Bashing North Korea for Political Reasons

by Stephen Lendman

Pressured by Washington, four anti-North Korea Security Council resolutions were adopted since 2006.

The first two came after Pyongyang's 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests, the third in 2012 after it successfully launched a satellite. 

Previous resolutions prohibited space launches, on the phony pretext of claiming the technology has potential dual use ballistic missile development applications.

In February 2013, the fourth resolution was adopted after another North Korean nuclear test. All resolutions were unanimously approved under Chapter VII, Article 41 of the UN Charter, authorizing SC measures not involving use of armed force, including economic and political sanctions.

They called for Pyongyang to dismantle its nuclear program "in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner" and refrain from ballistic missile tests.

A fifth SC resolution looms following an emergency Sunday meeting, its text to be determined in the coming days or weeks. Earlier ones didn't deter Pyongyang's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. All were adopted for political, not security reasons.

Western nations, Israel and others have nuclear and ballistic missile programs - free from Security Council sanctions. Why North Korea and not them?

A previous article explained Pyongyang was victimized by US 1950s aggression. It justifiably fears a possible repeat. It never attacked another country throughout its history. It threatens none now.

Claims otherwise reflect US-led Western propaganda - hostility solely for political reasons. Washington needs enemies to justify its out-of-control military spending and imperial project.

When none exist, they're invented. For decades, North Korea sought rapprochement with the West. Washington continues to block it.

Longstanding US hostility gives Pyongyang just cause to feel threatened. Its military related activities are pursued for self-defense.

Without them, it's vulnerable to more US-led naked aggression. The UN Charter and other international law recognize the right of self-defense - in response to an armed attack and in preparation trying to prevent one.

Yet North Korea is targeted for pursuing its legitimate rights, a nation wanting peace, stability and mutual cooperation with all nations.

US-led NATO members, Israel and their rogue allies threaten world peace. What actions have Security Council members and the UN secretary-general taken to address an issue too grave to ignore?

America wages endless wars of aggression against one invented enemy after another, raping and pillaging countries, stealing their resources, slaughtering millions, exploiting people globally, threatening world peace.

The UN and its member states turn a blind eye to its high crimes, giving US regimes carte blanche to wage war on humanity with impunity.

Why haven't Washington's weapons of mass destruction been sanctioned? Why not other NATO states and Israel?

Why are they allowed to operate solely by their own rules, consistently violating fundamental international laws?

Why is non-threatening North Korea and other independent states alone targeted by international sanctions?

Do as we say, not as we do represents longstanding US-led Western policy. Unacceptable double standards reflect it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. 

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.