two South Korean soldiers fired warning shots, but the event that caused a crisis to break out between both countries was the explosion of three anti-personnel mines in the southern part of the military border (called the Demilitarised Zone) in early August that wounded two South Korean soldiers. A joint investigation undertaken by the South Korean government and the United Nations found that the mines had been planted by the North Korean Armed Forces in order to cause casualties among the South Korean military. Although North Korea denied these allegations, Seoul decided to blast anti-government propaganda from loudspeakers on the border for the first time in 11 years. The tension rose in the days that followed until fire was exchanged on the border on 20 August, though no fatalities were reported.
North Korea set a deadline for South Korea’s propaganda to end and put its troops on a state of pre-war alert, doubled the number of military troops on the border and deployed around 50 submarines. Meanwhile, South Korea also declared that it is ready for any kind of armed confrontation and evacuated about 10,000 people living near the border. Finally, on 25 August,
following long talks in the Panmunjon border region (in the Demilitarised Zone), both countries reached an agreement to improve their bilateral relations, South Korea put an end to its propaganda efforts and North Korea lamented the incident involving the anti-personnel mines. The United Nations and various governments, including the government of the United States, welcomed the agreement and recognised that the stability of the Korean
Peninsula had been at risk in the days before. Despite this agreement, both countries once again traded accusations in the days that followed and in early September, the South Korean and US governments conducted joint military exercises and naval manoeuvres to cope with potential North Korean attacks with biological weapons. The dialogue between both countries did not resume until the end of the year, when they signed a framework agreement to hold high-level talks in November and convened the first deputy minister-level meeting since the belligerent escalation in August.
In addition to the rising tensions in August, other sources of strain during the year included Pyongyang’s harsh criticism of the joint military exercises conducted by South Korea and the United States at different times of the year; South Korea’s condemnation of North Korea’s different short-range missile tests and the alleged test launch of ballistic missiles from a submarine in November; Pyongyang’s complaints about South Korea’s anticipated increase in military spending made public in April; the alarm raised by alleged statements by Kim Jong-un regarding completion of the manufacture of a hydrogen bomb and rumours about tests of the same that Pyongyang may be preparing; and the rise of military tension on the maritime border between both countries, which is also disputed. Concerning the last
factor, in early May North Korea threatened to shoot live ammunition at South Korean vessels without warning after 17 South Korean patrol boats crossed the maritime border claimed by Pyongyang, which is located somewhat further south than the Northern Limit Line (NLL), which serves as the de facto maritime border between both countries. In mid-May, North Korea conducted military exercises with live ammunition near the NLL, and at the end of the month Seoul accused Pyongyang of building military artillery facilities near the same border area.
Also in this area, Seoul fired several warning shots at North Korean ships on the grounds that they had entered its territorial waters in late June and again in October.
In May, South Korea also conducted military exercises with live ammunition in the Sea of Japan. Meanwhile, South Korea criticised its neighbour’s human rights situation on many occasions. In this regard, in the middle of the year, some South Korean media outlets echoed intelligence reports about the public execution of the North Korean defence minister for having ignored direct guidance from Kim Jong-un on various occasions and stated that around 15 senior officials had
been executed on Kim Jong-un’s orders in 2015, although Pyongyang adamantly denied these reports. In December, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution condemning the human rights situation in North Korea and urging the UN Security Council, which had addressed the same subject days earlier, to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court.
Despite all these sources of tension, throughout the year both parties repeated their willingness to close the gap in their positions and implemented various confidence-building measures, such as North Korea’s release of two South Koreans who had crossed into North Korea from China in April; Seoul’s delivery of fertiliser to Pyongyang for the first time in five years; an international march to the Demilitarised Zone to demand a formal end to the war between North and South Korea, reunification of the families separated by the war and more participation from women in the talks held by both countries; the beginning of talks on the possible exchange for cash of the approximately 500 Korean War prisoners remaining in North Korea, some of whom perform forced labour, according to human rights organisations; and the more than 500 people that Seoul thinks Pyongyang has abducted (for example, members of South Korea vessels held in the neighbouring country). Moreover, hundreds of people (400 alone in South Korea) participated in a series of reunions of families separated by the Korean War (1950-53) at North Korea’s Mount Kumgang for several days in late October. It is estimated that one million families are affected and in South Korea there are only 70,000 people on the waiting list to participate in one of these family reunions, the last of which took place in early 2014. Since these kinds of meetings began shortly after 2000, which was probably when bilateral relations were at their closest and when the most progress was made in
the interest of reconciliation and reunification between both countries, nearly 19,000 people have participated in 19 meetings in person and another 4,000 have made contact through videoconference. Meanwhile, during various moments of the year both parties declared their willingness to find common ground. Notable in this regard was North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s speech in early 2015 that not only criticised the joint military exercises conducted each year by South Korea and the United States, but also did not rule out holding a high-level summit and suggested his readiness to declare a temporary moratorium on nuclear testing if the United States declines to participate in the aforementioned military exercises. However, the United States rejected the proposal, arguing that routine military exercises are not comparable to a nuclear programme that violates various UN resolutions. Coinciding with the 15th anniversary of the aforementioned inter-Korean summit in June, Pyongyang expressed its willingness to talk if three conditions are met: the end of South Korea and the United States’ joint military exercises, the lifting of sanctions by South Korea and the end of any form of propaganda from South Korea, such as leaflets dropped from balloons.
Korea, DPR – USA, Japan, Rep. of Korea
Intensity: 2
Trend: =
Type: Government
International
Main parties: DPR Korea, USA, Japan, Rep. of Korea, China, Russia
Summary:
International concern about North Korea’s nuclear programme dates back to the early 1990s, when the North Korean government restricted the presence in the country of observers from the International Atomic Energy Agency and carried out a series of missile tests. Nevertheless, international tension escalated notably after the US Administration of George W. Bush included the North Korean regime within the so-called “axis of evil”. A few months after Pyongyang reactivated an important nuclear reactor and withdrew from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in 2003, multilateral talks began on the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula in which the governments of North Korea, South Korea, the USA, Japan, China and Russia participated.
In April 2009, North Korea announced its withdrawal from the said talks after the United Nations imposed new sanctions after the country launched a long-range missile.
As in previous years, intense diplomatic activity continued to be reported to achieve a resumption of multilateral talks on the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula, but concern rose substantially among the international community over the progress made in the North Korean nuclear programme. At various times during the year, the North Korean government issued public statements about the qualitative and quantitative progress of its nuclear programme, as well as its readiness to use it in certain circumstances. In May, for
example, Pyongyang claimed significant improvements in the accuracy of its short-range, medium-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles. It also stated that it had improved its ability to miniaturise nuclear warheads to attach them to ICBMs. One of the primary fears of the international community, the latter effort had already been mentioned in a report by two North Korea experts in January. The report also warned of the possibility that in around 2020, Pyongyang would have between 20 and 100 nuclear bombs (it is estimated to have possibly produced between 13 and 16 since 2003). The top part of the range presented in the report indicates a substantial increase over previous estimates, but coincides with calculations made by the Chinese government, according to some journalistic sources.
The report also mentions that notable investments in both the nuclear programme and the missile programme are planned over the next five years and asserts that the North Korean government currently has around 1,000 ballistic missiles (including long-distance ones). Regarding this last issue, intelligence reports have indicated a notable improvement in facilities and platforms to launch missiles, rockets and satellites. In early May, international concern grew after a ballistic missile was fired from a submarine. Several analysts questioned the veracity of the images that the North Korean government used to demonstrate the test and said that Pyongyang was still very far from carrying out such a test. Nevertheless, various governments condemned the action on the grounds that it was a clear violation of several UN resolutions. A few days after the test, the governments of the United States, South Korea and Japan met and agreed to boost political and military pressure and implement existing sanctions against North Korea in order to slow down the expansion of its nuclear programme.
In September, the North Korean government said that it was finalising the ballistics technology necessary to put weather satellites in orbit. Even though North Korea officially defended its right to develop a peaceful satellite programme, various governments claimed that Pyongyang’s intention was to conduct a test with long-range ballistic missiles, which the United States and South Korea say would violate various UN resolutions.
Such a test would have coincided with the 70th anniversary of the founding of the Workers’ Party on 10 October. Although the test did not take place in the end, tension rose appreciably in the region due to Washington’s warnings that it could impose new sanctions on North Korea, US statements supporting the installation of an anti-missile system in South Korea and Seoul’s deployment of a destroyer ship equipped with Aegis combat technology in the Sea of Japan.
Meanwhile, Pyongyang announced the reopening of the main nuclear reactor in the country (in Yongbyon) at full capacity after several years of inactivity. With the US-Korean Institute at John Hopkins University having warned of its activity through satellite images in January, this reactor is considered one of the main sources of plutonium production and uranium enrichment, both
necessary for developing nuclear weapons. In the closing months of the year, regional tension increased again due to intelligence reports that suggested that North Korea is preparing new nuclear tests; due to a failed test to launch a ballistic missile from a submarine in November; due to the publication of satellite images suggesting significant improvements in the largest satellite-launching facility in North Korea (in Sohae) and new activity at the underground nuclear testing facilities in Punggye-ri, where three tests have been reported thus far; and due to Kim Jong-un’s statements in December that the government had developed a hydrogen bomb that would be tested in the near future.
On a positive note, many diplomatic efforts were exerted to resume multilateral talks. Therefore, in March the South Korean government declared that China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and the United States had reached (and informed North Korea of) a minimum consensus on the conditions for resuming the negotiations. In other developments, during her speech before the UN General Assembly, South Korean President Park Geun-hye urged the international community to follow the example of the deal with Iran and to resolve the conflict over North Korea’s nuclear programme, which she considers the last important challenge in terms of nuclear non-proliferation facing the international community. Park Geun-hye said that if North Korea chose the path of dialogue and not confrontation, her government and the international community would actively participate in the economic reconstruction of the country.
South Asia
Bangladesh
Intensity: 3
Trend: ↑
Type: Government
Internal
Main parties: Government (Awami League), political opposition (Bangladesh National Party and Jamaat-e-Islami), International Crimes Tribunal
Summary:
Since the creation of Bangladesh as an independent State in 1971, after breaking away from Pakistan in an armed conflict that caused three million deaths, the country has experienced a complex political situation. The 1991 elections led to democracy after a series of authoritarian military governments dominating the country since its independence. The two main parties, BNP and AL have since then succeeded one another in power after several elections, always contested by the loosing party, leading to governments that have never met the country’s main challenges such as poverty, corruption or the low quality of democracy, and have always given it to one-sided interests. In 2008, the AL came to power after a two-year period dominated by a military interim Government was unsuccessful in its attempt to end the political crisis that had led the country into a spiral of violence during the previous months and that even led to the imprisonment of the leaders of both parties. The call for
elections in 2014 in a very fragile political context and with a strong opposition from the BNP to the reforms undertaken by the AL such as eliminating the interim Government to supervise electoral processes led to a serious and violent political crisis in 2013. Alongside this, the establishment of a tribunal to judge crimes committed during the 1971 war, used by the Government to end with the Islamist opposition, especially with the party Jamaat-e-Islami, worsened the situation in the country.
The politically tense situation in Bangladesh remained active throughout the year, with some serious episodes of violence and intense persecution of the political opposition and journalists. The violence was especially serious during the first quarter of the year, in which the protests called by the opposition party, the BNP, led to riots and clashes between demonstrators and police. These occurred one year after the parliamentary elections in 2014, which were the epicentre of a very serious political crisis. One hundred and fifty people died as a result of this violence during the first three quarters of the year, which also witnessed a general strike, the blockage of land, rail and river transport across the country and repeated attacks and burnings of trucks, buses and private vehicles. Begum Khaleda Zia, the leader of the BNP, refused to call off the protests, prompting the Bangladeshi government to subject her to house arrest for 17 days. In addition, she was formally charged with murder as the instigator of an attack on a passenger bus that killed 27 people. This was a qualitative leap regarding the accusations formulated against the leader of the BNP, since formal criminal charges had never been levelled against her before. The charges filed against her previously were for corruption. Her indictment was followed by an order in June requiring the opposition leader to turn herself in within two months. In July, the formation of a special tribunal under the anti-terrorism law was announced to judge the cases against Beghum Khaleda Zia and other members of the BNP. After a few months of intense violence, the political crisis dragged on with the announcement of local elections in Dhaka and Chittagong that were also boycotted by the BNP. An attack on a motorcade in which Khaleda Zia was travelling prompted the opposition party to withdraw its support for holding the elections, in which it initially seemed to have an advantage.
Neither the ruling AL party nor the BNP competed in them directly, but they had given explicit support to specific candidates. The elections handed victory to the ruling party once again and the BNP repeated its accusations of electoral fraud. Arrests and trials of opposition politicians were repeated throughout the year. Media outlets indicated that around 17,000 BNP employees and activists were detained and 22,000 cases were brought to court.
Throughout the year, the International Crimes Tribunal executed several people accused of war crimes committed during the war of independence in 1971.
Jamaat-e-Islami leader Muhammad Kamaruzzaman was executed in April, which led to protests in which two people were shot dead. Clashes between the police and demonstrators were also reported. The Tribunal handed out new prison and death sentences to people accused
India (Manipur)
Intensity: 3
Trend: ↑
Type: Identity, Self-government Internal
Main parties: Government, armed groups PLA, UNLF, PREPAK, PREPAK (Pro), KNF, KNA, KYKL, RPF, UPPK, PCP Summary:
The tension that confronts the government against the various armed groups that operate in the state, and several of them against each other, has its origin in the demands for the independence of various of these groups, as well as the existing tensions between the various ethnic groups that live in the state. In the 1960s and 70s several armed groups were created, some with a Communist inspiration and others with ethnic origins, groups which were to remain active throughout the forthcoming decades. On the other hand, the regional context, in a state that borders with Nagaland, Assam and Myanmar, also marked the development of the conflict in Manipur and the tension between the ethnic Manipur groups and the Nagaland population which would be constant. The economic impoverishment of the state and its isolation with regard to the rest of the country contributed decisively to consolidate a grievance feeling in the Manipur population. Recent years saw a reduction of armed violence.
India (Nagaland)
Intensity: 2
Trend: ↑
Type: Identity, Self-government Internal
Main parties: Government, NSCN-K, NSCN-IM, NSCN (Khole-Kitovi), NNC, ZUF Summary:
The conflict affecting the state of Nagaland began following the British decolonisation process in India (1947), when a Naga movement emerged that demanded recognition for the collective rights of the Naga population, which is mostly
The conflict affecting the state of Nagaland began following the British decolonisation process in India (1947), when a Naga movement emerged that demanded recognition for the collective rights of the Naga population, which is mostly