Remarks by Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield at a UN Security Council briefing on the DPRK’s recent ICBM launch

Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield
US Representative to the United Nations
New-York, New-York

AS DELIVERED

Thank you Mr President. And thank you, Assistant Secretary Jenca, for your informative briefing and recommendations to this council. I welcome the Republic of Korea’s participation by our side today.

The United States strongly condemns the DPRK’s March 15 ICBM and SRBM launches.

Exactly one month ago to the day, we met here to discuss the launch of an ICBM in the DPRK. In the face of the growing threat to international peace and security posed by the DPRK, we called for Council unity.

A month later, the DPRK launched another ICBM and just days later followed it up with another ballistic missile launch, again in violation of several Security Council resolutions.

Not only are these launches threatening, destabilizing and illegal, they also allow the DPRK to pursue the development of more sophisticated and dangerous weapons.

The DPRK’s irresponsible, unannounced takeoffs also pose an unacceptable risk to international air and maritime transport.

I know that two members of this council think we should keep quiet. But the Council’s silence doesn’t work. Hoping that the DPRK regime will stop by itself does not work. Month after month, these two members are demanding that we do the same thing and expect different results.

Our silence in the face of DPRK escalations weakens the Council’s credibility, jeopardizes the global non-proliferation regime and increases the DPRK’s appetite to flaunt the body’s collective mandate.

Not only is the DPRK watching, the world is watching. How can we be silent?

A Council resolution is the appropriate backlash for the launch of just one ICBM. That’s not just my opinion. That used to be the consensus on this council. The Council unanimously adopted resolutions in response to the DPRK’s first three ICBM launches.

These resolutions not only sent a clear diplomatic message to the DPRK and all potential proliferators, but also implemented concrete measures that successfully increased the cost for the DPRK to advance its illicit weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile program.

Now, with the Council’s alternative stance, we’ve seen ten ICBM launches since early 2022.

In response to this crisis, the United States has repeatedly proposed Council products. We have made clear our sincere intention to negotiate in good faith. And the vast majority of the Council has shared our commitment and commitment to diplomacy.

But three member states are refusing to engage in good faith diplomacy in the face of this threat: the DPRK, which continues to ignore our numerous offers of dialogue, and China and Russia, whose Council obstructionism encourages the DPRK to launch ballistic missiles with impunity.

China and Russia will tell you they are not defending the DPRK.

But their actions speak louder than words.

They will tell you that council meetings and legitimate defense drills are “provocative”.

I will remind them that the Council’s products are unifying statements and part of the Council’s responsibility. There are no provocative actions. In fact, they have de-escalated rocket launches in the past.

And the DPRK’s unprecedented launch campaign began well before the United States and our allies resumed our long-standing defensive drills.

So here’s my question: How many times does the DPRK have to breach its obligations under the UN Security Council resolution before China and Russia stop shielding the DPRK regime?

How often does the DPRK have to choose ammunition over food?

How many starving people does the DPRK need?

What happens when a missile test fails mid-flight and debris rains down underneath?

What happens if there is a nuclear test on China’s doorstep?

Please think about these questions.

In my view, enough is enough.

The United States is imploring Council members to return to the level of cooperation that existed earlier on the DPRK threat.

This Council must convey three messages to the DPRK and all proliferators: first, that the Security Council and the international community condemn these actions as a clear threat to international peace and security; Secondly, that we must reaffirm and fully implement the resolutions adopted unanimously; And third, it is time for the DPRK to completely, verifiably and irreversibly abandon its illicit weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs and instead initiate dialogue.

The United States has proposed a PRST, the latest Council product we’ve written, to do just that.

I encourage everyone in this Chamber to join us in these messages of peace.

Thank you Mr President.