice the DPRK proposed to hold a political conference of a higher level to establish a stable peace mechanism in the Korean peninsula, and has since made numerous proposals for peace. Some typical ones are the proposal to hold the DPRK-USA talks in the 1970s, three-party talks involving the DPRK, USA and south Korea in the 1980s, and negotiation between military authorities of the DPRK and the US to establish a new peace mechanism to cope with the prevailing situation caused by the latter’s moves to wreck the armistice machinery in the 1990s.
On the other hand, the DPRK has made painstaking efforts to remove the US’s nuclear threat. In 1959 it made a proposal to create a nuclear-free, peace zone in Asia, in 1981 the one to create a nuclear-free, peace zone in Northeast Asia and in 1986 the one to turn the Korean peninsula into a nuclear-free zone.
In recent years the DPRK made proposals of crucial importance to deal with the situation in which the US’s anti-DPRK hostile policy has gone to such an extent of making a reckless threat of nuclear strike against Pyongyang endangering the nation’s sovereignty and destiny. It also proposed that the US make a bold political decision to halt joint military exercises conducted under the cloak of “annual” and “defensive” program while the DPRK taking corresponding practical measures at the same time. The US, however, branded all the endeavour of the DPRK as “camouflaged peace offensive” and an effort aiming at “publicity effect,” aggravating the situation more serious. These days, clamouring about the “possible collapse” of Korea, it is resorting to sanctions and joint military rehearsals to translate its scheme of “occupation of Pyongyang” into reality.
Suffering from the US’s nuclear threat for scores of years the Korean people found their own way out. In March 1993 the DPRK government made public a statement declaring its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and conducted the first underground nuclear test in 2006. And in January 2016 it successfully carried out an H-bomb test. Consequently, the structure of confrontation came into being in the Korean peninsula—between the housebreaker with nukes and the master who is determined to defend himself with nukes. When the DPRK successfully launched its artificial earth satellites exercising its right as sovereign state, the US said “no,” and when there came voices favouring Korea’s deterrent in the international community and even in America, Washington always insisted “no.” It still says “no” to the DPRK’s proposal to terminate the tragedy of division and create a peaceful environment in the Korean peninsula.
Now Korea has enough power to tackle any mode of warfare wanted by the US and is ready to take tough countermeasures against the hostile forces’ violation of its sovereignty and provocation. This is a result from the successive US administrations’ inherent antagonism toward the DPRK. Now it is the US’s turn to answer the question, “How long will you say no?”
Kim Yong Un