[. . .] the failure to achieve Chapter 7 status for the resolution -- the use of military force to make sure it is obeyed -- leaves the door open for a debate about whether its provisions have real teeth or are just a bark.Let's face it. Paris Hilton's Chihuahua has more teeth than this resolution and frankly Ms. Hilton is more skilled at striking deals than Christopher Hill, the lead US envoy to the North Korea non-talks.
It was notable yesterday that Russia and China were staying silent on claims by the US, Japan and Britain that the resolution was "legally binding".
The answer to the latter question is probably nothing. The absence of an official sanctions committee to monitor compliance with the resolution and report on any breaches is a significant weakness that leaves the measure prone to abuse.
US ambassador John Bolton tried to put a positive face on this yesterday when he said: "You can have this kind of resolution without going through the normal sanctions kind of regime."
Yes, you can -- but it won't do you much good when it comes to a multilateral response against those prepared to assist rogue states such as North Korea to spread their weapons of mass destruction.
-- David Nason, The Australian
All I can add is that we need to find a way to stop Robert Zoellick from frolicking with a panda again the next time he visits China.
We need a deputy secretary of state who is aware that no amount of trade with China will change the nature of their government or loose their hold on North Korea -- and who advises the secretary of state accordingly.