The missile launch two weeks ago led by the aggressive Pyongyang leader Kim Jong Un sent shivers and escalating
panic to the international community, with the United States, Japan, China and other global players scrambling for answers on how to respond to a looming political and security crisis. With every possible step to be taken, there is an equivalent risk that can tilt the delicate balance of power to the detriment of humanity and our planet.
North Korea’s missile landed in the Pacific Ocean, more than a thousand miles near Hokkaido, Japan, and not Guam. But the fact that it flew over the aerial space of Japan, resulted to an alert being issued via television and mobile phones that citizens should take shelter in buildings or underground. And where the missile landed resulted to a flurry of analysis on what the real intentions of North Korea were. Was it really directed against Japan? Was it for the US, because the earlier Pyongyang threat was directed at the American base in Guam? Was it intended to send a message to China that it should remain as North Korea’s staunch and steady ally despite the former becoming more enveloped in a capitalist global order?
Confusion and threats
For its part, Japan is now in an absolute quandary. It is torn between adopting a concrete reaction plan to the expanding nuclear program of North Korea, how it can ensure that any military action or preemptive strike will not offend the “self defense” limitation in its constitution and what its impact will be to its partnership with the US. While it has moved on, the pain and scourge of World War II still hounds its populace.
Trump, on the other hand and as expected, announced that the US will respond with fire and fury if North Korea persists in its nuclear weapons tests. However, there appears to be some inconsistency and incoherence in the foreign and security policy statements of the White House. The President, at one time, communicated his desire for both Japan and South Korea to strengthen their military capabilities by purchasing more state-of-the-art military equipment from America. This included beefing up their own nuclear arsenal, which Japan has opposed. And while the United Nations released a new round of sanctions against North Korea, these sanctions were considered by Trump as “very near the limit” of what his government can do through the UN. His frustration extends to the UN’s disagreement to his proposal to inspect North Korean ships bearing arms, which is prohibited by the UN itself. Guam is another matter, altogether. If this mighty Pacific base is attacked, then a strong military response will surely be forthcoming. And fairly recently, Secretary Rex Tillerson challenged China for its humongous supply of oil to North Korea and Russia for its constant use of North Korean workers for its projects and industries.
Test of will and alliances
China, with its territorial adventures in the East and South China Sea, is another player that Japan and the US has to manage in the midst of Pyongyang’s nuclear experiments. Traditional global alliances have been put to a test by the surge in economic and political strength of Beijing. While understanding the disastrous effect of North Korea’s militarism, China has to grapple with the pressure of the community of nations because of its reliance on the former’s trade and cooperation channels. On September 24 China announced a limitation on its oil and gas supplies to North Korea and will stop buying textiles and other products, too. How North Korea will react is something that the entire world is watching out for.
Prime Minister Abe’s warning that North Korea’s missile tests amounted to an “unprecedented, serious and grave threat” rings loud, clear and very true. The wide grins displayed by Pyongyang’s Kim Jong Un while launching his latest missile over Japan demonstrate his country’s capability to foment a nuclear war, an event that the entire world has and is trying to prevent through various treaties and agreements, continuous talks, diplomatic remedies and political alignments among nations and international organizations. But the painful reality is that some countries have bigger interests to protect than the others. Focus has been on traditional alliances, leaving the others in the cold. The powerless stands to lose more than anyone else. Nothing wrong with alliances. In fact, the scope should be wider, engulfing other nations to actively participate in the dialogue.
The trouble is that there is an apparent lack of alignment and self-interest remains to be the fundamental driver. But what will self-interest bring you in a nuclear world war? How far can the wealth of a big and strong nation shield its people from decimation? Or will there still be people remaining in the face of the earth once nuclear warheads become the rule rather than the exception? No one to protect. Utterly useless.