‘Raising the immediate risk factor in fear of N. Korean bio-weapons is path to war’
RT.com
28 Dec, 2017
The US invaded Iraq claiming Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons. However, they were never found; and there is no necessity to defend against anthrax in South Korea now, says human rights attorney Eric Sirotkin.
A North Korean soldier who defected to South Korea this year has reportedly been found to have anthrax antibodies in his blood.
It has added to the media panic over Pyongyang potentially developing biological weapons.
Author and human rights attorney Eric Sirotkin suggests the fear-mongering over the issue of North Korean biological weapons just makes war more likely.
RT: So far all the focus has been on North Korea’s nuclear program. But in the light of this discovery, should we also be concerned about their biological weapons capability?
Eric Sirotkin: What we have to worry about is often the response to it. We should worry about biological and chemical weapons with any country that has them. Although in this situation, if you remember the lead up to the Iraq war, when the US invaded contra to its statutes, and to the UN requirements under the UN Charter, they said Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons and “we have proof,” and therefore, it became one of the bases for going in and invading Iraq. And these were never found. I find it very interesting that these are in the blood of a defector because on a lot of levels, they have been concerned about chemical and biological attacks from the US. I’ve toured museums there in North Korea, where they make a big deal of how during the Korean War the US did use chemical and biological warfare. So, consequently the fact that he has antibodies in the blood may be not related to being exposed to that, but being exposed to the vaccine.
There has to be a concern that a country that is developing weapons of mass destruction. And remember, there are countries around the world that possess weapons of mass destruction, not just North Korea – the UK, France, the US, Russia, and China, for example, they are seeking the means to develop other forms of WMD. In North Korean’s case, it would be particularly unsurprising after all. Here we’ve got a country that sees itself – justifiably many would argue – under threat, particularly from the US and is seeing other countries, such as Iraq, Libya, that are very publicly and under pressure given up their weapons of mass destruction… and then arguably from one perspective paid the price of giving up those weapons by them being attacked and destroyed by countries such as the US and its allies…- Charles Shoebridge, security analyst, and former UK army officer
The Rest…HERE
