Home  >  Proliferation / Russia & Korea / Sanctions / WMD

Russia’s nuclear cooperation with N. Korea violates at least three UNSC resolutions

My final excerpt from the draft U.N. Panel of Experts report is a lengthy graf (below the fold) describing long-standing and continuing Russian assistance to, and cooperation with, some of the same scientists involved in North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

It’s hard for me to understand how this is not a violation of the UNSC sanctions. Despite the fact that key scientists in designated North Korean agencies (for example, its General Bureau of Atomic Energy) were invited to do research in Russia, Russia argues that technically, it didn’t invite any designated individuals, that its own facility’s purposes are peaceful, and that North Korea “should not be excluded from fundamental science activities.”

The POE responds that “all … nuclear programmes” means what it says. I’ll helpfully insert the relevant provisions, starting with this one from UNSCR 1718 (2006):

6. Decides that the DPRK shall abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner, shall act strictly in accordance with the obligations applicable to parties under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the terms and conditions of its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Safeguards Agreement (IAEA INFCIRC/403) and shall provide the IAEA transparency measures extending beyond these requirements, including such access to individuals, documentation, equipments and facilities as may be required and deemed necessary by the IAEA;

And there is this, from UNSCR 1874 (2009):

“8.   Decides that the DPRK shall abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner and immediately cease all related activities, shall act strictly in accordance with the obligations applicable to parties under the NPT and the terms and conditions of the IAEA Safeguards Agreement (IAEA INFCIRC/403) and shall provide the IAEA transparency measures extending beyond these requirements, including such access to individuals, documentation, equipment and facilities as may be required and deemed necessary by the IAEA;

And this, from UNSCR 2094 (2013):

“5.   Condemns all the DPRK’s ongoing nuclear activities, including its uranium enrichment, notes that all such activities are in violation of resolutions 1718 (2006), 1874 (2009) and 2087 (2013), reaffirms its decision that the DPRK shall abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes, in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner and immediately cease all related activities and shall act strictly in accordance with the obligations applicable to parties under the NPT and the terms and conditions of the IAEA Safeguards Agreement (IAEA INFCIRC/403);

Under Section 104(a) of the NKSEA, the Russian institute concerned would be subject to mandatory asset blocking, and possibly to criminal prosecution leading to the forfeiture of its U.S.-based assets. Unless, of course, the institute was unwise enough to have kept its funds in Euros or (may God help them) Rubles. In which case, the question would shift to which bank the Institute uses.

The POE stops short of concluding that Russia is in violation, but says it will continue to investigate. The POE is also investigating that recent report that Russia invited North Korean representatives to attend a weapons trade fair. All in all, it’s a promising candidacy for the Axis of Evil. Excerpts follow.

29. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has participated in the activities of an international intergovernmental research organization for nuclear sciences called the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, headquartered in the Russian Federation. The Chief Science Secretary of the Joint Institute informed the Panel that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was one of the countries that founded the Institute in 1956, that it may send specialists to work at the Institute’s laboratories and that its representatives may (and have to) participate in sessions of the Scientific Council. It was also stated that the government representatives should participate in activities of the supreme governing body, the Committee of Plenipotentiaries of the Governments of the 18 Member States of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research. Accordingly, the Institute’s website lists Mr. Li Je Sen (or Ri Je-Son) as a member of this Committee since 1998; Mr. Kim Son Hyok as a member of the Institute’s Scientific Council and Director of the Department of Science of “the General Administration for Atomic Energy of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”; and Mr. Hwan[g] Sok Hwa and Mr. Pak Ben Seb as former Scientific Council members (see annex 5). Mr. Ri Je-son, the Minister of Atomic Energy Industry, and Mr. Hwang Sok Hwa were designated by the Committee on 16 July 2009.

30. The Chief Science Secretary of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research confirmed that as at 2 January 2015, four nationals of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were affiliated with the Institute, with their terms ending on 30 March 2015. Their information is provided in table 1 below.

31. The Joint Institute for Nuclear Research informed the Panel that representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s embassy in Moscow had participated in the activities of the Scientific Council or the Committee of Plenipotentiaries as observers in recent years, but that there was no participation by designated entities or individuals. The Secretary further stated that “the problem of the growing debt of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the budget of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research became the ground for the recent decision by the Committee of Plenipotentiaries to interrupt the reception of Democratic People’s Republic of Korea specialists at the Institute.”

32. The Russian Federation informed the Panel that no designated entities or individuals were invited to the Russian Federation, that specialized training within the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research was conducted under its “international organizational” status, and that the Institute’s peaceful activities do not fall within the provisions under the resolutions, and therefore no violation of sanctions occurred. The Russian Federation also noted that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea should not be excluded from fundamental science activities.

33. The Panel recalls that under the resolutions, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is obliged to abandon all … nuclear programmes … and immediately cease all related activities. The Panel will continue its investigation.

9 Responses

  1. Russia are no angels, but I do believe a lot of this could have been avoided had the European Union not poked the Russia bear continuously. You only have to see the kind of rhetoric that comes out about Russia in UK newspapers from various people, such as claims that they are the biggest threat to the UKs national security etc. And of course the coverage you see about planes flying through international airspace close to the UK/Other European countries. They of course don’t mention that other countries such as the US does the same to Russia too.

    Russia seems to have been isolated over the Ukraine issues, if this can somehow be resolved, perhaps it could play nice again with the international community as a whole. And not do stuff like this with North Korea.

  2. Matthew, even ignoring the illegal annexation of Ukraine territory by pretty clear Russian weaponry and manpower, let’s look at a few other things going on. What about the recent flagrant Nemtsov murder which has been conveniently blamed on Chechen separatists, among other shady murders like Litvinenko’s Polonium 210 poisoning or Boris Berezovsky’s murder thereafter? I see Russia in a fairly obvious slide back into the arms of totalitarianism under a new flag other than the hammer and sickle. It seems that corruption, chest-thumping and anti-western sentiment are the order of the day over there under the guise of “Nationalism”. The recent walling off of data requiring all data to reside within Russia so that the government can fully control everything is another step towards Orwellian state practices http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/04/russia_internet_sovereignty_vladimir_putin_is_tightening_his_grip_on_the.html .

    I’m not saying the west is perfect, far from it, and the NSA surveillance stuff has been a nightmare for the US’ reputation. Nonetheless, I don’t find it difficult to imagine Putin’s Russia being more than happy to cooperate and collaborate with North Korea simply to piss off and intimidate the west and have a trading partner they could take advantage of in future, not to mention a military and political hedge in Asia. Why not encourage another nutty state that the west can’t control or predict as long as Russia can benefit politically and financially from it? One pseudo-totalitarian government doesn’t mind another as long as it isn’t being directly threatened by it. Dictators must support other dictators in today’s democratically-weighted political landscape.

  3. I do agree with you, that’s why I said Russia are no angels, however European Union expansionism is clearly a concern for Russia, it clearly doesn’t want a superstate on its own doorstep and is being a bit defensive over it. Putin clearly knows he’s a pariah and is acting like it, I just don’t agree with the rhetoric that could drag the West into a war with Russia. A lot of this has to be solved diplomatically, and if it doesn’t work sanctions still.

    Let’s be honest here, it’s unlikely Russia will surrender Crimea back to Ukraine, attention should be given to making a lasting peace in the rest of Ukraine, no more fighting or anything like that, just restore things to the status quo again.

  4. Lol Matthew, let’s just give Mr Hitler that territory, that’ll calm him down and he’ll never bother anybody again, right?

  5. Crimea was part of Russia for hundreds of years. Same thing with these areas in eastern Ukraine. Putin has a point of view that deserves consideration.

  7. @Fred

    What, so you want World War 3 to start over one little piece of land populated mostly by Russians anyway? I have a good point, Russia won’t had it over, and taking it from Russia will cause a war. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather just things stay how they are, it’s not like the people in Crimea are suffering.

  8. Were it not for the way Putin seized Crimea, I’d have been sympathetic to the idea that Crimea is historically and overwhelmingly Russian, but suggesting that World War 3 is the only way to oppose an aggressive land grab — and hopefully, deter the next one — looks like a classic false choice argument. After all, Putin’s unprovoked invasion of the Ukraine and his destruction of a civilian airliner didn’t start World War 3. Likewise, I don’t think it would start World War 3 if we gave the Ukrainians enough arms to stabilize the lines, weaken Putin domestically, and create the conditions for a settlement.

  9. But we all know that the Russians are backing the anti Ukrainian forces, with military equipment etc. It’s clearly a proxy war. Would you risk it? Russia has on multiple occasions warned against Western interference on the ground, such as arming the Government forces etc

    @Putin’s unprovoked invasion of the Ukraine

    Because the United States and the United Kingdom know full well that a war against the Russians would be a devastating one and wouldn’t risk it over Ukraine. If either country sent troops to engage them surely you must realize that would result in a war?

    @destruction of a civilian airliner

    Such a sad event, and we know full well the Russians are to blame, but again no one would start a war over that, sanctions are the only alternative.