Tensions in the two Koreas

Tensions are rising on the Korean peninsula after an international board of investigation confirmed that North Korea was responsible for the unprovoked sinking of a South Korean naval vessel on March 26 with the loss of 46 sailors.

In response to this blatant act of war, South Korea has cut trade links with Pyongyang, banned North Korean ships entering South Korean waters, resumed the broadcasting of propaganda messages across the border and re-designated the North as its arch-enemy.

Communist North Korea, which denies responsibility for the sinking, said there will be no dialogue with the South during President Lee Myung Bak's term of office (which comes to an end in February 2013). It also "totally" abrogated the non-aggression pact with South Korea, threatened to open fire on the South Korean loudspeakers on the border and scrapped an agreement aimed at preventing accidental naval clashes with South Korea.

So the situation is indeed alarming. The two states are still technically at war after the Korean conflict ended without a peace treaty in 1953. This latest confrontation appears to be the closest the two have come to war since 1994 when the North threatened to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire".

The Stalinist state has a long history of carrying out terrorist attacks against its southern neighbour, but this is the first time it has conducted a military attack on a military target - a clear violation of the armistice between the two countries.

What made North Korea sink this ship? It is very difficult to say, but this military attack is believed by most analysts to be linked to the precarious domestic situation in North Korea.

There is some evidence to suggest that North Korea is facing a crisis at home, and one way of deviating attention from this is to cause a confrontation with South Korea and its ally, the United States.

A currency revaluation last winter is reported to have gone terribly long, leading to food shortages and wiping out people's savings. Furthermore, some reports say that North Korea is now on the brink of a massive famine.

This latest attack could also be linked to a succession strategy by North Korea's Communist dictator Kim Jong-il, who is in bad health and who is said to be positioning his third son, Kim Jong-un, to succeed him.

Some media reports have even suggested that the order to sink the South Korean vessel could have been given by a renegade hardline military official in a power play.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has expressed support for South Korea and said the international community must respond to this crisis. However, there are no easy options.

Military action seems to be ruled out as it carries the risk that North Korea will retaliate in a massive way. Pyongyang has a million-strong army and thousands of artillery pieces which are trained on Seoul. These would cause thousands of casualties and severe economic damage if stocks of conventional, chemical and biological shells were used.

Furthermore, North Korea is moving closer to becoming a nuclear armed state and is believed to have enough plutonium to produce six to eight nuclear bombs. This alone may give the country's leaders enough confidence that the US and South Korea will not resort to military action.

South Korea has taken North Korea's act of aggression to the UN Security Council, where it hopes additional sanctions will be imposed on Pyongyang. However, sanctions have had a limited impact on impoverished North Korea, and it is doubtful whether further sanctions - if they are approved - will make any difference to the North's behaviour.

There is another factor that needs to be taken into consideration. The US, China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea want the six-party nuclear disarmament talks - which North Korea quit last year - to resume and for North Korea to end its nuclear programme, although Japan and South Korea say talks cannot restart while this latest incident is unresolved. Punishing Pyongyang further is unlikely to entice it to re-enter these talks.

China has so far only urged restraint and has refused to condemn North Korea for its act of war. It is also doubtful whether China will agree to vote for more sanctions against its ally at the UN.

China's main interest so far has been to maintain the status quo. It does not want North Korea to collapse as it fears instability and an influx of refugees pouring across its borders. It has also looked at North Korea as a buffer between China's US military forces in the region.

China, though, cannot continue with its Cold War alliance mentality towards North Korea. Since it aspires to greater international respectability and a global leadership role, it should act in a responsible way.

The least it should do is support a Security Council resolution condemning North Korea for its behaviour and calling on it to apologise and punish those responsible for this act of aggression.

It should also make it clear that it will no longer support Pyongyang if it refuses to change its attitude towards the South.