Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea agrees with the request of Uganda and Russia over the DPRK's Space Program, with some reservations.

However, if North Korea wishes to avoid repercussions, it must remain more open about it's launches, provide full launch information to the UNSC, and give us their personal assurance they are not attempting to create any sort of tactical short range nuclear weapon.

In return for giving launch information to the UNSC, we first must have the UNSC apologize for its insult, and affirm that our space program is for peaceful purposes. By removing this insult, we would be able to see the UNSC is negogiating in good faith, and we will be happy to provide all the information the UNSC needs to know about our space program.

However, we will not give personal assurance that we are creating any sort of tactical short range nuclear weapon. We will do what is necessary in order to defend the DPRK from any external threat, and at the moment, the danger of an invasion is very high indeed. Nuclear weapons does work in deterring imperialism and protecting the soverignity of the Korean people.

To Japan, we frankly don't trust you. Years ago, you colonized the Korean Pennisula and engaged in dreadful crimes against humanity, crimes that you have not yet apologized for. You are in alliance with the United States, and thus indirectly pose a threat to our security. There are radicals trying to convince Japan to gain nuclear weapons and re-invade Korea. Even now, you are engaging in human right abuses by suppressing the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryon), a pro-DPRK organization dedicated to the peaceful reunification of Korea. This strongly suggest discussions with your nation might be counterproductive. We however believe that your interests can be adequately represented by the United States in two-party talks, or three-party talks.

The DPRK will stress that new sanctions will not affect the behavior of the DPRK. We have been under sanctions from the UNSC and the imperialists for a long time, and thus we have experience in dealing with sanctions. The DPRK is self-reliant, and will continue to survive.

The DPRK also will make a statement in favor of nuclear nonproliferation.

[Emperor_Jonathan]

We may, DRPK, indirectly pose a threat to your security. But with these missiles, you are posing a direct threat to us.

[Servant Corps]

We regret to inform the United Nations Security Council that a state of war now exists on the Korean Pennisula. The south Korean authorities, in violation of the 1953 armistice, has joined up with the "Proliferation Security Initiative", or the PSI, and thus will be sending in ships in order to search our DPRK shipping vesels.

We have informed the south Korean regime that if they join up with the PSI, we would be treating it as if south Korea has violated the 1953 armistice, and thus, that south Korea would be declaring war on the DPRK. Despite our warning, the south Koreans has decided to enter into the PSI anyway, using the excuse of our recent nuclear test.

The 1953 Armistice specifically bans "any form of blockade" against the other belligerent party. Indeed, the main purpose of the PSI is to blockade the DPRK by intercepting our shipping vessels, so when the south Koreans has joined up with the PSI, it is engaging in such a blockade.

Since the south Koreans are violating the armistice, the DPRK no longer feel bound by it. The puppet south Korean regime, alongside with American imperialists, threaten DPRK's security, and while they call upon us to follow their wishes, the south Koreans do not even follow the armistice.

Since the armistice is no longer in effect, it is only natural that a State of War now exist.

We will alert the UNSC of the three actions that we are going to be engaging in, as a result of the current State of War that now exists between the DPRK and the south Korean regime:

1. The DPRK will deal a decisive and merciless retaliatory blow, no matter from which place, at any attempt to stop, check and inspect its vessels, regarding it as a violation of its inviolable sovereignty and territory and a grave provocation to it.

2. The DPRK will take such a practical counter-action as in the wartime now that the south Korean authorities declared a war in wanton violation of its dignity and sovereignty by fully participating in the PSI.

3. We will not guarantee the legal status of the five islands under the south side's control (Paekryong, Taechong, Sochong, Yonphyong and U islands) in our side's territorial waters northwest of the extension of the Military Demarcation Line in the West Sea of Korea and safe sailing of warships of the U.S. imperialist aggression forces and the south Korean puppet navy and civilian ships operating in the waters around there.

Spoiler: OOC (click to show/hide)

I do hope you guys don't exactly overreact. This is recent news, and it seems I am pretty constrained by what North Korea does, so I have to post it. Eventually, the UNSC should be able to pass some sort of resolution, and we can begin to drift away from reality...and don't have to worry about surprise Crisis Simulations such as this one...

Please, don't overreact.

Oh, and semi-bump. Oh, and the links are to the offical North Korean news agency.

[Pandarsenic]

The People's Republic of China will not stand for this shameless and wanton violation of the national sovereignty of our ally. South Korea, you will break this blockade immediately or we will break it for you.

[Zasit Alebath]

we, of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya condemn this one-sided act of South Korea...

[Jetman123]

Uganda is _extremely_ dissapointed in South Korea's unilateral and reckless action. By performing this shameless act, you may have fully compromised the peace in the region we have worked so hard to maintain.

Uganda calls for the immediate cessation of hostilities should they start, return to six party talks as a temporary measure to find a resolution to this conflict (NOT in terms of the nuclear weapons program - that can be resolved afterwards), and urges all nations in the theater to act calmly and rationally to this crisis. Peace must be preserved at all costs.

On another matter, the Ugandan government accepts the North Korean's terms. In response to the NK statement: "We are very glad you have accepted these terms and commend you for acting rationally. We remain dissapointed in your lack of openness about your WMD programs, however, we are convinced this is a step in the right direction. Further arrangements shall follow once the current diplomatic crisis is resolved."

[mainiac]

((Okay... this is getting pretty unrealistic, so I'm doing a completely roleplay-free response explaining why.))

Spoiler: China (click to show/hide)

The People's Republic of China will not stand for this shameless and wanton violation of the national sovereignty of our ally. South Korea, you will break this blockade immediately or we will break it for you.

((This response is completely contrary to Chinese foreign policy.  China's primary interest in North Korea is avoiding instability.  They want to avoid a costly influx of North Korean refugees.  To a lesser degree, they want a buffer state between them and an American ally.  Making the situation more volatile by promoting North Korean warmongering undermines both these goals.  Giving Kim a blank check for further bellicose actions will lead to further bellicose with complete certainty.

Even worse, the economic stupidity of threatening your main trade partners when your export dependent economy needs to employ 8 million more people a year can't be overstated.  Trade is nearly 2 trillion dollars of economic activity in the roughly 4.5 trillion dollar Chinese economy, about half of which is with America, S. Korea, Hong Kong and Japan and most of the rest with Western Europe.  That's not even getting into that Chinese supported proliferation BEGS Japan to develop it's own nuclear weapons (if they had reason to, they could make them in months and could make hundreds), possibly leading to a scenario of proliferation across asia, a nightmare for China.

And threatening to attack the S. Korean navy is completely out of the question in every way:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Seventh_Fleet))

Spoiler: Libya (click to show/hide)

we, of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya condemn this one-sided act of South Korea...

((And this is worse.  Libya participates in the PSI.  That's because cooperating with America on WMD's has been profitable for the Libyan regime.  Libya denouncing S. Korea taking part in an initiative it supports and profits from would be like Israel denouncing sanctions against Iran.))

Spoiler: Uganda (click to show/hide)

On another matter, the Ugandan government accepts the North Korean's terms. In response to the NK statement: "We are very glad you have accepted these terms and commend you for acting rationally. We remain dissapointed in your lack of openness about your WMD programs, however, we are convinced this is a step in the right direction. Further arrangements shall follow once the current diplomatic crisis is resolved."

((And it's kind of ridiculous to think that your country (or any country) would suddenly decide to support North Korea's long standing policy of "cave to our demands and we'll come back with new ones."  Furthermore, Uganda is in desperate need of continued of international lending from western banks.  Denouncing the foreign policy of the west in support of North Korea is not going to be conductive to Uganda becoming an investment haven.  Nor would it facilitate any American initiatives to help Africa if they were, for example, to be undertaken by the first black president of a western nation.  Said president is, btw, a hero in his father's homeland of Kenya right next door...  It's assumed by many Africans that his presidency will be rather good for Eastern African nations...))

((I'm not saying that you guys should become experts on geopolitics for this game.  But you really should get some basic familiarity with the nations you are playing as.  You appear to be getting your information by S.C.'s North Korean press releases.  His press releases are well written and I applaud him for that.  However North Korean public statements are generally written without the slightest attempt at international credibility.  Suggesting that North Korea be taken at face value would get you some funny looks on the security council.  Just browsing a wikipedia article or two on your country and reading a news story on the games current crises is all it would take to make this game be more then random illogical threats.  I can understand how I should be explaining any references to obscure stuff like, the 1994 accord, but this game kinda requires at least some background...

'Cause reactions like this indicate that your countries either think that North Korea is a great strategic asset or that you are trying to start either WWIII or a second cold war.  I'm pretty sure that the "Hermit Kingdom" is a valuable strategic asset to nobody.  The three nations that have replied so far all stand to lose a lot in WWIII or a second cold war.

A game of diplomacy can't work if the players don't do their research and schizophrenically undermine their own policies.  And stop living in the cold war, it ended nearly 20 years ago.  If you want to start a game about the cold war or a second cold war, I recommend you start a cold war game.  These belligerent replies are what you'd expect from the 60's nuclear staring contests, not the new millennium.

Sorry if I went a little overboard, but I find international politics to be a very interesting topic.  And the international community isn't exactly leaping to North Korea's defense...))

[Servant Corps]

((Yeah, I'm going to somewhat concur with maniac. North Korea isn't exactly a country you should trust. At all.

I would expect the South Korean to pull back to avoid a confronation with Pandarsenic/China, resolving this "crisis", but this would showcase that Pandarsenic/China will defend North Korea no matter what, providing a blank check, making inaluct/USA's job a whole lot harder than it is in real life.

I don't really like telling people though that they are roleplaying the countries badly, though.))

[Aqizzar]

((Burkina Faso is way too far behind to catch up now, but I have to ask.

Did you really think this "game" would turn out any differently?  What forum are you hanging around?))

[Servant Corps]

((Doing some more research, maniac, you might want to alert Uganda that it's behaving a little unrealistically.

Then again, I'm sorta confused of how the UN was able to pass its Presidental Statement with this "somewhat" pro-NK nation. Maybe Uganda decided not to speak up? Never mind, Uganda has been stated by the US Department of State to "seeks good relations with other nations without reference to ideological orientation". Uganda likely wanted to keep good relations with the West and North Korea...a terrible balancing act. Still, meh.)

[Jetman123]

((I'm pursuing a policy of "encourage good behaviour". I don't actually hold out much hope for NK holding to it's demands. However, spitting in NK's face when we're pretty much lucky they're even TALKING to us at this point is pretty much useless and will do nothing except aggravate them until they cut off comms entirely.

The priority one for me is peace in the region. Everything else comes second. To maintain peace we must maintain communication.))

[mainiac]

I would expect the South Korean to pull back to avoid a confronation with Pandarsenic/China, resolving this "crisis", but this would showcase that Pandarsenic/China will defend North Korea no matter what, providing a blank check, making inaluct/USA's job a whole lot harder than it is in real life.

((It's an interesting hypothetical.  I'd say, it boils down to who's got the guns and what everyone stands to win and lose:
-Militarily: there's no contest.  China's military is ready for land, not naval, engagements.  They can't take on someone working with the seventh fleet.  Economically, the conflict would be far worse for trade dependent China.  Even without the seventh fleet, that would make this conflict too dangerous.
-Korea: small victory vs. big defeat; Kim is watching, he's more dangerous to them then the Chinese navy.  Korea really wants to win.
-America: pyrrhic victory vs. big defeat vs. hope for compromise; same as Korea, plus allies worldwide (Isreal, Taiwan, Afghanistan are watching) however America loses by alienating either side, so wants to make this incident disappear.
-China: Pyric victory vs. incidental defeat; China would be getting goodwill with Kim by destroying goodwill with much more important countries (i.e. most of the world).  But they don't have a free press so...

My prediction:  Europe and America do their best to downplay the incident.  China quietly backpedals.  A face saving compromise is quickly announced that reaffirms that Korea will not be boarding ships in Chinese territorial waters which is exactly what China wanted all along, what are you talking about?  The incident never makes Chinese news, is off international news in a few hours but Korea get's a kick out of it between coverage of the more pressing issue in the north.  China might quietly get a new ambassador.))

((I'm pursuing a policy of "encourage good behaviour". I don't actually hold out much hope for NK holding to it's demands. However, spitting in NK's face when we're pretty much lucky they're even TALKING to us at this point is pretty much useless and will do nothing except aggravate them until they cut off comms entirely.

The priority one for me is peace in the region. Everything else comes second. To maintain peace we must maintain communication.))

((That's a valid concern.  However the Korean terms are a declaration that a state of open war now exists.  What is there to encourage?  To slip back into the game for a moment...))

The mexican ambassador comments to the ugandan ambassador during a recess.  "Sadly, maintaining communication seems like a lost cause at this point.  The North Koreans may be talking, but they are saying nothing.  We have seen this in the past.  At some point, they will let us know what they want and true communication can begin.  Before that point, they simply wish to make the crisis as large as possible..." here he gives a sideways glance at certain members of the assembly before continuing.  "Three years before the bank freeze brought them to the table.  Today... who knows?"

((Burkina Faso is way too far behind to catch up now, but I have to ask.

Did you really think this "game" would turn out any differently?  What forum are you hanging around?))

((You raise a valid point.  But not much has passed, so I encourage the return of a voice of sanity.))

[Jetman123]

Uganda's representative ponders the Mexican rep's words for a full minute, then finally regards him. "... It's with a heavy heart that I must admit you are right. I don't think the NK are going to back down. Perhaps we should refocus our efforts upon the South Koreans."

[mainiac]

"They certainly have the most ability to anger their neighbors to the North.  But I wonder, should we cast a wider net?  If the South Koreans and the Americans could  partner with the Chinese on this issue, I believe they could work towards a solution more effectively."

[Pandarsenic]

Spoiler: China (click to show/hide)

The People's Republic of China will not stand for this shameless and wanton violation of the national sovereignty of our ally. South Korea, you will break this blockade immediately or we will break it for you.

((This response is completely contrary to Chinese foreign policy.  China's primary interest in North Korea is avoiding instability.  They want to avoid a costly influx of North Korean refugees.  To a lesser degree, they want a buffer state between them and an American ally.  Making the situation more volatile by promoting North Korean warmongering undermines both these goals.  Giving Kim a blank check for further bellicose actions will lead to further bellicose with complete certainty.

Even worse, the economic stupidity of threatening your main trade partners when your export dependent economy needs to employ 8 million more people a year can't be overstated.  Trade is nearly 2 trillion dollars of economic activity in the roughly 4.5 trillion dollar Chinese economy, about half of which is with America, S. Korea, Hong Kong and Japan and most of the rest with Western Europe.  That's not even getting into that Chinese supported proliferation BEGS Japan to develop it's own nuclear weapons (if they had reason to, they could make them in months and could make hundreds), possibly leading to a scenario of proliferation across Asia, a nightmare for China.

And threatening to attack the S. Korean navy is completely out of the question in every way:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Seventh_Fleet))

((If there's one thing I've learned in my 4 years of Model United Nations experience, it's that being outrageous and belligerent is more fun than being on-policy, but hell, if you're gonna piss and moan....))

The People's Republic of China has issued a statement of dual condemnation, against North Korea's disregard for its neighbors and the region with its nuclear weapons policy and South Korea's militant action giving the North Koreans a chance to provoke a war they can attempt, however weakly, to paint as legitimate.