N. Korea tests nuclear weapon

[tomahawk6]

China provides food and energy to the NK regime. They could have stopped the program but didnt because it suits their purpose to have a nuclear North Korea. What they dont want is a nuclear Japan, a counterweight to their power in asia. Japan is stable and reliable, unlike Iran and North Korea. Once Iran gets the bomb there will be nuclear proliferation.

 

[dglad]

I think China's motivation to not simply cut off aid to NK was to avoid collapsing what little life there is that country's economy, and end up with hundreds of thousands , if not millions, of economic refugees streaming into China and South Korea.  In fact, I'd go so far as to suggest that China is probably quite unhappy that its "proxy' just went ahead and detonated a nuke (well, appear to have, anyway, assuming it wasn't 5-15 kt of TNT detonated in an underground excavation).  There's really not much advantage that I can see, from China's point of view, to a nuclear-armed NK.  All it does is threaten to destabilize an already difficult situation on their eastern border, exactly when their economy is running red-hot and is becoming increasingly dependent on access to Western markets, resources and investment capital.

 

[dglad]

As suggested above, no one is going to flatten anything.  The result would be massive outflux of refugees from NK into China and SK.  Moreover, before the "flattening" is complete, NK will have had ample opportunity to devastate large bits of SK with artillery fire.

NK has to definitively prove that they detonated a nuclear weapon, and didn't stage it with kilotons of TNT.  But assuming the worst, that they did, then the next step is to manage the whole region's stability.  Perhaps a combination of carefully designed economic sanctions, taken to together with some very careful intelligence gathering inside NK to locate probable nuclear weapons facilities, as well as conventional assets such as long-range artillery that could fire on e.g. Seoul is in order.  If a military response is warranted, it must be able to immediately cripple NK's ability to strike back, either with nuclear or conventional means (I suspect this latter activity has been going on for some time now).

In any case, the global community has to do SOMETHING both firm and obvious, to send a message to other states that might be considering nuclear weapons development (Iran, certainly, but there are undoubtedly others).

 

[vonGarvin]

Would the following be an accurate weather forecast for Pyongyang?
"Fair to cool in the morning, followed by a rapid spike of temperature to that approaching the surface of the sun.  Winds initially breezy, with a high possibility of gusts of upwards of 500 km/h radiating outward from Kim Jong Il's (or whatever his name is) house.  Residents are warned to stay inside downwind in order to avoid high doses of radiation"


>

 

[couchcommander]

Russia is confirming it was a nuclear explosion. IMO the US can't strike, Seoul would be gone. As for the Security Council... cats kinda out of the bag now... but I suppose they *could*, I mean if they wanted to take concrete action, get very very angry, and then write them a letter telling them how angry they are.

 

[Trinity]

Russia is confirming it was a nuclear explosion. IMO the US can't strike, Seoul would be gone. As for the Security Council... cats kinda out of the bag now... but I suppose they *could*, I mean if they wanted to take concrete action, get very very angry, and then write them a letter telling them how angry they are.

Um.. after seeing you in the army.ca t-shirt.... I can't take your political opinion seriously.

 

[Bert]

I'd say nuclear proliferation was here, here now, and in the future.  Many countries have nuclear
weapons now is the case in point.  Missile technology, bomb technology, enriched materials,
and the R&D that makes it more efficient is available in bits and pieces.  Those that seek to influence
global or regional will acquire a level of nuclear capability somehow.

The fact that the US, France, Britian, Russia, China, even Israel, India, and Pakistan have nuclear
capability does not  bother me.  There wasn't anything we could do to stop them from gathering this
capability however they've demonstrated responsibility and managed to keep a balance of things.  
Countries like Iran and North Korea are unpredictable, have not demonstrated responsibility in the
case of NK, and have beyond the need of national security threatened other countries in the case of
Iran.

The logical move is to stop any country that seeks to bring a more unpredictable nature to this
balance of things or making it worse, despite the argument that if someone else has the bomb
and has influence, then they should rightfully have it too.  The vary nature of Russia, the US, the EU,
and China trying to compete/control regional issues for their own well being allows these other minor
players to seek their nuclear arsenals.  Sanctions and talks since the 1950s haven't stopped NK from
apparently acquiring a level of nuclear capability, further sanctions likely won't be that effective.  
An opportunity may exist with the fact the KimJong dynasty won't last forever.

 

[couchcommander]

Um.. after seeing you in the army.ca t-shirt.... I can't take your political opinion seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKQYsE_Qwec

"We will be very, very angry with you.."

 

[Kirkhill]

From GAP : A New Look at the Afghanistan-Pakistan Problem
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51227/post-458100.html#msg458100

What I see, woven through this (the Afghanistan-Pakistan thread) and other threads, news releases, etc., is that China is really pushing the envelope in the Asia/Pacific and South American regions where they are gaining footholds as Russia and the US lose them for fall out of favor. This does not bode well in the next few decades.

So who does a nuclear armed North Korea present most problems to?  China or the US?
A nuclear capable North Korea also seems to have acted as a goad to South Korea and Japan.

So conspiracy time again. > >

Was it in the US's interests to prevent North Korea getting the bomb? Or was it worthwhile dragging their feet a bit?

:warstory:  Moving out of the line of fire now.

 

[GAP]

As a neophyte I would guess that it was in the US's interest to strain the relations between China and NK. The possibility of NK developing some accurate, long range delivery system in the very near future is not likely without sophisticated help.

 

[Kirkhill]

Russia is confirming it was a nuclear explosion. IMO the US can't strike, Seoul would be gone. As for the Security Council... cats kinda out of the bag now... but I suppose they *could*, I mean if they wanted to take concrete action, get very very angry, and then write them a letter telling them how angry they are.

Suddenly I am channeling Elmer Fudd. 

 

[tomahawk6]

I reiterate that the US must help Japan, ROK and even Taiwan get nuclear weapons. This will send a strong message to China.

 

[a_majoor]

Threatening the DPRK with sanctions is pointless, the nation is economically isolated already, and how much swag does the leadership really need (i.e. if you could smuggle a single container ship's worth of goods over a year, would that be enough to keep the elites satisfied?)

The only possible way to make economic sanctions "work" would be a total land, sea and air blockade of the DPRK, but since China controlls the land frontier and has not taken steps to eliminate the DPRK's ability to go nuclear, you can see how well that is going to work. Perhaps a simple "time out" will do. The United States, ROK and other nations which have propped up the DPRK in the past for humanitarian or other reasons should simply say that all aid is suspended pending a reassessment of the situation. China can carry the can as far as supplying food, fuel and other aid if they want to (and self interest suggests they may well have to indeed).

Kaplan's article in the Atlantic suggests that the DPRK could disintegrate into warlordism based around existing military formations; if there is any way to make contact with senior military personnel and get them thinking about the post "Dear Leader" period (and getting through the rough patch with our help), then that is one avenue to explore. A "Science fiction" sort of scenario would involve using a wave of Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapons to paralyze the DPRK's command and control network, it isn't like they can switch over to the Internet or something. The military will be paralyzed and have difficulty threatening Seoul or anything else, while the civilian sector will see little disruption (stuck as it is with a very primitive communications network). The Western military would have to stand ready to respond, but if something like this happend at midnight local time and no overt Western activity happened thereafter, how would the DPRK react?

Unfortunately the Atlantic Monthly article is for subscribers only (or you can buy the magazine), but it is well worth reading.

 

[couchcommander]

I reiterate that the US must help Japan, ROK and even Taiwan get nuclear weapons. This will send a strong message to China.

It would also increase the risk of a nuclear war breaking out. Remember we're not talking about MAD situations here, these are countries and situations that could very well justify the periodic use of tactical nuclear strikes.

 

[warspite]

It would also increase the risk of a nuclear war breaking out. Remember we're not talking about MAD situations here, these are countries and situations that could very well justify the periodic use of tactical nuclear strikes.

Exactly right. We've got to remember this isn't the U.S. and Soviet Russia. The situation is very different.

Unfortunately the Atlantic Monthly article is for subscribers only (or you can buy the magazine), but it is well worth reading.

Or you could check out your public library ;D

 

[a_majoor]

Of course the most complicit group is trying to blame this on the current administration. When you go to the link and check out the picture, you will see it is NOT Dr. Rice toasting the "Dear Leader"

http://kerplonka.blogspot.com/2006/10/from-party-that-brought-you-1994.html

From the party that brought you the 1994 Korean Appeasement Package comes...
THIS. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061010/ap_on_el_ge/us_north_korea_politics

I've been saving this .gif for just such an occasion:

(UPDATE: the guy in this .gif is supposed to be smashing his head into his keyboard, but for some reason he doesn't feel up to it. But you get the idea.)

It boggles the mind! These guys represent the party and president that signed an agreement with Kim back in 1994 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework (when Bush was just learning the ropes as an isolationist governor), and yet their fruits of their policy are being laid at the door of Bush. I linked to the LGF comment about how the Dems would blame this on Karl Rove, but only as a joke. Who would've thought that the Dems would actually blame North Korea's actions on Bush?



'Nuff said


Well, aside from those who've actually seen how deranged Dems've become in the last few years...

This is the standard criticism:
"The Bush administration has for several years been in a state of denial about the growing challenge of North Korea, and has too often tried to downplay the issue or change the subject," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

"We had the opportunity to stop North Korea from increasing its nuclear power, but George Bush went to sleep at the switch while he pursued his narrow agenda in Iraq," added Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat in a tough campaign in New Jersey.
I guess all those jump-started talks and attempts to include an intentionally complacent China were Bush's fault too, huh?

Tell me, guys, what Bush should have done differently. Tell me how the so-declared myopia over Iraq hurt options in North Korea.

More importantly, how would John Kerry have done it?

Oh. Right. He would've handed them the uranium. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=11966 Was it Lenin who said that a capitalist would be the first in line to sell you the rope used to hang him? Aside from the capitalist part, spot on.

It's moments like this, just in case the left is wondering, that validates the opinion held by many that though they deserve to lose so badly, Bush was the right choice. Deranged lefty positions (such as the ubiquitous "... and this is ALSO the fault of George Bush...") are making it really hard to think of Bush as anything more than the lesser of two evils.

The food and oil that was delivered to the DPRK starting in 1994 certainly went a long way to proppong up the regime so they could last long enough to pull this off. But then again, the Democrats don't even know enough to post a picture of an American soldier on a web page devoted to saying how much they support their troops (the page has been changed, but you can see what happened here: http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006073.htm).

 

[couchcommander]

They were under the impression the state would collaspe quickly, so they decided this would be the best action in the mean time (as opposed to doing virtually nothing).

At least they didn't invade the wrong country, however. Now THAT would be embarassing, especially considering the right country had publically announced it had built the bomb months before they went ahead.

 

[tomahawk6]

It would also increase the risk of a nuclear war breaking out. Remember we're not talking about MAD situations here, these are countries and situations that could very well justify the periodic use of tactical nuclear strikes.

Rogue states getting nuclear weapons is like gun control. The only people with guns are the criminals. If a rogue state has nuclear weapons and you dont then you are vulnerable to blackmail and bullying. If China wants to be the only nuclear power then they must shut down the NK nuclear program or else see new nuclear powers in their neighborhood.

 

[Kirkhill]

Further to the concern about Japan adopting nuclear weapons - perhaps not?

A few months ago China issued a warning to the US that use of PGMs (Precision Guided Munitions) in China would result in China resorting to nuclear retaliation.  I took this as an indication that China believes that the US no longer needs to go nuclear to achieve strategic aims and also that China lacks the ability to counter such an effort by restricting itself to the same weapons. Perhaps due to a lack of plaforms (forward airfields, aircraft carriers, ICBM subs, limited numbers of long range bombers etc.) and perhaps due to a lack of technology (GPS, computer chips.....).

Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are all well capable of fielding PGMs. In fact I believe they already do.  None of them lack the ability to put rounds on the Chinese mainland.  The only thing preventing them is politics.  If Japan adjusts its constitution then one more "caveat" is removed from the equation.  N. Korea has just made it that much easier for Japan's new Prime Minister to make that shift.  China's neighbourhood just became that much more dangerous.

In addition the Nuclear ICBM threat now demontstrated also makes it more pallatable for Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to deploy and enhance Ballistic Missile Defences both by acquiring their own systems and by welcoming allied systems (such as AEGIS cruisers) into their territory.  These systems may or may not have 100% efficiency but they will tend to degrade the ability of local ICBMs to successfully get past the critical boost stage when the missile is moving slowly and accelerating.  All of this layering will have the advantage of improving the defences of the US and countering the offensive capabilities of not just North Korea but also China (and to a lesser extent Russia). 

IMHO, China is the biggest loser out of their inability to contain North Korea. They have not just lost face but strategic advantage.  Dear Leader has just demonstrated himself to be China's version of Hugo Chavez - but less rational, better armed and more unstable - not to mention physically closer.

October 10, 2006


Japan Now Seems Likely to Rally Behind New Prime Minister’s Call for a Stronger Military
 

By MARTIN FACKLER, International Herald Tribune

TOKYO, Oct. 9 — The last time North Korea tested a powerful new weapon, in 1998 when it fired a ballistic missile over the largest Japanese island, Japan reacted by upgrading its military and swinging politically to the right.

North Korea’s claim that it tested a nuclear weapon on Monday appears likely to push Japan even further down the same nationalist path. Many political analysts say the test, which has yet to be confirmed, could weaken public support for the pacifism Japan adopted after World War II and prompt it to seek a growing regional security role.

But could the crisis be big enough to force Japan to break what might be its ultimate postwar taboo and go nuclear itself?

http://www.nytimes.com/learning/students/pop/articles/10japan.html

 

[a_majoor]

+1 to Kirkhill.

A vast arsenal of PGMs deployed from multiple nations and platforms would degrade the conventional military threat from China, the DPRK and Russia, making the Western Pacific that much more of an American lake. The only down side to military action in that part of the world (besides uncontrolled escalation) is the physical closeness and thus minimum response time available to most of the parties involved.

The United States does have strategic depth, since PACCOM covers such a huge region, and additional support can come from various other commands (while actions take place in Korea, American and allied forces could deploy from Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, for example). If the Anglosphere comes into action (as it probably must, given the high stakes), then resources from North America, England, India and Australia are available, and America, as the world's only "oceanic" power has the ability to project these resources to and from virtually any spot on the globe.

An interesting side note is the wide range of variables in the analysis of the blast. Even without "expert" commentary, I noticed that many of the estimated yields were well into the "sub nuclear" or "fizzle" yield. In other words, there is a radioactive mess at the bottom of the tunnel, but there may not have been a nuclear chain reaction. Coupled with the poor performance of the DPRK's Fourth of July fireworks display, it is probably far more prudent to work on a counter to the DPRK's artillery park aimed at Seoul rather than to obsess about their nuclear ambitions.

Regardless, the fact that China, Russia and South Korea have finally had their wishful thinking about the DPRK dispelled "could" lead to the breakthrough that is needed, a coordinated shut down of the flow of money and resources into the DPRK, leading to the final collapse as the umbilical cord is cut.