North Korea fires unidentified ballistic missile: Seoul military

North Korea fires unidentified ballistic missile: Seoul military
People walk past a television showing a news broadcast with file footage of a North Korean missile test, at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 8 sec ago

North Korea fires unidentified ballistic missile: Seoul military

North Korea fires unidentified ballistic missile: Seoul military
  • South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said North Korea fired an unidentified ballistic missile toward the East Sea, referring to the body of water also known as the Sea of Japan

SEOUL: North Korea fired a ballistic missile Friday, Seoul’s military said, around a week after US President Donald Trump approved South Korea’s plan to build a nuclear-powered submarine.
Analysts have said Seoul’s plan to construct one of the atomic-driven vessels would likely draw an aggressive response from Pyongyang.
South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said North Korea fired an unidentified ballistic missile toward the East Sea, referring to the body of water also known as the Sea of Japan.
The missile landed in the sea outside Japan’s economic waters and no damage or injuries had been reported, said Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi.
But the Kremlin defended North Korea’s latest launch, saying Pyongyang — a key ally for Russia during its Ukraine campaign — had the “legitimate right” to do so.
“We are respectful of the legitimate right of our friends in the DPRK (North Korea) to ensure their security and take measures for it,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Washington’s security ally Tokyo, meanwhile, said North Korea’s ballistic missile launches have been “absolutely unforgivable.”
As “evidenced” by North Korea’s provocations, “it’s never too early to accelerate efforts to revamp our defense capabilities,” Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi said.
“We will consider what steps are needed to protect our nation’s... peace and the lives of our people, without ruling out any options.”
The missile launched at 12:35 p.m. (0335 GMT) from an area north of Pyongyang and flew around 700 kilometers (435 miles), South Korea’s military said.
North Korea has significantly increased missile testing in recent years, which analysts say is aimed at improving precision strike capabilities, challenging the United States as well as South Korea, and testing weapons before potentially exporting them to Russia.
“From North Korea’s perspective, the possibility of sudden attacks from the East Sea will be a source of anxiety,” Ahn Chan-il, a defector-turned-researcher who runs the World Institute for North Korea Studies, told AFP.
“If South Korea acquires a nuclear-powered submarine, they would be able to enter North Korean waters and preemptively monitor or intercept weapons such as submarine-launched ballistic missiles.”
Trump had announced that South Korea would build the submarine in the United States, but Seoul says it is considering making it at home.
Unlike diesel-powered submarines, which must regularly surface to recharge their batteries, nuclear-powered ones can remain submerged for far longer.

- ‘Irreversible’ nuclear state -

Analysts say developing a nuclear-powered submarine would be a significant leap for South Korea.
Only the United States, Australia, China, Russia, India, France and Britain have moved toward nuclear-powered submarines, according to media and analysis reports.
Since North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s 2019 summit with Trump collapsed over the scope of denuclearization and sanctions relief, Pyongyang has repeatedly declared itself an “irreversible” nuclear state.
Kim has since been emboldened by the war in Ukraine, securing critical support from Moscow after sending thousands of troops to fight alongside Russian forces.
Pyongyang did not respond to Trump’s offer to meet with Kim last week, and instead its Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui headed to Moscow, where she and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to strengthen bilateral ties.
In September, Kim appeared alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping and Putin at an elaborate military parade in Beijing — a striking display of his new, elevated status in global politics.
Trump met Kim three times during his first term and once famously said the pair had fallen “in love,” but the US leader ultimately failed to secure a lasting agreement on North Korea’s nuclear program.
South Korean lawmaker Lee Seong-kweun said this week that Seoul’s spy agency believes Kim was still open to talks with Washington, “and will seek contact when the conditions are in place.”
Although the proposed meeting with Trump did not materialize, “multiple signs suggest” that Pyongyang “had been preparing behind the scenes for possible talks with the US,” said the lawmaker.


US officials, NGOs cry foul as Washington snubs UN rights review

Updated 3 sec ago

US officials, NGOs cry foul as Washington snubs UN rights review

US officials, NGOs cry foul as Washington snubs UN rights review
GENEVA: US officials and rights defenders gathered at the United Nations in Geneva on Friday to voice concerns over human rights under President Donald Trump’s administration, and denounce Washington’s decision to snub a review of its record.
The US mission in Geneva confirmed this week that the country would skip its so-called Universal Periodic Review (UPR), after first announcing the decision in August, becoming only the second country to ever boycott the process.
All 193 United Nations member states are required to undergo the standard review of their rights situation every four to five years.
The decision “is deeply disappointing,” Uzra Zeya, head of Human Rights First, said in an email.
“It sends the wrong message and weakens a process that has helped drive progress on human rights worldwide — including in the United States.”
Zeya was to host one of several events at the UN in Geneva featuring activists and elected US officials voicing concerns around rights in the United States, in particular since Trump returned to power in January.
The US decision to snub its review was linked to Trump’s order in February withdrawing the country from a number of UN bodies, including participation in the Human Rights Council.
But dropping the UPR was not a given. Trump also withdrew from the council during his first term, but his administration still opted to take part in its 2020 review.
The US under Trump especially has repeatedly slammed the council for being biased against Israel, and has cited that alleged bias as prompting its withdrawal from the review.

- ‘Tragic’ -

The move “really, really undermines ... the notion that international human rights law is inalienable and applies equally to all,” warned Phil Lynch, head of the International Service for Human Rights.
He was speaking at an event in a room of the UN’s European headquarters where former US first lady Eleanor Roosevelt helped draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights before its adoption in 1948.
“It’s tragic and deeply ironic that we helped to create the norms as well as this (UPR) process that we are now backing out of,” a former senior US official told AFP, asking not to be named.
Another former US official who worked on the country’s previous UPR engagements warned the move was a “dangerous” signal.
“We’re losing our legitimacy globally on human rights leadership... It’s a hard pill to swallow.”
The US absence sparked outrage among civil society, which typically participates in reviews, providing analysis and recommendations.
Denied the UPR platform, numerous groups, academics and local US officials were nonetheless intent on making their concerns known.
They listed a string of alarming developments, including repression of dissent, militarised immigration crackdowns, national guards sent into US cities, crackdowns on universities and art institutions, and lethal strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific.

- Need for ‘sunlight’ -

Many urged the international community to speak out and support their work to hold the US government in check.
“It’s the Human Rights Council, the United Nations system and a community of nations committed to human rights and democracy who can bring necessary sunlight to these abuses,” said Chandra Bhatnagar, head of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)’s southern California branch.
Robert Saleem Holbrook, head of the Abolitionist Law Center agreed, insisting that as “we see our civil liberties being decimated, these forums are going to take on increasing importance in the future.”
The United States is set to become one of the only two countries to fail to show up for their own review since the inception of the UPR system in 2008.
While some countries have requested postponements, only Israel has previously been a no-show, in early 2013, although it eventually underwent a postponed review 10 months later.
Observers warned the US absence could serve as a bad example.
“We hope this doesn’t risk normalizing withdrawal from the council,” Sanjay Sethi, co-head of the Artistic Freedom Initiative, told AFP.