Monday, April 6, 2009

The North Korean Missile, Should We Care?

As most of you know, North Korea attempted to launch a satellite into space the other day ( The United States, South Korea, and various other organizations claimed that it was a missile test; a test that would show that NK has the ability to reach the US with a nuke if need be. North Korea claims that the test worked, and that a satellite is in orbit playing patriotic songs. The United States, considering their argument, claimed that the test failed and it landed in the sea. Either way, everybody agrees that NK launched something, and that they were not supposed to.

When we look at this, we really need to consider three issues:
What was launched
Was this a threat
Why is North Korea not allowed to do this

What was Launched
Technically, North Korea is not supposed to engage in any ballistic activities. Arguably a satellite is not one, but as it launches on a rocket, we can count this as a missile. Thus, we know that this launch violates UN rules.

This seems to be more an issue of he-said she-said, and it doesn't seem like anybody is being logical. Had North Korea said that the satellite failed, then it would have always been an argument between them. However, NK decided to say that the satellite is working and orbiting, so it is easy to test. Is there a new object orbiting and emitting information (it should not be that hard to figure out)? If there is, then shut up USA. If not, then shut up NK. There, that was easy.

Was this a threat
If this was simply a missile test, and not a satellite on top, then this was a threat. If this was a satellite test, then this becomes even more interesting. Consider the following:
1) NK told everybody that it was going to happen
2) NK claims that it was a satellite
3) NK gave plans of the path, and everything along with that
Clearly, North Korea was working to make sure that the USA, EU, SK, and UN were all up to date and ready to go with this. I can not conceive of the Communist Party of that country giving out this information, unless they were trying to ensure that it would not be taken as a threat. Clearly, North Korea did their best to keep this civil, so I do not believe that it was a threat

Why is North Korea not Allowed to do this?
For some reason, South Korea, the United Nations, the European Union, Japan, and America all think that North Korea has no right to test missiles. You know what, I disagree with this logic. The international political arena is an anarchy, and nobody should be able to stop NK from doing what they want unless they are willing to fight about it. Sure, the two Koreas are still at war (the war is technically on a cease fire), but if NK wants to test a rocket, they have every right to.

In other words, I believe that North Korea attempted to do this properly, was not making a threat, launched a satellite, and has every right to do this.


Ander said...

seeing as people can't feed themselves, I don't think anyone should really care about some frivolous waste of our earths resources.

Barga said...

Personally, I believe that the usage of satellites is a great use of the resources

Quoizel said...

whether or not North Korea launched a satelite or a missle. We need to be worried about there leader. It just goes to show you he is going the show his difence to the world and do whatever he wants.

Barga said...

which he has every right to do...

Curse said...

It's a matter of sovereignty. If this thing went over Japan it could have been more than a small crisis.

There needs to be more transparency and more visibility in these launches so things like this wont happen.

Barga said...

you do not own the airspace above your country except by force and stupid UN mandates. I disown the UN as an attempt to police an anarchtic international state.

They announced it and said the fligth plan, what more is needed

Curse said...

If the USA announced a 'launch' that came suspiciously close to NK territory in its path, I'm not so sure they'd just sit around and happily let it happen as if it isn't some missile of some sort.

At the very bare minimum, give the world access to a live feed of launches -does NASA not do the same in many cases?

Barga said...

Notice my last comment, the use of force is the only way to stop your skies. Sitting around bitching at some non-existint entity doesnt help. That said, I am sure if the US explained it and showed it first they would be fine (we fly over them hundreds of times a day)

NASA is the only group that gives live feeds...

Ander said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ander said...

"I disown the UN as an attempt to police an anarchtic international state."

I think I have authority to speak here seeing as I am an "anarchist" and know what I believe so from my perspective the UN is not attempting police anything "anarchic". to have something to police is the complete opposite of "anarchy"

the police are the physical manifestation of need for enforcing the laws that the archy or state creates. why have laws if there is no consequence for disobeying them?

The UN is absolutely trying to police a chaotic international state. The state unbalances power and creates chaos.

I am trying to create an anarchy.

Barga said...

internationalist state is anarchtic
not talking about anything else

Ander said...

you're going to have to explain that because there is no where in anarchist thought where an international organization especially a state is desired.

Barga said...

ANder, try this again
the international state is in anarchy, that is a internation polysci area, not a localized version

Ander said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ander said...

how is an international state in anarchy? you can't have a state be in anarchy. that's an etymological contradiction. You can't have an archy in anarchy.

Barga said...

do you know anything about international political science?
the issue is that there is an anarchy in the international sphere, with each state (country) acting as an indivudal agent

Andrew Beyea said...

the actions by the DPRK are proof of the 'anarchy' of international relations, but their obvious contrast against the relations between the hegemonic great powers and their vassal states shows that national independence/sovereignty is in danger of being eclipsed by global government.

the USA attempts to expand its empire to all ends of the earth, using its military power, the UN security council, and trade agreements with other countries to influence and direct global events.

it has been rare until recently (with the notable exceptions of Iran and the DPRK) for states to flaunt their unwillingness to toe the line of the washington consensus, the effective government of the world.

one should be able to conceive of the idea that the world is moving from a fundamentally anarchic environment to one based on a centralized hierarchy of power, by gleaning evidence from this situation.

the uproar of the international community following the DPRK ballistic missile test (regardless of the rocket's payload) shows that the world is largely unified behind some set of rules, and that the major powers expect them to be voluntarily followed by all states, even those who do not fall under the umbrella of colonizer and colony.

it seems as though the nations at the forefront of the global power-elite believe that they are the rulers of the world, and that
their destiny is to preempt the sovereignty of other states, in fact to end the international anarchy Barga claims as immutable.

The rules of the game being often quite different from the rules the game is purported to be played by, I find it hard to concur with any theory that would claim states cannot help but remain individual actors, and would consider as more likely that with the exception of a few 'rogue' actors, the world can more easily be percieved as united under the hegemony of an oligarchy of great powers.

Barga said...

ANDREW, HOW IS THAT AT ALL Relevant to the discussion at hand? Korea did what they have every right to do, so it is not really relevant if that is a modernistic take or not

Ander said...

I think we're both trying to point out a bigger picture in which this whole post is irrelevant with respect to reality.


You will be redirected shortly to our new website. If you are not redirected within 5 seconds please CLICK HERE!

Copyright Notice

(C) All articles, postings, images, etc. on this site are protected by relevant copyright law, unless otherwise specified. To use any original material in totality please ask for author permission.

(C) 2009, all rights reserved by, Robert M. Barga, and all contributing authors.