On
DPRK, Extended
Scope of
Sanctions, No
Jeopardizing
of Trade,
China Says
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, Jan
22, updated
with
transcripts --
After the
North Korea
resolution was
adopted by the
UN Security
Council by a
15-0 vote on
Tuesday
afternoon, the
Ambassadors of
the US, China
and South
Korea each
came out to
take press
questions.
Inner
City Press
asked US
Ambassador
Susan Rice if
the resolution
was
"proportionate"
-- as China's
Li Baodong
said was his
country's
benchmark --
and if it
really imposed
"new
sanctions."
Rice
did not
address the
word
"proportionate."
She called the
latter
question
"semantics,"
arguing that
by definition
it is new
sanctions: new
companies and
entities on
the sanctions
list.
Later
South Korea's
Permanent
Representative
Kim Sook said
the resolution
"extended the
scope of the
sanctions."
Inner
City Press
asked Li
Baodong if the
resolution
China agreed
to included
new sanctions.
He said there
had been
proposals for
new sanctions
which would
have
"jeopardized
normal trade"
for North
Korea, and
that these are
been rejected
and excluded
from the
resolution.
Back
in December
after DPRK's
launch, Inner
City Press
asked South
Korea's Kim
Sook if he had
spoken in the
consultations
he'd attended
as an incoming
Council
member. "Until
January," he
answered, "I
have no
mouth."
On
Tuesday Inner
City Press
asked, now
that you have
a mouth, being
on the
Security
Council, how
do you feel
about the
negotiations
being between
the US and
China, only
presented late
to the
Council's 15
members?
Kim
Sook replied
diplomatically
that all 15
members
contributed.
But is that
really true?
Watch this
site.
US
Mission to the
UN's
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
China had said
it would only
agree to a
resolution
that was, in
its view,
proportionate
to this
launch. Do you
think that
this
response-they're
claiming that
it doesn't
really-it's
putting new
names under
existing
sanctions but
it's not
really new
sanctions. Is
it a
proportionate
response?
Ambassador
Rice:
...Clearly
there are new
sanctions in
this
resolution. By
definition,
any time
additional
entities or
individuals or
items are
banned from
action that
they would
otherwise not
be banned
from, that's a
new sanction,
by definition.
So, we don't
need to have a
semantic
debate and
discussion
here.
But this is
also a
resolution
that built
upon 1874 and
1718 and was a
substantial
tightening of
the existing
regime, which
as you know is
already a very
robust
sanctions
regime. And we
think the
tightening of
it and strict
implementation
of it, in and
of itself, are
very valuable
steps. We
worked quite
closely and
cooperatively,
as I said, not
only with
China but
other partners
in the P5, and
the Republic
of Korea and
Japan and
other
interested
members of the
Security
Council to
arrive at this
outcome. We
think it is a
strong and
credible
outcome worthy
of the
collective
effort we all
invested in
it. Thank you
very much.
Summary
from stakeout
of RoK PR Kim
Sook:
Inner
City Press: It
seems the
resolution was
negotiated
between the US
and
China.
What was South
Korea's role
in those
negotiations?
Are you
satisfied by
the process?
Amb. Kim Sook:
I appreciate
the
demonstration
of solidarity
in the
security
council in the
process of
negotiating
the language
of the
resolution,
and I
especially
appreciate the
role that was
played by the
United States
and China, but
at the same
time, this is
the concerted
effort of all
the security
council
members.
So, we did
what we did,
and every
member had
played a
positive role,
I would
say. I'm
not going to
go into detail
about that,
but we did
actually
participate,
and I think I
contributed in
a positive
way.
, 
