The hysteria surrounding today’s launch by North Korea of a long range rocket illustrates dramatically the extent to which a small, isolated and impoverished country can command the helpless attention of the whole world.

But as the smoke settles at the Musudan-ri launch site, there are two outstanding questions: what difference does it make, and what can the rest of the world do about it? The answer to both is: not very much.

The point of the operation was four-fold: to carry out a practical test of the Taepodong 2 rocket, to boost morale at home with a propaganda coup, to advertise North Korean missile capabilities to potential foreign buyers, and to increase negotiating pressure on the US in the diplomatic talks on North Korean disarmament. The success of all of these is compromised by the apparent failure of the rocket to deliver its satellite into orbit.

Even if it had all gone as planned, it would have made little difference to the military balance in northeast Asia. North Korea remains hopelessly outgunned by the US and South Korea – any full-blown conflict would be a kamikaze effort in which the regime might inflict a good deal of damage on its neighbour but would also face prompt and certain doom.

Far more worrying than the Taepodong are North Korea’s short-range Scud and medium-range Rodong missiles which, according to reputable analysts, already have miniaturised warheads capable of being fired into South Korea and Japan.

This, and the North’s large number of conventional artillery pieces, puts a military response to the rocket test completely out of the question. But, despite the huffing and puffing in the UN Security Council (UNSC) today, there isn’t much else that the outraged governments of Europe, Japan and the US can do either.

UNSC resolutions 1695 and 1718, passed in 2006 after the last Taepodong test, require North Korea to suspend its ballistic missile programme. But Pyongyang will argue that it has the right to peaceful space exploration and that, because this was a missile-bearing vehicle, rather than a test missile, the ban does not apply. Its former allies, China and Russia, who both enjoy a veto in the Security Council, may accept this argument; in any case, they are unlikely to accede to new sanctions or a formal condemnation.

The council may formulate a non-binding “chairman’s statement”. And it may choose to impose more stringently sanctions that were agreed upon in 2006. These included a freeze on assets and a ban on travel for those involved in the North’s missile programmes – so far, not a single person has been named. But this is because members of the Security Council, including the US, chose to hold back in the interests of luring North Korea to the negotiating table in the chronically sluggish Six Party Talks on nuclear disarmament.

They remain the only serious prospect for reaching some kind of an agreement – and any tough action now will only make their success less likely. The concerned parties will pout and splutter over it for a while longer but, in the end, the mighty missile of April will make very little difference to the dense complexities of dealing with the world’s most isolated state.

Times Recommends

• Violent video games won’t corrupt
• Pope Benedict XVI: Alma Mater
• Chávez should know what’s good for him