State Status of North Korea Persistent Objector with Respect To The Prohibition on the Use of Nuclear Weapons

Abstract

Nuclear weapons are a type of weapon that has been tried to be limited in production and use in some ways due to the serious effects they have on both living things and the environment since they were first used by the USA in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 provides an important arrangement for this purpose. The treaty recognised the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China as nuclear states. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is not a state that the treaty recognises as a nuclear state. However, North Korea began nuclear weapons studies during its first leader, Kim Il Jong, and declared that it had reached its goal of developing nuclear weapons in 2018. For this reason, it is known today that North Korea also has nuclear weapons. North Korea has also confirmed this information at different times. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was signed in 2017, which introduced an explicit ban, but the treaty faced objections from five states, which are considered nuclear states. North Korea, which withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NSYÖA) in 2003, is also not a party to the treaty. Therefore, he argued that there is no binding regulation. Therefore, the nature of the prohibition on the use of such weapons has become more important in terms of the sources of international law. It should be noted that the prohibition has become a customary rule and therefore binds all states that do not have a persistent objector attribute. Therefore, states that do not want to be subjected to this ban, which has become a universal customary rule, must constantly and persistently object to the said rule. For North Korea to not be subjected to a ban, it must also have a persistent objector status. In order to determine the situation of North Korea with respect to the ban, it should be examined whether it has the status of a persistent objector.

Keywords

• Nuclear Weapons
• Nuclear States
• Prohibition of Threats or Use of Nuclear Weapons
• North Korea
• Persistent

Nükleer Silahların Kullanılması Yasağı Bakımından Kuzey Kore’nin Israrlı Muhalif (Persistent Objector) Devlet Statüsü

Abstract

Nükleer silahlar 1945 yılında ilk kez Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD) tarafından Hiroşima ve Nagazaki’de kullanılmasından beri hem canlılar hem de çevre üzerinde yarattığı ciddi etkiler nedeniyle bir şekilde hem üretimi hem kullanımı sınırlandırılmaya çalışılan bir silah türüdür. 1968 tarihli Nükleer Silahların Yayılmasının Önlenmesi Andlaşması (NSYÖA) bu amaçla yapılan önemli bir düzenlemedir. Andlaşma ABD, Rusya, Birleşik Krallık, Fransa ve Çin’i nükleer devlet olarak kabul etmiştir. Kore Demokratik Halk Cumhuriyeti (Kuzey Kore) andlaşmanın nükleer devlet sıfatı tanıdığı devletlerden biri değildir. Ancak Kuzey Kore, ilk lideri Kim Il Jong döneminde nükleer silah çalışmalarını başlatmış ve 2018 yılında nükleer silah geliştirme hedefine ulaştığını ilan etmiştir. Bu nedenle bugün Kuzey Kore’nin de nükleer silah sahibi olduğu bilinmektedir. Kuzey Kore de bu bilgiyi faklı zamanlarda da doğrulamaya devam etmektedir. 2017 yılında Nükleer Silahların Yasaklanmasına Dair Andlaşma yapılmış, ancak açık bir yasak getiren bu andlaşma özellikle nükleer devlet olarak kabul edilen beş devletin itirazıyla karşılaşmıştır. 2003 yılında Nükleer Silahların Yayılmasının Önlenmesi Andlaşması’ndan çekilen Kuzey Kore bu andlaşmanın da tarafı değildir. Bu nedenle kendisi için herhangi bağlayıcı bir düzenleme bulunmadığını savunmaktadır. Dolayısıyla söz konusu silahların kullanılmasına ilişkin yasağın uluslararası hukuk kaynakları bakımından niteliği daha önemli hâle gelmektedir. Yasağın örf ve adet kuralına dönüştüğü ve bu nedenle ısrarlı muhalif niteliği bulunmayan tüm devletleri bağlayacağı ifade edilmelidir. Dolayısıyla evrensel bir örf adet kuralına dönüşen bu yasağa tabi olmak istemeyen devletler sözü edilen kurala sürekli ve ısrarlı bir şekilde itiraz etmelidir. Kuzey Kore’nin yasağa tabi olmaması için de ısrarlı muhalif statüsüne sahip olması gerekir. Bu nedenle Kuzey Kore’nin yasak karşısındaki durumunun tespiti için ısrarlı muhalif statüsü incelenmelidir.

Keywords

• Nükleer Silah
• Nükleer Devlet
• Nükleer Silah Tehdidi veya Kullanımı Yasağı
• Kuzey Kore
• Israrlı Muhalif

References

1. Akdoğan E, 21. Yüzyılda Yeni Silah Teknolojileri Silahların Kontrolü ve Uluslararası Hukuk (1. Baskı, Legem 2018). google scholar
2. Aksar Y, Evrensel Yargı Kuruluşları (1. Baskı, Seçkin 2007). google scholar
3. Aksar Y, Uluslararası Hukuk I (6. Baskı, Seçkin 2021). google scholar
4. Alpkaya G, “Nükleer Silahlar ve Uluslararası Adalet Divanı” (1997) 52(1-4) Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 105-115. google scholar
5. Arsava A. F, “Nükleer Silahların Yasaklanması Andlaşması ve NATO Andlaşması” Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi (2023) 14(56) 203-228. google scholar
6. Bradley CA ve Mitu G, “Wihtdrawing from International Custom” (2010) 120(202) The Yale Law Journal 202-275. google scholar
7. Cirincione J. / Wolfsthal J. / Rajkumar M., Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Threads (2nd Edition, Carnagie Endowment for International Peace 2005). google scholar Cha VD ve David CK, Nuclear North Korea (1 st Edition, Colombia University 2003). google scholar
8. Colson DA, “How Persistent Must the Persistent Objector Be?” (1986) 61(3) Washington Law Review 957-970. google scholar

9. Çelik EF, Milletlerarası Hukuk Birinci Kitap (2. Baskı, Filiz 1987). google scholar
10. Davenport K, “North Korea Conducts Nuclear Test” (2013) 43(2) Arms Control Today 20-24. google scholar
11. Denk E, “Uluslararası Andlaşmalar Hukukunda Jus Cogens Kurallar” (2001) 56(2) Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 43-70. google scholar
12. Denk E, “Bir Kitle İmha Silahı Olarak Nükleer Silahların Yasaklanmasına Yönelik Çabalar” 2011(66/3), Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 93-136. google scholar
13. Dumberry P, “Incoherenet and Ineffetive: The Consept of Persistent Objector Revisited” (2010) 59(3) The International and Comparative Law Quaartely 779-802. google scholar
14. Emir N, “Nükleer silahların yasaklanması Andlaşması’nın Nükleer Silahsızlanma çabaları ve Andlaşmalar Hukuku Bakımından Değerlendirilmesi” (2021) 27(1) Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi 239-253. google scholar
15. Green J. E, “India’s status As a Nuclear Weapons Power under Customary International Law” National Law School of Indıa Review (2012) 24(1) 125-146. google scholar
16. Jun BG, “Cyclical Patterns of North Korean Nuclear Crisis and Solutions: A South Korean Perspective”, Jungmin Kang (edr), Assessment of the Nuclear Programs of Iran and North Korea (1st Edition, Springer Netherlands 2013) 53-64. google scholar
17. Hayashi K ve Terus K, Kim Il Jong’s North Korea (1st Edition, Institute of Developing Economies 1997). google scholar
18. Heller K.J, “Specially-Affected States and the Formation of Custom” American Journal of International Law (2018) 112(2) 191-243. google scholar
19. Hildreth S. A, “North Korean Ballistic Missile Threat to The United States”, Simon R. Holden (edr), North Korea’s Nuclear and Ballistic Weapons (Nova Science Publishers 2010) 1-9. google scholar
20. Hillier T, Principles of Public International Law (1st Edition, Cavendish Publishing 1999). google scholar
21. Karabel S, “Kuzey Kore-ABD Nükleer Denkleminde Çin’in Konumu” (2018) 13(1) Stratejist 5865. google scholar
22. Karakoç İ, “Uluslararası Hukukta Emredici Kural (Jus Cogens=Peremptory Norm) Olgusuna Tarihsel Bir Yaklaşım” (2006) 8(1) Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 87-122. google scholar
23. Keskin Y, “Uluslararası Hukukta Nükleer Silahların Meşruluğu Sorunu” (2019) 14(183/184) Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1961-2022. google scholar
24. Kim H, “Comparing North Korea Policies of The Obama and Trump Admnistrations” (2017) 39(1) Nanzan Review of American Studies 45-69. google scholar
25. Kim S. C, “North Korea’s Nuclear Dıoctrine and Revisionist Strategy”, Sung Shull Kim ve Michael E. Cohen (edr) North Korea and Nuclear Weapons: Entering The New Era od Deterrence (Georgetown University Press 2017) 31-54. google scholar
26. Kibaroğlu M, “Kuzey Kore’nin Nükleer Silah Programı: Sebepler ve Sonuçlar” (2004) 1(1) Uluslararası İlişkiler 154-172. google scholar
27. Koskenniemi M, From Apology to Utopia-The Structure of International Legal Argument, Reissue with a new Epilogue (Cambridge University Press 2005). google scholar
28. Lepard B. D, Customary International Law A new Theory with Practical Applications (Cambridge University Press 2010) google scholar
29. Lythgoe G, Nuclear Weapons and International Law: The Impact of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, https://www.ejiltalk.org/nuclearweapons-and-international-law-the-impact-of-the-treaty-on-the-prohibition-ofnuclear-weapons/ (8.2.2024). google scholar
30. Nam SW, North Kore’s Nuclear Weapons and Reunification of The Korean Peninsula (1st Edition, Word Scientific 2019). google scholar
31. Niksch LA, North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Development and Diplomacy (1st Edition, Congressional Research Service 2010). google scholar
32. O’hanlon M ve Mike M, Crisis on The Korean Peninsula (1st Edition, McGraw-Hill Education 2003). google scholar
33. Orlov V., “The Crimean Crisis and the Issie of Security Guarantees for Ukraine”, (2014 )2, International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations, 22-34. google scholar
34. Öktem E, Uluslararası Teamül Hukuku (1. Baskı, Beta 2013) google scholar
35. Pazarcı H, Uluslararası Hukuk (19. Baskı, Turhan 2020). google scholar
36. Roehring T, “One Rogue State Crisis at a Time!”: The United States and North Koreas’s Nuclear Weapons Programe (2003) 165(4) Word Affairs 155-178. google scholar
37. Rozman G, Strategic Thinking About the Korean Nuclear Crisis (1st Edition, Palgrave Macmillan 2011). google scholar
38. Shaw MN, International Law (7th Edition, Cambridge University Press 2017). google scholar
39. Slouka ZJ, International Custom and the Contiental Shelf (1st Edition, Martinus Nijhoff 1968). google scholar
40. Sigal LV, Disaming Strangers, Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea (1st Edition, Princeton University Press 1997). google scholar
41. Spector LS, Mcdonough MM ve Medeıros ES, Tracking Nuclear Proliferation: A Guide in Maps and Charts 1995 (Brookings Institution Press 1995). google scholar
42. Stein TL, “The Approach of the Different Drummer: The Principle of the Persistent Objector in International Law” (1985) 26(2) Harvard International Law Journal 457-482. google scholar
43. Steinfeld A, “Nuclear Objections: The Persistent Objector and The Legality of the Use of Nuclear Weapons” (1996) 62(4) Brooklyn Law Review 1635-1686. google scholar
44. Sur M, Uluslararası Hukukun Esasları (14. Baskı, Beta 2020). google scholar
45. Tütüncü AN, “Nükleer Silahlar ve Milletlerarası İnsancıl Hukuk İlişkisi’nin Divan’ın 1996 Tarihli Danışma Görüşü Çerçevesinde Değerlendirilmesi” (2003) 23 Milletlerarası Hukuk Bülteni 791816. google scholar Uzun E, “Milletlerarası Adalet Divanı’nın Nükleer Silahların Tehdidi veya Kullanımının Meşruiyeti ile İlgili 1991 Tarihli İstişari Mütaalasına İnsancıl Hukuku Açısından Bir Bakış” (2003) 7(3-4) Atatürk Üniversitesi Erzincan Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 557-589. google scholar
46. Ünal B, “İran-kuzey Kore Savunma Sanayii ve Nükleer Teknoloji İşbirliği” (2014) 6(10) Bilge Strateji 557-589. google scholar
47. Varriale C, Arms Control Today (October-2018) 48(7) 6-10. google scholar
48. Villiger ME, Customary International Law and Treaties (1st Edition, Nijhoff Publishers 1985). google scholar
49. Weeramantry C, “Dissenting Opinion-Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Legality ofthe Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons” American Journal of International Law (1996) 86(3) 476-505, https:// www.icj-cij.org/en/case/95(28.3.2022). google scholar
50. International Court of Juctice, Continental Shelf (Libya/Malta), 3 June 1985, https://www.icj-cij. org/public/files/case-related/68/068-19850603-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (14.3.2022). google scholar
51. International Court of Justice, The Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 8 July 1996, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/95/095-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf (14.3.2022). google scholar
52. International Court of Justice, Asylum Case (Colombia/Peru), 20 November 1950, https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/7/007-19501120-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (15.01.2024). google scholar
53. International Court of Justice, Bozkurt-Lotus Case (France /Turkey), 7 September 1927, https:// www.icj-cij.org/list-of-all-cases?dateorder=introduction&order=desc (15.1.2024). google scholar
54. International Court of Justice, Right of Passage over Indıan Terrority (Portukal /India), 12 April 1960 https://www.icj-cij.org/case/32 (30.1.2024). google scholar
55. International Court of Justice, North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany/ Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands), 20 February 1969, https://www.icj-cij. org/case/51 (30.1.2024). google scholar
56. International Court of Justice, Border and Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua/Costa Rica), 28 July 1986, https://www.icj-cij.org/case/73 (6.2.2024). google scholar
57. International Court of Justice, Reservatıons To The Conventıon On The Preventıon And Punıshment Of The Crıme Of Genocıde Advısory Opınıon, 28 May 1951, https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/ default/files/case-related/12/012-19510528-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf (7.2.2024). google scholar
58. United Nations Security Council, S/RES/2371(2017), Adopted by the Security Council at its 8019th meeting on 5 July 2017, https://undocs.org/S/RES/2371(2017) (13.4.2022). google scholar
59. United Nations Security Council, S/RES/2397(2017),Adopted by the Security Council at its 8151st meeting on 22 December 2017, https://undocs.org/S/RES/2397(2017) (13.4.2022). google scholar
60. United Nations Security Council, A/RES/1653(1961), Declaration on the prohibition of the use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons, https://daccess-ods.un.org/tmp/6799777.74620056.html (25.1.2024). google scholar
61. United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/1(I), Establishment of a Commission to Deal with the Problems Raised by the Discovery of Atomic Energy, 24 January 1946, chrome-extension:// efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://documents.un.org/doc/resolution/gen/nr0/032/52/ pdf/nr003252.pdf?token=50OgZ9pYrWQV0VgOtp&fe=true (6.2.2024). google scholar
62. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://armscontrolcenter.org/wp-content/ uploads/2022/11/START-I-Fact-Sheet.pdf (30.1.2024). google scholar
63. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://20092017.state.gov/documents/ organization/27389.pdf (30.1.2024). google scholar
64. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/ cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_1994_1399.pdf (30.1.2024). google scholar
65. https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/95/8680.pdf (12.01.2024). google scholar
66. https://www.refworld.org/cases,ICJ,3ae6b67f14.html (15.01.2024). google scholar
67. nato.int/docu/review/tr/articles/2020/06/088 (26.1.2024). google scholar
68. https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/trty/102360.htm (30.1.2024). google scholar
69. https://2001-2009.state.gov/t/ac/trt/18016.htm (30.1.2024). google scholar
70. https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/tutanaklar/TUTANAK/TBMM/d21/c015/tbmm21015014ss0171.pdf (30.1.2024). google scholar
71. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=442726 (30.1.2024). google scholar
72. https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/isn/5182.htm (30.1.2024). google scholar
73. https://www.tBirleşmişMilletlerm.gov.tr/tutanaklar/ TUTANAK/TBİRLEŞMİŞ MİLLETLERM/ d21/c015/tBirleşmiş Milletlerm21015014ss0171 .pdf (30.1.2024). google scholar
74. https://www.diplomasi.net/antarktika-antlasmasi/(30.1.2024). google scholar
75. https://www.iaea.org/publications/documents/treaties/ treaty-prohibition-nuclear-weapons-latin-america-tlatelolco-treaty (30.1.2024). google scholar
76. http://edam.org.tr/nukleer-silahlardanarindirilmis-bolgeler/ (30.1.2024). google scholar
77. https://asean.org/?static_post=treaty-on-the-southeastasia-nuclear-weapon-free-zone (30.1.2024). google scholar
78. http://edam.org.tr/nukleer-silahlardan-arindirilmisbolgeler/(30.1.2024). google scholar
79. http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/canwfz/text (30.1.2024). google scholar
80. https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/deterrence/trilateral.html (30.1.2024). google scholar
81. https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVI-9&chapter=26 (1.2.2024). google scholar
82. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/putin-rus-devletinin-varligina-tehdit-olursa-nukleer-silah-kullanacaklarini-soyledi/3008761 (7.2.2024). google scholar
83. https://www.trthaber.com/haber/dunya/rusya-ukraynanin-fuze-sistemlerimizi-vurma-girisimi-nukleer-silah-kullanma-sebebi-828287.html (7.2.2024). google scholar
84. https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/ (7.2.2024). google scholar
85. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm (8.2.2024) google scholar