By KCNA
June 6, 2008

Pyongyang -- The international community does not want the renewal of the Cold War. However, concern over "a new Cold War" does not fade out and the argument on it goes on. Looming on its backdrop are acute discord and contradiction between the multipolar and the unipolar forces.

The Cold War of the last century was an unreasonable rivalry between the superpowers to gain the upper hand in strength.

The confrontational structure of strength between the two superpowers collapsed and the balance of forces in the world arena was destroyed with "the end of the Cold War".

Seized by the vertigo of strength, the United States resorted to strong arm and arbitrary practices everywhere, but it is now on the point of losing its position of "the only superpower" in face of the powerful advance of the multipolarization trend.

Nearly twenty years after the curtain fell on the Cold War, Russia and other big powers are getting more pronounced in their push to attain a balance of strategic strength with the U.S. while hastening their economic development. This is a serious challenge to the unipolar ambition of the U.S.

The sensitive reaction of the U.S. administration to the concern of China and Russia over the U.S. moves to deploy a missile defense system in their joint statement published in Beijing on May 23 disclosed its uneasy mind-set. This indicated the surfacing contradiction and confrontation between the multipolar forces trying to attain a balance of forces and the unipolar forces pitching hard to maintain the imbalance of forces in the international arena.

As argued by many countries, multipolarization means an advance of history, being a process of the democratization of international relations, while unipolarization is a reaction to history aimed at the fascistization of international relations.

What underlies the growing concern over and argument about "a new Cold War" is the unchanged maneuvers of the U.S. to increase tension in and after the Cold War days. The Cold War drive of the U.S. still continues, though it has changed the slogan from "anti-communism" to "anti-terrorism".

The United States claims that "the initiative of non-proliferation of mass destruction weapons" and MD deployment must be pushed forward and the world be "democratized" in the U.S. style in order to cope with the challenge and threat of "the terrorist nations".

In this the U.S. has fused into "anti-terrorism war" the nuclear stick policy and "human rights diplomacy" which it held out as the linchpin of the strategy for world supremacy in the period of the Cold War.

The U.S. is expanding and reinforcing such aggressive military blocks as the NATO, challenging pointblank the demand of the international community to discard the legacy of the bygone days. They even openly contend that "the anti-terrorist war" and the Cold War are same in principles and similar in strategy.

The U.S. is persistently clinging to the Cold War policy because its monopolies can survive only through aggression, war and acute international tension.

The concern over "a new Cold War" would vanish, if the U.S. abandoned its bid for a unipolar world and stopped aggravating the international tension.

The anachronistic Cold War policy of the U.S. will eventually end in fiasco and bring irretrievable catastrophe to it, running up against the resistance of the world progressives.