define('DISABLE_WP_CRON', true); Oppose Nuclear War and North Korea | Chris White Online

Oppose Nuclear War and North Korea


Update: December 17 The costs of war are too great. Time to pressure Turnbull against nuclear war

Nuclear disarmament is realistic

Update September:Pilger on war with North Korea
Trump threatens North Korea
From Putin: negotiate

Picasso Peace dove

Picasso Peace dove

Imagine if North Korea decided to conduct massive “live fire” military drills, accompanied by a Chinese naval flotilla, just three miles off the coast of California. And, let’s say, they decided to send formations of strategic high-altitude aircraft loaded with nuclear bombs to fly along the Canada and Mexico borders while tens of thousands of combat troops accompanied by hundreds of tanks and armored vehicles rehearsed a “shock and awe” type blitz onto US territory where they would immediately crush the defending army, level cities and critical civilian infrastructure, and topple the regime in Washington.

Do you think Trump would dismiss the North’s provocative war games as merely “defensive maneuvers” or would they see them as a danger to US national security warranting a muscular response from the military?

What kind of civilization have we developed when two mentally unstable national leaders, in an escalating confrontation with each other, threaten one another―and the world―with nuclear war? And Turnbull supports this nuclear chicken madness.

On China “The rise of China and the escalating conflict in the South China Seas means that Australia is now caught between the US, our greatest military ally and China, our greatest economic ally
“All Australians want to be safe. However the reality is we are currently acting as a giant US military base in the Pacific.”
peace trust

I post articles on Trump and North Korea. I support the campaign against nuclear war, for an independent and peaceful foreign policy and pressure on Turnbull to agree to the UN Nuclear Disarmament treaty.
Please sign CIDC and Greenpeace petitions to Turnbull/Bishop:sign the Nuclear Disarmament treaty
Peace movement building
International Day for Nuclear Disarmament 26 september
Scroll down to read ‘Boys And Their Toys: The Growing Movement Against Nuclear Nations’ By Sue Warham Medical Association for the Prevention of War

As Tensions Explode on Korean Peninsula, US Peace Delegation Calls for Immediate Response to North Korea’s Offer to Freeze Its Nuclear Program” read here from US Labor against War

Picasso Peace dove

Picasso Peace dove

Further report from peace delegation to South Korea

Picasso Peace dove

Picasso Peace dove

Rudd condemns Turnbull joined at hip with Trump over war with North Korea Note that Richard Marles, ALP, fails to condemn Turnbull.

North Korea could negotiate
Peace Convergence banner
The North Korean’s want peace. They want a formal end to the war and they want guarantees that the United States won’t preemptively attack them. Is that too much to ask?



Independent and Peaceful Australia Network NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2017 MELBOURNE
8,9 & 10 September 2017 Conference Theme: War, Peace & Independence: Keep Australia out of US Wars. Media release 22 August 2017

ANZUS alliance “highly problematic” in the face of current global affairs

● South China Sea conflict a nuclear threat, Australia must distance itself from US military alliance says barrister and academic James O’Neil
● O’Neil to set out a path for Australia’s role in the future at the upcoming IPAN conference in September, Melbourne

O’Neil states “For near a century, the US have been the virtually unchallenged dominant global power. Our military alliance with the US made sense during that time, but things are different now.
“The rise of China and the escalating conflict in the South China Seas means that Australia is now caught between the US, our greatest military ally and China, our greatest economic ally.
“Australia is a strong regional leader and we can benefit from China’s rise. However we must have an independent foreign policy in order to do so.
“All Australians want to be safe. However the reality is we are currently acting as a giant US military base in the Pacific.
“Continuing this pattern amidst escalating conflict in our region between the US and China is highly problematic, and not at all in our strategic interests.
“It’s time for Australia to let go of our military attachment to the US and stand on our own two feet.”

James O’Neill has been a lecturer at the University of Bergen, Norway, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Waikato, New Zealand, a Visiting Professor at the University of Louvain la Neuve, Belgium, and a visiting Professorial Fellow at NIDI in The Hague. He was also a consultant at the UN Economic commission for Europe in Geneva. James O’Neill has practised as a barrister since 1984. His particular area of interest is international law. He writes on matters of geopolitics, especially at the interface of law and international policy.
For Interviews: James O’Neill, contact 0405 819 980
IPAN Media Liaison: Kathryn Kelly, contact 0417 269 984
Playing Nuclear “Chicken” With Our Lives
by Lawrence Wittner
A foreign policy that requires tens of millions of people to simply keep their fingers crossed is simply unacceptable.
What kind of civilization have we developed when two mentally unstable national leaders, in an escalating confrontation with each other, threaten one another―and the world―with nuclear war?

That question arises as a potentially violent showdown emerges between Kim Jong Un of North Korea and Donald Trump of the United States. In recent years, the North Korean government has produced about 10 nuclear weapons and has been making them increasingly operational through improvements in its missile technology. The U.S. government first developed nuclear weapons in 1945, when it employed them to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and currently possesses 6,800 of them, mostly deployed on missiles, submarines, and bombers.

According to the North Korean government, its nuclear weapons are necessary to defend itself against the United States. Similarity, the U.S. government argues that its nuclear weapons are necessary to defend itself against countries like North Korea….

But are the two governments headed by reasonable men? Both Kim and Trump appear psychologically disturbed, erratic, and startlingly immature―much like the juvenile delinquents once associated with the game of “Chicken.” Let us hope, though, that with enough public resistance and some residual sanity, they will back away from the brink and begin to resolve their differences peacefully. That’s certainly possible.

Even if the current confrontation eases, though, we are left with a world in which some 15,000 nuclear weapons exist and with numerous people who, in the future, might not scruple about using them. And so the fundamental problem continues: As long as nuclear weapons exist, we teeter on the edge of catastrophe

Fortunately, this past July, in an historic development, the vast majority of the world’s nations voted at a UN conference to approve a treaty banning nuclear weapons. Nations will begin the process of signing onto the treaty this September. Although, sadly, all of the nuclear powers (including the United States and North Korea) oppose the treaty, it’s long past time for nuclear weapons to be prohibited and eliminated.

Until they are, government officials will remain free to play nuclear “Chicken” with their lives . . . and with ours.
Read here

Picasso Peace dove

Picasso Peace dove

IPAN press release Richard Tanter

Pine Gap hardwires Australia into a Korean war
“Whether we like it or not, Australia would be dragged into a conflict on the Korean Peninsula because of the critical role of Pine Gap in US military operations against North Korea”, says Professor Richard Tanter, senior research associate at the Nautilus Institute and honorary professor in the School of Political and Social Sciences at Melbourne University.
peace trust
“Given the geography of Korea and the decades of military preparations of both sides,” said Tanter, “we could become a participant in a war likely to result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Koreans, with a high likelihood of uncontrollable escalation to involve regional conflict.”
peace trust
“Informed commentators recognize that there is no military solution to this conflict, and talking is the only option to avoid unimaginable horror,” said Professor Tanter. “Difficult though it is to negotiate with North Korea, there is good reason to believe that its leaders are not bent on suicide. There are indications that negotiations could be possible, but they need to be genuine to have any chance of avoiding war.”
“The Australian government’s strategic response has for a long time been compliance with whatever constitutes United States policy of the day. In the hands of President Trump, this places the future of both the Korean Peninsula and Australia in the hands of a deeply delusional narcissist who is incapable of comprehending the consequences of his actions.”

“The Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap will play a critical role in both conventional and nuclear-armed U.S. attacks on North Korea”, said Professor Tanter. “Pine Gap hardwires Australia into US combat operations in Northeast Asia. Pine Gap’s tasking will now be very actively focussed on North Korea.”

“The logic of nuclear weapons, epitomized by the United States’ nuclear posture, and fully supported by compliant Australian governments, has led to North Korea’s
successful path to nuclear weapons state status. Its goal has clearly been to deter U.S. from attempting regime change, rather than suicidal nuclear aggression.”

“It is time for Australia to take an independent stance urging the utmost caution on its nuclear-armed ally as well as on North Korea, and actively oppose any action leading to what would be a catastrophic outbreak of war.”



“But equally, the present crisis makes clear that doctrines of nuclear deterrence – by any country – hold the whole world to ransom, with deterrence failure inevitable in the long run. It is clear that only the abolition of nuclear weapons will offer any chance of planetary safety. The Australian government’s craven acceptance of US demands that its allies boycott the treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons adopted at the United Nations indicates that we have no independent foreign policy.”

Professor Tanter will address the issue ‘What would an independent Australian foreign policy look like?’ during the upcoming Independent and Peaceful Australia Network National Conference in Melbourne over the weekend of 8-10th September.

For Media Interviews: Richard Tanter, 0407 824 336
IPAN Media Liaison: Kathryn Kelly, 0417 269 984
Important listening from ABC on Pine Gap

Subscribe to IPAN Voice here from no 8
An IPAN Response:

To the leaders of North Korea and the United States:
“Negotiate and de-escalate”

To the North Korean Leadership:
“Cease your threats to fire missiles around Guam”

To the US Leadership:
“Reduce the military threat perceived by North Korea, by ceasing US Bomber flights over the Korean peninsula, cease the US/Sth Korean large scale military exercises and reduce the heavy military concentrations near North Korea by commencing the dismantling of US bases and reduction in the heavy naval presence in the region.”

To the international community including the US:
“Remove the economic sanctions on North Korea, accept its legitimacy as a nation and its right to develop its own self defence and seek to integrate North Korea into the international economic community”.

To Malcom Turnbull;
“Supporting the US to the hilt – reflects an appalling lack of judgement about the risks of nuclear war and potentially endangers millions of lives including Australian’s. Australia should adopt a non-aligned policy at this stage and not use an invalid reading of the ANZUS Treaty to automatically assure the US of Australia’s support in a war with North Korea.
Furthermore, the US military bases on our soil including Pine Gap integrate Australia into the US war machine and lock us into wars that are prosecuted by the US. These bases deny Australia our sovereignty and our freedom to make foreign policy decisions independently of the US; they must be addressed urgently if Australia is to be able to pursue independent and peaceful relations with our neighbours and the international community.”

History of the Korean dispute
Further history and likelihood of war
Earlier Tanter against war with China
Boys And Their Toys: The Growing Movement Against Nuclear Nations
By Sue Warham MAPW in New Matilda
July 12, 2017 International Affairs
The case against nuclear weapons has always been strong. What’s changing is a growing global resolve to eliminate them, writes Dr Sue Wareham*.

Nuclear weapons – the only man made threat that could virtually destroy our planet in an afternoon – have hit the news again, in two ways that represent polar opposites of the struggle to banish them forever.
In New York at the United Nations we have just witnessed historic progress towards realising the goal of a nuclear weapons free world. Late last week, the UN adopted the new ‘Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons’, to prohibit states from developing, testing, producing, manufacturing, acquiring, possessing, stockpiling, transferring, deploying, stationing, using or threatening to use nuclear weapons, under any circumstances. Read here

Pine Gap: Australia to be prosecuted?
Why There’s No Reason to Worry About War With North Korea

I think it best to assume that the sanctions against North Korea imposed by the UN with PRC and Russian support will not deter Pyongyang from pursuing its nuclear weapons program. The North Korean economy has been growing in recent years; even if it’s hit by declining coal exports it will muddle on.

The people are long-suffering, and religiously conditioned to revere the Kim dynasty that Washington loathes and insults. Having survived the economic impact of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and the effects of the famine years from 1994 to 1998. They are probably able to accept more economic hardship if it’s imposed by foreigners who seem to oppose the DPRK’s right to self-defense. The fact is, the U.S. has long sought regime change. (What did Dick Cheney say about North Korea, as he derailed talks in 2002? “We don’t negotiate with evil, we defeat it.”)
Peace Convergence banner
But now the State Department is denying that it seeks regime change, and that it is willing to talk with Pyongyang—meaning it’s willing to return to a practice abandoned fifteen years ago, with the repercussions we’ve seen. Trump even made that unusual statement in May that, “If it would be appropriate for me to meet with [Kim Jong Un] I would absolutely, I would be honored to do it, if it’s under the, again, under the right circumstances. But I would do that.” It will be necessary for somebody to do that, the alternative being a military strike condemned by China, Russia, and the world in general, followed immediately by the destruction of Seoul. (Pyongyang has threatened to turn Seoul into a “sea of fire.”)

Logic would suggest ruling out a military response to North Korean nuclear tests and missile launches. But Sen. Lindsey Graham has told NBC that Trump has “told me to my face” that reports that “there is no military option” are “just false.”
“There is a military option: to destroy North Korea’s nuclear program and North Korea itself. He’s not going to allow — President Trump — the ability of this madman [Kim Jong Un] to have a missile that could hit America. If there’s going to be a war to stop him, it will be over there. If thousands die, they’re going to die over there. They’re not going to die over here — and he’s told me that to my face.”
Waging Peace on War: Canberra. WACA Peace Convergence
He doesn’t mention how many thousands. But North Korea has a (conventional weapons) arsenal on its side of the DMZ that could rain 300,000 rounds on the south during the first hour of a counterattack. We’re talking tens of thousands of Korean civilians, dying over there, supposedly to protect America.

Nah. Won’t happen. Can’t happen. Read more here



Ditch bipartisanship and debate Australia’s defence and security, politicians urged
Exclusive: Trump’s election threatens longstanding assumptions and turbulent times require return to an ‘adversarial’ democratic approach, new report argues
“Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, Penny Wong, has, since taking the shadow portfolio, also attempted to create a subtle point of difference concerning Australia’s alliance with the US post-Trump.

Wong has argued Australia needs to define a more independent foreign policy within the established alliance framework, and needs “a better road map in Asia”.

The former Labor prime minister Paul Keating has also argued Australia needs to develop a “more independent, balanced foreign policy”, particularly towards China and Indonesia, after Trump’s election.” Katherine Murphy see above

Japan and North Korea
Peace is union business – time to campaign against war. And come to
IPAN National Conference: Theme – War, Peace & Independence: Keep Australia out of US Wars. 8,9,10 September 2017 Melbourne. Book now. See you there.

, ,

Comments are closed.