Palermo, proletarians in struggle supporting the Peopels’s War:
Source: ICSPW India
ශ්රී ලංකාවේ උතරු නැගෙනහිර යුද්ධයේ අවසාන හරියේදී උතුරේ පවුල්වල සාමාජිකයින් විසින් සිය පවුල්වල දේශපාලන ක්රියාධරයින් රජයේ හමුදාවට බාර දුන්හ. මෙසේ බාර කළ ප්රමාණය 12,000කට ආසන්න බව කියැවේ. යුද්ධය හමාර වී වසර 9ක් වී ඇතත් මෙලෙස බාර කළ පුද්ගලයින් පිළිබඳව කිසිදු තොරතරුක් තවම දැන ගන්නට නොමැත.
July 9, 2018
Vavuniya Families of the Disappeared take protest to Nallur ahead of 500th day
අතරුදහන් වූවන්ගේ පවුල්වල සාමාජිකයින් විසින් දියත් කළ විරෝධතාවයට දින 500ක් සැපිරෙන දිනයේ වවුනියාවේ සිට නල්ලූර් වලට විරෝධතාවය රැගෙන ගොස් තිබේ.
Families of the disappeared currently protesting in Vavuniya, took their struggle to Nallur today, staging a one-day hunger strike in front of the Jaffna temple.
අතුරුදන් වූවන්ගේ පවුල්වල සාමාජිකයින් විසින් වවුනියාවේ පැවැත් වූ විරෝධතාවය වවුනියාවේ සිට නල්ලූර් වලට ගෙන ගොස් ඇත. එසේම අද යාපනය කෝවිල ඉදිරිපට එක් දිනක මාරාන්තික උපවාසයක්ද සිදු කරන ලදි.
The Vavuniya protest reaches its 500th day tomorrow, Sunday. The protestors carried out special prayers at the Nallur Kovil, and also paid tribute to Thileepan at the nearby monument.
ඉරිදා දිනය වන විට වවුනියාව විරෝධතාවය දින 500 ඉක්මවා ඇත. විරෝධතාකරුවන් නල්ලූර් කෝවිල පරිශ්රයේදී, තිලීපන් සිහිකොට ගෞරව දැක්වුයේ ඒ ස්මාරකය ආසන්නයේදීය.
Saturday, June 9, 2018
Palermo, proletarians in struggle supporting the Peopels’s War:
Source: ICSPW India
From Colombo Telegraph
New pictures of the LTTE media TV newsreader Isaipriya alive have emerged.The Sri Lanka Ministry of Defence claims 53 Division troops killed Isaipriya during the last battle. Her name is in the Ministry of Defence’s published list – “Identified LTTE leaders who were killed on 18 May 2009 by 53 Division troops“ – as “Lieutenant Colonel – Issei Piriya – Communications/Publicity Wing”.
Isaipriya was taken into army custody on May 18, 2009. First pictures of her dead body emerged. Then on June 22, 2012 , Colombo Telegraph published pictures and a video which show the LTTE media TV announcer Issapriya’s naked body lies with the hundreds of dead bodies, but this time her hands are untied. The security forces officer speaking in Sinhala language to a female says, “here, here, Voice of Tiger announcer.” (Watch at 2.56mins in the video). When her dead body was photographed the first time , her hands were tied behind her back and allegedly raped. Exclusive – Warning Disturbing Images: Issapriya’s Naked Body With Tied And Untied Hands – Colombo Telegraph.The video clearly demonstrates a pattern of woeful consistency of the Sri Lankan forces.
They were killed
Isaipriya’s dead body and her hands are untied – to see click here
COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA(MAOIST) CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Press Release Full Text
Down with the shameful betrayal and surrender of Jinugu Narasinha Reddy!
Long live the revolutionary tradition of uncompromising struggle and selfless sacrifice!
The revolution will surge forward sweeping aside all kinds of much on its path!
Jinugu Narasimha Reddy(Jhampanna, Rajesh), a member of the Central Committee(CC) of our party, has surrendered before the enemy. He had already lost confidence in the invincibility of the proletarian ideology, the Maoist party, the Protracted People’s War, the revolutionary movement and the oppressed masses. Unable to face the new and difficult conditions of class struggle brought by objectives changes and the enemy’s intensifying all-round offensive, he chose the most selfish, heinous and cowardly path of desertion and shamelessly knelt down before the enemy. This is an outright betrayal of the Indian proletarist, its vanguard Party, the Indian revolution and the heroic struggle of the country’s toiling masses. It is an affront on the sacrifice of thousands of revolutionary martyrs who have selflessly laid down their lives fighting the same class enemy whom Rajesh has now so shameleslly embraced. With this, his three decades of political life in the revolutinary movement has come to an ignominious end. Our CC condemns his betrayal in strongest terms and appeals to the rank and file of Party, the entire revolutionary camp, the vast struggling masses and the friends of the Indian revolution to reject outright such renegades and their abominable path of surrender. Undeterred by the degenaration and fall of Narasimha Reddy, our CC firmly and unambiguously renews its pledge to resolutely carry forward the greed red banner of class struggle in pursuance of our Party’s immediate and ultimate aims.
Narasimha Reddy had joined the movement in the early 1980s, when he was working in factory as a technician in Hyderabad city. He later became a professional revolutionary and was sent by the Party to work as a guerilla squad member in Eturunagaram forest area of Warangal district. Subsequently, he developed to a squad commander, Area committee Member, District Committee member and District Committee Secretary in the period between 1986 and 1995. North Telangana Special Zonal Committee(NTSZC) was formed in 1995 with a plan to develop the guerillla war to a higher level in that zone. He was elected to the NTSZC in its first conference held that year. In 2000, he became the Secretary of NTSZC and continued to work in this capacity till 2007. He was elected to the CC in 2001 and worked as a CCM in North Telangana between 2001 and 2007. He was co-opted to CMC in 2007 and worked in North Telangana and some other parts of the Central Region. He was transferred to Odisha in 2011 where he continued to work till the end of 2016. For the last one year he was deeply submerged in ideoligical and political vacillation and finally informed the concerned CCMs in November 2017 about his decision to surrender.
It is true that Narsimha Reddy had particpated in the revoltionary movement for a relatively long period of over three decades and developed politically to become a member of its highest leading committee, the CC, contributing to the movement in the process. But at the same time, he also had several serious weaknesses, limitations and non-proletarian trends like individualism, bureaucracy and false prestige that continued throughout his political life.
Comrades who worked with him in the guerillla squad and the Party committees or the leadership comrades continuously struggled against these negative aspects of his all this time. The concerned committees put efforts at every step to rectify him and he too accepted many of the
criticism in one way or another. But his weaknesses, mistakes and limitations had persisted. Particularly in the last few years, these negative aspects got magnified and finally became dominant under the present difficult condition of the Party and the movement. The terror of the enemy had so overtaken him that he could no longer fulfil the tasks given to him by Party. He refused to attend important meetings with the excuse of probable enemy attacks even though other comrades in a similar situation shared such unfounded apprehension. Apart from comrades in highet committees, his protection comrades too criticised his panicky behaviour and defeatism. The prevailing conditions and enemy’s serious offensive demand that the leadership comrades of the Party at the high level remain firm and confident in the battlefield and courageously safeguard themselves as an inseperble part of safeguarding the Party, PLGA and the movement.
This has to be done in all spheres of revolutionary work including in the military sphere. But as a CCM, Narasimha Reddy failed to live up to the higher level of responsibilities and tasks given him by the Party displaying heightened political consciousness, preparedness, courage, discipline, selfless sacrifice, self-critical attitude and other leadership qualities.
Our CC reviewed Narasimha Reddy’s work in view of his persistent weakness and limitations that had reached a serious level. The CC concluded that he was seriously bogged down by subjectivesm, resulting in his overestimation of the enemy and underestimation of the revolutionary movement and the people. He had lost his bearing and sense of proportion, became incapable of analysing the objective situation as a member of the Party’s leading committee, repeatedly followed wrong organisational method and utterly failed to fulfil important responsibilties he was entrusted with. This was in addition to his long-standing weakness of imposing his subjective and individualistic thinking on Party committees. It had become a habit for him to bring up disputes and illogical debates on individual problems in a sectarian and arbitrary way, violating democratic centralism and proletarian discipine. Sometimes he created deadlock in the functioning of the concerned Party committee and threatened to boycott some meetings when criticised by other comrades. Due to his anti-organisational behaviour and functioning, he gradually lost the confidence of his comrades and became isolated. All these wrong traits were criticised by the comrades of the concerned Party committees on several occasions with the aim of helping him rectify his mistakes and weaknesses on the basis of unity-struggle-unity. But he failed to recognise the gravity of his negative aspects, stubbornly refused to take a self-critical attitude, failed to remould his world outlook in the light of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This not only led to his downfall but also caused much damage to the Party.
Taking all this into consideration, our CC decided to suspend Narasimha Reddy from the CC for two years earlier this year with hope that he would acknowledge his mistakes and weaknesses and seriously put efforts to rectify with the help of his comrades. However, he neither accepted this decision positively nor did he undertake any self-criticsm at all. He also refused to take up responsibility of a State Committee Member the CC had assigned him. Overcome by petty-bourgeois false prestige and selfish narrow-mindedness, he refused to submit to the Party’s decision, declined to struggle against the non-proletarian traits present in him and failed to remould himself into a thoroughgoing communist revolutionary. Rather than humbly serving the revolution and the people with bowed head, he deemed it better to surrender and survive as a dirty creature at the service of enemy. In this way, the transformation of a revolutionary into an unrepentant and diehard betrayer and scoundral was complete.
Whenever CC had taken the suspension decision on him, he had raised the political differences with partl line. He was discussed that “Now India is not semi feudal – semi colonial country, it is transformed into capitalist country”. Thus our party line should change according to conditions and party would take insurrection line in Indian latest conditions. These political differences are nothing but, cover up his degeneration.
All revolutions pass through twists turns, ups and downs and diffcult situations. It is only by boldly tiding over such challenges that a proletarian party gets steeled and acquires the capability to lead the revolution to victory. In periods like this, it becomes all the more necessary for all communists – particularly those who join the Communist Party from non-proletarian classes – to deepen their ideological and political understanding, to remould themselves by adopting the proletarian world outlook and to firmly stick to it. They need to more resolutely apply the principle democratic centralism, abide by the iron discipline of the Pary, more closely integrate with the comrades and the people, learn from practices, rectify their mistakes, fight self, serve the people selflessly and stand at forefront of struggle so as to remain a committed revoltunionary till the very end. But there are always those who fail in such testing times. History shows that it is quite common for a handful of individuals who do not remould themselves and who are not prepared for sacrifice to distance themselves from the movement at such crucial junctures, giving foremost priority to their own survival. They desert the revolutionary camp and at times become counter-revolutionaries serving the enemy. Narasimha Reddy presents a glaring negative example of a revolutionary who stopped integrating with the cadres and the masses, stopped struggling against his weaknesses and became overawed by the enemy. Panic-stricken, they pathetically prostrate before the class enemy and thereby end their usefulness for the people with their own hands. The revolution will discard such people as waste material and throw them out from time to time in the process of class struggle.
It should not be surprising if such despicable individuals start singing in the tune of the enemy and cast aspersions on the Party, its leadership, the revolutionary movement and the future of the Indian revolution. Propped up by the enemy, they may appear before the people in new avatars as (pseudo) ‘intellectuals’, ‘journalists’, ‘social workers’, etc. with sole aim of harming the Party and the revolution. Our comrades, friends and well-wishers of the Indian revolution should remain alert to such eventualities and give befitting response to them. Knowing them to be a part of the enemy’s Goebbelsian propoganda machine, the class-conscious toiling masses should throw the claptrap of such traitors into the scrapheap.
In total contrast to the traitors and renegades, every proletarian revolution brings forward uncompromising communist fighters who serve the masses till the last breath. Indian revolution too is no exception, which inherits a long and glorious tradition of selfless sacrifice by thousands of heroic martyrs. Among them are our beloved great leaders and cadres like comrades CM and KC, Saroj Dutta, Sushital Roy Choudhuri, Amulya Sen, Chandrashekhar Das, Krishnamurthy, Satyam, Kailasham, Appu, Varghese, Biswakarma, Balan, Dinakar, Shyam, Mahesh, Murali, Karam Singh, Parimal Sen, Sande Rajamouli, Vadkapur Chandramouli, Anuradha Ghandy, Patel Sudhakar, Cherukuri Rajkumar, Mallujhola Koteswarlu, Rawoof, Sushil Roy, Sridhar Srinivasan, Kuppu Devaraj, Narayan Sanyal, Padma, Lalithakka, Urmila, Rajitha, Ajitha, Saketh Rajan, Maimuddin, Ashish Yadav, Prasad, Daya, Prabhakar, Mangtu, Shaheeda, RK, Yadanna, Madhav, Mahendar, Mastan Rao, Puli Anjanna, Kanchan, Sashadhar Mahato, Janardhan, Bhumaiyya-Kista Gaud and thousands of other martyred comrades, to name a just a few, who remained true to their commitment to the revolution and the people till the very end. They are the real heroes of the masses who show us the way.
The desertion, betrayal and the treachery of a few renegades in the pay-role of the reactionary ruling classes can never stop the revolution! They may only create some temporary hurdles and inflicit some temporary damage, but the revolution will sweep all such pests into their graves and surge forward towards its goal. Led by the proletarian revolutionaries and inspired by the heroic martyrs, millions upon millions of the oppressed masses of the country will throw them away along with their masters into the dustbin of history and achieve final victory.
[We have excerpted this article form New Democracy, #63, organ of the NDMLP]
Whenever North Korea announces the testing of a nuclear device or a ballistic missile, media respond with nervous concern that North Korea is taking the world to the brink of war. While it is the US that is seeking a pretext to wage war on North Korea by claiming that it constitutes a threat to Global Security, the impression created is that North Korea is a poverty stricken rouge state which indulges in military adventure to divert attention of its people from their problems by repeated reference to threats by the US and its client state in South Korea, and that North Korea thereby threatens world peace through its limited stock of nuclear weapons and missile delivery stems.
The concern expressed by the US officialdom and its docile media is that North Korea has acquired the means of an effective self-defence, which makes it a threat to the US. Such attitude is not new and has been the excuse for the US to threaten, subvert, attack and invade countries that it presents to its public as a threat to its security. The list of victims is long. However, Cuba, Iran and North Korea constitute the best remembered cases of prolonged unsuccessful victimization by the US.
It is important to know the history of the conflict in Korea to understand the true situation and recognize who poses a threat to whose existence in the standoff between the US and North Korea.
North Korea, which is the most heavily sanctioned country, has been the victim of the wrath of the US from the time it frustrated US efforts to prevent socialism taking root in Korea after the liberation of the country from Japanese occupation in 1945. The US, fearing widespread popularity of the Korean revolution across Korea, immediately created the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK) south of the 38th Parallel and made it the sole legal authority until the Republic of Korea (ROK) was formally established on 15thAugust 1948 in South Korea. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) was formed in North Korea on 9th September 1948. Thus Korea was divided without consulting the people of Korea and the pledge of fair nationwide elections to enable reunification was not honoured.US military occupation of South Korea has continued despite its becoming a republic; and the US intervened in the elections to impose the right-wing nationalist, Syngman Rhee on South Korea. His murderous regime lasted until 26th April 1960, when he was overthrown by a weeklong protest by students opposing police violence and demanding fair elections.
The US used the bitterly anti-communist Syngman Rhee to provoke conflict with the North; and, contrary to the official Western version propagated by the dominant media that North Korea invaded South Korea on 25th June 1950, it was the South Korean forces that bombed the North Korean town of Haeju on 23rd and 24th June and announced its capture in the morning of 26th June. The New York Times admitted on June 26, 1950 that provocative pronouncements came from the South Korean regime and not the North. Thus North Korea was dragged into a war by the US using its glove puppet regime in Seoul.
North Korea was dragged into war by the US and named the aggressor by the UN, when the Soviet Union boycotted its General Assembly. With the Soviet Union lacking its veto in the Security Council, the US was able to use the name of the UN for its war on North Korea from 27th June 1950.
The US scored initial success by inflicting untold destruction on North Korea but failed to accomplish its mission of subduing North Korea. The war, besides, led to another humiliation of the US when it dragged China into the conflict in mid-October.
China entered the fray when US intervened to drive back the North Korean forces from the positions that they captured in the South and advance into the northernmost parts of North Korea. The Chinese and North Koreans together overcame the South Korean and US forces within weeks putting them on the retreat until January 1951, after which China expressed interest in bringing the conflict to an end. But that was rejected by war mongers of the US establishment like General MacArthur, who even threatened to use a nuclear bomb against North Korea. But Macarthur was soon relieved of his command post in Korea and peace talks started, much against the wishes of Syngman Rhee, at Kaesong on 10thJuly 1951 and continued in Panmunjom from 25th October. Armistice was signed on27th July 1953 with the 38th Parallel reset as boundary between the North and the US-dominated South. Cold War tensions continued unabated as the Armistice was not a peace treaty so that, in theory, the war has not ended.
The wanton damage inflicted by the armed forces of the US on the people of North Korea has been variously estimated. Between 20 and 30% of the North Korean population of a little over eight million were reported killed mainly by indiscriminate US bombing which destroyed 78 cities and thousands of villages and demolished nearly all power plants and most of the industry in North Korea.
US bombing of North Korea comprised 635,000 tons of bombs including 32,557 tons of napalm, compared to 503,000 tons of bombs dropped by the US in the entire Pacific theatre of World War II. (This record was surpassed several fold during the Vietnam War with napalm and Agent Orange defoliants usage exceeding napalm usage against North Korea by a factor of ten.)
Such wanton destruction is adequate basis for North Korea to view every move of the US in East Asia with strong suspicion. Actions of successive US governments have done little to diminish the fears of North Korea.
North Korea was, however, very keen on the reunification of North and South Korea as were the people of both parts of the country divided by US imperialism. Reuniting the North and South by peaceful means would mean that the US will not be able to station its troops in South Korea for long as well as leave few excuses for the presence of US troops in East Asia including Japan. Hence the US was interested in not only keeping the country divided but also maintaining a permanent state of hostility between the divided parts.
Even Syngman Rhee, like Kim Il Sung, all along wanted a united Korea. A reunited Korea is the dream of all Koreans. The real obstacle to reunion has been the US which resents the idea of rapprochement between the North and the South and exerts pressure on South Korean heads of state whenever they seek closer ties with the North. Even today there is bitter conflict between US President Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in about the need for dialogue with the North, unlike his corrupt predecessors Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak who pursued hostility towards the North at the instigation of the US while paying lip service to reunification.
The global media works overtime to present an image of a democratic South Korea struggling against an aggressive North Korea which plans to destroy the South. A reading of the history of democracy in South Korea will dispel such illusion.
Syngman Rhee, the first ruler of South Korea was a dictator overthrown by student protest in 1960, only to be soon followed by direct military rule from 1961 to 1963 by General Park Chung Hee who got himself elected twice and in 1972 declared himself President for Life. His dictatorial regime ended in 1979 with his assassination. He was followed by the dictatorial regimes of Major General Chun Doo-Hwan (1980-1988) and General Roh Tae Woo (1988-1993).
Kim Young-sam, elected president in 1992,served as the first civilian president of the country from 1993 to 1998 and sought to improve relations with the North. He also ensured that the two former presidents, Chun Doo-Hwan and Roh Tae Woo, who were guilty of bribery and corruption, were sentenced to imprisonment. He was followed by Kim Dae-jung (1998-2003) whose actions to reconcile with North Korea culminated in reunions of the separated families of the Korean War and a summit talk with North Korea’s Leader Kim Jong Il. That was resented by the US and a hostile policy came into effect following the election of Lee Myung-bak as the next President and lasted even more vigorously through the presidency of Park Geun-hye who was formally impeached in 2017 for corruption. President Moon Jae-in who swore in on 10th May 2017, although desirous of friendly relations with the North, is constrained by the unhealthy climate created over the past 14 years.
The US has kept Korea divided by promoting the illusion that North Korea is a threat to the South; and the international media portray North Korea, the only country in recent history to lose a quarter of its population in war, as a threat to global security. The current theme is the nuclear threat posed by North Korea, ignoring the sources of such threat.
South Korea admitted to the IAEA in 2004 that its scientists had secretly been enriching uranium. In the early 1970’s, fearing the effect of US troop reduction in South Korea, the Weapons Exploitation Committee of the government decided to develop nuclear weapons. The programme appears to have continued until October 1979. South Korea has admitted to secret activities that began in 1979 and continued through 1987 without declaration to the IAEA, in violation of its NPT commitments. Whether or not the scientists were working with higher-level approval is unknown. But the scientists belonged to the state funded Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute. [See: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/41928-correcting-history-five-things-no-one-wants-to-say-about-korea]
South Korea, although not a producer of nuclear weapons, was provided with nuclear weapons by the US which decided on their type, quantity and location. The US Army deployed Nike Hercules surface-to-air missiles to South Korea in 1961 for possible use as surface-to-surface missiles to lay a carpet of radioactivity along the DMZ. Also in 1961 the US Army in South Korea added a surface to surface missile with a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead. Tactical nuclear recoilless rifles provided with nuclear artillery shells were in service in South Korea from 1962 to 1968.
At the height of the Cold War, US nuclear deployment in South Korea was approximately 950 weapons of all types. However, by the 1970s the US Army and Air Force had phased out all nuclear rockets, surface to surface missiles and cruise missiles from South Korea, leaving behind artillery shells and gravity bombs as the only tactical nuclear weapons, until removal of all nuclear weapons was ordered in 1991. The US arsenal of nuclear gravity bombs in South Korea had Air Force F-4D Phantom II fighter jets as delivery vehicles with tactical nuclear weapons deployed at a high state of readiness against surprise invasion by North Korea and for an all-out nuclear war. [See: https://scout.com/military/warrior/Article/The-History-of-US-Nuclear-Weapons-in-South-Korea-107229766]
Not long after the Korean War the US was at war in Vietnam following the ignominious defeat of the French colonialists in 1954. US involvement grew to the point of committing US troops in 1965 and the war ended in a humiliating defeat for the US in 1975.
Besides, the 1970’s also saw strong anti-colonial and anti-imperialist upsurges in the Third World which put imperialism on the retreat. But US influence in East and South East Asia was strong among its allies such as Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Taiwan and South Korea which fought alongside the US in Vietnam. However, threatening North Korea was not easy while a militarily strong Soviet Union sided with North Korea, which was also friendly with China. Yet, as explained earlier, the US stockpiled tactical nuclear weapons across South Korea until 1991. Despite US claims that it has no nuclear weapons in South Korea, it is likely that they are held in ships offshore.
North Korea’s interest in nuclear technology began in the 1950’s. It received knowledge and technology from the Soviet Union to found its Atomic and Nuclear Physics Research Institute in 1955. Agreement was made with the Soviet Union in September 1959on the use of nuclear power. A research reactor was set up in 1963 and became operational in 1965.Through subsequent independent research, North Korea upgraded its Soviet-built reactor to 8 MW and installed home-built power plants and uranium-ore processing and fuel-rod fabrication plants. North Korean light-water reactors met the growing demand for electric power.
In 1985, North Korea signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but refused inspection of its nuclear sites by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) while nuclear weapons remained in South Korea. It was in this context that the US removed its nuclear stockpile in South Korea in 1991 so that pressure could be mounted on the North to prevent its developing nuclear weapons.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US escalated its nuclear threat against North Korea, whose nuclear crisis began in February 1993when General Lee Butler, head of the US Strategic Command, announced that he was retargeting strategic nuclear weapons meant for the old USSR, on North Korea (among others).Also, CIA chief James Woolsey testified that North Korea was ‘our most grave current concern’ and by mid-March 1993, tens of thousands of US soldiers carried out war games in South Korea which involved B1-B bombers, B-52s and naval vessels carrying cruise missiles. North Korea, in response, pulled out of the NPT.[Bruce Cumings, Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History, W.W. Norton & Co. 2005. pp 488-489 cited in https://gowans.wordpress.com/2017/07/05/the-real-reason-washington-is-worried-about-north-koreas-icbm-test/].
In 1994, North Korea signed the US-North Korea Agreed Framework with the United States and under the terms of the 1994 framework, North Korea agreed to freeze and ultimately dismantle its nuclear programme in exchange for full normalisation of political and economic relations with the US. This meant:
Despite the testimony to the US Congress in 1998 by officials involved in implementing the agreement with the US and the IAEA agreeing that there had been “no fundamental violation of any aspect of the framework agreement” by North Korea, the US failed to honour its pledges.[Source: Maria Ryan in the Independent,http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/north-korea-missile-test-us-1994-agreed-framework-pyongyang-programme-kim-jong-un-donald-trump-a7876446.html]
In July 2005, following a meeting between the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and North Korean Vice Foreign Minister, North Korea announced its return to the six-party talks (involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and the US) based on the understanding reached that the US side clarified its official stand to recognize North Korea as a sovereign state, not to invade it and hold bilateral talks within the framework of the six-party talks.
Agreements reached in 2005, like in 1994, bound the US to stop threats against North Korea, act to normalize relations, and plan work on a light-water reactor that would produce fuel but not weapons. But, as pointed out by Noam Chomsky (see ‘What We Say Goes: Conversations on U.S. Power in a Changing World’ by Noam Chomsky and David Barsamian, Metropolitan Books, 2007) diplomacy’s failure lay once again with the US and not North Korea. President Bush broke his light-water reactor promise and launched economic warfare on North Korea. In June 2008 North Korea stated that it had begun to dismantle its nuclear programme and declared that it would turn over all of its plans to the international community. But the six-party talks broke down in 2008 owing to the US insisting that international inspectors be allowed into North Korea with no assurance on its part about escalation of tension in the region. Clearly, the US did not want a negotiated peace in Korea which would mean an end to US military occupation of South Korea.
Complaints about the North Korea’s nuclear tests in 2006, 2009 and 2013 fail to take into account the provocative escalation of US military activity in the region and harassment through economic sanctions. North Korea has learned from history on how to deal with US imperialism. It realizes that the possession of nuclear weapons and ability to deliver them across a long distance comprise its only deterrent against attack by the US. It also realizes that it can rely on neither China nor Russia for its defence against US subversion and aggression.
The threat posed by the US since the Korean War is multi-faceted. The pretext for the annual South Korea-US joint military exercises― which North Korea accuses are preparations for war ―was until recently the security of South Korea. North Korea has repeatedly offered to freeze its nuclear and missile tests if the exercises are suspended. But the US and South Korea have kept rejecting the offer, claiming that the drills are legitimate defence exercises that have been conducted for decades.
The US maintains an elaborate system of military bases and locations throughout South Korea. Currently 37,000 US troops are stationed at 100 military installations, including four major Air Force bases, two naval bases and a number of US Army camps clustered in several locations. The headquarters base for the US-ROK combined forces, and the 8th US Army, is at Yongsan in downtown Seoul.
The US has escalated its economic war against North Korea by imposing a series of punitive sanctions in the past two decades besides what it pushes through the UN. The theme for the anti North Korea policy of the US has now been shifted with the help of an obliging media network from a threat to South Korea to nuclear threat against the world.
It should be noted that the US, besides using the nuclear threat against several countries, is the only country that launched a nuclear attack on another country. It also used highly radioactive depleted uranium in its war on Iraq and insists on the use of such material in future if necessary. Stubborn refusal by the US not to adopt a no-first-use policy regarding nuclear weapons and the arrogant declaration that it reserves the right to use nuclear weapons first in the case of conflict clearly show that the US is the real threat to the world.
It is claimed that North Korea refuses to negotiate away its nuclear weapons program. That is untrue. Recently, North Korea’s Deputy Ambassador Kim In-ryong clarified to the UN Secretary General António Guterres that “As long as the US hostile policy and nuclear threat continue, the DPRK, no matter who may say what, will never place its self-defensive nuclear deterrence on the negotiating table”. Thus North Korea only asserts that it will not negotiate away a deterrent until guarantees are there that obviate the need.
The fears of North Korea are based on reality. It was the US that violated the armistice agreement of 1953 which prohibited bringing new weapons into the Korean Peninsula by placing nuclear-tipped missiles in South Korea in 1958 which remained there for 33 years until 1991.
As a country traumatized by the wanton destruction by the US during Korean War, North Korea has been understandably sensitive to threats ranging from US nuclear missiles in South Korea and the clandestine South Korean nuclear weapons program, to explicit threats contained in the “Axis of Evil” declaration by the US and being named a country the US should be prepared to drop a nuclear bomb on. The threat has been kept alive by the US-South Korean military exercises on the North Korean border which include simulation of nuclear attacks on North Korea. Recent threats by President Donald Trump include a military option to destroy North Korea.
It was North Korea that took the initiative to propose denuclearization of the region. In 2014, President Obama rejected a North Korean offer to freeze missile testing if the US freezes its joint military exercises with South Korea. The offer was repeated in 2015 and again rejected.
In January 2017, North Korea offered to sit with the U.S. anytime to discuss US war games and its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. North Korea proposed that the US should contribute to easing tensions in the Korean peninsula by temporarily suspending joint military exercises in South Korea and its vicinity, in which case North Korea will take responsive steps such as temporarily suspending nuclear tests. The proposal was supported by China and Russia and later by South Korea’s new president Moon Jae-in. But the US rebuffed the proposal, refusing equivalence between ‘legitimate’ US-led war games and North Korea’s ‘illegitimate’ missile and nuclear tests.
The point to note is that North Korea, unlike Iraq under Saddam Hussein and Libya under Muammar Gaddafi, has successfully resisted the schemes of the US, which exercises a global dictatorship and claims the right to intervene in any part of the globe, in order that the US has total control over the political and economic affairs of countries.
There is tendency among some on the Left to place on par the nuclear weapons programmes of the US and that of North Korea based on a desire for denuclearization. This ignores the context in which North Korea chose to develop nuclear weapons. It will be useful to consider why China chose to develop nuclear weapons in the early 1960’s. Development and possession of nuclear weapons by the US and North Korea differ not only in scale but also in their respective approaches to the use of nuclear weapons and nuclear disarmament.
The central issue concerns the continuing military threat against North Korea by US troops based in South Korea. Withdrawal of US military presence in South Korea is a precondition for peace in the region and for fulfilling the long cherished ambition of the people of the North and the South to reunite Korea as one country.
It is the moral responsibility of all left and progressive forces to defend North Korea against US attempts to subdue and control North Korea by undermining its economy using sanctions as a weapon. Thus there is need for a coordinated campaign demanding that the US stops its economic and military harassment of North Korea and puts an end to all military exercises in Korea and its waters.
William Blum: Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (Common Courage Press, 1995)