Nuclear Korea, the future of Iran?

North Korea and weapons of mass destruction (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It was announced today that North Korea conducted its third nuclear test. As we’d all expect the world responded quickly with some harsh…words. As we’ve seen happen all too many times before with North Korea they do something provocative and all we get is words. Sure there are plenty of sanctions in place and it’s an isolated hell hole but obviously that isn’t doing much to deter them from developing missile and nuclear technology. The UN warned of “Significant consequences” whilst President Obama was calling for “swift action”. OK well we’ve heard that before and not much has happened. North Korea is already isolated and its people suffering so what more are planning to do? Unless China gets on board sanctions aren’t going to cut it anymore so these words of warning aren’t going to be scaring anyone in North Korea. Contrast the situation there to that of Iran, North Korea’s technology is clearly more advanced and they are closer to making a viable weapon. However I don’t hear anyone calling for war with North Korea which is the debate you get every time Iran takes a breath. Now obviously there are more options open when dealing with Iran in that sanctions are more likely to work as it is more plugged into the global economy. So you have to ask, why are people ready to invade Iran but not Korea? The answer I imagine is China, whatever North Korea does it literally has China right next to it. No one particularly wants to go to war with China. If Iran had a superpower buddy right next-door you can but the political hawks wouldn’t be so keen to go and bust down their front door. Either way the West generally looks fairly impotent, when dealing with potentially nuclear threats. Sure the talk a good game but when it comes to stepping up and stopping nuclear proliferation I’m not seeing much action. If the UN and America do want to seriously stop countries like Iran and North Korea this is going to be the year to do, it’s going to take some bold action and less worthless words. Welcome to the year of the Snake.

Big issues over small rocks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recently in the news there seems to have been quite a few pieces about territorial disputes over fairly small and insignificant floating rocks. First lets take the recent flare up of tensions between Japan and China . Japan controls the islands, which it calls the Senkaku islands, while China calls them the Diaoyu islands.  The fact that they have two different names for the same few rocks is probably a warning sign straight away, if you can’t agree on a name you don’t have much hope for anything else. Predictably these disputes are usually about natural resources, if the islands didn’t have any oil I’m thinking no one cares who they belong to since they’re uninhabited. Or at least the situation wouldn’t be escalating so alarmingly. I see it this way, the islands belong to Japan, they actually bought the islands and they’re closer to Japan than to China. I have no idea what China’s claim is here but we can be quite sure they probably won’t be giving up on it anytime soon. To me the logical solution would be to let Japan keep control of the islands and perhaps work out some revenue sharing deal with China in relation to the oil. This would be the quickest and most painless way to solve the crisis. However knowing politicians they have already identified this as the simplest solution and dismissed it in favor of a more dangerous convoluted game of brinksmanship. Now I may not be Chinese or Japanese so maybe I don’t understand how much these small pointless rocks actually mean to their respective societies and cultures but they do not seem worth going to war over. Unfortunately we seem to be getting dangerously close to that possibility with news emerging recently that China has targeted Japanese ships with its weapons radar system. It probably wouldn’t be going to far to say if hostilities did occur we could potentially see the start of World War 3 as the USA would be forced to go to war with China due to its defensive alliance with Japan. Oil isn’t worth as much as blood, I can’t put it any more basic terms than that. So everyone needs to cool off, have some Sake and figure out a compromise.

The second situation is similar but has a few key difference, I’m talking about the Falkland Islands. The most recent volley in the war of words was fired by Argentina, again, claiming that they would control the Falkland Islands within the next 20 years. Yet again they can’t agree on the name the Falklands or las Malvinas seeing a trend here? Unlike the China/Japan dispute this one seems a little more clear-cut to me. These islands are inhabited, there will soon be a referendum on who the population wants to see in control of the islands and you might think that would solve the problem right? Nope afraid not because people living on the Falklands do not have the right to self-determination according to Argentina. But wait I hear you say, the Argentine’s would take control of an island despite the inhabitants opposing them?! Surely that would be colonialism! Well yes you’d be right it most certainly would be. So why they are complaining about Britain acting like a colonial power I have no idea. Britain has owned the islands since the 1833 before that is  irrelevant to the conversation. Colonies, lands, islands etc all changed hands many times between colonial powers that this time, if everyone was trying to reclaim different bits of land they had a claim on 200 years ago then we’d all be in a right mess. Can you imagine France asking for the Louisiana purchase back?

“Um… Hi America its France calling, so you know that massive chunk of land we sold you? Yeah well we’ve decided that we’d like it back now it has more people in and is actually worth something… What do you mean we can’t have it?! That outrageous you colonized that land you terrible colonialists! We’re going to get it back one way or the other!”

 

No its ridiculous, just because something you might have had a claim to a few hundreds years ago has now increased in value doesn’t mean everyone can say they want it back. By surrendering the island means you surrender your claim to it. There were a mere handful of inhabitants on the island, less than 50, when it came under British control, who were themselves colonists. Today there are over 2,800 on the island in all probability a number of these from the original populous on the island. Argentina should play by one set of rules, not one for themselves and another for Britain. You can’t scold Britain for setting up a colony 200 years ago then try to set up your own in the same place with no respect for the current inhabitants. Surely this is just what they are accusing the British of doing? Just incase you were wondering when they took control of the islands the British gave the people living there to option to leave, only 2 did. Thankfully this dispute will probably not come to war again. Argentina is about as scary as a wet kitten when it comes to military prowess and would undoubtedly go home crying with llama dung all over its outdated army again. Now I’d be just fine to see a revenue sharing deal for the oil near the Falkland Islands as well, but the Argentine government has rejected this. Well that was a terrible move, now they probably just won’t get anything. Just what they deserve. But I will say this rock or oil is not worth blood. Compromises should be made where possible but war is most certainly not the answer.