The challenge of Security Council reform has been on the agenda at the United Nations for decades with little obvious effect on the workings of the Security Council itself.(1)

But what happens when an action of the Security Council is an improvement over past Security Council practices and presents an important model for conflict resolution in line with the obligations of the Charter? Will there be recognition of the peaceful direction that the action points in or will it be ignored and members of the Security Council revert back to the practice of the past?

The situation I am referring to is the consideration by the Security Council of the sinking of the South Korean naval warship, the Cheonan. The dispute over the sinking of the Cheonan was brought to the Security Council in June and a Presidential Statement was agreed to in July.

An account of some… weiter lesen

An article on the Cheonan warship sinking, “The whole story of the South Korean government as a false account?” was published in Telepolis on June 1. It documents several of the misleading claims being made by the South Korean government to put the blame on North Korea.

The June 2 election in South Korea for local and regional government showed that many South Koreas citizens and netizens rejected the Lee Myung-bak government claims and rendered his Grand National Party candidates a surprising and serious defeat.

This, however, has not deterred the Lee government from its goal. The election results were announced demonstrating the criticism of the government’s hostile policy toward North Korean represented by the so called “investigation” blaming North Korea for the sinking of the Cheonan. Yet, the South Korean government initiated action to take its spurious claims to the United Nations Security Council. A… weiter lesen