Slashdot Mirror
N. Korea Could Face Prosecution For 'Crimes Against Humanity'
An anonymous reader writes with this news from The Telegraph: "North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, has been warned that he could face prosecution for crimes against humanity after a United Nations inquiry accused him of some of the worst human rights abuses since the Second World War. In some of the harshest criticism ever unleashed by the international community against the Pyongyang regime, a UN panel branded it 'a shock to the conscience of humanity.' Michael Kirby, a retired Australian judge who has spent nearly a year taking testimony from victims of the regime, said much of it reminded him of atrocities perpetrated by Nazi Germany and Pol Pot's Cambodia. Yesterday his team published a 374-page report detailing allegations of murder, torture, rape, abductions, enslavement, and starvation, describing North Korea as a dictatorship 'that does not have any parallel in the contemporary world.' In a bid to put pressure on Kim Jong-un, 31, Mr Kirby has taken the unusual step of writing to the North Korean leader to warn him that both he and hundreds of his henchmen could one day face prosecution."
More at the BBC, including a cache of the report.
Issue a sternly worded warning.
That'll teach him.
We know this has been going on.....why is the UN bothering now and what could they possibly do that they're not doing now?
Good karma sticks to me like velcro on a piece of plexiglass.
Move along, citizen.
These atrocities have been known for a long time, and there are already several good books on the subject (which hopefully some Slashdotters with more time can link). What I don't understand is why this report came out know? Is there some political timing involved in it coming out now as opposed to a decade ago?
North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, has been warned that he could face prosecution for crimes against humanity after a United Nations inquiry accused him of some of the worst human rights abuses since the Second World War.
Not as long as China protects him he won't. For various reasons I don't entirely understand China has elected to keep this family in power. (I know they want a buffer from South Korea but there has to be more to it than that) They don't even seem concerned about North Korea possessing nuclear weapons.
If China decides to withdraw support, the North Korean regime will be gone pretty quick most likely. Until then, nothing will happen unless a war starts between North and South Korea.
I'm sure Kim Jong-un is just quivering in his boots at this "strongly worded condemnation" by the UN. After all, the UN has such a strong record of following up such condemnations with action...
What's pathetic about this is such UN declarations just serve to reinforce what an absolute joke the whole organization is. The UN has no power whatsoever to do anything to North Korea and Dear Leader knows this.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
I propose a Grand Army of the UN. Worked well for the Old Republic.
Hey! We're talking about reducing the torture there!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You can be an atheist and still behave morally, ethically, and decently towards other human beings.
Likewise, you can believe in a god (or gods) and still be a murderous psychopath. Heck, as long as you fervently believe those gods are on your side, you can pretty much do anything you like... including interpreting scripture to suit your own purposes.
Koans and fables for the software engineer
Even ignoring the problem of getting him from power, ICC has no jurisdiction as Korea isn't a signatory and the UN security council is needed either to refer the case to the ICC or to create an ad hoc tribunal. Even if China might as some point decide to stop propping up its neighbour, it is not very likely that they will allow them to be tried in court.
Maybe you haven't heard but the US did fight a war there to keep North Korea out of South Korea. The US still has tens of thousands of troops there. That kind of shoots a hole in the whole "blood for oil" thing, huh?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Send a fleet of C-130 Hercules filled with lawyers and drop them on Pyongyang at 10000 ft.
If that doesn't work send another fleet and drop more lawyers, but this time give them parachutes
Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
As much as we can criticize many regimes for their ill conduct, I have a hard time imagining that what the Saudis or Israelis do is anything close to the North Korean regime's abuses.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
North Koeans are required to worship their leaders as gods. There is nothing Atheistic about that.
i ~ Celebrating Science, Cyberspace, Speculation
I always find it interesting that a regime we like has "officials" and a regime we don't like has "henchmen."
How about the fact that a country that we're friends with has a government, and the others have regimes? I don't think I've ever seen a US newspaper talking about the Tony Blair regime, or the Francois Hollande regime.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Have you been to Syria lately?
Have YOU been to Syria?
Syria is a propaganda story. Here's a TINY example, plucked from the firehose of lies:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/02/cnn-propaganda-poor-lone-kid-edition.html
Same for Venezuela:
https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/10360
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
So you are poorly informed AND you have a weak imagination.
Hey Anonymous Coward, pull your head out of the sand.
Can Saudis leave their country?
Are Saudis starving to death?
Are mothers of Saudi newborn Saudi babies forced to drown them?
Is crystal meth the only medicine available to a sick Saudi?
Is Saudi Arabia a paradise? No damn way - But to suggest Saudi Arabia is as bad as North Korea is an INSULT to your fellow humans in North Korea, including children for christ's sake, who are suffering and dying.
Do that, and North Korea is likely, in its dying moments, to bomb South Korea (if not its own populace, I honestly wouldn't put it past them). This is why there is this sort of unofficial entente between the US and China over North Korea. Neither probably likes the regime at all, but keeping it propped up is infinitely better than what may happen if it melts down.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Well, it's really China's imperative to do something about the monsters that they create. China shouldn't have to stop trading with North Korea, they should want to stop. Until we get to that point it won't matter much what the rest of the world thinks.
You are the recipient of other people's "information".
Saudi's CANNOT leave. Unless they are of a certain class, and have been specifically cleared by the secret police.
Saudi's are starving to death in the NW Shiite region
Rural Saudi girls are killed on birth, as liabilities to their poor families
Meth? You are crazy. But yes. Qat is the only medicine for millions.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
The difference is in the amount of power concentrated in a single person. There's a strong correlation between "countries we're friends with" and "widely-distributed authority". Tony Blair and Francois Hollande are limited by their various democratic councils, but Kim Jong-un is not.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
I guess the British Empire should have let the Nazis march all over Europe because Britain's record had blemishes.
This is the most tortured logic I can imagine.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Rather, it is China's view that it is no one's business outside the DPRK how the DPRK conducts it's affairs.
Baloney. If that were the case then China wouldn't be subsidizing the regime. China thinks it is China's business what the DPRK does.
China never wants to be involved in other countries' problems nor do they seek to impose their will on other countries - you don't see China out trying to spread their own unique brand of communist/capitalism elsewhere do you?
They most certainly do get themselves involved in other countries problems. Ask Tibet. Need more examples? Look at what China is doing in Africa. They are investing hugely there and they certainly are pushing their own interests. China is contesting with Japan over various islands (over oil mostly), they continue to insist that Taiwan is their property, they are increasingly becoming a force in east asian geo-politics, they are growing their military rapidly, etc. Claims that China doesn't exert power in other parts of the world is complete nonsense and demonstrably so.
It is hard for people in the West to believe this because in the West foreign policy is essentially *ALL ABOUT* spreading your influence and trying to spread democracy. China has no interest in any of this.
Bullshit China doesn't have any interest. China is NO different than any other large nation state. They definitely see themselves as a player on the world stage and they are behaving like a country with global interests. To simply keep their economic engine humming they HAVE to be involved in other parts of the world whether they want to or not.
Many countries have departure restrictions. Not defending it, but that's hardly unique to the Saudis. India has lots of people living at or below the poverty, as well as the killing of baby girls.
No matter how you cut it, North Korea puts almost every other regime in recent memory to shame. That's not to say that there are lots of other states with appalling human rights records, but there's appalling and then there's nightmares.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Isn't this kind of like warning a serial killer to not kill again because he might be prosecuted if he does? Seriously, why would KimCo be willing to believe that by not committing any more crimes they'd be safe from prosecution? Warning them to try and minimize future crimes is fine, just don't expect it to work on them. Other Kim wannabees might possibly pay attention to it, however. But even that would work a lot better if KimCo were actually prosecuted.
regime
riZHm
noun
1. a government, esp. an authoritarian one
The emphasis is on the authoritarian part. Granted, one could argue that many "governments" we support are actually regimes in disguise...
Granted, one could argue that many "governments" we support are actually regimes in disguise...
If one uses a definition of "disguise" loose enough to mean "can fool Lois Lane."
Just because America allowed the Iraqis (and Kuwaitis) self-rule in no way proves that their aggressions in the Persian Gulf were /not/ about ensuring itself a continued supply of petrochemicals.
But the fact that when the government of Iraq asked us to leave, we did, does indicate that access to oil isn't the primary goal. It is at least secondary if not lower on the list or you just continue to occupy the country.
The USA has a LONG history of not wanting to be an imperial power. We could have been. Lord knows we conquered enough territory to control more than half of the world if that was our goal. The same with oil. We've captured and returned to it's previous owners much of the world's oil supply. If our primary goal was to obtain oil, we are pretty stupid to give it back all the time.
But it does seem that the USA tends to get involved in conflict that surrounds the world's supply of Oil more often than other areas. A tendency that I can only explain by agreeing that oil is a consideration, as is the free flow of it around the world. But I would argue that this has accrued to the overall benefit for all of the world. We could have just taken it and hauled it home, but over and over we haven't.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
No, it's China's view that the DPRK's internal affairs are none of its business until China feels that the DPRK is no longer worth propping up. China is out for China's interest, and they are more than happy to interfere when it's in their national interest, no different than any other major global power. They may not currently have the force projection capabilities that other nations had, but just the sheer number of weapons they've shipped during the PRC's short history to pro-Chinese insurgencies and governments shows that they are not above this game. Perhaps the most blatant was the punitive campaign they launched against Vietnam in 1979, leaving tens of thousands of people dead and "scorched earth" in the northern half of Vietnam, all because the Vietnamese had the audacity to stop the massacres of the pro-PRC Khmer Rouge.
Yet for now, as much of a headache that the DPRK is for China, they put up with them because all of the other options are much less desirable for China (anarchy from regime collapse, war on its frontier, millions of refugees).
Note, if the NK regime was demonstrably reasonable --- let's say, anywhere between China's government and South Korea's --- it would make a lot of sense to drawn down the US presence. So there is no impasse here.
In this day and age, there is no need to go to war with an entire nation to remove in inhumane and oppressive regime. ... whatever it takes. Just take them down quietly, one at a time, no press statements, warnings or threats.
Go to war with the leaders and only the leaders. The U.N. needs a tactical and surgical response. Use intelligence, snipers, spies, drones, DNA biological agents, laser-equipped frogs,
They'll eventually lose their nerve.