North Korea responds angrily to South Korea's talk of pre-emptive strike

January 27, 2010

North Korea alerted its media that they will consider any strike that South Korea takes against its nuclear facilities as a declaration of war.The North was countering to comments made by the South Korean defense minister. Defense Minister Kim Tae-young of South Korea said that his country could launch a pre-emptive strike on North Korea's nuclear facilities if it confirmed that the communist nation was preparing for a nuclear attack. The minister said that his country would have no choice but to attack first. The two countries have technically remain in a state of war since the Korean War ended in 1953, even though their relations have warmed somewhat in the last few years. The Korean conflict ended in a truce, but no formal peace treaty was ever signed.

Reflection:

What struck me about this article is how both North and South Korea are threating war on each other due to N. Korea's nuclear position. I don't see why they would announce it to the public that they are going to attack under certain situations. Also under the circumstances that they never officially signed a peace treaty that this may turn out bad.

Evidence:

-"The two countries have technically remained in a state of war since the Korean War ended in 1953"

-"North Korea will consider any pre-emptive strike that the South takes against its nuclear facilities as a declaration of war, "

-"The minister (of South Korea) said that his country would have no choice but to strike first in such a situation."

Questions:

1. Why don't they sign a formal treaty?

2. Why did both North and South Korea announce the possible attack?

I found all my information from:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/01/24/north.korea.attack.reaction/index.html?iref=allsearch

."N. Korea responds angrily to South's talk of pre-emptive strike." CNN 31 Jan. 2010

Hillary Clinton pushes new sanctions on Iran over nuclear porograms

January 27, 2010

The United States is try to get other world powers to consider putting new and more powerful number of sanctions against Iran for its global defiance over its nuclear program. During one of the meetings in London on Yemen and Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is making it aware for the sanctions by having talks with foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China, Italy, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. The push for new sanctions comes as Iran continues to stall on a deal that has the United Nations on its side, on its nuclear program.The country had until the end of 2009 to accept the deal offered, which consists of permanent U.N. Security Council members from Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany. But instead Iran countered, giving the West until the end of January to accept its own proposal.

But even though with all this effort China has emerged as the main spoiler in this effort to apply new sanctions against Iran. Beijing refused to send a delegate to meetings earlier this month on Iran, suggesting it did not support the new ideas.

Reflection:

When I first read saw this article I agree with Hilary Clinton's act to put on new sanctions in order to at least try and get Iran to disassemble their nuclear facilities. What struck me about this article is that china is the main factor which is stopping the U.N from applying new sanctions on Iran. The only bias perspectives that i can see is how China and other countries or opposed to the idea of new sanctions, for if they didn't take Iran's side we might be closer to submitting Iran to getting rid of their nuclear programs.

Evidence:

-"We believe that there is a growing understanding in the international community that Iran should face consequences for its defiance of international obligations," Clinton

Questions:

1. Why doesn't China approve of the new sanctions or new ideas against Iran?

2. What does Iran mean by "giving the west until the end of January to accept its own proposal"?

All information from:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/01/27/clinton.iran.nuclear/index.html?iref=allsearch

Dougherty, Jill and Labott, Elise. "Clinton Pushes for New Sanctions on Iran Over Nuclear Program". CNN 30 Jan. 2010

North Korea tests nuclear weapon as underground nuclear explosion triggers earthquake

May 25, 2009

North Korea risked further threat to the world after they claimed to have successfully tested a nuclear missile as powerful as the atomic bomb that landed on Hiroshima during world war II. The underground atomic explosion, created an earthquake of about a magnitude of 4.5 in Kilju county in North Korea's north-east. Russian defense experts estimated the explosion's power was between 10 and 20 kilotons, which is much more than the 1 kiloton measured in North Korea's first nuclear test in 2006 and that is about as powerful as the bombs the US used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One kiloton is equal to the explosion produced by 1,000 tones of TNT.

Reflection:

When i first read this I was shocked at how North Korea tested their nuclear weapon and it caused a earth quake which didn't only effect them but also countries around them. Also that the nuclear bomb they tested was equal to the force of about 10,000 to 20,000 tons of TNT. It's amazing how they created this weapon without any other country knowing.

Evidence:

-"Pyongyang insisted it had put a peaceful communications satellite in orbit, but experts said the technology and methods were identical to those used to launch a long-range Taepodong-2 missile."

-

Questions:

1. Why has there been no action against North Korea in any way such as sanctions or investigations regarding their nuclear tests?

2. What are the reasons behind the testing?

all information found from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/25/north-korea-hiroshima-nuclear-test

McCurry,Justin. "

North Korea tests nuclear weapon 'as powerful as Hiroshima bomb'". 30, Jan. 2010

Essental Question

My question is What are North Korea's and Iran's true plans for their Nuclear technology. Also what is the U.N's involvement and what they plans to do. We chose this question because it is a topic that is not getting enough publicity and this topic needs to be globally aware through the U.N or via some news source (such as P.S.A's or a news network)