"Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." (Matthew 24:8-9).
"Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done" (Mark 13:30).
Showing posts with label Iran-Russia-China-N.Korea Alliance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran-Russia-China-N.Korea Alliance. Show all posts
May 22, 2012
North Korea to Boost Nuclear Deterrent after U.S. Pressure
Isolated North Korea stepped up its war of words against the United States on Tuesday, vowing to boost its nuclear deterrent after Washington warned Pyongyang of further sanctions if it did not abandon its atomic program.
The North's foreign ministry spokesman said via the official KCNA news agency that it would "bolster its nuclear deterrent as long as the United States was continuing with its hostile policies" and that it planned "countermeasures" following pressure from Washington.
Last week, world leaders meeting in the United States said the isolated North needed to adhere to international norms on nuclear issues and said it would face more isolation if it "continues down the path of provocation".
Under new leader Kim Jong-un, North Korea launched a long range rocket in April, breaking an agreement with the United States that would have traded food aid for access to its nuclear facilities, among other things.
Many experts now believe the reclusive North is preparing for a third nuclear test, and could even use highly enriched uranium for the first time. Experts say the North already has enough fissile material from plutonium for at least six nuclear bombs.
U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Policy Glyn Davies told reporters in Seoul on Monday that North Korea could expect "a swift and sure" reaction by the international community if it undertook further hostile actions.
Davies was holding talks with his Chinese counterpart in Beijing on Tuesday.
China is North Korea's sole major economic and diplomatic backer and even it has put pressure on Pyongyang to back down on plans for a nuclear test.
Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, was skeptical that the latest rhetoric from Pyongyang signaled a nuclear test was imminent.
"North Korea is simply saying: Don't agitate or provoke us," he said.
Recent satellite imagery published by IHS Jane's Defense Weekly, a specialist defense publication, showed there had been more work at the site of previous nuclear tests that could indicate the North was preparing for its third nuclear test.
The Janes analysis showed mining carts and excavation equipment as well more debris from inside a tunnel that could be used for a third nuclear test.
"A third nuclear test by North Korea would be the latest move in restarting its nuclear weapons program, which it agreed to mothball in a 29 February deal with the U.S.," said Janes analyst James Hardy.
Since the death of Kim Jong-il in December, Kim Jong-un, believed to be in his late 20s, has shown he will continue with his father's hardline "military first" policy.
January 30, 2012
China, India and Russia Have Bilateral Agreements with Iran to Buy Oil; U.S. 'Disgusted' by Russia, China Veto of Syria Resolution
ABC OTUS News -The United States is "disgusted" by Russia and China's decision to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution today that called for an immediate end to the violence in Syria, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said today.
The Security Council vote today came on one of the bloodiest days of the popular uprising in Syray, as President Bashar al Assad's security forces launched a withering artillery assault on the city of Homs that has reportedly left 200 to 400 dead.
Though they were the only negative votes in a 13 to 2 vote, Russia and China's veto power as permanent members of the Security Council killed the resolution drafted by Arab and European countries.
The vetoes came after a week of intense negotiations to gain Russian support for a resolution it had opposed from the start. The resolution supported an Arab League plan that called for an immediate end to the violence in Syria and a political solution to the crisis. Russia was opposed to the resolution because of concerns that it could leave an opening for a foreign intervention against one of its loyal client states.
The vetoes drew harsh criticism from Security Council members that supported the resolution and who had amended it several times to ease those concerns, rewording language about the transition of power and watering down the possibility of future sanctions against the Assad regime.
"The United States is disgusted that a couple of members of this Council continue to prevent us from fulfilling our sole purpose," U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said.
"For months this Council has been held hostage by a couple of members," she said, referring to Russia and China, who she said had been "delaying and stripping bare any text to force Assad to stop his actions."
Without referring to Russia by name, she said the vetoes were "even more shameful" given that Russia has continued to sell weapons to to Syria. She called the vetoes "unforgivable" and said "any further blood that flows will be on their hands."
In brief remarks to the Council, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Russia actively supports an end to the violence in Syria, but that the resolution did not "accurately reflect the real state of affairs" in Syria and "sent an unbalanced signal to the parties." Churkin was speaking about armed opposition groups that have also been conducting violent attacks against the Assad regime in Syria.
He once again cited Russian concerns about "regime change" by "influential members of the international community who have been undermining the possibility of a settlement in Syria."
French Ambassador Gerard Araud said the vetoes were a "sad day for the UN Security Council … a sad day for democracy and a sad day for Syrians. … Hundreds of Syrians are dying and it is no longer possible to wait. "
Peter Wittig, the German ambassador to the United Nations criticized the vetoes particularly for having come on "one of bloodiest days of the Arab spring" and the 30th anniversary of the massacre in Hama, Syria ordered by Assad's father that resulted in 20,000 dead.
"This is the real scandal," Wittig said. "Afraid this will spur further violence and make it difficult to reach a political solution."
British Ambassador to the U.N. Mark Lyall said Russia and China should "ask themselves how many more deaths they are prepared to tolerate." He said the negotiations had "removed every possible excuse" for voting against the resolution. He also said that the United Kingdom and other countries would continue their efforts to stop the violence in Syria.
Li Baodong, China's Ambassador to the UN told Council members that China voted against the resolution because it would "further complicate the situation" in Syria.
He also said that China supported the Russian delegation's last minute calls for a delay on the vote as well as amendments proposed by Russia that were not taken up by the Council.
Iran is the fifth largest producers of oil in the world.
In what is likely a long overdue move, Iran has finally decided to give Europe a harsh lesson in game theory. Instead of letting Euro-area politicians score brownie points at its expense by threatening to halt imports and cut off the Iranian economy, the Iranian government will instead propose a bill calling for an immediate halt to oil deliveries to Europe.
The move, with most reports citing the Iranian news agency Mehr, has come about in response to the EU agreement to impose sanctions against Iran, which were announced earlier this week. And why not? After all if Europe is indeed serious, sooner or later Iran will be cut off but in the meantime experience significant policy uncertainty, which is precisely what the flipflops on the ground need. The one thing that Europe, however is forgetting, is that all that whopping 0.8 Mb/d in imports will simply find a new buyer. Quickly.
So with China, India and Russia already having bilateral agreements with Iran in place, we are confident that said buyer will have a contract signed, sealed and delivered within an hour of the proposed bill's passage.
Furthermore, as SocGen speculated, the fact that Europe will be even more bottlenecked in its crude supplies (good luck Saudi Arabia with that imaginary excess capacity), and which just may force the IEA to release some more of that strategic petroleum reserve (and thus give JPM some more free money on the replenishment arbitrage) will send Brent to $125-150 - something which Iran will be delighted by.
That is of course unless some "experts" discover that Iran may or may not have a complete arsenal of shark with fricking nuclear warheads attached to their heads (despite what Paneta has already said) which gives the US the green light for a full blown incursion,which in turn will send oil over $200, and the world economy into a global coordinated re-depression.
"If this bill is passed, the government will be forced to stop selling oil to Europe before the actual implementation of their sanctions," said Emad Hosseini, spokesman for the Iranian parliament's energy commission, reportedly said. The bill is set to become law on Sunday.
The EU sanctions allow for oil deliveries from Iran until July 1. Any pre-empting of this timescale by Tehran could prove problematic for countries like Italy, Greece and Spain, who would need to urgently find new suppliers.
China, meanwhile, a major importer of Iranian oil, has also criticized the EU sanctions. The Xinhua news agency quoted the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Thursday as saying: "To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches."
Many members of the EU are now heavily dependent on Iranian oil. Some 500,000 barrels arrive in Europe every day from Iran, with southern European countries consuming most of it. Greece is the most exposed, receiving a third of all its oil imports from Iran, but Italy too depends on Iran for 13 percent of its oil needs. If this source were to dry up abruptly, the economic conditions in the two struggling countries could become even worse.
Already on Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned of the economic consequences of the EU's planned embargo. Stopping deliveries from the world's fifth largest producer could drive up the price of oil by 20 to 30 percent.
Perhaps instead of doing its best at crippling the world energy markets, and crushing the global economy, Europe should stick to bailing itself out, and other activities in which it has extensive experience.
Iran Won't Give Up Its Right to Enrich Uranium and Produce Nuclear Fuel, But It Will Allow Inspectors to Visit Its Nuclear Sites to Ensure That Its Nuclear Program Won't Be Weaponized
Iran is ready to revive talks with the world powers, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday, as toughening sanctions aim at forcing Tehran to sharply scale back its nuclear program.
Even so, he insisted that the pressures will not force Iran to give up its demands, including to continue enriching uranium, that led to the collapse of dialogue last year.
The United States and its allies want Iran to halt making nuclear fuel, which they worry could eventually lead to weapons-grade material and the production of nuclear weapons.
Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes — generating electricity and producing medical radioisotopes to treat cancer patients.
The 27-member European Union imposed an oil embargo against Iran on Monday, part of sanctions to pressure Tehran into resuming talks on the country's nuclear program.It follows U.S. action also aimed at limiting Iran's ability to sell oil, which accounts for 80 percent of its foreign revenue.
No date is set for the possible resumption of talks between Iran and the five permanent U.N. Security Council members plus Germany. Negotiations ended in stalemate in January 2011, and Iran later rejected a plan to send its stockpile of low-enriched uranium abroad in exchange for reactor-ready fuel rods.
Iran had previously indicated that it is ready for a new round of talks. Ahmadinejad is the highest-ranking official to make the offer.
He accused the West of trying to scuttle negotiations as a way to further squeeze Iran.
"It is you who come up with excuses each time and issue resolutions on the verge of talks so that negotiations collapse," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Kerman in southeastern Iran. "Why should we shun talks? Why and how should a party that has logic and is right shun talks? It is evident that those who resort to coercion are opposed to talks and always bring pretexts and blame us instead."
A senior U.N. nuclear agency team is expected to visit Tehran on Saturday, the first such mission since a report in November that alleged Iran conducted secret weapons-related tests and that Tehran was on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon.
The delegation from the International Atomic Energy Agency will be led by Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts, who is in charge of the Iran nuclear file, and might include Peri Lynne Johnson, the agency's senior legal official.
Iran begun uranium enrichment at a new underground site built to withstand possible airstrikes earlier this month, in another show of defiance against Western pressure to rein in Tehran's nuclear program.
Centrifuges at the bunker-like Fordo facility near Iran's holy city of Qom are churning out uranium enriched to 20 percent. That level is higher than the 3.5 percent being made at Iran's main enrichment plant at Natanz, central Iran, and can be turned into warhead material faster and with less work.
Iran says it won't give up its right to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel, but it has offered to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit its nuclear sites to ensure that its nuclear program won't be weaponized.
Ahmadinejad also said sanctions and oil embargo will backfire because it has minimum trade with EU.
"Americans have not purchased Iranian oil for 30 years. Our central bank has had no dealings with them... our (total) foreign trade is about $200 billion. Between $23 billion to $24 billion of our trade is with Europeans, making up about 10 percent of our total trade ... Iran won't suffer," Ahmadinejad said.
His comments were posted on state TV's website.
Ahmadinejad said sanctions won't harm the government, but only the people.
He said officials will be paid.
"They won't be under pressure ... it's clear that you (U.S. and allies) want to pressure the people," Ahmadinejad said. "History has shown that the Iranian nation has overcome obstacles. The bigger the obstacles, the more determined the Iranian nation is."
The EU had been importing about 450,000 barrels of oil a day from Iran, making up 18 percent of Iran's oil exports.
In Beijing, the official Xinhua News Agency quoted the Foreign Ministry as opposing the latest EU measures on Iran.
"To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches," the statement said.
China, which is a major buyer of Iranian oil, has urged that the nuclear standoff be resolved through dialogue and consultation.
January 29, 2012
Russia Says It Would Never Support a U.N. Resolution Imposing Economic Sanctions on Iran
Bible prophecy describes a coalition of nations that will almost certainly include China and Russia and several other Muslim nations of the Middle East. The Euphrates originates in Turkey, and flows through Syria and Iraq; then it converges with the Tigris River, which then borders Iran. Anyone who hears the daily news should know that these four nations are extremely volatile trouble spots for military conflicts nowadays. The prophecies even imply that the nation of Iraq, once controlled by the regime of Saddam Hussein, will be a notable part of this final showdown. The population of these countries today is: Turkey -- 77 million; Syria -- 19.4 million; Iraq -- 29 million; Iran -- 70 million. The total population of that region is 195.4 million. Obviously, a 200-million-man army cannot come from these nations alone. In the light of China's cooperation with Iran and Syria (both openly and covertly), it appears to be fairly certain that China will league with Iran and Syria, somehow engaging Iraq and Turkey as well, to attempt to defeat Israel and the West. Their rabid anti-Zionism, anti-American hatred will not die, but will escalate into the worst conflagration in the history of human conflicts. Every day, the evidence mounts that China will be tightly leagued with Russia and many of the Islamic nations in a powerful new anti-Israel political and military alliance from which this 200-million-man army will ultimately come. - The Church Will Be 'Raptured' at Armageddon
With the United States and its allies pressing President Bashar al-Assad to step down, the Arab League last week issued a detailed plan for a political transition in Syria. The plan was welcomed by the Obama administration, and Arab leaders quickly said they would refer it to the United Nations.
And a day later, Russia had its say: Not a chance.
“This is an effort from the Arab League, if I understand correctly, to sort of already put a precooked solution on the table,” said Vitaly I. Churkin, Moscow’s envoy to the United Nations. “I understand that the attitude of Damascus to that has been negative.”
The response doomed any hope of a quick resolution at the United Nations to bring greater pressure to bear on the Syrian government, but it also fell into a familiar pattern by which Moscow has shown a growing willingness to challenge the United States and its European partners on a range of issues.
In recent weeks, Moscow has sought U.N. scrutiny of possible crimes by NATO during its air campaign in Libya, and even called for investigations into organ sales in Kosovo, a close ally of the West. Most notably, Moscow has obstructed any effort to increase pressure on Iran. Asked in an interview whether Russia would ever support a U.N. resolution imposing economic sanctions on the Islamic republic, Churkin said:
“No chance, no chance, no chance. . . . Ever.”
Critics say Moscow’s tough line at the United Nations reflects what one senior council diplomat described as “the Putinization of Russian foreign policy,” on the eve of what many expect will be the return of Vladimir Putin to the presidency.Other analysts say Russia is trying to reassert its authority in the council following a period in which the United States and Europe prevailed in the handling of several major crises, engineering the downfall of former Ivory Coast leader Laurent Gbagbo and, more recently, of Moammar Gaddafi in Libya.
“The Russians looked diminished in the first half of 2011, and the strategy is to show, one, they are prepared to act as a spoiler, but, two, they can also lay out a more proactive agenda,” said Richard Gowan, an expert on the United Nations at the New York University Center for International Cooperation.
The United States and its European partners have responded to Russian aims by mounting a campaign to isolate it at the United Nations, and portraying Moscow as an obstacle to the democratic changes sweeping through the Middle East.
This past week, for example, the United States, Britain, Germany and France publicly rebuked Syria’s arms suppliers, a veiled reference to Russia, for continuing to sell weapons to Damascus.
“It is glaringly obvious that transferring weapons into a volatile and violent situation is irresponsible and will only fuel the bloodshed,” Britain’s U.N. envoy, Mark Lyall Grant, told the Security Council.
Russia is coming under mounting pressure to break with Assad from the Arab League, which is sending a delegation to the Security Council on Tuesday to press its case for a political transition that would require that the Syrian leader step aside. Meanwhile, Morocco, acting on behalf of a group of Western and Arab governments, has introduced a draft resolution endorsing the Arab League initiative calling on states to follow the Arab organization’s example by imposing sanctions on Syria. The Russians have responded coolly.
The high-level diplomatic gamesmanship is playing out as violence continues to spiral in Syria, forcing the United States to prepare for the possible closure of its embassy and the evacuation of its diplomatic personnel. U.N. officials estimate that more than 5,400 civilians have been killed, mostly at the hands of government security forces, since protesters took to the streets earlier last year.
Russia’s stance underscores the strength and depth of its relationship with Assad’s regime, which is not only a recipient of Russian arms but also host of a Russian naval base. The crisis in Syria also has provided Moscow with an opportunity to show it is a more reliable ally than Western powers, particularly the United States, which is seen by many in the region as having abandoned one of its closest allies, former Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak.
“If you have good relations with a country, a government for years, for decades, then it’s not so easy to ditch those politicians and those governments because of political expediency,” Churkin said. “We are stronger on our allegiances than others.”
Tensions between the West and Russia have spilled over into a series of highly personal attacks at the United Nations. Last month, U.S. Ambassador Susan E. Rice derided Churkin’s appeal for a new probe into possible NATO killings as a “cheap stunt” aimed at distracting attention from the killing in Syria.
Churkin fired back at the Stanford-educated envoy, saying,
“Really this Stanford dictionary of expletives must be replaced by something more Victorian.”
Rice’s media spokesman posted a tweet with a photoshopped picture of Churkin on the head of “the Grinch Who Stole Christmas.”
Asked if he was trying to change the subject from Syria, Churkin acknowledged that the Security Council has been the scene of “games of distraction,” but he said Russia’s concerns about the Libya mission were legitimate, asserting that the killing of civilians during the NATO campaign was “a real issue.”
Russia, along with Brazil, China, India and South Africa, believe “it would be extremely dangerous if” the West continues to be “carried away by this regime-change idea,” he said.
In Syria, Russia has pursued a complicated diplomatic strategy to shore up the regime, joining China in vetoing the Western-backed resolution threatening sanctions against Damascus, and introducing its own resolution.That resolution, now stalled, sought to focus the Security Council’s energy on backing a political settlement between the Syrian government and the opposition, and cutting off military supplies to the opposition.
Under the resolution, Assad’s army could still be armed.
Asked if Russia’s ongoing arms sales to Assad’s government were perhaps undercutting his government’s effort to pursue a political settlement, Churkin said:
“We are not doing anything which is contrary to international law. Other than that, we don’t have to give any explanation to anybody.”
January 15, 2012
China Criticizes the U.S. for Imposing Sanctions for Its Export of Petroleum Products to Iran
China has criticised the United States for imposing sanctions on a state-run oil firm for exporting petroleum products to Iran, saying the move was "without reason".
Washington on Thursday slapped sanctions on China's Zhuhai Zhenrong Co., barring it from doing business in the United States, saying it brokered delivery of more than $500 million worth of gasoline to Iran from July 2010-January 2011.
"We express strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition to this," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Weimin said in a statement carried by the official Xinhua news agency late Saturday.
The sanctions, also placed on companies from Singapore and the United Arab Emirates, bar the three firms from receiving US export licenses, trade support from the US Export Import Bank, and loans over $10 million from US financial institutions.
Liu said China's cooperation with Iran was similar to other countries.
"Like many other countries, China maintains normal cooperation with Iran in energy, economic and trade fields," he said, adding that the US had acted unilaterally to impose the sanctions.
"This is without reason, and against the content and spirit of resolutions by the United Nations Security Council on the Iran nuclear issue."
Chinese state media Saturday quoted the company as dismissing the US claims as "fiction", with an official saying the firm doesn't export refined oil to Iran.
The US sanctions came shortly after US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner met Chinese leaders in Beijing to ask for help in squeezing Iran's key oil revenues and pushing Tehran to halt its nuclear ambitions.
But China, long an important buyer of Iranian oil, has resisted adding its weight to the US and European campaign.
Chinese officials have warned against making links between China's trade relations with Iran and the issue of Tehran's nuclear program.
December 8, 2011
China Prepares Navy for Combat to Safeguard National Security
The real showdown between China and the West may end up being in the Middle East if and when the Muslim world enlists China's assistance in the anti-American, anti-Israeli confrontation. The record shows that China has already been engaged in illicit sales of nuclear armaments to Muslim nations. Many of the Muslim nations in the Middle East are client states of China. The de facto alliance already exists. Both China and the Muslim nations have a similar interest in maintaining control of the oilfields of the Middle East. It may be that China joins with the Muslim nations in a cataclysmic confrontation with both Israel and the West in the near future, probably over the oil wealth of that region. - Ken Raggio, The Sixth Trumpet War of Revelation 9
Chinese President Hu Jintao Tuesday urged the navy to prepare for military combat amid growing regional tensions over maritime disputes and a US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific power.
The navy should "accelerate its transformation and modernisation in a sturdy way, and make extended preparations for military combat in order to make greater contributions to safeguard national security," he said.
Addressing the powerful Central Military Commission, Hu said:
"Our work must closely encircle the main theme of national defence and military building."
His remarks, which were posted on a statement on a government website, come amid growing US and regional concerns over China's naval ambitions, particularly in the South China Sea.
China claims all of the maritime area, as does Taiwan, while four Southeast Asian countries declare ownership of parts of it, with Vietnam and the Philippines accusing Chinese forces of increasing aggression there.
In a translation of Hu's comments, the official Xinhua news agency quoted the president as saying China's navy should "make extended preparations for warfare."
But the Pentagon on Tuesday downplayed Hu's speech, saying that Beijing had the right to develop its military, although it should do so transparently.
"They have a right to develop military capabilities and to plan, just as we do," said Pentagon spokesman George Little, but he added "we have repeatedly called for transparency from the Chinese and that's part of the relationship we're continuing to build with the Chinese military."
"Nobody's looking for a scrap here," insisted another spokesman Admiral John Kirby. "Certainly we wouldn't begrudge any other nation the opportunity, the right to develop naval forces to be ready.
"Our naval forces are ready and they'll stay ready."
US undersecretary of defence Michelle Flournoy is due to meet in Beijing with her Chinese counterparts on Wednesday for military-to-military talks.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao last month warned against interference by "external forces" in regional territorial disputes including in the South China Sea, a strategic and resource-rich area where several nations have overlapping claims.
And China said late last month it would conduct naval exercises in the Pacific Ocean, after Obama, who has dubbed himself America's first Pacific president, said the US would deploy up to 2,500 Marines to Australia.
China's People's Liberation Army, the largest military in the world, is primarily a land force, but its navy is playing an increasingly important role as Beijing grows more assertive about its territorial claims.
Earlier this year, the Pentagon warned that Beijing was increasingly focused on its naval power and had invested in high-tech weaponry that would extend its reach in the Pacific and beyond.
China's first aircraft carrier began its second sea trial last week after undergoing refurbishments and testing, the government said. The 300-metre (990-foot) ship, a refitted former Soviet carrier, underwent five days of trials in August that sparked international concern about China's widening naval reach.
Beijing only confirmed this year that it was revamping the old Soviet ship and has repeatedly insisted that the carrier poses no threat to its neighbours and will be used mainly for training and research purposes. But the August sea trials were met with concern from regional powers including Japan and the United States, which called on Beijing to explain why it needs an aircraft carrier.
China, which publicly announced around 50 separate naval exercises in the seas off its coast over the past two years -- usually after the event -- says its military is only focused on defending the country's territory.
North Korea Making Missile Able to Hit U.S.
The US, Israel and the NATO Alliance have already put Iran, Lebanon, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia and China on notice. And the “withdrawals” from Iraq and the Af-Pak region are over-hyped. The occupation of these countries continues with no end in sight. In fact, they aren’t withdrawing as much as they are repositioning and shifting their forces, preparing for an escalation. In many ways the wars in Iraq and Af-Pak have only been the initial phase of a global attack, positioning forces and building massive military bases in pivotal geo-strategic locations. The operations in this region have essentially been a warm-up for much wider-ranging attacks against much stronger countries. While most of the US population is playing checkers, seeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as one-off battles, the global banking cartel is playing chess, using these wars as only initial geo-strategic moves in a grand strategy toward total world domination.The intensity of military maneuvering presently occurring is alarming. - David DeGraw, The Global Banking Cartel Has One Card Left to Play, Amped Status, September 28, 2010
New intelligence indicates that North Korea is moving ahead with building its first road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, an easily hidden weapon capable of hitting the United States, according to Obama administration officials.
The intelligence was revealed in a classified Capitol Hill briefing last month. Its existence was made public in a letter to Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta from five House Republicans.
“As members of the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces …, we write out of concerns about new intelligence concerning foreign developments in long-range ballistic missile development, specifically ballistic missiles capable of attacking the United States,” the Nov. 17 letter said.
“We believe this new intelligence reiterates the need for the administration to correct its priorities regarding missile defenses, which should have, first and foremost, the missile defense of the homeland.”
Officials familiar with the intelligence said government analysts believe the missile could be a variant of North Korea’s new Musudan intermediate-range missile, first disclosed publicly in October 2010.
Other intelligence indicates that the new ICBM may be under development at a huge missile testing facility on North Korea’s western coast.
Prior to its mobile ICBM, North Korea’s long-range missiles were the pad-launched Taepodong-1 prototype, and the Taepodong-2 (TD-2) dual-use ICBM and space launcher. The TD-2 was test-launched in April 2009.
‘Direct threat’
Mobile missiles are difficult for tracking radar to locate, making them easier to hide. They also can be set up and launched much more quickly than missiles fired from silos or launchpads.
China’s military recently deployed two new mobile ICBMs, the DF-31 and DF-31A. It is not known whether North Korea’s new mobile missile is based on Chinese technology. China in the past has provided missile technology to North Korea, a fraternal communist ally.
The first indications of Pyongyang’s new mobile ICBM were made public in June by Robert M. Gates, who was defense secretary at the time. After a speech in Singapore, Mr. Gates said,
“With the continued development of long-range missiles and potentially a road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile and their continuing development of nuclear weapons, … North Korea is in the process of becoming a direct threat to the United States.”
The new intelligence was discussed during a closed-door briefing in mid-November for the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces and discussed in the letter to Mr. Panetta. The letter did not say specifically that the missile was North Korean, but it quoted Mr. Gates on Pyongyang’s mobile ICBM development.
The letter was signed by Rep. Michael R. Turner, Ohio Republican and chairman of the subcommittee; Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; and Republican Reps. Trent Franks of Arizona, Doug Lamborn of Colorado and Mac Thornberry of Texas.
Congressional aides declined to comment on the intelligence.
Administration officials familiar with the missile data said U.S. intelligence analysts have some disagreement over the developments.
Implications for talks
The intelligence on North Korea’s progress on a mobile ICBM was disclosed as the Obama administration is seeking to restart the failed six-nation talks on North Korea’s nuclear program.
Glyn Davies, special envoy for North Korea, leaves Tuesday for talks in China, Japan and South Korea about North Korea’s nuclear program, the State Department announced Monday.
Last week, North Korea issued a government white paper that defended its April 2009 launch of a Taepodong-2 as part of a satellite development program.
Government analysts viewed the statement as an indication that North Korea may be preparing for a missile flight test.
The United Nations imposed unprecedented sanctions on North Korea after a 2009 test of a nuclear device.
Three paths
Details of North Korea’s first mobile intermediate-range missile, the Musudan, and the new west coast North Korean launch facility were made public in classified State Department cables on the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks.
A February 2010 cable outlining a U.S.-Russian exchange on missile threats stated that the U.S. government suspects North Korea has three paths to building ICBMs.
One is using the Taepodong-2, with a range of up to 9,300 miles, as its main strategic missile. A second way is to further develop the ranges of existing missiles like the Musudan, and last is to “use the very large launch facility that is being constructed on the west coast of North Korea to launch a very large missile,” the cable said.
The cable said the size of the facility is a concern because “it does not simply replicate other sites.”
“This facility is much larger than the Taepodong launch facility,” the cable said. “This is not to say there is evidence of a new missile system larger than the Taepodong-2 being developed, but it suggests the possibility.”
An Oct. 6, 2009, cable on North Korea’s missile program said the Musudan intermediate-range missile is based on Russia’s SS-N-6 submarine-launched missile that has a range of up to 2,400 miles.
The Musudan uses an advanced liquid propellent called unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (N204) that are easier to store in missiles.
“Development of the Musudan with this more advanced propulsion technology allows North Korea to build even longer-range missiles – or shorter range missiles with greater payload capacity – than would be possible using Scud-type technology,” the cable said.
North Korea also has a new solid-fueled short-range missile called the Toksa, with a range of 75 miles, and has sold a number of shorter-range Musudan missiles to Iran, the report said.
‘Hedging strategy’
In their letter, the five lawmakers called on the Pentagon to reverse its decision to curb development of long-range ground-based interceptors in favor of European-based missile defenses against Iranian missiles. They also asked for the Pentagon’s plan for a “hedging strategy” to be prepared to counter new missile threats like the North Korean mobile ICBM.
“In view of the briefing the subcommittee received this week, we do not believe the United States can afford further delay in the release of the hedging strategy by the Department of Defense,” they stated, asking for a report on the strategy by the end of the year.
Asked about the new intelligence, Cmdr. Leslie Hull-Ryde said the Pentagon had nothing to add to Mr. Gates‘ comments.
“Specific information related to North Korea’s development of road-mobile ICBM would be an intelligence matter, and it is our policy not to comment on intelligence matters,” she said.
A U.S. intelligence community spokesman referred a reporter’s questions about the new intelligence to the February statement to Congress by James Clapper, director of national intelligence.
Mr. Clapper stated in his prepared remarks that “North Korea’s progress in developing the TD-2 shows its determination to achieve long-range ballistic missile and space-launch capabilities. If configured as an ICBM, the TD-2 could reach at least portions of the United States; the TD-2 or associated technologies also could be exported.”
Gates' prediction
Mr. Gates first told reporters Jan. 11 during a visit to China that North Korea’s progress in building intercontinental ballistic missiles was turning the Pyongyang regime into a “direct threat to the United States.”
Pressed for details, he said, “I don’t think it’s an immediate threat, no. But on the other hand, I don’t think it’s a five-year threat.”
“Let me be precise,” he added. “I think that North Korea will have developed an intercontinental ballistic missile within that time frame, not that they will have huge numbers or anything like that, but I believe they will have a very limited capability.”
The Daily Beast quoted Mr. Gates in June saying,
“They are developing a road-mobile ICBM. I never would have dreamed they would go to a road-mobile before testing a static ICBM. It’s a huge problem. As we’ve found out in a lot of places, finding mobile missiles is very tough.”
Richard Fisher, a military analyst with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said,
“A nuclear armed North Korean road mobile ICBM would pose a spectacular challenge to the U.S.-led alliance system in Northeast Asia, as Pyongyang could severely undermine U.S. extended nuclear deterrence commitments.”
November 16, 2011
Iran and North Korea Cooperate in Building Atomic Bombs
News media in Northeast Asia are reporting details of alleged cooperation between Iran and North Korea in trying to build atomic bombs. Such joint activities have been suspected for years.
South Korea’s foreign ministry and the national intelligence service say they cannot comment on fresh reports linking Pyongyang's atomic efforts to Iran.
Officials with the agencies considered at the forefront of monitoring North Korea's nuclear programs say the allegations, apparently leaked by diplomats in recent days, involve classified information.
The IAEA's most comprehensive assessment yet about Iran's nuclear programs details what it says is evidence of Iran's covert and continuous effort, since 2003, to build a nuclear bomb, going far beyond the stated goals of energy and medical research.
Last Friday, Iran's top envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, called the report a fabrication based on "lousy" intelligence by the United States and its allies.
The 25-page report has since been leaked and makes no mention of a link between Iran and North Korea. But last Friday U.N. investigators gave a private technical presentation to the 35 member states of the IAEA Board of Governors. Since then, diplomats have been quoted anonymously by South Korea media alleging that hundreds of North Korean scientists and engineers have been working at nuclear and missile facilities in Iran.
Covert trips
Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun says among the Iranian sites the North Koreans have been visiting are three research centers carrying out simulations of how to trigger nuclear weapons.
Bruce Bennett, a senior defense analyst at the Rand Corporation, which conducts research and analysis for the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, says experts, for years, have been suspicious about this type of cooperation.
"There've been stories of Iranians at the nuclear tests in North Korea, for example," Bennett said. "So if information is really being shared then you've got a much more dangerous situation because most people would argue that the North Korean nuclear program is out ahead of Iran and we don't want Iran having that assistance."
The London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, in a report this year, characterized the cooperation as mutual. It said North Korea has a technological edge over Iran in uranium enrichment and the manufacture of nuclear-related equipment, such as high-strength steel. The IISS report said North Korea's weapons programs also benefit from Iranian technology.
Bennett, of the Rand Corporation, says the international community needs to pay more attention to the nuclear links between North Korea and Iran.
"But stopping that or even slowing it down is going to be complicated. The people can travel to Iran without having to go through places where we can't stop them," he said.
The South Korean media reports say the North Koreans enter Iran covertly through other countries, such as Russia and China. The North Koreans are said to be employed at 10 nuclear and missile facilities in Iran and are apparently rotated every few months.
Nuclear capability
The Washington Post reported November 7 that Western diplomats and nuclear experts briefed on the IAEA findings say that Iran has reached the threshold of nuclear capability with crucial technology linked to North Korea and Pakistan.
Iran and North Korea were customers of the network run by Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan. And both countries are under United Nations economic sanctions for their nuclear programs.
U.S. President Barack Obama, at the conclusion of Sunday's APEC Summit in Hawaii, told reporters the sanctions against Tehran have had "enormous bite" and he will consult with other nations about additional steps to prevent Iran for acquiring an atomic weapon.
North Korea has also been accused in U.N. and other reports of possibly supplying not only Iran but also Syria and Burma with banned atomic technology.
In August, German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported North Korea had provided Iran with a computer program that can help scientists identify self-sustaining chain reactions, vital for the construction of reactors and also in the development of nuclear explosives. Tracking cooperation
Analysts say they have also been tracking, since the 1980s, cooperation between Pyongyang and Tehran on missile development.
Of utmost concern is whether North Korea has given Iran some Russian designed advanced missiles. There is no evidence, however, that either North Korea or Iran has flight-tested the missile, known as the BM-25 or Musudan.
Russia denies its existence. Some analysts contend previous public displays of the Musudan in Pyongayng military parades were merely fakes. The missile is believed to be based on the former Soviet Union’s R-27, a submarine-launched missile with a range of between 2,500 and 4,000 kilometers, designed to carry nuclear warheads.
In a presentation at a think tank seminar in Seoul last week, Bennett of the Rand Corporation, said there is wide speculation about the size of North Korea's possible nuclear weapons arsenal. He said Pyongyang may not have any weapons yet but could have "as many as 20" with the number of reliable ones ranging between two and 16.
But Bennett is adamant that it would be wrong to characterize North Korea as a nuclear power because it has not demonstrated a working atomic bomb, despite carrying out tests of nuclear devices in 2006 and 2009.
The two Koreas have no diplomatic relations. They fought a three-year civil war to a stalemate in the early 1950's. They technically remain at war as no peace treaty has ever been signed.
AP - North Korean leader Kim Jong Il arrived in Russia on Saturday and will meet with President Dmitry Medvedev during his visit, the Kremlin said.
North Korea's state news agency did not specify a meeting with Medvedev but said that Kim's visit was at the invitation of the Russian president.
It is Kim's first trip to Russia since 2002 and is the latest sign that North Korea is trying to reach out in an effort to secure aid and restart stalled nuclear disarmament talks.
South Korean officials reported that Kim's train had arrived in the Russian border city of Khasan, but the first confirmation that Kim was in Russia came in statements issued simultaneously by the Kremlin and North Korea's official news agency.
Kim will visit the Far East region of Russia and travel west to Siberia, the Kremlin and North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency said.
KCNA said in an English dispatch that "top leaders" of the two countries would meet. There were no details on how long Kim's trip would last or when a meeting would take place.
On his first trip to Russia in 2001, Kim made a 24-day train trek across the country. His trip the following year was limited to the Far East and lasted four days.
Russia and North Korea both announced Friday that Moscow was providing food assistance to the North. And North Korea said earlier this week that Medvedev sent a letter calling for greater energy cooperation among Russia and the two Koreas, saying it would enhance regional security.
Russia's foreign minister also said Moscow was in talks with Pyongyang and Seoul separately on putting gas pipes through the Korean peninsula.
Russia and North Korea maintain cordial ties, though they are not as close as they were in Soviet times, when Moscow provided significant aid and support to Pyongyang. Moscow is a member of six-party forum aimed at persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear programs in exchange for aid and security guarantees.
Last month, a senior North Korean diplomat visited New York to discuss ways to resume six-nation talks last held in December 2008. The discussions came after the nuclear envoys of the Koreas met in Indonesia for talks.
Russia and China oppose outside interference in the unrest in the Arab world, the two presidents said on Thursday in a declaration, as the West seeks their support for increasing pressure on Syria.
"The sides believe that the search for settling the situation in the countries of the Middle East and North Africa should take place in the legal field and through political means," said the declaration signed by Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Hu Jintao.
"Outside forces should not interfere in internal processes in the countries of the region."
Rather, the conflicts should be solved by "launching broad national dialogue about rebuilding stability and social order and the promotion of democratic and economic reforms," the statement said.
The two presidents also expressed concern over the situation in Libya, calling for an end to hostilities between the forces of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi and the rebels.
Russia has said it opposes the UN Security Council adopting any resolution on Syria, risking a major dispute with the West over the response to the crackdown on Syrian protestors.
China has backed Russia's cautious stance although, as is customary, it has allowed its fellow permanent UN Security Council member to do most of the public talking on the issue.
Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich confirmed in Moscow that Russia "as before" was opposed to a UN Security Council resolution on Syria.
"This position, as you know, has been set by the president and it remains unchanged," the Interfax news agency quoted him as saying.
Once bitter foes during the Cold War, Moscow and Beijing have over the past years ramped up political cooperation as both are driven by a desire to counterbalance US global dominance.
Speaking through a translator, Hu said at the Kremlin that Russia and China should expand their "strategic cooperation" including within multilateral structures like the UN and the Group of Twenty developed and developing economies.
Joint work should also be ramped up within regional groupings like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in order to "support peace, security and stability on the planet and facilitate the formation of a multilateral world and the democratisation of international relations," Hu said.
In their joint declartion, the two countries also said they would also seek to intensify cooperation with major regional player India.
March 24, 2011
Overrunning the Entire Middle East, Erasing Entire Civilizations and Building a Servile Homogeneous Regional Block to be Rolled into a Greater Global Government
By Tony Cartalucci, LandDestroyer.com March 23, 2011
Once again, “claims” and “allegations” herald broader western meddling in the Middle East under the guise of the suspiciously ubiquitous “Arab Spring.” As the global corporate-financier oligarchy directs US, British, and French planes to bomb yet another Arab nation, their media tentacles are searching for sensationalism and sympathy in Syria to bolster destabilization efforts on the ground.
Indeed the “Otpor fist” that heralded unrest from Tunisia to Egypt is now being “raised” in Syria.
In a recent TIME magazine article titled, “Arab Spring: Is a Revolution Starting Up in Syria?,” it cites “descriptions” of protests, “claims” of government brutality, and “alleged details” of protesters rising up against the Syrian government, long slated for removal by the global corporate-financier oligarchs.
Yemen as well, cited as an example of Western hypocrisy for not garnering it’s own UN “no-fly zone” in reality doesn’t need one, as the British created and managed Muslim Brotherhood and elements within the Yemeni army are already on their way to ousting President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
Mohammed Qahtan, Yemen’s Al-Islah (Muslim Brotherhood) leader, is leading the calls to oust Saleh from power, not “the people of Yemen.” In a March 23, 2011 Reuters report, Qahtan was quoted as warning Saleh,
“We will arrive where you are and we will remove you.”
In the same report, the US gives yet another shocking display of feigned surprise over the Middle East upheaval, voicing concerns that Saleh’s ouster would be a blow to their fight against “Al Qaeda.”
As we will soon see, such upheaval has been in the works for 20 years, and this dishonesty now being portrayed since the unrest began in Tunisia is yet another look into the bottomless well of depravity from which our “leadership” reigns.
The Greater Middle East
Concurrently the US is providing Al-Qaeda linked militant extremists in Libya with air support in their bid to oust Qaddafi. A recent US Army report aired by geopolitical analyst and historian Dr. Webster Tarpley shows the US Army noticed in 2007 that many of the Al Qaeda operatives sent to destabilize Iraq were from Libya. More specifically, these operatives were from the current eastern rebel strongholds of Benghazi and Darnah, now under the protection of a US led no-fly zone.
While this may seem to defy all reason, it only does so if measured against the now discredited official narrative peddled since the “War on Terror” began on September 11, 2001. If America is truly waging global war against Al Qaeda, indeed, nothing about the current crisis in the Middle East makes sense, officially or unofficially.
If however, Al Qaeda represents a militant force still as armed, supported, and directed by the West as it was during its US-backed inception during the Soviet-Afghan war in the 1980′s, it makes perfect sense.
Al Qaeda has made it possible for the US to not only justify its own military adventures in the Middle East, but has given them a militant force to badger target regimes as an alternative to the “moderate” Muslim Brotherhood and the US State Department’s armies of youth activists. That America and Al Qaeda appear as “mortal enemies” helps the global corporate-financier oligarchy exert military force while circumventing the untidy anti-Western sentiment that accompanies each Western intervention.
The broader plan, of course, is to overrun the entire Middle East, erase entire civilizations and build a servile homogeneous regional block to be rolled into a greater global government. While this sounds like the stuff of wild conspiracy theories, former NATO commander Wesley Clark stated that in 1991, Paul Wolfowitz was already determined to use US military might to conquer the Middle East.
CFR and International Crisis Group member Wesley Clark, makes a shocking confession confirming the imperialist designs of the corporate-financier oligarchy. Before Bush was even put into office in 2000, the plan to seize the Middle East was already well underway, with 9/11 the opening act. It has more to do with global domination than simply “oil.”
Clark specifically cites as the architects of this decades spanning plan, the “Project for a New American Century (PNAC).” PNAC is a “Neo-Con” cadre within the globalist combine that has been recently peddling cartoonish propaganda to incite war with Iran. Their serendipitously timed propaganda film “Iranium” focusing on aggressive support for another “Green Revolution” in Iran, just so happened to be released in January 2011 at the height of the unrest sweeping the Arab world. These same “Neo-Cons” are also complicit with supporting the various uprisings via an extensive network of NGOs funded and supported by the Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy.
The Rest of the World
Clark’s prophetic words in 2007 also shed light on the Russian factor – unwilling or unable to stop US military aggression against their own allies back in the 1990′s, and with the recent failure to vote down UNSC r.1973 regarding Libya, they embolden the West to continue their march toward Tehran.
Of course, both Russia and China are dealing with a myriad of destabilization efforts both on their borders and within.
Russia, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, has been struggling against Western-aligned oligarchs including the likes of Mikhail Khodorkovsky who attempted to erect a George Soros-style “Open Russian Society” network of NGOs, complete with Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger sitting on its board of directors. Khodorkovsky was eventually stopped, and now resides in a Siberian prison cell courtesy of Vladamir Putin.
To this day, Khodorkovsky is being supported, and his imprisonment leveraged by the West to create tension within Russia via globalist lobbying firms like Robert Amsterdam’s Amsterdam & Peroff. Ongoing destabilization efforts in neighboring Belarus, openly backed by the US State Department and creatures like Joe Lieberman, are also taxing Russia’s ability to confront the West’s encroachment elsewhere.
Joe Lieberman misappropriates the American people’s time by obsessing over Belarus’ internal affairs while his own nation teeters on economic collapse, ironically caused by imperialist pursuits.
China has been the subject of encirclement and meddling for over two centuries. The US currently occupies South Korea, Japan, and Afghanistan, with a concerted and ongoing effort to destabilize relations within and between India and Pakistan, as well as efforts to stoke color revolutions in Myanmar (Burma) and Thailand. All of this is aimed at disrupting China’s ability to challenge Anglo-American hegemony in Asia.
China is no stranger to the effects of foreign, imperialistic meddling. Its recent history is more or less a continuum of fending off the ill-effects of foreign occupation and foreign backed regimes including the devastating “Great Leap Forward” by Mao Zedong.
Domestically, a “Jasmine Revolution” was averted by Chinese officials on the back of January’s Egyptian unrest. The US State Department and the BBC are now pledging to assist “activists” inside China (and Iran) with circumventing measures put in place to prevent another attempted uprising. Creating instability inside a nation of over a billion people with regional diversity rivaling that of Europe will undoubtedly result in thousands, perhaps millions of deaths (see the rise of Mao) and gives us another instructive look into the motivations and “values” of our alleged leadership.
As reported previously, this current globalist blitzkrieg signals the largest geopolitical reordering since WW2. It is but one step, albeit a large step, toward a unipolar one world government centered around the global corporate-financier oligarchy. Considering that it is a gambit 20 years in the making, we should not wonder why operations in Libya have taken precedence over the unfolding disaster in Japan.
We should however be outraged, as the men that lord over us and dominate our nations financially and industrially are irrefutably committing real crimes against humanity through aggression and criminal negligence.
For more information on alternative economics, getting self-sufficient and moving on without the parasitic, incompetent, criminal globalist oligarchs:
Leaked U.S. diplomatic cables show China's frustration with communist ally North Korea and speculate Beijing would accept a future Korean peninsula unified under South Korean rule, according to the documents released by whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.
The memos indicate the enormous import American and South Korean diplomats place on China's attitude toward the future survival of the isolated and impoverished hard-line communist regime in Pyongyang.
The release of the documents follows new tensions in the region with North Korea unleashing a fiery artillery barrage on a South Korean island that killed four people a week ago. The regime also warned that joint U.S.-South Korean naval drills this week had pushed the peninsula to the "brink of war."
China "would be comfortable with a reunified Korea controlled by Seoul and anchored to the US in a 'benign alliance' as long as Korea was not hostile towards China," then-South Korean vice foreign minister, Chun Yung-woo, is quoted as telling U.S. ambassador to South Korea, Kathleen Stephens, in February.
The diplomatic cables warn, however, that China would not accept the presence of U.S. troops north of the demilitarized zone that currently forms the border between the two Koreas.
Economic opportunities in a reunified Korea could further induce Chinese acquiescence, Chun says.
Chun predicts the government in Pyongyang would last no more than three years following the death of ailing leader Kim Jong Il, who is seeking to pass power to son Kim Jong Un, a political ingenue in his 20s.
While China favors maintaining the status quo, it has little ability to stop a collapse and less influence over the authorities in Pyongyang than is widely believed.
"Beijing had 'no will' to use its economic leverage to force a change in Pyongyang's policies," Chun says, adding the North Korean leadership would continue refusing to dismantle its nuclear program in the absence of a more forceful Chinese approach.
Chun also dismisses the possibility of Chinese military intervention if North Korea threatened to descend into chaos.
China is preparing to handle any outbreaks of unrest along the border that could follow a collapse of the regime. Chinese officials say they could deal with up to 300,000 refugees, but might have to seal the border to maintain order, the memos say, citing an unidentified representative of an international aid group.
Chinese officials are also quoted as using mocking language in reference to North Korea, pointing to tensions between the two neighbors in contrast to official statements underscoring strong historical ties.
Then-Deputy Foreign Minister He Yafei is quoted as telling a U.S. official in April 2009 that Pyongyang was acting like a "spoiled child" by staging a missile test in an attempt to achieve its demand of bilateral talks with Washington.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asserted Monday that WikiLeaks acted illegally in posting the material. Officials around the world have said the disclosure jeopardizes national security, diplomats, intelligence assets and relationships between foreign governments.
Five international media organizations, including The New York Times and Britain's the Guardian newspaper, were among those to receive the documents in advance.
Adding to heightened tensions on the peninsula, North Korea revealed two weeks ago the existence of a uranium enrichment facility that could provide the country with a second route for building a nuclear bomb.
China has largely rebuffed calls to use its influence to force Pyongyang to moderate its behavior, while opposing harsh economic sanctions or international censure. Beijing has responded to the latest crises by repeating calls for a return to long-stalled, six-nation denuclearization talks that the North has rejected.
Meanwhile, the chairman of North Korea's Supreme People's Assembly, Choe Thae Bok, arrived in Beijing on Tuesday for a five-day visit following a call last week from China for emergency consultations. Japan also says it will send an envoy for talks.
The 2,000 working centrifuges for processing uranium adaptable to the fueling of nuclear weapons, which North Korea showed off to visiting US scientist Prof. Siegried Hecker of Stanford University on Nov. 12, told US and Western intelligence that Pyongyang was shifting its weapons program to enriched uranium.
The plutonium facilities which yielded North Korea's estimated arsenal of 8-12 nuclear weapons were judged by the visiting American scientist to be dormant.
In the light of the Hecker report, US and Israel intelligence cannot avoid suspecting that Iran, with characteristic furtiveness, may have performed a similar transformation. After all, the North Korean, Iranian and Syrian nuclear programs have collaborated closely in the last decade and maintained a thriving give-and-take relationship that grows progressively stronger.
debkafile's intelligence sources note that Tehran maintains a permanent military mission in Pyongyang matched by a permanent North Korean mission in Tehran. Their primary task is to keep nuclear technology flowing uninterrupted between their two programs and making sure they benefit reciprocally from innovations. That way, they avoid duplicating research and save time and money.
In his report, Prof. Hecker writes:
"I have previously stated my concern about potential cooperation and exchanges in uranium technologies between North Korea and Iran."
Our sources stress that Pyongyang, Tehran and Damascus share more than technology; they have the same nuclear image of self and coordinate their diplomatic strategies. As a well-knit nuclear alliance, the trio challenge United States and seek to defy its leverage for dictating which countries are entitled to be nuclear-armed and which are not.
This bloc did not rise spontaneously; it was secretly crafted by China as a tool for diminishing America as a military power.
For ten years, Washington has tried to persuade Beijing to put a stop to Pyongyang nuclear ventures.
To distract attention from its lack of success, US analysts are trying to link the display of North Korea's nuclear advances to Prof. Hecker, including work on a light-water reactor, as bound up with the succession struggle and Kim Jong-Il's wish to impress the military with his son Kim Jon-un's nuclear credentials.
According to debkafile's analysts, Pyongyang's rationale is more far-reaching.
Although treated by the West as a pariah state with a failed economy, North Korea has managed to develop two advanced nuclear programs fueled by plutonium and now enriched uranium and export its technologies to Iran, Syria and, some Asian intelligence sources believe, Myanmar.
The sanctions initiated by President George W. Bush and his successor in the White House, Barack Obama, have been of no avail because of Chinese backing. Beijing has run Obama's drive to halt nuclear proliferation into the sand, while building up strategic interests in Tehran to a level comparable to its stake in Pyongyang.
According to OPEC figures, Iran's oil sales to China jumped in recent months by 30 percent to 597,800 barrels a day. Aggressive in its quest for energy, Beijing will do whatever it takes to protect its energy sources and supply routes.
On Nov. 10, the high-ranking Chinese official Tong Xiaoling said his government would expand its investments in developing Iran's oil and gas fields and building refineries. Those investments have already passed the $40 billion mark.
At this time, therefore, given China's calculations, North Korea's interest in selling nuclear technologies for hard foreign currency and Iran's relentless pursuit of a nuclear weapon, it should not be hard to anticipate Tehran following Pyongyang's brazen example before long. A Western or Arab nuclear expert may be invited to take a look at an advanced -- and banned -- nuclear plant or process undiscovered by Western intelligence, and displayed proudly as a fait accompli. Not only does North Korean nuclear and missile technology tend to catch on and spread, so too will the Hecker effect because nothing really stands in its way.
On Monday, Nov. 22, questions to the Obama administration about the professor's report drew this response:
The United States and its allies Monday accuse North Korea of being a danger to the region after it showed off its latest advances in uranium enrichment, but Washington is still open to talks. The US is hoping to revive the six-party talks over the North's nuclear facilities based at Yongbyon.
Closer to the firing line -- and therefore more realistic -- South Korea's defense minister Kim Tae-young said his country may consider having US tactical nuclear weapons deployed on its soil for the first time in 19 years, in the light of North Korea's latest escalation.
When North Korea tested a nuclear device last year, China issued bland criticism and urged Pyongyang to resume diplomacy. After a South Korean navy ship was sunk, most likely by a North Korean torpedo, Beijing sent its sympathies but called the evidence inconclusive.
Now that North Korea has unleashed an artillery barrage on a South Korean island that killed four people — including two civilians — and raised tensions in the heavily armed region, Beijing again appears unwilling to rein in its neighbor.
For all China's growing international might, its tolerance of North Korea's wayward behavior shows how differently Beijing sees the world — or at least its corner of it.
"There is zero chance of China, either in open or in private, putting major substantive pressure on North Korea," said Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations at Beijing's Renmin University.
As impoverished North Korea's most important diplomatic ally and source of crucial food and fuel assistance, China holds the sort of influence that could bring Pyongyang to heel. But keeping the region stable so that China may continue its upward trajectory is the Chinese leadership's No. 1 priority. If that means putting up with the occasional North Korean provocation, experts say, so be it.
China has reasons to worry if the current, tenuous peace dissolves. It lost an estimated 400,000 troops in the 1950-53 Korean War. Another conflict or a meltdown of North Korea's dictatorship could send hundreds of thousands of North Koreans across the border, burdening Chinese provinces that only in recent years recovered from painful restructuring of the planned economy. Worse, a South Korean victory would bring to China's threshold a U.S. ally that hosts American military forces.
Following Tuesday's bombardment, Beijing has so far shied away from calling North Korea to task.
In its first written statement about the incident, China's Foreign Ministry said China feels regret about the loss of lives and property and urged all parties to avoid escalation and restart dialogue.
The statement by spokesman Hong Lei said the relevant parties should "oppose any actions that harm the peace and stability on the peninsula."
While it said that China was worried about the developments, it did not condemn either side.
State media, the only media there is in China, maintained a mostly studied neutrality, describing the skirmish as an exchange of fire.
"China is very much concerned with the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula, as both the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) are China's close neighbors," the Xinhua News Agency quoted Zha Peixin, a member of the legislature's foreign affairs committee, as saying.
China's strategy to steady North Korea has exacted costs. Beijing's refusal to criticize North Korea after the sinking of South Korea's naval corvette, the Cheonan, in which 46 sailors died, offended Seoul, a key investor and trade partner which had been drawing closer diplomatically. In the United Nations, China shielded North Korea from punishment over the incident.
China's protection of North Korea at times seems so unreasonable that it adds to misgivings among Japan, Vietnam and other nations already upset over Beijing's more forceful assertion of its territorial claims in the East and South China seas.
Relations with Washington may suffer too, just two months before Chinese President Hu Jintao wants to pay a pomp-filled state visit.
President Barack Obama has called upon Beijing to restrain its ally. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said U.S. diplomats had delivered a message to China that it was "pivotal" to changing North Korea's behavior, adding that Beijing has a responsibility to make it clear to Pyongyang that deliberate attempts to inflame tensions with Seoul are not acceptable.
But some American officials and independent analysts have questioned the amount of influence that China actually has with its neighbor, and warned against relying on the Chinese to change North Korean actions.
Far from backing away from Pyongyang, China has in recent years doubled down on its support. As Japan, South Korea and others have reduced trade and aid in recent years in response to North Korean nuclear and missile tests, China has stepped up deliveries of food and other assistance.
China accounted for half of all North Korea's imports and took a quarter of its exports in 2008, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service. That was before the North's relations with South Korea began souring, taking tourism and investment programs with them.
Politically, Beijing has upped its engagement too, sending a stream of leaders to Pyongyang and twice hosting reclusive North Korean leader Kim Jong Il this summer. The first trip came weeks after the Cheonan sinking. The second time came just before North Korea's Worker's Party held a rare conclave and then a nationwide pageant for the elevation of Kim's son, Kim Jong Un, as dictator-in-waiting. Chinese Politburo member Zhou Yongkang stood with the elder Kim during the festivities.
The steadfastness of Beijing's support at the expense of its international image and relations with Seoul and Washington have raised criticisms even in China that the North Korean tail sometimes wags the Chinese dog. Chinese officials and experts acknowledge the risk, saying Beijing's leverage is limited, given that it is unwilling to throw its economic heft.
"Even if China tried to tell North Korea what to do, it's unlikely they would easily listen," said Gong Keyu, deputy director of the Asia-Pacific Research Center at Shanghai's Institute for International Studies.
China and Russia have decided to renounce the US dollar and resort to using their own currencies for bilateral trade, Premier Wen Jiabao and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin announced late on Tuesday.
Chinese experts said the move reflected closer relations between Beijing and Moscow and is not aimed at challenging the dollar, but to protect their domestic economies.
"About trade settlement, we have decided to use our own currencies," Putin said at a joint news conference with Wen in St. Petersburg.
The two countries were accustomed to using other currencies, especially the dollar, for bilateral trade. Since the financial crisis, however, high-ranking officials on both sides began to explore other possibilities. The yuan has now started trading against the Russian rouble in the Chinese interbank market, while the renminbi will soon be allowed to trade against the rouble in Russia, Putin said.
"That has forged an important step in bilateral trade and it is a result of the consolidated financial systems of world countries," he said.
Putin made his remarks after a meeting with Wen. They also officiated at a signing ceremony for 12 documents, including energy cooperation.
The documents covered cooperation on aviation, railroad construction, customs, protecting intellectual property, culture and a joint communiqu. Details of the documents have yet to be released.
Putin said one of the pacts between the two countries is about the purchase of two nuclear reactors from Russia by China's Tianwan nuclear power plant, the most advanced nuclear power complex in China.
Putin has called for boosting sales of natural resources - Russia's main export - to China, but price has proven to be a sticking point.
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, who holds sway over Russia's energy sector, said following a meeting with Chinese representatives that Moscow and Beijing are unlikely to agree on the price of Russian gas supplies to China before the middle of next year. Russia is looking for China to pay prices similar to those Russian gas giant Gazprom charges its European customers, but Beijing wants a discount. The two sides were about $100 per 1,000 cubic meters apart, according to Chinese officials last week.
Wen's trip follows Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's three-day visit to China in September, during which he and President Hu Jintao launched a cross-border pipeline linking the world's biggest energy producer with the largest energy consumer.
Wen said at the press conference that the partnership between Beijing and Moscow has "reached an unprecedented level" and pledged the two countries will "never become each other's enemy."
Over the past year, "our strategic cooperative partnership endured strenuous tests and reached an unprecedented level," Wen said, adding the two nations are now more confident and determined to defend their mutual interests.
"China will firmly follow the path of peaceful development and support the renaissance of Russia as a great power," he said.
"The modernization of China will not affect other countries' interests, while a solid and strong Sino-Russian relationship is in line with the fundamental interests of both countries."
Wen said Beijing is willing to boost cooperation with Moscow in Northeast Asia, Central Asia and the Asia-Pacific region, as well as in major international organizations and on mechanisms in pursuit of a "fair and reasonable new order" in international politics and the economy.
Sun Zhuangzhi, a senior researcher in Central Asian studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the new mode of trade settlement between China and Russia follows a global trend after the financial crisis exposed the faults of a dollar-dominated world financial system.
Pang Zhongying, who specializes in international politics at Renmin University of China, said the proposal is not challenging the dollar, but aimed at avoiding the risks the dollar represents.
Wen arrived in the northern Russian city on Monday evening for a regular meeting between Chinese and Russian heads of government. He left St. Petersburg for Moscow late on Tuesday and is set to meet with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Wednesday.
This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
