Tensions are high in Asia, as threats of war are growled from around the globe. North Korea in particular has been the most vocal, declaring it will wage all out war if there is any retaliation from South Korea.
But why would South Korea attack North Korea? Well a report that was published yesterday concluded that the sinking of the South Korean warship in March was caused by a North Korean torpedo.
The report was compiled by an international team of investigators who concluded that there was “no other plausible explanation” for the explosion other than it was a “torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine”.
The report includes a computer simulation of the attack on the warship. The simulation shows the warship, the Cheonan, being struck by an acoustic homing torpedo armed with a ¼ tonne warhead.
The minute the findings became public yesterday, a war of words began. Pyongyang dismissed the report as a fabrication, while Seoul vowed to take “resolute counter measures” against North Korea.
The torpedo ripped through the 1200 tonne corvette and killed 46 sailors according to the report. If correct, this would be the worst naval tragedy in South Korea.
The United Kingdom and the United States of America have immediately thrown their support behind the report’s findings. William Hague, the new Foreign Secretary has condemned the attack and its “total indifference to human life.
“UK and its international partners are committed to working closely with the Republic of Korea as they consider an appropriate multilateral response to this callous act”
The White House itself stated that the report represented an act of aggression that constituted a challenge to international law, peace and security.
The Australian Prime Minister has also promised strong measures against North Korea, stating that “resolute countermeasures will be taken against North Korea.”
“South Korea, through strong international co-operation, should make North Korea admit its wrongdoing and return as a responsible member of the international community”
Legal Consequences?
This issue is supposed to be taken before the United Nations Security Council. What would that achieve? There are only two situations in which the use of force can be authourized. The first is seen in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for the inherent right of all to collective self defense.
The second is authorisation through the Security Council as per their powers under 24 and 25.
There is also of course the action of sanctions against North Korea, but the history of United Nations have found this to be rather ineffective and only to the detriment of the general public of that nation. When dealing with nations with little regard for civil liberties and the welfare of the public, sanctions would prove ineffective.
Following the actions taken by the United States and Great Britain in Iraq, the concept of use of force has proven to be rather fragile and susceptible to the disregard of major states. Based on the war of the words, there is some real concern that the principles of the United Nations will be cast to the side without hesitation.
Antonia Torr is a graduate from the University of Leicester, with a degree in Law with European Union Law. Having enjoyed writing from a young age, Antonia has received numerous awards that act as a testament to her quality of writing. Let us put you in touch with the best
Solicitors in Wigan from our branches Nationwide. Or visit
http://www.qualitysolicitors.com 
Categories
