UN emergency meeting after North Korea missile tests

Ambassadors from the 15 states on the UN Security Council went into emergency talks today to discuss North Korea’s test-firing of at least seven ballistic missiles, one of them with the potential range to reach Alaska.

But while Japan, clearly threatened by the development, promised to push for sanctions, the Chinese envoy played down the seriousness of the crisis and suggested that the UN Council would not need to pass a formal resolution.

The first tests were carried out at dawn and a seventh at 5.22pm local time (0922 BST). Russia said that a total of ten missiles had been fired, although that could not be confirmed.

Within hours, Japan drafted a resolution criticising the launches and suspended a ferry servicing connecting the two countries. “The international community needs to sternly denounce the North Korean action, and it is important to have a united response,” said the Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) defied months of warnings from foreign governments, including China, its most important ally, to test-fire the missles. The state news agency made no mention of the tests but referred to Pyongyang’s “invincible military might”.

The Pentagon observed six tests, including the suspected launch of a Taepodong-2 long-range missile. that can reach Alaska, but the head of Russia’s General Staff was quoted saying that as many as 10 weapons were fired.

According to US officials, at least four of the six missiles were short and medium range Scud-type weapons. The missile believed to be the Taepodong-2 failed just 40 seconds after lifting off at 5.01am local time (21.01 BST). All the rockets fell harmlessly into the Sea of Japan.

The tests, which came as a surprise after eight years in which North Korea has observed a moratorium on firing long-range missiles, have unsettled financial markets and provoked a hail of diplomatic protest. South Korea put its military on high alert and said ministerial talks with Pyongyang, scheduled for next week, could be suspended.

“We will make a decision soon by putting various situations into consideration,” said Lee Kwan-Sei, South Korea’s Assistant Unification Minister, who added that a delivery of 150,000 tonnes of fertiliser to the impoverished state would go ahead.

Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, condemned the tests and urged North Korea to return to the Six Party talks on the future of its nuclear programme.

“I was concerned to learn that the Government of the DPRK had gone ahead with these missile launches, despite international pressure on them not to. These tests are provocative, and only serve to raise tensions in the region,” she said.

“The only way the DPRK will be able to resolve international concerns about its nuclear and missile programmes is through diplomatic negotiation.”

Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, also condemned the North Korean action, saying that the outrage heard around the world after the missle tests was a message to Pyongyang to “change its behaviour”.

The first batch of missile tests took place over four hours last night and were timed to coincide with the fireworks of the US Fourth of July celebrations and the launch of the space shuttle Discovery.

As the Security Council members went into their emergency talks, however, it was clear that China, which wields a veto, might block any firm condemnation or action.

Shinichi Kitaoka, Japan’s deputy ambassador to the world body, said that his country would push for a formal resolution from the Council, which diplomats said would be under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter and thus be militarily enforceable. The diplomat said: “Sanctions is probably included in our first proposal.”

But Wang Guangya, the Chinese ambassador, while expressing concern about the North Korean missile tests, pointedly drew a parallel with the last such tests eight years ago, when the Security Council contented itself with issuing a press statement - which did not even become part of the Council’s official record.

“Certainly I think this is not the first time the Security Council takes action on this particular issue, because we had a precedent in 1998. So if all Council members feel that some appropriate action is needed by the Council, then we will see,” he said.

Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.