Korea fired missiles that flew over Japan’s airspace. Responses have been measured and muted.
At minimum, North Korea violated Japan airspace.
At maximum it was an act of war (not sure the legal definition of that term).
Why isn’t this considered a violation of international law, and three days later why haven’t there been severe and immediate consequences?
Given that they’re basically holding Seoul hostage on the business end of thousands of artillery units, and their unarmed missile-over-Japan didn’t do any actual harm, what did you have in mind? What would you consider a prudent response toward North Korea by the international community for this act?
This. They’re firing duds.
NK has already shelled a SK island in the last decade. SK responded by blowing some shit up, and everyone clapped and went home.
If one of these missiles actually hits something and makes a BOOM!, then we might see a more escalated response. Right now, it’s the equivalent of a toddler throwing his toys around in the tub.
The missile was well above Japan’s airspace.
Not that I’m suggesting it it but what would happen if Japan or U.S. tested a missile that overflew NK in response?
It would almost certainly have to overfly China as well.
I believe that is the root of the problem concerning North Korea.
What severe and immediate consequences do you suggest? That is a serious question, because I can’t see what ‘consequences’ you expect anyone to inflict on North Korea other than starting a massive war that will kill millions of people and prompt decades of expensive occupation and cleanup, plus possible war with China.
It is considered a violation of international law, but so what? Lots of stuff is considered a violation of international law, it doesn’t mean anything unless a country powerful enough to do something about it is bothered enough to do something and has the means and will to carry out the enforcement. For a legitimate country cutting trade or raising tariffs or expelling ambassadors can offer pressure, but North Korea’s only cuttable trade is stuff that will starve peons and won’t hurt the leadership at all, there’s nothing to raise tariffs on, and there’s already no embassy with most countries. Unless you want to start an actual shooting war, there really isn’t anything but harsh words to use.
It’s nothing new. It’s not even the first time North Korea flew a missile over Japan. (Unless you want to make a fine distinction between a satellite launch and a missile launch.)
Also, what “consequences” would you suggest? The US has no diplomatic relations with North Korea. There are already strict economic sanctions on North Korea, and I’m not even sure if there’s anything left that isn’t already done.
How come? A U.S. Navy warship could park in the international waters on either the west or east side of North Korea and fire a missile over North Korea that would land in the waters on the other side, without the missile ever overflying Chinese land.
Moved to Great Debates.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Italics mine.
Don’t you mean “continue” or “restart”?
If I understand correctly, the missile’s altitude when it crossed Japan’s territory was higher than the orbit of the ISS.
I imagine the launch violates some kind of international sanctions against North Korea, but did it otherwise violate international law? Are we not permitted to launch things in outer space over other countries?
I have not seen the altitude, only news accounts saying it was in Japan’s airspace. If it was above the navigable atmosphere then perhaps these reports were a bit too breathless. However, Japan did alert its population.
I am not posting to say “Here’s what we should have done instead.” I am posting to ask, “Why isn’t this considered a crisis on par with something like the Cuban Missile Crisis”?
The distinction I would draw is that between a test of an inert satellite and an offensive weapon deliberately intended to be a provocation.
Were that the case, would the North Korean missile not be in orbit?
Hypothetical: How would you feel about this if they had launched something that passed over Hawaii or the Aleutian Islands?
The kind of response I have in mind might be at least posturing US ships to conduct “routine” military exercises in the Sea of Japan.
It was like 350 miles high. Different countries have different rules for airspace, but the highest bound is 62 miles.
As I understand it, Japan alerted their citizens to seek shelter. That’s kind of a big deal outside of perhaps Israel.
But, as someone said, North Korea is holding Seoul hostage, so we’ll write them another harshly-worded letter, warning them to desist or else we’ll write them another harshly-worded letter.
We did kind of do this: http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/31/politics/us-bombers-korean-peninsula/index.html