Is North Korea Really a 'State Sponsor of Terrorism'?
By Ron Paul
November 27, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- President Trump announced last week that
he was returning North Korea to the US list
of “state sponsors of terrorism” after
having been off the list for the past nine
years. Americans may wonder what dramatic
event led the US president to re-designate
North Korea as a terrorism-sponsoring
nation. Has Pyongyang been found guilty of
some spectacular terrorist attack overseas
or perhaps of plotting to overthrow another
country by force? No, that is not the case.
North Korea is back on the US list of state
sponsors of terrorism because President
Trump thinks the move will convince the
government to give up its nuclear weapons
and ballistic missile program. He believes
that continuing down the path toward
confrontation with North Korea will lead the
country to capitulate to Washington’s
demands. That will not happen.
President Trump and Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson argued that North Korea deserved
to be back on the list because the North
Korean government is reported to have
assassinated a North Korean citizen – Kim
Jong-Un’s own half-brother -- in February at
the Kuala Lumpur International Airport. But
what does that say about Washington’s own
program to assassinate US citizens like
Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16 year old son
under Obama, and later Awlaki’s six year old
daughter under Trump? Like Kim’s half
brother, Awlaki and his two children were
never tried or convicted of a crime before
being killed by their own government.
The neocons, who are pushing for a war with
North Korea, are extremely pleased by
Trump’s move. John Bolton called it “exactly
the right thing to do.”
Designating North Korea as a state sponsor
of terrorism will allow President Trump to
impose the “highest level of sanctions” on
North Korea. Does anyone believe more
sanctions – which hurt the suffering
citizens of North Korea the most – will
actually lead North Korea’s leadership to
surrender to Washington’s demands? Sanctions
never work. They hurt the weakest and most
vulnerable members of society the hardest
and affect the elites the least.
|
Never Miss Another Story |
So
North Korea is officially a
terrorism-sponsoring nation according to the
Trump Administration because Kim Jong-Un
killed a family member. Meanwhile, Saudi
Arabia is in the process of killing the
entire country of Yemen and no one says a
word. In fact, the US government has just
announced it will sell Saudi Arabia $7
billion more weapons to help it finish the
job.
Also, is it not “state-sponsorship” of
terrorism to back al-Qaeda and ISIS, as
Saudi Arabia has done in Syria?
The truth is a “state sponsor of terrorism”
designation has little to do with actual
support for global terrorism. As bad as the
North Korean government is, it is does not
go abroad looking for countries to invade.
The designation is a political one, allowing
Washington to ramp up more aggression
against North Korea.
Next month the US and South Korean
militaries will conduct a massive military
exercise practicing an attack on North
Korea. American and South Korean air force
fighters and bombers will practice “enemy
infiltration” and “precision strike drills.”
Are these not also to be seen as
threatening?
What is terrorism? Maybe we should ask a
Yemeni child constantly wondering when the
next Saudi bomb overhead might kill his
family. Or perhaps we might even ask a
Pakistani, Somali, Iraqi, Syrian, or other
child who is terrified that the next US bomb
will do the same to his family. Perhaps we
need to look at whether US foreign policy
actually reflects the American values we
claim to be exporting before we point out
the flaws in others.
This article was originally published by RonPaul Institute -
====
Note regarding comments
You spoke and we listened. It is no longer necessary for ICH readers to register before placing a comment. This website encourages readers to use the "Report" link found at the base of each comment. When a predetermined number of ICH readers click on the "Report" link, the comment will be automatically sent to "moderation". This would appear to be the most logical way to allow open comments, where you the reader/supporter, can determine what is acceptable speech. Please don't use the report feature simply because you disagree with the author point of view. Treat others with respect, remembering that "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."- Benjamin Franklin. Please read our Comment Policy before posting -
|
|
