Diplomacy & Crisis News

After a series of ballistic missile tests this year, North Korea uncorks what may prove to be their most successful demonstration to date.

North Korea’s bellicose posture has reached an unprecedented peak after the recent threats of a thermonuclear war against the United States.

Last month, the Deputy Permanent Representative of the DPRK to the U.N. unleashed a new series of threats against Washington, determined to fiercely antagonize any additional implementations of the North Korea’s nuclear program. The program has  significantly accelerated since Kim Jong-un took the power in 2011.

For years, the threat posed by North Korea has been minimized. Now, the emergence of a more aggressive posture fueled by its leadership is not only undermining Washington’s influence in the region but also triggers the specter of nuclear proliferation in East Asia.

Pyongyang’s desire to conduct new missile launches has demonstrated North Korea leadership’s willingness to develop a nuclear-based offensive defense doctrine, improving the quality and the quantity of its nuclear arsenal. North Korea has already acquired a second strike capability, and by 2020 analyst expect that the country will be able to rely on nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles.

In defiance of Washington’s warnings, Pyongyang carried out four ballistic missiles tests in the past two months, including the last on April 29th.

The new missile test comes just after the US Secretary of the State Tillerson has warned North Korea of the catastrophic consequences of pursuing nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, Washington has urged for a new range of sanctions increasing the economic isolation of North Korea.

It has also tried to convince China to increase the pressure on its erratic ally. For decades Beijing has maintained a close entente with Pyongyang, considered as a valuable ally and precious buffer zone from America’s sphere of influence. Yet, the unpredictable and dangerous behavior that has characterized Kim Jong-un’s leadership has certainly contributed to foster mutual mistrust, putting their relations in disarray.

In a recent report on the state media Rodong Sinmun, North Korean’s leadership has expressed a rare criticism towards China for its renewed closeness with Washington It highlighted the severe consequences of any major changes that could negatively affect the North Korea-China relations, such as a new round of sanctions under U.S. auspices.

The Chinese leadership remains extremely concerned about a potential escalation of the confrontation between Pyongyang and Washington and its implications for regional security balance. Although Beijing is considered as a critical actor in restraining North Korea’s aggressive pursuit of nuclear weapons, Pyongyang has several times ignored President Xi’s calls to comply with the U.N. Security Council resolutions. A

After months of hostile rhetoric towards Beijing, culminated in labeling China as a currency manipulator, the Trump administration has shown willingness to mend ties with the Xi government. After the reconciliatory summit between Mr Trump and his Chinese counterpart in Florida last month, Washington has repeatedly stressed the need for a wider engagement with China to clamp down North Korea’s nuclear ambitions.

Many believe that this would represent a valuable opportunity for Beijing to fulfill its desire of emerging as a major power, demonstrating to the international community its ability to play a pivotal role in solving a delicate global security issue.

China’s economic leverage on Pyongyang is considered as a decisive tool to rein in its former protégé. Yet it is unlikely that Beijing will be pursuing drastic measures that could seriously jeopardize the stability of the regime.

Beijing, however, has bowed to the international community’s pressure and has undertaken significant steps such as joining Washington in imposing sanctions and also restricting of North Korean coal imports, considered as a critical source of foreign exchange revenue from Pyongyang. Aside from that, Beijing has maintained a certain reluctance to enforce unilateral economic and trade sanctions despite Washington’s continuous request.

The current U.S. administration claims to be prepared to act unilaterally against threat represented by North Korea. Certainly, the era of strategic patience has come to an end as reaffirmed by Vice President Pence during his visit to South Korea last month.

Yet, the risk of a dreadful military escalation could seriously endanger the regional order and eventually aliment the chance of a nuclear confrontation remains dangerously high. The Trump administration has harshly condemned the failed launch as an additional provocation from Pyongyang, stressing that diplomatic and economic pressure could be accompanied by significant military actions to curb North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile program.

U.S. Vice President Pence visiting the DMZ during his recent visit to South Korea.

In addition, the Trump administration’s recent decision to deploy the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson in the Sea of Japan aims not only to reassure allies that the U.S. is able to defend them from the North Korea’s threat but also to display a more robust engagement in maintaining the status quo in the Korean peninsula. North Korean’s nuclear activities are per se an evident threat to Washington and its allies, but also could represent a significant disruption of the global non-proliferation regime considered as a fundamental pillar of the U.S. security policy.

Since the policy of strategic patience promoted by the previous administration has failed to bring about the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, Washington is now determined to confront Pyongyang. Concerns from China, that perceives any shifts in the regional balance as a threat to its power projection capabilities, have exacerbated tensions with Seoul after the controversial decision to deploy the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense to deter missile threats from North Korea.

Previous administrations have failed to stop Pyongyang’s nuclear program. The program is considered not merely a bargaining chip at the negotiation table, but as a cornerstone of North Korea’s manifest destiny and ultimate tool to ensure the regime survival.

The Trump administration has inherited from its predecessors an increasingly aggressive North Korea, close to the final stage of acquiring ICBM capabilities and miniaturization technologies required to target the continental United States. Pyongyang’s decision to pursue an aggressive agenda aims at compelling Washington to accept Pyongyang’s nuclear power status as a fait accompli.

It is critical to understand that North Korea’s decision makers are determined to pursue the dangerous path of the nuclear power acquisition even if this could dramatically escalate in a military intervention in the Korean peninsula, marking the end of the regime. Acquiring a strong deterrence against any military threat and other external pressure is a keystone for the core leadership that is adamant in ensuring the regime survival at any costs.

North Korea’s perpetual state of war against the imminent threat posed by Washington and South Korea and the pursuit of a self-reliant defense system (Chawi) as enshrined in the Juche ideology has represented a dominant narrative for its people but also the ultimate source of legitimacy for its ruling elites. In the past notable example of pursuing similar outcomes such as the Military First Policy (Songun Chongch’i) under the leadership of Kim Jong-Il led to an economic breakdown and to an extensive famine in the attempt of revitalizing its core leadership whose legitimacy was rapidly eroding in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, exposing North Korea to a similar fate.

North Korea leadership strongly understands the importance of retaining its nuclear capabilities either to bolster domestic stability or as an effective deterrence tool to prevent any military threat. Albeit, Pyongyang has neither the military power nor a direct gain in attacking the United States and its allies without fearing dreadful retaliations that would undermine Kim’s regime, North Korea remains still committed to the reunification of the Korean peninsula on its terms. Since 1950’s invasion of the North and the conflict that inflamed the peninsula, North Korean leadership has rejected the legitimacy of the Republic of Korea (ROK) and still perceives Seoul as the most immediate source of destabilization for the regime.

Over the decades, North Korea has increased the level of confrontation with Washington over its interference in the Korean peninsula, demanding the end of the US nuclear umbrella, the withdrawal of the US forces stationed in South Korea and the end of the joint military exercise with the ROK Forces and more important the ultimate acceptance of North Korea as a legitimate nuclear power nation.

The recent impetuous shown by Trump administration to define the new contours of Washington’ strategy, saluted by the maximum pressure and engagement approach and the adamant rejection of any compromises regarding North Korea’s additional steps towards nuclear power status have not yet produced the expected results.

Aside from resorting to any military options that could eventually jeopardize Washington’s renewed commitment and role in the region, the chance of a successful diplomatic action that could resolve the dangerous standoff also relies on China’s role to convince Pyongyang to pursue a different direction under “the right circumstances” such as Washington’s reassurance of not pursuing any attempt to depose Kim’s leadership or encouraging any military interventions in the Korean peninsula.

While tensions have been high for months, Trump Administration has recently shown a certain inclination to engage Pyongyang in new talks. In the past, North Korea used the nuclear crisis to pressure Washington to normalize the relations, but this time the priority for its leadership has markedly shifted.

Undoubtedly, Pyongyang is still perceived as an unreliable actor with a proven record of violations and deceptions and all the diplomatic efforts to bring back North Korea to the negotiation and frame a longstanding deal that could prevent any additional dangerous shifts in the Korean peninsula have produced no tangible results so far.

The Trump administration is preparing to face a daunting challenge putting real pressure on North Korea to protect Washington’s role and strategic interest in the region. It could develop an appeasement policy toward Pyongyang to temporarily defuse the situation, but with no guarantees about the resurgence of the North Korea nuclear program in the future, this seems unlikely.

 

The post Trump’s Dilemma in the Korean Peninsula appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

La naissance du fascisme en Italie apparaît comme une conséquence de la première guerre mondiale. A la fin du conflit, frappé par l'inflation et le chômage, le pays est saisi par une forte agitation sociale. Pour se protéger, les industriels et les propriétaires fonciers font appel aux escouades fascistes créées par Benito Mussolini en 1915, lui ouvrant la voie vers la prise du pouvoir.

« Avant l'ouverture du parachute », par Tullio Crali, 1931. En 1909, les signataires italiens du Manifeste futuriste, rédigé par Marinetti, exaltent un art à « la violence culbutante et incendiaire ». Fascinés par la guerre, « seule hygiène du monde », et par la technique, les « aéropeintres » comme Tullio Crali jouent de perspectives cosmiques afin de mettre en scène la puissance des moyens de transport modernes. Dès les années 1920, une grande partie du courant se rallie au fascisme.
Exposition temporaire du Guggenheim NY.

Quand la guerre éclate en 1914, l'Italie est alliée, depuis la fin du XIXe siècle, à l'Allemagne et à l'Autriche-Hongrie. Cependant, son gouvernement choisit de rester neutre. Les « interventionnistes », peu nombreux, qui veulent se battre aux côtés de la Triple-Entente (France, Royaume-Uni et Russie), trouvent alors un porte-parole : Benito Mussolini, qui dirige l'organe du Parti socialiste, Avanti  ! Cette prise de position lui vaut d'être exclu de son parti. Mais, le 14 novembre 1914, financé par la France, il fonde un autre journal, Il Popolo d'Italia. Il y appelle, le 1er janvier 1915, à lancer « la révolution contre la monarchie inerte » grâce au soutien des Fasci autonomi d'azione rivoluzionaria, les Faisceaux autonomes (ou milices) d'action révolutionnaire.

Le 23 mai 1915, retournement de l'Italie. Mussolini et ses Fasci n'y sont pas pour grand-chose. Un accord est intervenu entre le gouvernement italien et la Triple-Entente pour que, en cas de victoire, l'Italie bénéficie d'avantages territoriaux.

Bilan de la guerre : le déficit de l'Etat a été multiplié par huit, quand, de leur côté, les industriels ont vu leurs profits augumenter de plus de 20 %. Les Italiens doivent subir à la fois l'inflation et le chômage. Dans les usines du Nord, on compte 200 000 grévistes. Autant dans le Sud, sur les exploitations agricoles. Des révoltes éclatent, les magasins sont pillés. Au lieu de laisser agir l'Etat, les industriels et les propriétaires fonciers en appellent aux escouades fascistes, sous prétexte de « menace bolchevique ». Les Faisceaux italiens de combat, instaurés par Mussolini le 23 mars 1919 pour remplacer les Faisceaux d'action révolutionnaire, attaquent les syndicats et les Bourses du travail.

Contrôle de la presse, instauration d'une police secrète, suppression de l'impôt sur les profits.

Jusque-là, le « fascisme » était selon Mussolini un « état d'esprit ». Mais le 12 novembre 1921 est fondé le Parti national fasciste, dont le mélange de conservatisme et de nationalisme satisfait pleinement les milieux industriels. Ils subventionnent donc les organisations fascistes. Les Faisceaux de combat, qui comptaient 17 000 membres en octobre 1919, en affichent trois ans plus tard plus de 300 000.

« Profil continu de Mussolini », par Renato Bertelli, 1933. Renato Bertelli, source : Fondation Marinela Ferrari/DR

Pour Mussolini, l'heure de montrer sa force est arrivée. Le 28 octobre 1922, c'est la marche sur Rome de ses Chemises noires. Redoutant une guerre civile, le roi Victor-Emmanuel III refuse de signer le décret qui permettrait à l'armée de réprimer le coup de force. Le 30 octobre 1922, il se résigne à demander à Mussolini de constituer le nouveau gouvernement.

Une fois que le Parlement lui a accordé les pleins pouvoirs, Mussolini, promu guide (duce) de la nation italienne, s'attaque aux institutions démocratiques. Contrôle de la presse, instauration d'une police secrète, emprisonnements, assassinats... Le pouvoir économique des classes possédantes est renforcé. Les impôts et taxes sur les biens vendus ou hérités, sur les profits des capitalisations financières et sur les articles de luxe sont supprimés. Les participations de l'Etat dans des entreprises sont transférées à des sociétés privées.

La politique sociale est également modifiée. La durée hebdomadaire du travail, qui pouvait dépasser 50 heures, est limitée à 40 heures en 1923. Une organisation de loisirs, le Dopolavoro, est instituée en avril 1925. En 1927, un programme de santé publique est mis en place. Mais la promulgation, la même année, d'une charte du travail, aboutit à une réduction des salaires de 20 % pour 2 millions de travailleurs.

La Padula et Romano Construit entre 1938 et 1940 par les architectes Guerrini, La Padula et Romano, le Palais de la civilisation italienne est un monument emblématique de l'architecture fasciste.
© Fotogramma/Ropi-REA.

Quand la crise économique mondiale atteint l'Italie, en 1931, Mussolini vient au secours des banques en faillite, mesure sans effet sur l'emploi. En deux ans, alors que plusieurs millions d'Italiens ont déjà dû émigrer pour trouver du travail, le nombre des chômeurs passe d'une centaine de milliers à plus d'un million.

Avec le régime fasciste, un nouveau type de dictature apparaît. Dans toute l'Europe, devant la perspective de changements sociaux que leurs adversaires estiment d'inspiration « com­­­muniste », des groupes d'action se forment sur le modèle des Faisceaux de combat.

manuel scolaire italien

Quoique sévèrement réprimée, l'opposition au régime fasciste n'en a pas moins été active. Ainsi, comme le montre ce manuel italien publié en 2008, les communistes n'ont cessé, vingt ans durant, de défier le Duce.

Pour qui voulait s'opposer activement au fascisme, il n'existait que deux possibilités : l'exil à l'étranger ou l'agitation clandestine en Italie. Ceux qui employèrent, depuis le début, cette dernière forme de lutte furent surtout (mais pas exclusivement) des communistes – les seuls à être préparés à l'activité clandestine, par la structure de leur organisation ou du fait d'avoir été victimes de la répression systématique des autorités. Pendant vingt ans, le Parti communiste italien (PCI) a réussi à maintenir sur pied et à alimenter, de l'intérieur comme de l'étranger, un réseau clandestin, à diffuser des brochures et des journaux de propagande, à placer ses hommes dans les syndicats et les organisations de jeunesse fascistes. Tout cela nonobstant des résultats immédiats modestes et les immenses risques que couraient ces militants : plus des trois quarts des 4 500 condamnés par le tribunal spécial et des 10 000 personnes assignées à résidence entre 1926 et 1943 furent en effet des communistes.

Giovanni Sabbatucci et Vittorio Vidotto, Storia contemporanea. Il Novecento, Editori Laterza, 2008.

Following their recent visit to Haiti, a United Nations advisory group on the island nation called on the international community to work closely with the Government and capitalize on the opportunities that have presented there.

Notwithstanding the challenges faced by countries in Asia and Pacific, the region has witnessed economic and social achievements beyond expectations over the past 70 years, according to the head of the United Nations body assisting with development efforts.

The United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) held a memorial ceremony today in honour of five peacekeepers who lost their lives after their convoy was attacked in the south-eastern part of the country earlier this week.

Is the global health community ready to stop another outbreak?

Don't be fooled by the Trump administration's trade deal with Beijing. America is losing out badly on the bigger game.

An Ebola outbreak in north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has killed at least one person, the United Nations World health Organization (WHO) announced earlier today.

When President Donald Trump nominated Ambassador Mark Green to run USAID on Wednesday, it was the absolute best choice he could have made. Green brings deep experience in development and foreign affairs, moral clarity, and a belief in a strong U.S. role in the world. USAID is at a critical juncture as the administration considers ...

An insider’s view on how we got here — and what Trump can do about it.

Maria Zakharova is NOT laughing up her sleeve.

Democracy is less resilient in the United States than in Europe because Americans forgot it needed to be.

Washington and Beijing are cutting pragmatic deals, but the administration keeps up a harsh tone with allies like Canada, Mexico, and Japan.

Trump heading to Brussels to ask European allies to do more, everywhere, but he might get the cold shoulder

Less than four weeks after opening its last camp, the United Nations refugee agency welcomed families fleeing the fighting in western Mosul this week with its twelfth camp set up deal with the ongoing emergency in and around the Iraqi city.

Secretary-General António Guterres today appointed Mark Lowcock, a national of the United Kingdom, as the United Nation’s highest official on humanitarian assistance and aid coordination, the UN Spokesperson’s office announced today.

Expressing deep concern over the protracted political and institutional crisis in Guinea Bissau, the United Nations Security Council has said it is ready to take necessary measures if the situation further deteriorates.

When searching intelligence data, analysts from the National Security Agency failed to follow the rules “with much greater frequency” than was previously disclosed, documents published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence show. The secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court accused the NSA of a “lack of candor” when reporting those failures, which are ...

With violence and insecurity continuing to force people to flee Democratic Republic of Congo’s Kasai region and seek refuge in neighbouring Angola, the United Nations refugee agency has called for a suitable place to shelter them as well as additional resources to support those in urgent need.