UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL
Nuclear Program of North Korea
AMUN
2013
1
LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD
Delegates,
It gives me immense pleasure to welcome you to UNSC (United Nations Security Council) at
AMUN 2013. The issue that will be discussed is one of the most intriguing one i.e. Nuclear
Programs of North Korea. With each nation being represented by a delegate, each must
take note of the fact that they will be judged upon their debating skills, impeccable
knowledge and diplomatic courtesy. This Background Guide is designed to be the beginning
of your research process, and by no means should encompass the scope of your research.
The agenda of the committee is open-ended but requires focused research in certain key
aspects that have been listed in this guide. The delegates must research thoroughly and
explore the different aspects associated with the agenda. If there is something we want to
really stress on, then it is: Research well! That is the first step towards becoming a good
MUNer.
We encourage you to find how your particular country views these topics, what it is
currently doing to improve the related situation. You should also understand how these
issues are affecting other countries of the world. Your understanding of the topics through
research will be the key to a successful debate that would influence the Resolution writing
process. Also note delegates, there have been many resolutions for this agenda in the past
and it is our committee’s priority to see whether they are being implemented or not.
We look forward to working with you to debate and draft resolutions.
Regards,
Chairperson Vice-President
Ritwik Sharma Sparsh Chawla
2
The United Nations Security Council
The Security Council is the executive body of the United Nations whose main responsibility
as laid out by Chapter V of the UN Charter is to maintain international peace and security.
The Security Council is designed to respond quickly and decisively to spontaneous out bursts
of conflicts.
The Security Council comprises of 15 member states, as per Article 23 of the UN Charter: 5
Permanent Members and 10 non- permanent states, which are elected for terms lasting
two years. The five permanent states (collectively known as the P5) are the United States of
America, Russian Federation, French Republic, The People’s Republic of China and the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Northern Ireland. The 10 non-permanent
members are Azerbaijan, Australia, Argentina, Guatemala, Republic Of Korea, Morocco,
Pakistan, Luxemburg, Rwanda, Togo.
3
For all voting procedures regarding amendments and resolutions, nine affirmative votes are
required, including the collective consent of the P5 nations. Observer states may not vote
on substantial matters. The Security Council enjoys a number of special powers under its
jurisdiction that enable it to successfully accomplish its objectives as per the UN Charter:
Article 25: All member states must accept and carry out the decisions taken by the Council.
Articles 33-38: The Security Council can assess any conflict so as to ascertain whether it
poses a threat to international peace. It may call upon the parties to the conflict to adopt
specific means to bring the dispute to a pacific settlement. These recommendations are
non-binding in nature.
Articles 39-51: The Security Council may determine any threat to international peace and
can suggest a set of provisional measures to ease the tension. Furthermore, it enjoys the
power to impose enforcement measures, such as economic sanctions or collective military
action. These decisions are binding in nature. However, it should also be noted that the
Charter does not preclude the inherent right of self-defence of a nation or a group of
nations (Article 51), nor does it prohibit the existence of regional arrangements among
member states (Chapter VIII), provided that the activities of such agencies are consistent
with the Principles of the UN.
Security Council Resolutions are legally binding if they are made under Chapter VII (Action
with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression) of the
Charter of the United Nations.
4
Historical Context
Korea has been a divided country since 1945, when it was liberated from the defeated Japan
after World War II. The Korean War was
fought from June 25, 1950 until an
Armistice Agreement was signed on July 27,
1953. As part of the Armistice, both sides,
including U.S. forces, conduct military
patrols within the Korean Demilitarized
Zone. However paragraph 13(d) of the
Korean Armistice Agreement mandated that
both sides should not introduce new types
of weapons into Korea, so preventing the
introduction of nuclear weapons and
missiles. In August 1957 NSC 5702/2
permitting the deployment of nuclear
weapons in Korea was approved. Paragraph
13(d) of the Korean Armistice Agreement
mandated that both sides should not
introduce new types of weapons into Korea,
so preventing the introduction of nuclear
weapons and missiles. The U.S. decided to
unilaterally abrogate paragraph 13(d),
breaking the Armistice Agreement followed by firing of armed Honest John missiles and
280mm atomic cannons which were deployed to South Korea in January 1958, a year later
adding nuclear armed Matador cruise missiles with the range to reach China and the Soviet
Union.
North Korea denounced the attempt to wreck the armistice agreement and turn Korea into
a U.S. atomic warfare zone. At the U.N. General Assembly in November 1957 the Soviet
Union and Czechoslovakia condemned the decision of the United Nations Command to
introduce nuclear weapons into Korea.
North Korea responded militarily by digging massive underground fortifications resistant to
nuclear attack, and forward deployment of its conventional forces so that the use of nuclear
weapons against it would endanger South Korean and U.S. forces as well. In 1963 North
Korea asked the Soviet Union for help in developing nuclear weapons, but was refused
.However instead the Soviet Union agreed to help North Korea develop a peaceful nuclear
energy program, including the training of nuclear scientists. China later, after its nuclear
tests, similarly rejected North Korean requests for help with developing nuclear weapons.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korean leaders recognized the need for a new
security relationship with a major power since Pyongyang could not afford to maintain its
5
military posture. North Korean leaders therefore sought to forge a new relationship with the
United States, the only power strong enough to step into the vacuum left by the collapse of
the Soviet Union. From the early 1990s, throughout the first nuclear crisis, North Korea
sought a non-aggression pact with the United States. The U.S. rejected North Korean calls
for bilateral talks concerning a non-aggression pact, and stated that only six-party talks that
also include the People's Republic of China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea are acceptable.
North Korea refused to speak in the context of six-party talks, stating that it would only
accept bilateral talks with the United States. This led to a diplomatic stalemate.
North Korea and Non-Proliferation Treaty
North Korea ratified the NPT on December 12, 1985, but gave notice of withdrawal from
the treaty on January 10, 2003 following U.S. allegations that it had started an illegal
enriched uranium weapons program. Article X allows a state to leave the treaty if
"extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the
supreme interests of its country", giving three months' (ninety days') notice. The state is
required to give reasons for leaving the NPT in this notice. On February 10, 2005, North
Korea publicly declared that it possessed nuclear weapons and pulled out of the six-party
talks hosted by China to find a diplomatic solution to the issue. "We had already taken the
resolute action of pulling out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and have
manufactured nuclear arms for self-defence to cope with the Bush administration's
evermore undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of
Korea]," a North Korean Foreign Ministry statement said regarding the issue. On September
19, 2005, North Korea announced that it would agree to a preliminary accord. Under the
accord, North Korea would scrap all of its existing nuclear weapons and nuclear production
facilities, re-join the NPT.
On 2 October 2006, the North Korean foreign minister announced that his country was
planning to conduct a nuclear test "in the future", although it did not state when. On
October 9, the United States Geological Survey detected a magnitude 4.3 seismic event 70
km (43 mi) north of Kimchaek, North Korea, indicating a nuclear test. The North Korean
government announced shortly afterward that they had completed a successful
underground test of a nuclear fission device. On November 19, 2006, North Korea's Minju
Joson newspaper accused South Korea of building up arms in order to attack the country,
claiming that "the South Korean military is openly clamouring that the development and
introduction of new weapons are to target the North." North Korea accused South Korea of
conspiring with the United States to attack it, an accusation made frequently by the North
and routinely denied by the United States. The United Nations Security Council condemned
the test in Resolution 1874.
6
In 2007, reports from Washington suggested that the 2002 CIA report stating that North
Korea was developing an enriched uranium weapons program, which led to North Korea
leaving the NPT, had overstated or misread the intelligence. On the other hand, even apart
from these press allegations, this could have been planted in order to justify the United
States giving up trying to verify the dismantlement of Pyongyang's uranium program in the
face of North Korean intransigence—there remains some information in the public record
indicating the existence of a uranium effort. Quite apart from the fact that North Korean
First Vice-Minister Kang Sok Ju at one point admitted the existence of a uranium enrichment
program, Pakistan's then-President Musharraf revealed that the A.Q. Khan Proliferation
network had provided North Korea with a number of gas centrifuges designed for uranium
enrichment. Additionally, press reports have cited U.S. officials to the effect that evidence
obtained in dismantling Libya's WMD programs points toward North Korea as the source for
Libya's uranium hexafluoride (UF6) – which, if true, would mean that North Korea has a
uranium conversion facility for producing feedstock for centrifuge enrichment.
Past International Action:
The United States persuaded the North
Korean government not to develop
nuclear weapons by offering them
incentives, or promises of economic and
humanitarian aid. The US agreed to
provide oil supplies and to help North
Korea build more powerful, but safer
nuclear power plants. South Korea and
Japan also agreed to provide energy
resources. In return, the government of
North Korea agreed not to develop
nuclear weapons and to let IAEA
inspectors investigate. These promises
became known as the 1994 Agreed Framework. To carry out the Agreed Framework, the
US, South Korea and Japan created the Korean Peninsula Energy Development
Organization (KEDO). This organization arranged the transport of food aid and oil,
implemented energy projects in North Korea, and helped maintain peace and stability in the
region. In the years following the creation of the Agreed Framework, North Korea received
food and oil through KEDO, but the government complained that KEDO was purposefully
delaying the construction of nuclear power plants.
By 2002, the Agreed Framework started to break down. North Korea revealed it was running
a uranium-enrichment program, needed for the development of nuclear weapons. KEDO
7
responded by stopping heavy-oil shipments. North Korea then announced that it would
reopen nuclear facilities that it had closed under the Agreed Framework
In 2003, the IAEA adopted several resolutions calling for North Korea to comply with
international standards. When North Korea continued to ignore those resolutions, IAEA
referred the situation to the UN Security Council.
The North Korean government demanded to negotiate directly with the United States
government, which the US refused. Instead, the governments of South Korea, North Korea
and the United States, along with Russia, China and Japan, met several times to discuss an
end to North Korea’s nuclear program. These meetings—known as the Six Party Talks—
were repeated over three years without resolution, primarily because of disagreements
between the United States and North Korean governments.
In July of 2005, North Korea tested seven missiles over the Sea of Japan. The United States,
Japan, South Korea and Australia immediately condemned the test as an act of provocation
and South Korea suspended food aid in protest. The Security Council unanimously passed
Resolution 1695 condemning the tests and demanding that North Korea suspend all missiles
launches. North Korea is now the ninth nation known to possess nuclear weapons.
The international community reacted with shock and outrage. The Security Council again
convened and unanimously issued a resolution condemning North Korea’s actions.
Resolution 1718 also imposed sanctions on North Korea, preventing the country from
buying, selling or receiving a range of goods from other nations, and imposing an asset
freeze and travel ban on officials related to the nuclear weapons program.
In July 2007, North Korea opened its borders for IAEA inspectors. Soon after, North Korea
and South Korea signed an 8-point peace agreement on issues of permanent peace,
economic cooperation and renewed travel between the countries. This was the second step
of what was outlined in the Six-Party Talks in February 2007, and was an indication of
thawing of relations between North Korea and the countries involved in the Six Party Talks.
On October 11, 2008, the US removed North Korea from its list of states that sponsor
terrorism. In January 2009, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, visited North Korea and
offered to normalize economic ties if they agreed to abandon their nuclear program. Days
later, however, North Korea confirmed that they were preparing to test the launch of a
ballistic missile believed to be capable of reaching the United States, calling it a ‘scientific
satellite’.
8
International Response to the events.
USA
After several announcement of DPRK,
the U.S condemned the announcements
as "highly provocative" and a direct
violation of Pyongyang's international
obligations. The US State Department
noted that U.N Security Council
Resolutions 1718 and 1874 banned
launches using ballistic missile
technology. It added that the planned
launch would pose a threat to regional
security and be inconsistent with
Pyongyang's recent undertaking to
refrain from long-range missile launches.
The launch, even though it was a failure,
called into serious question whether the
U.S. would still be willing to provide the
food aid program it had promised the
North if it returned to negotiations and
refrained from provocative actions such as this.
Following Kim Jong-il's death on 17 December 2011, his son Kim Jong-un inherited the
Korean regime. The latter announced on 29 February 2012 that North Korea would freeze
nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and uranium enrichment at its Yongbyon plant. In
addition, the new leader invited international nuclear inspectors who were ejected in 2009.
After the Launch of Bright Star-3
White House spokesman Jay Carney said "Despite the failure of its attempted missile
launch, North Korea’s provocative action threatens regional security, violates international
law and contravenes its own recent commitments" and that "While this action is not
surprising given North Korea’s pattern of aggressive behaviour, any missile activity by North
Korea is of concern to the international community". Russia considers Pyongyang's decision
to launch a scientific rocket to place a satellite in earth orbit as disregarding UN Security
Council resolutions. The North American Aerospace Defence Command said the first stage
fell into the sea west of South Korea, and the remainder was deemed to have failed.
9
Food Aid
Since 1996, the United States has sent just over 2 million metric tons (MT) of food
assistance, worth about $700 million, to help North Korea alleviate chronic, massive food
shortages that began in the early 1990s. A severe famine in the mid-1990s killed an
estimated 600,000-2 million North Koreans. Over 90% of U.S. food assistance to Pyongyang
has been channelled through the U.N. World Food Program (WFP), which has sent over 3.7
million metric tons (MT) of food to the DPRK since 1996. The U.S. is by far the largest
cumulative contributor to the WFP’s North Korea appeals. However, its share of the WFP’s
annual donations to North Korea has fallen markedly since 2002, and was suspended
altogether in March 2009 due to
straining ties between the two nations as a result of North Korea's refusal to return to the
six party talks until a peace agreement was reached with South Korea and the United States
and United Nation sanctions were lifted; the DPRK has additionally stated it does not intend
on ending its nuclear weapon program in exchange for aid, which was not their intention for
the program according to Kim Jong-Il's regime, as they allege they began their nuclear
weapons creation to maintain security in the face of an American threat. The United States
has hinted at restarting their distribution of food aid, which ceased after the North Korean
government refused to provide visas for Korean-speaking population. Prior to its cessation,
the program had contributed 169,000 tons of food aid between May 2008 and March 2009.
China
Following DPRK’s announcement, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin said in a
press briefing, "The Chinese side has taken note of the information released by the DPRK".
He called on all parties concerned to play constructive roles saying "To maintain the peace
and stability of the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia is not only in the common interests
of all sides concerned, but also the shared aspiration of the international community."
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, expressed concern about the launch and said Beijing
hoped for "restrained actions by the corresponding sides with the aim of preserving stability
on the peninsula". Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Liu Weimin, has also stated that
China did not receive specific notification before the launch of Bright-star 3, and declared
that China did not send any observers to witness the launch.
Arms Embargo Controversy – June 2009
Despite an embargo restricting North Korea's sale of weapons and limiting their imports to
small arms only, three shipments departing from the DPRK have been intercepted (legally
under the UN resolution authorizing the inspection of any-sized ship suspected of containing
North Korean-manufactured weapons) by a plethora of nations. The most recent of these
10
involved two containers, alleged to be filled with bulldozers, of T-54 & T-55 tank parts and
various sorts of military equipment being loaded behind sacks of rice in a ship bound for the
Congo Republic in the Chinese port of Dalian; these were discovered by South Africa. The
People's Republic of China denies any involvement in the acts violating international
sanctions, which are said to have originated in the Chinese port and been shipped via a
French container vessel to Malaysia to be transferred.
Russian Federation
Russia expressed serious concern over North Korea's plan to launch a satellite and urged
Pyongyang not to create hurdles to the revival of six-nation talks over its nuclear
programme. A statement released by the Russian Foreign Ministry said "We call on
Pyongyang not to put itself in opposition to the international community, to refrain from
actions that increase tension in the region and create additional complications for the re-
launch of six-sided negotiations about the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula".
On 4 April, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said "There should be no place for
emotions and we must not instigate a new loop of confrontation" and that the world’s
reaction to the launch should be "gauged". He added, "We are deeply concerned with such
plans and believe that they confront U.N Security Council resolutions".
On 10 April Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said Russia considers
Pyongyang's decision to launch a scientific rocket to place a satellite in earth orbit as
disregarding UN Security Council resolutions. Armed Forces spokesman said Interfax news
agency "In case of rejection of North Korea's rocket off course and a threat of falling into
Russian territory, Russian Aerospace Defence Forces are ready to shoot down the missile".
He said the attention of the Russian military in the North Korean missile launch was due to
the fact that the trajectory of a missile could pass close to the Russian Federation, and in
case of rejection of the rocket can fall on the Kuril Islands.
The government of Russia criticized North Korea for its rocket launch on Friday, saying that
Pyongyang had defied the U.N. Security Council and that neighbouring powers all opposed
it. In a joint news conference, foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said the U.N. Security Council
must respond to the North Korean launch, which Russia and other nations say violated
council sanctions, but suggested trade restrictions or military threats would be
counterproductive.
11
Alexander Zheleznyakov from the Russian Academy of Cosmonautics Tsiolkovsky said the
failure occurred due to North Korea's primitive missile technology. He said, "I think it all
happened because of the imperfections of the North Korean technology. I have, a few
weeks before the launch, suggested that the launch would fail. In the DPRK, level of missile
development is low, which, of course, could affect to this situation. Failure was predictable
and predetermined".
Food Aid and Trade
Russia contributed aid to the DPRK in the past in
various forms, including supplying them grain(
Vorontsov 12). Russia’s trade with the DPRK
reached its peak in the 1980s and significantly
decreased in the 1990s following the collapse of
the Soviet Union, but has grown again in the
new millennium, reaching exports of US$168.7
million in the first 9 months of 2005, and US$3.6
million in imports; critics of Pyongyang-Moscow
relations have asserted the economic weakness
of Russia and its lacklustre role in the North Korean economy have allowed its influence to
wane. Products exported by Russia to North Korea include oil products (63%), steel products
and ferrous metals (8%), and machinery and equipment (8%). There is a greater level of
regional cooperation involving Russian Far-Eastern factories and provinces employing North
Korean workers and receiving tourists from that country, with expansion in cooperation in
construction and agriculture.
12
United Kingdoms of Great Britain
After the announcement made by DPRK, a Foreign Office spokesperson of the UK said: "We
have seen the North Korean official government announcement that it plans to launch a
satellite between 12 and 16 April. We are deeply concerned that such a launch would
undermine North Korea’s recent efforts to engage with the international community. We
urge the North Korean Government to abide by its obligations under UN Security Council
Resolutions 1718 and 1874."
Foreign Secretary William Hague said on April 13th after the launch, "I am deeply concerned
about the DPRK’s satellite launch today. Such a launch uses ballistic missile technology and,
as such, is a clear violation of UNSCR 1874. Later today the Permanent Under-Secretary,
Simon Fraser, will summon the DPRK Ambassador to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
and make clear that the DPRK can expect a strong response from the international
community if it continues to develop its missile and nuclear capabilities. I strongly urge the
DPRK to suspend all missile and nuclear-related activity and to commit to re-engaging with
the international community.
13
Questions to consider when formulating a resolution:
1. How should North Korea be persuaded to end its nuclear program? What
methods of persuasion should be used?
2. Should food aid continue in North Korea? What can be done to help North Korea
to become self-sustaining and encourage it to invest in its own legitimate
economy and agriculture industry?
3. Under what circumstances should force be used to resolve this conflict?
4. What type of action regarding North Korea does your country support?
5. Does your country have a history of trade or economic relationships with North
Korea?
6. Has your country provided aid, or supported the provision of aid, to North Korea?
Has your country issued sanctions against North Korea?
7. What has the Security Council previously done to deal with the situation, what are
they currently doing, and has your country supported their actions?
14
References
[1]"North Korea's planned rocket launch raises missile concerns".
News.monstersandcritics.com. 16 March 2012.
[2] "White House Blasts N.Korea Rocket Launch". RIA Novosi. 13 April 2012.
[3]"China "takes note of" DPRK's satellite launch". Sina. 16 March 2012.
[4] http://news.hexun.com/2012-04-14/140395403.html
[5]"Ryabkov: Reaction to N.Korea Rocket Launch Should be Gauged". RIA Novosti. 4 April
2012.
[6] "Russia says N.Korea launch contradicts U.N. council". Reuters.com.
[7] "Foreign Office "deeply concerned" at the North Korean government announcement that
it plans to launch a satellite." Foreign and Commonwealth Office. 17 March 2012.
[8] "Foreign Secretary concerned by North Korea satellite launch"Foreign and
Commonwealth Office. 13 April 2012
[9] http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
[10] http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/NKorea%20SRES%201718.pdf