Jo Chol Su Advises UNSC against Double Standard

Double Standard Will Invite More Serious Consequence

Jo Chol Su

Jo Chol Su (m) with Russian ambassador A. Matsegora (r) and director of the Russian Center for Energy and Security A. Khlopkov (l) on October 2, 2019. (RusEmbDPRK Photo, cropped)


Jo Chol Su, director-general of the Department of International Organizations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK, released the following press statement on March 28:

Our test fire of new-type tactical guided missile on March 25 is an exercise of its righteous self-defensive right to deter military threats posed to the Korean peninsula and safeguard peace and prosperity of our state.


But, dangerous attempt is openly emerging, which is designed to negate the right of our state to self-defense.


The United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committee on DPRK held its closed working-level consultation hastily on March 26, where the United States called for "tightening implementation of sanctions" and "applying additional sanctions", while denouncing our self-defensive measure as "violation of UN resolutions."


It was also reported that, at the request of UK, France and other countries, the United Nations Security Council had decided to convene its closed meeting on March 30 to deal with the issue of our test fire of new-type tactical guided missile.


It constitutes a denial of sovereign state and an apparent double standard that UNSC takes issue, on the basis of the UN "resolutions" - direct products of the U.S. hostile policy toward the DPRK - with the normal activities which fall within the right of our state to self-defense.


It does not make any sense that only our righteous self-defensive measure should be singled out for denunciation, when many other countries across the globe are firing all kinds of projectiles for the purpose of increasing their military strength.


This also holds true when it is viewed from the principle of objectivity and impartiality.


The basic principle of and the logical sequence in solving any issue are to get to the bottom of the issue in an objective and impartial way.


The United Nations Security Council remains silent whenever U.S. enforces war drills against the DPRK at any time in its face. The contrast, however, is that it picks on the DPRK peremptorily when the latter takes self-defensive counter measures for defending the security of the state.


If this is the conduct of UNSC, we are only compelled to look at the cases of U.S., UK and France picking a quarrel with our self-defensive measure.


It is only some time ago when U.S. launched air raid against the territory of Syria. It is also only some days ago when UK made an official announcement that it would make a drastic increase in its nuclear warheads, having reneged on its nuclear disarmament obligations. The same is true of France which conducted a test fire of the new-generation, multi-tipped intercontinental ballistic missile.


The United Nations Security Council does not have a single record of having questioned or discussed such acts.


It is indeed preposterous that such countries spearheading the moves to undermine global peace and stability are picking on our self-defensive measure.


I strongly denounce the moves of UNSC as a serious infringement upon the dignity of an independent state and its sovereignty and a wanton violation of the UN Charter, as UNSC is holding meetings on and conducting investigations into the DPRK with its extreme bias and double standard.


UNSC should strictly follow the principle of impartiality, objectivity and equity if it is to be conducive to world peace and security in line with its intrinsic mission.


If UNSC continues to hold to double standard, it will only cause an aggravation, not amelioration, of situation and confrontation, not dialogue, on the Korean peninsula.


We will never condone the moves of some members of UNSC for abusing the United Nations in their pursuits of ulterior motives to trample on the sovereignty of independent countries and hold in check their development.


Any attempt to infringe upon our right to self-defense will inevitably prompt a countermeasure in kind.


(KCNA)

1 Comments

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post