Paris, Monday, September 18,
2017
Part 1: French text / Part 2:
English text, Google translation
Copy:
1- President of the French
Republic
2- European Commission
3- UN
4- Embassies: North Korea
(Berne), South Korea, China, European, Japan, Russia, USA.
5- Presidents of Parliament and
French Parliamentary Groups
Reflection on a statement by
Mrs. Haley, Permanent Ambassador of the United States to the United Nations,
Mr. Kim, President of North Korea, Mr. Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of
the Russian Federation.
On September 17, 2017, in an
interview with CNN, Ms. Nikki Haley, US Permanent Ambassador to the United
Nations, said: "We all know that if North Korea keeps this behavior
aggressive, Must
defend or defend their allies, North Korea will be destroyed. "
Ms. Haley justifies her point
of view by the failure of "diplomatic means": "We wanted to be
accountable and use every diplomatic means to pay attention to us," Haley
said. "If
that does not work, General Mattis will take care of it."
Previously, the United States
rejected the joint proposal of China and Russia.
What they call a
"reasonable plan" is a double "freeze"
a- Kim Jong-one freezes all
nuclear tests and launches of ballistic missiles,
b- The United States and South
Korea freeze large-scale military exercises, regularly used as a pretext in
North Korea to carry out tests.
No one has given North Korea
advice on this proposal and it is unclear whether it was addressed to him.
This effacement of the
principal interested in the diplomatic conversation refers to the characteristic
of the proposals of the Powers concerned in this debate.
They are all:
1- Excluding the participation
of North Korea, or even the two Koreas, in the solution.
2 - Be secret.
This is what Mrs. Haley calls,
as her alter egos, "all diplomatic means."
b- When Mr. Lavrov, Russian
Minister for Foreign Affairs, stated that "there is no alternative to
political and diplomatic means of solving the problem", he refers to the
proposal of the "freeze" and therefore to the verticality of its
diplomacy.
Yet the whole strategy of the
successive North Korean governments is precisely to prohibit any discussion of
Korea and a fortiori any evolution of the Korean situation without the
knowledge or against North Korea.
President Kim Jong-un
summarized the doctrinal view of the North Korean government before the members
of the Department of Defense Industry of the Central Committee of the Korean
Labor Party, according to the Central Press Agency North (KCNA):
"Our ultimate goal is to
ensure a real balance of nuclear forces with the United States and to force US
leaders to stop their speculation about the possibility of a military solution
for our country."
He called on the country's
engineers and scientists to continue the modernization of national missiles:
"We have to demonstrate
that we are capable of setting up the nuclear forces of our state despite the
unprecedented sanctions," Kim quoted Yohnap as saying.
In doing so, it is in the
function assigned to it by the armistice of July 27, 1953.
The armistice separates not two
distinct, sovereign "states", but distinguishes within a single
country two military-political teams to which it assigns territory to be
directed.
As a result, Reunification
becomes the political agenda of these two teams.
This subordination to the
Reunification is symbolically marked by the refusal of the so-called South
Korean team to ratify the armistice.
For both sides, this armistice
is only part-delivered. Their vocation
is Reunification.
So the North Korean government
plays the score assigned to it by giving itself the means to never be subverted
by the forces associated with South Korea.
The former precarious balances
guaranteed by the great powers everywhere lead to the multiplication of the
nuclear demand of the subordinate countries as a supreme guarantee of
sovereignty.
By its nuclear armament, North
Korea means that the two Koreas can no longer be considered indefinitely as
puppets of the Allied Powers.
It is therefore particularly
counterproductive to base "diplomatic and political means" on the
intimation of the two Koreas to accept being subjected to American maneuvers
and Chinese hegemony.
Kim Jong-un's
military-political team is in the role of giving the color of the absolute to
its territorial and unifying assignment established under the aegis of the UN.
It gives itself "the
means" to compensate the differential of civil power with the military-political
team of South Korea.
The calculation is not absurd
for two reasons:
1- Everyone knows that even if
North Korea was "destroyed", its territory could only become a no-man’s-land.
a- Indeed, China and Russia
will never agree to share a border with the team of South Korea, in other words
the United States.
b- This scenario would
reproduce the previous figure anyway since China and Russia should take over
the function of the government of North Korea.
2- Nuclear warfare cannot be
local.
On July 8, 2017, General
Vincent Desportes, former director of the War School, noted that "We have
forgotten the theory of nuclear winter, which means that beyond four or five
nuclear bombs the Earth stops living due to clouds of
dust and radiation. "
Western journalists believe
that the evidence of military destruction is likely to push back the North
Korean government.
This is not the case and it
will be less and less the thought, even public, of the countries of the South.
b- Atomic weapons of several
countries of the South go hand in hand with the growth of their political
presence.
What to do?
The question is not to run
after a "peace" which would reintroduce into the conversation both
the reasons for the war and the demand for reunification.
We must get out of the
armistice. How?
1- Recognize both parts of
Korea as full-fledged interlocutors and not unruly performers who can be
consulted in secret.
2- Bring all the parties
together in a conference which can be chaired by the Secretary-General of the United
Nations.
3- The two Korean parties:
a- Recognize that they have
become two distinct sovereign nations.
b. Formally renounce
reunification and any measures designed to achieve it.
c. Abandon any warlike
enterprise from one to the other.
d- Can change name.
4- The Allied Parties
Abandon any enterprise aimed at
imposing their hegemony, civil or military, on the sovereign Korean country
connected to the other network of alliances.
5- The atom
The two countries thus created
comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of which they are or have been
signatories.
Such compliance with
international law is possible because neither party could legally consider
subjecting the other; to
do so in the name of the law.
6- The announcement
The UN Secretary General
addresses the two populations directly to announce and explain the contents of
the agreement.
The demonstrations of force, no
doubt legitimate and useful, would serve to build two countries and to
consolidate peace, instead of aiming to "destroy" the "United
States" and "North Korea".
The formula of Mr. Lavrov
indicates on this occasion that a place is to be taken: "The first step
must be made by the strongest and the most intelligent".
In his speech of 8 July,
General Desportes also said:
1- "The French are not
sufficiently aware that an exchange of thermonuclear shots would be extremely
serious for our country ... This crisis concerns very directly the French. »
2- "But to be able to make
one's voice heard one must be able to act. It
is clear that neither Europe nor France have the means to act. Soft
power only works if you have hard power.
3- "The only country that
can do anything seriously outside the United States is China. »
Is it too much to ask Europeans
to notice that precisely:
1- Chinese President Mr. Xi
telephoned Ms. Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, and Mr. Macron, French President,
to ask them to intervene.
2- China has indicated to
France a place of overlap between soft power and hard power, namely the
Security Council: "China hopes that France, as a permanent member of the
Security Council of the
United Nations, will play a constructive role in calming the situation and
restarting dialogue (in the North Korean case)."
It would be welcome if the
Europeans answered the question.
Marc SALOMONE
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire