by Simon Wood, September 20, 2017
“As a responsible nuclear weapons state, our republic will not use a nuclear weapon unless its sovereignty is encroached upon by an aggressive hostile force with nuclear weapons. The DPRK will faithfully fulfill its obligation for non-proliferation and strive for global denuclearization.”
– Kim Jong Un, May 8, 2016
Attention: António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations
I am writing in regard to a speech given by US President Donald Trump to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) earlier this week, in particular the following excerpt:
“The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.”
As Secretary-General you are sworn to uphold the principles enshrined in the United Nations charter.
[The Purposes of the United Nations are:] [1.] To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.
Article 2, paragraph 4:
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the THREAT or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
[Emphasis in bold and capitals added]
I refer you to a statement made by President Kim of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) on July 4th:
“[T]he DPRK would neither put its nukes and ballistic rockets on the table of negotiations in any case nor flinch even an inch from the road of bolstering the nuclear force chosen by itself unless the U.S. hostile policy and nuclear threat to the DPRK are definitely terminated.”
As Mr. Kim’s statement clearly demonstrates a road forward for negotiation, as well as the perfectly reasonable pre-condition that hostile statements, actions and overall policy towards his nation cease, and given further that the US party is well aware of this position, Mr. Trump’s statement at the United Nations is in clear violation of the principles of the UN charter. I further add that the DPRK has ample cause for fear of the capabilities and will of the United States after the complete destruction of Pyongyang in the early 1950s.
I am writing therefore to inquire as to the date upon which you will hold an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council to discuss punitive sanctions upon the United States for the reckless and illegal statement of its highest representative. For context, I invite you to imagine the international response to, say, Russian President Vladimir Putin making an identical statement with regard to the United Kingdom. [We would have no choice but to destroy it if we perceive a threat]. Given recent tragic history, of which you will surely be aware, ‘threats’ can easily be invented via unnamed intelligence sources, amplified globally in major media organs, then later justified as ‘intelligence failures’ down the road once the damage is done.
Failure to censure the United States for this threat of force against a nation which – as all do – has the right to defend itself from clearly stated intentions of attack will only increase the suspicion held by many world citizens that the United Nations is powerless to impede or control powerful nations.
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
I believe Mr Wood is correct in his request. Unfortunately the UN has a history of being accountable to ??? The UN’s claims seldom materialise, whether through manipulation or incompetence, therefore the onus is upon the sovereign states that claim membership. Any organisation that allows only five members to veto any resolution cannot claim it represents all members. The UN deceit needs to be replaced.
Only country to ever use a nuclear thermal bomb against civilians. Truemen regime in 1945 on the Japanese
Korean war 1950-1953. More bombs were dropped by Nato/US airforce on the peninsula than were dropped in Europe and the pacidic in ww2
Flattened North Korea and northern parts of South Korea virtually leaving no building standing. iNorth Koreans had to live in caves in oder to avoid the incessant fire bombing and chemical bombings. First generation defoiliants were being used in the Korean war
Vietnam 1964-1972. Napalm and age. Agent Orange
1990-1999 The Balkan wars bombed FRY federal republic of Yugoslavia back to the stone age.
The illegal bombing and occupying of Iraq and Syria and training and funding the takfiri army under the guise of islamic terrorism funded by the House of Saud Qatar and Turkey run by the UK / US ?france /anglo-zionism.
Hell history is a bitch if only it were taught and analysed.
Exceptonalism breads ignorance ignorance breeds death to humanism. Humans /humanity is truely missing in our exceptionalist western values or lack of values.
Pace e benum
Where are peaceniks in our dying western paradigm
Given that the Uk armed forces are so depleted right now, Mr Putin would be laughed out of court, as the UK needs US permission to fire its nuclear missiles and hence could not threaten Mr Putin and Russia independently.
But point taken, no one but America can posture, warmonger or overthrow governments without international censure.
The letter states the truth of the situation! It is now up to those who believe in peace to deal with the US and North Korea on an equitable basis, not on the basis of power.
Of course, SG Guterres will do no such thing that the open letter requires because he is beholden to the U.S. for his position, and he is fully aware that men in dark suits will visit him if he strays from the required position. In other words, and now, at least since three SG’s ago, they have been neutralized, and the SC has become just another arm, with NATO, of American foreign policy. Don’t expect much.
I fact he is a ‘Poodle of Zionism’.
Israel’s Argentina-born ambassador at the UN, Danny Danon, was the first to congratulate Guterres, saying: “The State of Israel hopes, and expects, that the UN under his leadership will act in the spirit of its founding principles as a fair body able to differentiate between good and evil and will end its obsession with Israel. I hope that this change in leadership will bring an end to the organization’s hostility towards Israel.”
Reblogged this on Worldtruth.