Korea

Published on Aug 14, 2013
A video explaining why the country of Korea split into two different countries: North Korea and South Korea.

Published on Aug 14, 2013
A video explaining why the country of Korea split into two different countries: North Korea and South Korea.


MarkAny

MarkAny is a Korean rights management company, which has licensed Digimarc’s audio watermarking patents for combating music piracy. The most likely source is the software supplied with a Samsung MP3 player. Your PC will probably be running MAAgent.exe from C:Program FilesMarkAnyContentSafer (if it’s in a different folder, a file of the same name could be […]

MarkAny is a Korean rights management company, which has licensed Digimarc’s audio watermarking patents for combating music piracy. The most likely source is the software supplied with a Samsung MP3 player. Your PC will probably be running MAAgent.exe from C:Program FilesMarkAnyContentSafer (if it’s in a different folder, a file of the same name could be malware). You don’t need it.

It is almost certainly part of your samsung mobile phone driver package and intended to stop pirated music being downloaded by or played through the mobile phone.It came along with http://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mo…OFTWARE.MANUAL

it appears to be needed for you to use the samsung store and also does something when you conver videos to play on the mobile phone

You have 2 choices:
leave it alone or uninstall everything samsung related & don’t use of buy their products

the scariest place on earth

March 18, 2014 – 7:28 PM

– See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/north-korean-born-prison-camp-my-favorite-word-freedom#sthash.040mlHnp.dpuf

According to a comprehensive study by the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (PDF, 5.2 MB), as many as 200,000 North Koreans are incarcerated on political grounds. Former inmates have testified of routine beatings, systematic torture, forced abortions, infanticide and executions,
The report describes the Kwan-li-so as “political penal labor colonies, where North Koreans suspected of wrong-doing and wrong-thinking, along with up to three generations of family members are summarily deported without trial to disappear into fenced-in and heavily guarded mountainous areas where they are subjected to forced labor in mines, logging, state farming and factory work, for mostly lifetime duration.”

– See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/north-korean-born-prison-camp-my-favorite-word-freedom#sthash.040mlHnp.dpuf


Published: 21 December, 2012, 11:18

South Korea’s President-elect Park Geun-hye promises more openness with the North. But a resumption of the ‘Sunshine’ policy is unlikely as she makes demands Pyongyang will find impossible to meet.

The ever-changing political landscapes of the Korean Peninsula never fails to offer stark contrasts. To the north, a sombre December is spent mourning the forefathers of the communist dynasty under the rule of a boy-king and his advisers. To the south, voters have elected the nation’s first female president, the daughter of South Korea’s iconic former leader, Park Chung-hee.

While their circumstances and rise to power could not be more dissimilar, both Kim Jong-un and Park Geun-hye derive some degree of public support through channelling nostalgia for their parent’s legacies. In South Korea, one of the world’s most rapidly ageing societies, Park relied heavily on the elderly for her support base, who associate her with the economic prosperity of her father’s rule, in much the same way as northerners regard the times of Kim Il-sung. As the new president prepares to take office in February 2013, many among South Korea’s left leaning youth see Park Geun-hye as an enabler of status quo conservatism veiled behind a thin liberal facade.

Park is widely credited with resuscitating the legitimacy of the ruling Saenuri party, which has garnered record-setting disapproval ratings under incumbent President Lee Myung-bak. Money laundering scandals, tax evasion, and accusations of embezzlement have followed the outgoing President Lee, who has come down hard on dissenters by jailing activists and artists who have criticized his rule. Lee is also responsible for dismantling Seoul’s liberal approach to North Korea as seen through the “Sunshine Policy” of previous administrations, at the cost of nearly reigniting the Korean war after a series of provocative live fire exchanges in disputed territorial waters in 2010 that saw the North shell the South’s Yeonpyeong island, and the sinking of a South Korean naval vessel.

Despite running on the conservative ticket, Park has steered clear of openly advocating Lee’s hardline on Pyongyang in her campaign rhetoric. Although an unpredictable North Korea looms just 70km from Seoul, domestic economic issues are the most immediate focus of the South Korean voter.
­Leading a ‘Chaebol Republic’

An odious brand of crony-corporatism has prevailed in the South Korean economy, spearheaded by the chaebol, large-scale conglomerates like Hyundai, LG, and Samsung. While these recognizable brands have indeed brought much wealth and opportunity to the southern half of the peninsula, Koreans on the lower end of the economic food chain feel neglected by the nation’s mega-corporations and the wealthy political elite. Prior to taking office, President Lee ran the Hyundai Engineering and Construction conglomerate, and has pardoned the chairs of Samsung and Hyundai Motors from jail over convictions for fraud. Park’s opponent, the liberal Moon Jae-in of the Democratic United Party, has accused the country’s conglomerate-dominated economic model of being the main contributing factor to economic inequality, blaming Park’s father with developing the corporatist economic model still prevalent today.

The defeated Moon Jae-in spoke of increasing taxation on the wealthy and providing small businesses with economic protection from the chaebol. President Lee’s passing of a free-trade agreement with the United States enraged many working class people and farmers who fear the flooding of Korean markets with cheap foreign agricultural products. Moon publicly voiced his disapproval of the trade regime and vowed to re-negotiate it; this position resonated well with young leftists, but popular disdain for establishment parties like Moon’s Democratic United Party proved to be a major obstacle for the left.

Park, on the other hand, has toed the party line of President Lee by championing economic and diplomatic ties with Washington, while resisting calls for taxing the chaebol in fear of hampering their growth. Park has played more of a centrist role than one would expect from a conservative ticket by advocating college tuition cuts, maternity assistance, free school lunches, and other social welfare programs, but has come under fire for being unable to answer basic questions about minimum wage figures during a debate, prompting tough statements from the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions:

“It is terribly discouraging when a person who wants to become president does not even know the country’s minimum wage, which is a minimal right for survival and the first step toward a welfare state.”
Park’s ‘Trustpolitik’ & Inter-Korean relations

­The failures of Lee Myung-bak’s loathed tenure are none more apparent than in the field of inter-Korean relations. As Kim Jong-un consolidates power in Pyongyang and toys with introducing the seedlings of economic reform, it is high time for a change in attitude from the Blue House in Seoul toward more amenable relations between the two Koreas. Although Park has publically stood clear of Lee’s tough stance, a closer look at her foreign policy signifies more acquiesce than divergence from the status quo. In a 2011 article published by Park in the Council on Foreign Relation’s Foreign Affairs website titled, “A New Kind of Korea,” the incoming president talks of adopting a policy of «trustpolitik,» aimed at developing a minimum level of trust between the two Koreas. Just as it exists under the current leadership of President Lee, the cornerstone of Park’s policy revolves around Pyongyang abandoning its nuclear program and de-weaponizing, or suffering the consequences.

Park is setting herself up to fail, and having visited Pyongyang in person to negotiate with Kim Jong-il, one would assume she would be less naïve on the issue of Pyongyang’s nuclear program and the importance it holds to North Koreans. After the death of Kim Il-sung in 1994, his son oversaw general economic mismanagement and a series of natural disasters that led to widespread starvation. To legitimize his tenure, Kim Jong il introduced Songun politics, a military-first policy aimed at appeasing the military and building up national defenses. The attainment of a “nuclear deterrent” has been trumpeted as a major accomplishment in domestic North Korean propaganda, despite very little concrete evidence of the capability of these weapons, or the status of Pyongyang’s nuclear program.

It is unrealistic to expect Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program, primarily because achieving the status of a nuclear state, proven or not, is Kim Jong-il’s main “accomplishment.” The upper echelons of leadership in the Korean Worker’s Party surely hold dear the lessons of Gaddafi after dismantling Libya’s nuclear program. Pyongyang continues to pursue provocative missile tests and belligerent rhetoric because they view this as a means of ensuring their security, the fact that the Pyongyang power-dynasty has moved into a third generation is proof enough that this policy has worked for them. Park has spoken of taking a middle-of-the-road approach, and proposed an inter-Korean dialogue with Kim Jong-un. These are goals that represent a more practical shift, but if Park’s policy rests solely on being open to Pyongyang only if they disarm, the incoming administration will find itself mired in President Lee’s legacy of tension. In line with the militarism of her conservative party, Park has spoken of plans to create an East Asian military alliance and appears willing to continue the hardline against Pyongyang:

“Asian states must slow down their accelerating arms build-up, reduce military tensions, and establish a cooperative security regime that would complement existing bilateral agreements and help resolve persistent tensions in the region.”

“South Korea must first demonstrate, through a robust and credible deterrent posture, that it will no longer tolerate North Korea’s increasingly violent provocations. It must show Pyongyang that the North will pay a heavy price for its military and nuclear threats. This approach is not new, but in order to change the current situation, it must be enforced more vigorously than in the past.”

In contrast to Park, Moon Jae-in’s Democratic United Party has touted a return to the “Sunshine Policy,” and has advocated restarting unconditional aid to Pyongyang. The conservative political elite in Seoul fails to realize that relations with North Korea can more effectively be cooled not by pursuing hardline policies and provocative military drills, but by bolstering inter-Korean economic ties, tourism, and exchange. Kim Jong-un can only begin to dismantle the military-first policy by offering some alternative whereby he maintains his legitimacy – that could potentially be by increasing economic opportunity, raising standards of living, and developing North Korea’s economy. Seoul would be in a much better position to negotiate if they had a hand in mutually beneficial economic development with the North. Park’s ambitions of creating a “cooperative security regime” with Asian states (presuming North Korea is excluded) will certainly not help convince Pyongyang to disarm. An “Asian NATO” is counterproductive and would only make Pyongyang more unpredictable – as long as Seoul’s ballistic missiles are capable of hitting any part of North Korea, expecting Pyongyang to commit political suicide by disarming is simply not realistic.
Korea at the crossroads

The incoming South Korean administration has lots of problems on its hands; managing an ageing population with some of the world’s lowest birth rates, tackling increasing prostitution rates, high suicide rates and other social ills, and coping with an economic slowdown in China, the nation’s biggest export market. South Korea’s economic development has lifted millions out of poverty and into the economic space of high earners in the span of a few decades. It would be foolish for Park to pursue the foreign policy of her predecessor and risk reigniting a Korean war and all that would come with it; enormous civilian casualty rates, an unprecedented refugee crisis, along with the destruction of the South Korean economy. All signs point to Park Geun-hye continuing along the same economic trajectory as the incumbent President Lee, perhaps with a greater emphasis on social welfare programs. The next five years will be critical for inter-Korean relations. In attempting to emerge from her father’s shadow, one would hope that she could address the faults in the economic system her father helped create by reducing income disparity, and also learn from his mistakes by allowing free and open political dissent and total freedom of expression.

­Nile Bowie for RT

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


Published: 23 January, 2013, 06:50

Stressing its condemnation of North Korea’s recent rocket launch, the UN Security Council has unanimously approved a resolution expanding existing sanctions against Pyongyang. In response, the communist state vowed to step up its nuclear deterrence.

On Tuesday the council once again reiterated its demand that North Korea abandon its nuclear program, and «deplored» Pyongyang’s violations of previous resolutions.

December’s rocket launch put a satellite into orbit, but is suspected of being part of a covert program to develop ballistic missiles capable of carrying warheads.

The new resolution contains «important new sanctions on its companies and government agencies, including North Korea’s space agency, which was responsible for the launch, a bank and on North Korean individuals. It also updates current lists of nuclear and ballistic missile technology banned for transfer» to and from North Korea, said US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice.

In retaliation for the move, Pyongyang has threatened to step up its nuclear deterrence and pull out from the process of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

«We will take measures to boost and strengthen our defensive military power including nuclear deterrence,» its foreign ministry said in a statement carried by state news agency KCNA.

For the first time in four years, the move against Pyongyang was backed by its main regional ally China. China’s support makes the resolution binding, unlike previous Security Council statements, which were unenforceable.

“We believe that action taken by the Council should be prudent, measured, proportionate, and conducive to stability,» Chinese Ambassador Li Baodong said after the vote, as quoted by AP.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the adoption of the resolution, saying in a statement: “Speaking with one voice, the Security Council reiterated its firm stance that the DPRK’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, including means of delivery, is unacceptable.”


By Ju-min Park and Choonsik Yoo | Reuters
1/23/2013

SEOUL (Reuters) – North Korea said on Thursday it would carry out further rocket launches and a nuclear test that would target the United States, dramatically stepping up its threats against a country it called its «enemy».

The announcement by the country’s top military body came a day after the United Nations Security Council agreed a U.S.-backed resolution to censure and sanction the country for a rocket launch in December that breached U.N. rules.

«We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States,» North Korea’s National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA.

North Korea is believed by South Korea and other observers to be «technically ready» for a third nuclear test, and the decision to go ahead rests with leader Kim Jong-un who pressed ahead with the December rocket launch in defiance of the U.N. sanctions.

«Whether North Korea tests or not is up to North Korea,» Glyn Davies, the top U.S. envoy for North Korean diplomacy, said in the South Korean capital of Seoul as KCNA released its statement.

«We hope they don’t do it. We call on them not to do it,» Davies said. «This is not a moment to increase tensions on the Korean peninsula.»

The North was banned from developing missile and nuclear technology under sanctions dating from its 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests.

The concern now is that Pyongyang, whose only major diplomatic ally, China, endorsed the latest U.N. resolution, could undertake a third nuclear test using highly enriched uranium for the first time, opening a second path to a bomb.

Its previous tests have been viewed as limited successes and used plutonium, of which the North has limited stocks.

North Korea gave no time-frame for the coming test and often employs harsh rhetoric in response to U.N. and U.S. actions.

Its long-range rockets are not seen as capable of reaching the United States mainland and it is not believed to have the technology to mount a nuclear warhead on a long-range missile.

«The UNSC (Security Council) resolution masterminded by the U.S. has brought its hostile policy towards the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea) to its most dangerous stage,» the commission was quoted as saying.

(Writing by David Chance; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan)


President Barack Obama is due to visit the demilitarised zone (DMZ) on South Korea’s border with the North on Sunday before a nuclear summit in Seoul.

The United States president’s trip to the area separating the north and south on the Korean peninsula comes amidst increased tension over Pyongyang’s plan to launch a rocket next month.

His visit will be a show of support for South Korea, said the White House.

There are currently about 28,500 US soldiers stationed in the area.

North and South Korea technically remain at war because their three-year conflict ended in an armistice in 1953 and no peace treaty was signed. The US has since stationed troops in South Korea.

The 4km(2.5-mile)-wide DMZ is probably the most heavily guarded border area in the world. Former US President Bill Clinton described it as »the scariest place on earth» when he visited in the 1990s.

Mr Obama, who is expected to renew pressure on Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear ambitions, will also meet South Korea’s President Lee Myung-bak ahead of the summit starting on Monday.

The three-day Nuclear Security Summit involves more than 53 leaders from nations and international organisations.

Mr Obama is also due to meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and is widely expected to urge him to draw on Beijing’s influence for nuclear negotiations with Pyongyang.
‘Grave provocation’

North Korea’s announcement last week that it will launch a rocket carrying a satellite to mark its late leader Kim Il-sung’s birth centenary in April drew widespread criticism.

The move is seen as violating UN Security Council resolutions passed after a similar launch in 2009.

South Korea said the launch would be a «grave provocation» and Japan urged the North to «exercise restraint».

Japan, particularly concerned as the 2009 rocket was launched over the country, said the move would »interfere with our effort toward a dialogue».

Last month, Pyongyang agreed to suspend long-range missile tests as part of a deal for the US to supply 240,000 tonnes of food aid to North Korea.

The US has said that the planned launch could violate the agreement and affect the resumption of food aid.

The North said that the »working satellite» launch is an opportunity for »putting the country’s technology of space use for peaceful purposes on a higher stage».

At the nuclear summit dedicated to reducing the threats of nuclear terrorism, the North Korean issue will loom large, along with that of Iran’s nuclear programme.

March 18, 2014 - 7:28 PM
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/north-korean-born-prison-camp-my-favorite-word-freedom#sthash.040mlHnp.dpuf

According to a comprehensive study by the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (PDF, 5.2 MB), as many as 200,000 North Koreans are incarcerated on political grounds. Former inmates have testified of routine beatings, systematic torture, forced abortions, infanticide and executions,
The report describes the Kwan-li-so as “political penal labor colonies, where North Koreans suspected of wrong-doing and wrong-thinking, along with up to three generations of family members are summarily deported without trial to disappear into fenced-in and heavily guarded mountainous areas where they are subjected to forced labor in mines, logging, state farming and factory work, for mostly lifetime duration.”
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/north-korean-born-prison-camp-my-favorite-word-freedom#sthash.040mlHnp.dpuf




Published: 21 December, 2012, 11:18

South Korea's President-elect Park Geun-hye promises more openness with the North. But a resumption of the 'Sunshine' policy is unlikely as she makes demands Pyongyang will find impossible to meet.



The ever-changing political landscapes of the Korean Peninsula never fails to offer stark contrasts. To the north, a sombre December is spent mourning the forefathers of the communist dynasty under the rule of a boy-king and his advisers. To the south, voters have elected the nation’s first female president, the daughter of South Korea’s iconic former leader, Park Chung-hee.

While their circumstances and rise to power could not be more dissimilar, both Kim Jong-un and Park Geun-hye derive some degree of public support through channelling nostalgia for their parent’s legacies. In South Korea, one of the world’s most rapidly ageing societies, Park relied heavily on the elderly for her support base, who associate her with the economic prosperity of her father’s rule, in much the same way as northerners regard the times of Kim Il-sung. As the new president prepares to take office in February 2013, many among South Korea’s left leaning youth see Park Geun-hye as an enabler of status quo conservatism veiled behind a thin liberal facade.

Park is widely credited with resuscitating the legitimacy of the ruling Saenuri party, which has garnered record-setting disapproval ratings under incumbent President Lee Myung-bak. Money laundering scandals, tax evasion, and accusations of embezzlement have followed the outgoing President Lee, who has come down hard on dissenters by jailing activists and artists who have criticized his rule. Lee is also responsible for dismantling Seoul’s liberal approach to North Korea as seen through the “Sunshine Policy” of previous administrations, at the cost of nearly reigniting the Korean war after a series of provocative live fire exchanges in disputed territorial waters in 2010 that saw the North shell the South’s Yeonpyeong island, and the sinking of a South Korean naval vessel.

Despite running on the conservative ticket, Park has steered clear of openly advocating Lee’s hardline on Pyongyang in her campaign rhetoric. Although an unpredictable North Korea looms just 70km from Seoul, domestic economic issues are the most immediate focus of the South Korean voter.
­Leading a 'Chaebol Republic'

An odious brand of crony-corporatism has prevailed in the South Korean economy, spearheaded by the chaebol, large-scale conglomerates like Hyundai, LG, and Samsung. While these recognizable brands have indeed brought much wealth and opportunity to the southern half of the peninsula, Koreans on the lower end of the economic food chain feel neglected by the nation’s mega-corporations and the wealthy political elite. Prior to taking office, President Lee ran the Hyundai Engineering and Construction conglomerate, and has pardoned the chairs of Samsung and Hyundai Motors from jail over convictions for fraud. Park’s opponent, the liberal Moon Jae-in of the Democratic United Party, has accused the country’s conglomerate-dominated economic model of being the main contributing factor to economic inequality, blaming Park’s father with developing the corporatist economic model still prevalent today.

The defeated Moon Jae-in spoke of increasing taxation on the wealthy and providing small businesses with economic protection from the chaebol. President Lee’s passing of a free-trade agreement with the United States enraged many working class people and farmers who fear the flooding of Korean markets with cheap foreign agricultural products. Moon publicly voiced his disapproval of the trade regime and vowed to re-negotiate it; this position resonated well with young leftists, but popular disdain for establishment parties like Moon’s Democratic United Party proved to be a major obstacle for the left.

Park, on the other hand, has toed the party line of President Lee by championing economic and diplomatic ties with Washington, while resisting calls for taxing the chaebol in fear of hampering their growth. Park has played more of a centrist role than one would expect from a conservative ticket by advocating college tuition cuts, maternity assistance, free school lunches, and other social welfare programs, but has come under fire for being unable to answer basic questions about minimum wage figures during a debate, prompting tough statements from the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions:

“It is terribly discouraging when a person who wants to become president does not even know the country’s minimum wage, which is a minimal right for survival and the first step toward a welfare state.”
Park’s 'Trustpolitik' & Inter-Korean relations

­The failures of Lee Myung-bak’s loathed tenure are none more apparent than in the field of inter-Korean relations. As Kim Jong-un consolidates power in Pyongyang and toys with introducing the seedlings of economic reform, it is high time for a change in attitude from the Blue House in Seoul toward more amenable relations between the two Koreas. Although Park has publically stood clear of Lee’s tough stance, a closer look at her foreign policy signifies more acquiesce than divergence from the status quo. In a 2011 article published by Park in the Council on Foreign Relation’s Foreign Affairs website titled, “A New Kind of Korea,” the incoming president talks of adopting a policy of "trustpolitik," aimed at developing a minimum level of trust between the two Koreas. Just as it exists under the current leadership of President Lee, the cornerstone of Park’s policy revolves around Pyongyang abandoning its nuclear program and de-weaponizing, or suffering the consequences.

Park is setting herself up to fail, and having visited Pyongyang in person to negotiate with Kim Jong-il, one would assume she would be less naïve on the issue of Pyongyang’s nuclear program and the importance it holds to North Koreans. After the death of Kim Il-sung in 1994, his son oversaw general economic mismanagement and a series of natural disasters that led to widespread starvation. To legitimize his tenure, Kim Jong il introduced Songun politics, a military-first policy aimed at appeasing the military and building up national defenses. The attainment of a “nuclear deterrent” has been trumpeted as a major accomplishment in domestic North Korean propaganda, despite very little concrete evidence of the capability of these weapons, or the status of Pyongyang’s nuclear program.

It is unrealistic to expect Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program, primarily because achieving the status of a nuclear state, proven or not, is Kim Jong-il’s main “accomplishment.” The upper echelons of leadership in the Korean Worker’s Party surely hold dear the lessons of Gaddafi after dismantling Libya’s nuclear program. Pyongyang continues to pursue provocative missile tests and belligerent rhetoric because they view this as a means of ensuring their security, the fact that the Pyongyang power-dynasty has moved into a third generation is proof enough that this policy has worked for them. Park has spoken of taking a middle-of-the-road approach, and proposed an inter-Korean dialogue with Kim Jong-un. These are goals that represent a more practical shift, but if Park’s policy rests solely on being open to Pyongyang only if they disarm, the incoming administration will find itself mired in President Lee’s legacy of tension. In line with the militarism of her conservative party, Park has spoken of plans to create an East Asian military alliance and appears willing to continue the hardline against Pyongyang:

“Asian states must slow down their accelerating arms build-up, reduce military tensions, and establish a cooperative security regime that would complement existing bilateral agreements and help resolve persistent tensions in the region.”

“South Korea must first demonstrate, through a robust and credible deterrent posture, that it will no longer tolerate North Korea's increasingly violent provocations. It must show Pyongyang that the North will pay a heavy price for its military and nuclear threats. This approach is not new, but in order to change the current situation, it must be enforced more vigorously than in the past.”

In contrast to Park, Moon Jae-in’s Democratic United Party has touted a return to the “Sunshine Policy,” and has advocated restarting unconditional aid to Pyongyang. The conservative political elite in Seoul fails to realize that relations with North Korea can more effectively be cooled not by pursuing hardline policies and provocative military drills, but by bolstering inter-Korean economic ties, tourism, and exchange. Kim Jong-un can only begin to dismantle the military-first policy by offering some alternative whereby he maintains his legitimacy – that could potentially be by increasing economic opportunity, raising standards of living, and developing North Korea’s economy. Seoul would be in a much better position to negotiate if they had a hand in mutually beneficial economic development with the North. Park’s ambitions of creating a “cooperative security regime” with Asian states (presuming North Korea is excluded) will certainly not help convince Pyongyang to disarm. An “Asian NATO” is counterproductive and would only make Pyongyang more unpredictable – as long as Seoul’s ballistic missiles are capable of hitting any part of North Korea, expecting Pyongyang to commit political suicide by disarming is simply not realistic.
Korea at the crossroads

The incoming South Korean administration has lots of problems on its hands; managing an ageing population with some of the world’s lowest birth rates, tackling increasing prostitution rates, high suicide rates and other social ills, and coping with an economic slowdown in China, the nation’s biggest export market. South Korea’s economic development has lifted millions out of poverty and into the economic space of high earners in the span of a few decades. It would be foolish for Park to pursue the foreign policy of her predecessor and risk reigniting a Korean war and all that would come with it; enormous civilian casualty rates, an unprecedented refugee crisis, along with the destruction of the South Korean economy. All signs point to Park Geun-hye continuing along the same economic trajectory as the incumbent President Lee, perhaps with a greater emphasis on social welfare programs. The next five years will be critical for inter-Korean relations. In attempting to emerge from her father’s shadow, one would hope that she could address the faults in the economic system her father helped create by reducing income disparity, and also learn from his mistakes by allowing free and open political dissent and total freedom of expression.

­Nile Bowie for RT

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.





Published: 23 January, 2013, 06:50

Stressing its condemnation of North Korea’s recent rocket launch, the UN Security Council has unanimously approved a resolution expanding existing sanctions against Pyongyang. In response, the communist state vowed to step up its nuclear deterrence.

On Tuesday the council once again reiterated its demand that North Korea abandon its nuclear program, and "deplored" Pyongyang's violations of previous resolutions.

December’s rocket launch put a satellite into orbit, but is suspected of being part of a covert program to develop ballistic missiles capable of carrying warheads.

The new resolution contains "important new sanctions on its companies and government agencies, including North Korea's space agency, which was responsible for the launch, a bank and on North Korean individuals. It also updates current lists of nuclear and ballistic missile technology banned for transfer" to and from North Korea, said US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice.

In retaliation for the move, Pyongyang has threatened to step up its nuclear deterrence and pull out from the process of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

"We will take measures to boost and strengthen our defensive military power including nuclear deterrence," its foreign ministry said in a statement carried by state news agency KCNA.

For the first time in four years, the move against Pyongyang was backed by its main regional ally China. China’s support makes the resolution binding, unlike previous Security Council statements, which were unenforceable.

“We believe that action taken by the Council should be prudent, measured, proportionate, and conducive to stability," Chinese Ambassador Li Baodong said after the vote, as quoted by AP.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the adoption of the resolution, saying in a statement: “Speaking with one voice, the Security Council reiterated its firm stance that the DPRK’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, including means of delivery, is unacceptable.”



By Ju-min Park and Choonsik Yoo | Reuters
1/23/2013

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea said on Thursday it would carry out further rocket launches and a nuclear test that would target the United States, dramatically stepping up its threats against a country it called its "enemy".



The announcement by the country's top military body came a day after the United Nations Security Council agreed a U.S.-backed resolution to censure and sanction the country for a rocket launch in December that breached U.N. rules.

"We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States," North Korea's National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA.

North Korea is believed by South Korea and other observers to be "technically ready" for a third nuclear test, and the decision to go ahead rests with leader Kim Jong-un who pressed ahead with the December rocket launch in defiance of the U.N. sanctions.

"Whether North Korea tests or not is up to North Korea," Glyn Davies, the top U.S. envoy for North Korean diplomacy, said in the South Korean capital of Seoul as KCNA released its statement.

"We hope they don't do it. We call on them not to do it," Davies said. "This is not a moment to increase tensions on the Korean peninsula."

The North was banned from developing missile and nuclear technology under sanctions dating from its 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests.

The concern now is that Pyongyang, whose only major diplomatic ally, China, endorsed the latest U.N. resolution, could undertake a third nuclear test using highly enriched uranium for the first time, opening a second path to a bomb.

Its previous tests have been viewed as limited successes and used plutonium, of which the North has limited stocks.

North Korea gave no time-frame for the coming test and often employs harsh rhetoric in response to U.N. and U.S. actions.

Its long-range rockets are not seen as capable of reaching the United States mainland and it is not believed to have the technology to mount a nuclear warhead on a long-range missile.

"The UNSC (Security Council) resolution masterminded by the U.S. has brought its hostile policy towards the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea) to its most dangerous stage," the commission was quoted as saying.

(Writing by David Chance; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan)




President Barack Obama is due to visit the demilitarised zone (DMZ) on South Korea's border with the North on Sunday before a nuclear summit in Seoul.

The United States president's trip to the area separating the north and south on the Korean peninsula comes amidst increased tension over Pyongyang's plan to launch a rocket next month.

His visit will be a show of support for South Korea, said the White House.

There are currently about 28,500 US soldiers stationed in the area.

North and South Korea technically remain at war because their three-year conflict ended in an armistice in 1953 and no peace treaty was signed. The US has since stationed troops in South Korea.

The 4km(2.5-mile)-wide DMZ is probably the most heavily guarded border area in the world. Former US President Bill Clinton described it as ''the scariest place on earth'' when he visited in the 1990s.

Mr Obama, who is expected to renew pressure on Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear ambitions, will also meet South Korea's President Lee Myung-bak ahead of the summit starting on Monday.

The three-day Nuclear Security Summit involves more than 53 leaders from nations and international organisations.

Mr Obama is also due to meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and is widely expected to urge him to draw on Beijing's influence for nuclear negotiations with Pyongyang.
'Grave provocation'

North Korea's announcement last week that it will launch a rocket carrying a satellite to mark its late leader Kim Il-sung's birth centenary in April drew widespread criticism.

The move is seen as violating UN Security Council resolutions passed after a similar launch in 2009.

South Korea said the launch would be a "grave provocation" and Japan urged the North to "exercise restraint".

Japan, particularly concerned as the 2009 rocket was launched over the country, said the move would ''interfere with our effort toward a dialogue''.

Last month, Pyongyang agreed to suspend long-range missile tests as part of a deal for the US to supply 240,000 tonnes of food aid to North Korea.

The US has said that the planned launch could violate the agreement and affect the resumption of food aid.

The North said that the ''working satellite'' launch is an opportunity for ''putting the country's technology of space use for peaceful purposes on a higher stage''.

At the nuclear summit dedicated to reducing the threats of nuclear terrorism, the North Korean issue will loom large, along with that of Iran's nuclear programme.

The anti-proliferation brigade

Uploaded on Jul 22, 2010

Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto has created a beautiful, undeniably scary time-lapse map of the 2053 nuclear explosions which have taken place between 1945 and 1998, beginning with the Manhattan Project’s «Trinity» test near Los Alamos and concluding with Pakistan’s nuclear tests in May of 1998. This leaves out North Korea’s two alleged nuclear tests in this past decade (the legitimacy of both of which is not 100% clear).

Each nation gets a blip and a flashing dot on the map whenever they detonate a nuclear weapon, with a running tally kept on the top and bottom bars of the screen. Hashimoto, who began the project in 2003, says that he created it with the goal of showing»the fear and folly of nuclear weapons.» It starts really slow — if you want to see real action, skip ahead to 1962 or so — but the buildup becomes overwhelming.


The exact number of nuclear weapons in global arsenals is not known. With little exception, each of the nine countries with nuclear weapons guards these numbers as closely held national secrets. What is known, however, is that more than a decade and a half after the Cold War ended, the world’s combined stockpile of nuclear warheads remain at unacceptably high levels.
World Nuclear Stockpile Infographic

Full Report Israel Report India Report Pakistan Report United Kingdom Report China Report France Report United States Report Russia Report

Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris of the Federation of American Scientists are the leading experts in estimating the size of global nuclear weapons inventories. The table is a compilation of their estimates and analyses, with links to their full reports. These reports are published in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and discussed further at the FAS Strategic Security Blog.
As the authors of these estimates note, the above numbers may not add up due to rounding and uncertainty about the operational statuses and size of the total inventories. For a full analysis of how the authors arrived at their estimates, please view the provided links for the complete reports.
These huge stockpiles come at great financial cost to the countries that keep nuclear weapons. Even in the U.S., these costs area difficult to determine but, through careful analysis, Ploughshares Fund has released our best estimate of just how much nuclear weapons will cost the U.S. over the next ten years.
Updated November 4, 2013.




Uploaded on Jul 22, 2010

Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto has created a beautiful, undeniably scary time-lapse map of the 2053 nuclear explosions which have taken place between 1945 and 1998, beginning with the Manhattan Project's "Trinity" test near Los Alamos and concluding with Pakistan's nuclear tests in May of 1998. This leaves out North Korea's two alleged nuclear tests in this past decade (the legitimacy of both of which is not 100% clear).

Each nation gets a blip and a flashing dot on the map whenever they detonate a nuclear weapon, with a running tally kept on the top and bottom bars of the screen. Hashimoto, who began the project in 2003, says that he created it with the goal of showing"the fear and folly of nuclear weapons." It starts really slow — if you want to see real action, skip ahead to 1962 or so — but the buildup becomes overwhelming.



The exact number of nuclear weapons in global arsenals is not known. With little exception, each of the nine countries with nuclear weapons guards these numbers as closely held national secrets. What is known, however, is that more than a decade and a half after the Cold War ended, the world's combined stockpile of nuclear warheads remain at unacceptably high levels.
World Nuclear Stockpile Infographic Full ReportIsrael ReportIndia ReportPakistan ReportUnited Kingdom ReportChina ReportFrance ReportUnited States Report Russia Report

Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris of the Federation of American Scientists are the leading experts in estimating the size of global nuclear weapons inventories. The table is a compilation of their estimates and analyses, with links to their full reports. These reports are published in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and discussed further at the FAS Strategic Security Blog.
As the authors of these estimates note, the above numbers may not add up due to rounding and uncertainty about the operational statuses and size of the total inventories. For a full analysis of how the authors arrived at their estimates, please view the provided links for the complete reports.
These huge stockpiles come at great financial cost to the countries that keep nuclear weapons. Even in the U.S., these costs area difficult to determine but, through careful analysis, Ploughshares Fund has released our best estimate of just how much nuclear weapons will cost the U.S. over the next ten years.
Updated November 4, 2013.