North Korea (Superthread)

[CougarKing]

What amazes me is that the Chinese haven't loudly, and publicly, disciplined this yapping mutt.  Trans-Pacific missile ping pong would be bad for China's newly discovered greed machines.

Even certain key US Senators have acknowledged this publicly, showing how irked they were at China's inability to rein in Kim Jong Un:

link

U.S. lawmakers say China has failed to rein in North Korea

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - China has failed to use its influence to stop North Korea's warlike rhetoric against the United States and U.S.-backed South Korea, despite an escalating crisis that could trigger armed conflict by accident, U.S. lawmakers said on Sunday.

Republican Senator John McCain, a member of the Armed Services Committee, criticized China's "failure to rein in what could be a catastrophic situation," saying Beijing could step up pressure on Pyongyang by using its influence over North Korea's economy.

"China does hold the key to this problem. China could cut off their economy if they want to. Chinese behavior has been very disappointing," McCain said on CBS's "Face the Nation" program.

"More than once, wars have started by accident and this is a very serious situation," he added.

"South Korea would win. We would win if there was an all-out conflict. But the fact is that North Korea could set Seoul on fire. And that obviously would be a catastrophe of enormous proportions," McCain said.

Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat who has been a prominent critic of China's currency policy, said he agreed with McCain.

"The Chinese hold a lot of the cards here. They're by nature cautious. But they're carrying it to an extreme. It's about time they stepped up to the plate and put a little pressure on this North Korean regime," Schumer said on the same program.

North Korea has threatened war against the United States and the South in what analysts and U.S. politicians see as an attempt to wring concessions from the international community and shore up internal support for Pyongyang's 30-year-old leader, Kim Jong-un.

The senators' comments came as China, North Korea's sole financial and diplomatic backer, showed growing irritation with Pyongyang's vitriolic rhetoric toward the West.

Beijing has warned against "trouble making" on its doorstep in an apparent rebuke to North Korea, while Chinese leaders have spoken against provocative words and actions in the region.

On Sunday, the Foreign Ministry expressed "grave concern" and said China had asked North Korea to "ensure the safety of Chinese diplomats in North Korea, in accordance with the Vienna Convention and international laws and norms."

'BOILING POINT'

Meanwhile, the United States has postponed the long-scheduled test of its Minuteman III intercontinental missile to avoid what a defense official called "any misperception or miscalculation."

Former U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman told CNN on Sunday that it was unprecedented for Chinese President Xi Jinping to warn in a recent speech that no country "should be allowed to throw a region and even the whole world into chaos for selfish gain."

"It suggests to me, as I've watched the ratcheting up of frustration among Chinese leaders over the last many years, that they've probably hit the 212-degree boiling point as it relates to North Korea," Huntsman said.

The White House on Sunday had no immediate comment on recent Chinese statements.

But White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer told ABC's "This Week" program that North Korea is following a long-standing pattern of "provocative actions, bellicose rhetoric."

"The key here is for the North Koreans to stop their actions, start meeting their international obligations and put themselves in a position where they can achieve what is their stated goal, which is economic development," he said.

China also came under fire from Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a leading voice on foreign policy issues who also sits on the Armed Services Committee.

"I blame the Chinese more than anybody else. They're afraid of reunification. They don't want a democratic Korea next to China, so they are propping up this crazy regime. And they could determine the fate of North Korea better than anybody on the planet," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
(Reporting by David Morgan; Additional reporting by Aruna Viswanatha; Editing by Eric Beech)

 

[Edward Campbell]

China has "failed" to "reign in" the DPRK but, honestly, I cannot see WHY they would want to do that nor HOW they might manage it. Reports say that aid, other than food, has been slashed by as much as 40%. The Chinese are lot like us: no one wants to accused of starving North Korea into submission but it's hard to see what else might work. As to the "why,:" what is so bad, this time, compared to all the other times? The DPRK is still a step short of outrageous conduct ... "reigning them in" would, from a Chinese point of view, be akin to admitting that Chinese policy has been in error; that would be a dreadful loss of "face," and I cannot see the Chinese doing that until either:

1. North Korea does something really bad - worse than a missile test or sinking a ROK patrol boat; or

2. The USA and ROK offer comprehensive reunification talks that involve: a total withdrawal of US troops and a major - a trillion dollar - US financial commitment to the costs of reunification.

 

[CougarKing]

What amazes me is that the Chinese haven't loudly, and publicly, disciplined this yapping mutt.

Actually, Chinese President and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping came the closest any Chinese leader has ever gone to condemning their next-door neighbour and nominal ally:

South China Morning Post link

President Xi Jinping issues call for regional stability
President tells Boao forum that 'no country should be allowed to throw … the world into chaos' in apparent reference to North Korea


Monday, 08 April, 2013, 7:38am

President Xi Jinping said no country should be allowed to cause chaos in the region as he acknowledged Asia faced "new challenges" to its stability amid mounting concern over North Korea's nuclear threat.

"No one should be allowed to throw a region and even the whole world into chaos for selfish gains," Xi said in the opening speech yesterday at the Boao Forum for Asia in the southern province of Hainan. Xi did not name any particular country in his speech and his language appeared to be diplomatically ambiguous.

But Professor Wang Xinsheng, a historian at Peking University who specialises in Northeast Asia, said there was little doubt he was referring to the escalating tension on the Korean peninsula.

"I think this is a clear message to North Korea and I also think it was one of the toughest remarks on the issue by a Chinese leader," said Wang. Foreign Minister Wang Yi expressed frustration at North Korea in a statement late on Saturday, saying the central government would not "allow trouble-making on China's doorstep".

Tensions have soared in recent weeks, with North Korea threatening nuclear war after the United Nations imposed fresh sanctions over its latest atomic test and the United States and South Korea launched war games.

"Stability in Asia now faces new challenges as hot spot issues keep emerging and both traditional and non-traditional security threats exist," Xi said.

He added that relevant countries need to make "concerted efforts" to resolve major difficulties to ensure regional stability.

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard echoed Xi's remarks, saying that "all countries in the region share a deep interest in strategic stability".

But Gillard, who has been critical of Pyongyang, singled out North Korea at the forum, saying the situation on the Korean peninsula illustrated the potential consequences of conflict.

Beijing yesterday asked North Korea to ensure the safety of Chinese diplomats and citizens in North Korea.

Xi's wife, Peng Liyuan, a well-known soprano, was sitting in the second row of the audience as her husband, who became president last month, gave the keynote speech at the forum.

"The international community should advocate the vision of comprehensive security and cooperative security, so as to turn the global village into a big stage for common development rather than an arena where gladiators fight each other," Xi said.

While advocating a peaceful and open-minded approach for greater regional development, Xi - in an apparent reference to territorial disputes with neighbouring countries - said China would "properly handle differences and frictions with relevant countries", but would also continue to press its claims.

"On the basis of firmly upholding its sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, China will maintain good relations with its neighbours and overall peace and stability in our region," the president said.

Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse

 

[BrendenDias]

If North Korea makes one bad move, such as a missile getting fired over the DMZ, or something gets launched that harms the US, South Korea, anyone around them, the South Koreans and Americans WILL retaliate. The South Korean leader has already said that she will not stand for another event such as the ship sinking, and the island shelling. They will retaliate, and I do not blame the South Korean leader for stating that, because the DPRK cannot keep using "small attacks" with no retaliation and get out unscathed.. it almost seems like appeasement has been happening in the last few decades... for the most part I guess...

 

[GnyHwy]

it almost seems like appeasement has been happening in the last few decades... for the most part I guess...

Almost?  It's exactly like that.  Just like giving a baby a lollypop to shut them up when they cry.  Only the lollypop is billions of dollars in aid, oil, and recognition on the world stage.

 

[Journeyman]

Again, courtesy of Stratfor: Global Intelligence

I know it's a lot of words. Sorry. 

Ferocious, Weak and Crazy: The North Korean Strategy
April 9, 2013 | 0900 GMT

By George Friedman
Founder and Chairman

Editor's Note: George Friedman originally wrote this Geopolitical Weekly on North Korea's nuclear strategy on Jan. 29. More than two months later, the geopolitical contours of the still-evolving crisis have become more clear, so we believe it important to once again share with readers the fundamentals outlined in this earlier forecast.

North Korea's state-run media reported Sunday that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has ordered the country's top security officials to take "substantial and high-profile important state measures," which has been widely interpreted to mean that North Korea is planning its third nuclear test. Kim said the orders were retaliation for the U.S.-led push to tighten U.N. sanctions on Pyongyang following North Korea's missile test in October. A few days before Kim's statement emerged, the North Koreans said future tests would target the United States, which North Korea regards as its key adversary along with Washington's tool, South Korea.

North Korea has been using the threat of tests and the tests themselves as weapons against its neighbors and the United States for years. On the surface, threatening to test weapons does not appear particularly sensible. If the test fails, you look weak. If it succeeds, you look dangerous without actually having a deliverable weapon. And the closer you come to having a weapon, the more likely someone is to attack you so you don't succeed in actually getting one. Developing a weapon in absolute secret would seem to make more sense. When the weapon is ready, you display it, and you have something solid to threaten enemies with.

North Korea, of course, has been doing this for years and doing it successfully, so what appears absurd on the surface quite obviously isn't. On the contrary, it has proved to be a very effective maneuver. North Korea is estimated to have a gross domestic product of about $28 billion, about the same as Latvia or Turkmenistan. Yet it has maneuvered itself into a situation where the United States, Japan, China, Russia and South Korea have sat down with it at the negotiating table in a bid to persuade it not to build weapons. Sometimes, the great powers give North Korea money and food to persuade it not to develop weapons. It sometimes agrees to a halt, but then resumes its nuclear activities. It never completes a weapon, but it frequently threatens to test one. And when it carries out such tests, it claims its tests are directed at the United States and South Korea, as if the test itself were a threat.

There is brilliance in North Korea's strategy. When the Soviet Union collapsed, North Korea was left in dire economic straits. There were reasonable expectations that its government would soon collapse, leading to the unification of the Korean Peninsula. Naturally, the goal of the North Korean government was regime survival, so it was terrified that outside powers would invade or support an uprising against it. It needed a strategy that would dissuade anyone from trying that. Being weak in every sense, this wasn't going to be easy, but the North Koreans developed a strategy that we described more than 10 years ago as ferocious, weak and crazy. North Korea has pursued this course since the 1990s, and the latest manifestation of this strategy was on display last week. The strategy has worked marvelously and is still working.

A Three-Part Strategy
First, the North Koreans positioned themselves as ferocious by appearing to have, or to be on the verge of having, devastating power. Second, they positioned themselves as being weak such that no matter how ferocious they are, there would be no point in pushing them because they are going to collapse anyway. And third, they positioned themselves as crazy, meaning pushing them would be dangerous since they were liable to engage in the greatest risks imaginable at the slightest provocation.

In the beginning, Pyongyang's ability to appear ferocious was limited to the North Korean army's power to shell Seoul. It had massed artillery along the border and could theoretically devastate the southern capital, assuming the North had enough ammunition, its artillery worked and air power didn't lay waste to its massed artillery. The point was not that it was going to level Seoul but that it had the ability to do so. There were benefits to outsiders in destabilizing the northern regime, but Pyongyang's ferocity -- uncertain though its capabilities were -- was enough to dissuade South Korea and its allies from trying to undermine the regime. Its later move to develop missiles and nuclear weapons followed from the strategy of ferocity -- since nothing was worth a nuclear war, enraging the regime by trying to undermine it wasn't worth the risk.

Many nations have tried to play the ferocity game, but the North Koreans added a brilliant and subtle twist to it: being weak. The North Koreans advertised the weakness of their economy, particularly its food insecurity, by various means. This was not done overtly, but by allowing glimpses of its weakness. Given the weakness of its economy and the difficulty of life in North Korea, there was no need to risk trying to undermine the North. It would collapse from its own defects.

This was a double inoculation. The North Koreans' ferocity with weapons whose effectiveness might be questionable, but still pose an unquantifiable threat, caused its enemies to tread carefully. Why risk unleashing its ferocity when its weakness would bring it down? Indeed, a constant debate among Western analysts over the North's power versus its weakness combines to paralyze policymakers.

The North Koreans added a third layer to perfect all of this. They portrayed themselves as crazy, working to appear unpredictable, given to extravagant threats and seeming to welcome a war. Sometimes, they reaffirmed they were crazy via steps like sinking South Korean ships for no apparent reason. As in poker, so with the North: You can play against many sorts of players, from those who truly understand the odds to those who are just playing for fun, but never, ever play poker against a nut. He is totally unpredictable, can't be gamed, and if you play with his head you don't know what will happen. 

So long as the North Koreans remained ferocious, weak and crazy, the best thing to do was not irritate them too much and not to worry what kind of government they had. But being weak and crazy was the easy part for the North; maintaining its appearance of ferocity was more challenging. Not only did the North Koreans have to keep increasing their ferocity, they had to avoid increasing it so much that it overpowered the deterrent effect of their weakness and craziness. 

A Cautious Nuclear Program
Hence, we have North Korea's eternal nuclear program. It never quite produces a weapon, but no one can be sure whether a weapon might be produced. Due to widespread perceptions that the North Koreans are crazy, it is widely believed they might rush to complete their weapon and go to war at the slightest provocation. The result is the United States, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea holding meetings with North Korea to try to persuade it not to do something crazy.

Interestingly, North Korea never does anything significant and dangerous, or at least not dangerous enough to break the pattern. Since the Korean War, North Korea has carefully calculated its actions, timing them to avoid any move that could force a major reaction. We see this caution built into its nuclear program. After more than a decade of very public ferocity, the North Koreans have not come close to a deliverable weapon. But since if you upset them, they just might, the best bet has been to tread lightly and see if you can gently persuade them not to do something insane.

The North's positioning is superb: Minimal risky action sufficient to lend credibility to its ferocity and craziness plus endless rhetorical threats maneuvers North Korea into being a major global threat in the eyes of the great powers. Having won themselves this position, the North Koreans are not about to risk it, even if a 20-something leader is hurling threats.

The China Angle and the Iranian Pupil
There is, however, a somewhat more interesting dimension emerging. Over the years, the United States, Japan and South Korea have looked to the Chinese to intercede and persuade the North Koreans not to do anything rash. This diplomatic pattern has established itself so firmly that we wonder what the actual Chinese role is in all this. China is currently engaged in territorial disputes with U.S. allies in the South and East China seas. Whether anyone would or could go to war over islands in these waters is dubious, but the situation is still worth noting.

The Chinese and the Japanese have been particularly hostile toward one another in recent weeks in terms of rhetoric and moving their ships around. A crisis in North Korea, particularly one in which the North tested a nuclear weapon, would inevitably initiate the diplomatic dance whereby the Americans and Japanese ask the Chinese to intercede with the North Koreans. The Chinese would oblige. This is not a great effort for them, since having detonated a nuclear device, the North isn't interested in doing much more. In fact, Pyongyang will be drawing on the test's proverbial fallout for some time. The Chinese are calling in no chits with the North Koreans, and the Americans and Japanese -- terribly afraid of what the ferocious, weak, crazy North Koreans will do next -- will be grateful to China for defusing the "crisis." And who could be so churlish as to raise issues on trade or minor islands when China has used its power to force North Korea to step down?

It is impossible for us to know what the Chinese are thinking, and we have no overt basis for assuming the Chinese and North Koreans are collaborating, but we do note that China has taken an increasing interest in stabilizing North Korea. For its part, North Korea has tended to stage these crises -- and their subsequent Chinese interventions -- at quite useful times for Beijing.

It should also be noted that other countries have learned the ferocious, weak, crazy maneuver from North Korea. Iran is the best pupil. It has convincingly portrayed itself as ferocious via its nuclear program, endlessly and quite publicly pursuing its program without ever quite succeeding. It is also persistently seen as weak, perpetually facing economic crises and wrathful mobs of iPod-wielding youths. Whether Iran can play the weakness card as skillfully as North Korea remains unclear -- Iran just doesn't have the famines North Korea has.

Additionally, Iran's rhetoric at times can certainly be considered crazy: Tehran has carefully cultivated perceptions that it would wage nuclear war even if this meant the death of all Iranians. Like North Korea, Iran also has managed to retain its form of government and its national sovereignty. Endless predictions of the fall of the Islamic republic to a rising generation have proved false.

I do not mean to appear to be criticizing the "ferocious, weak and crazy" strategy. When you are playing a weak hand, such a strategy can yield demonstrable benefits. It preserves regimes, centers one as a major international player and can wring concessions out of major powers. It can be pushed too far, however, when the fear of ferocity and craziness undermines the solace your opponents find in your weakness.

Diplomacy is the art of nations achieving their ends without resorting to war. It is particularly important for small, isolated nations to survive without going to war. As in many things, the paradox of appearing willing to go to war in spite of all rational calculations can be the foundation for avoiding war. It is a sound strategy, and for North Korea and Iran, for the time being at least, it has worked.

As has been posted previously, despite the greater-than-usual rhetoric, this isn't particularly new. We'll have to watch how it plays out; since Tokyo has rolled out the capability-3 Patriot missile batteries, and the US has publicly declared that they're scaling back some of the exercise activities, North Korea apparently knows what they're doing in this latest round of brinkmanship.




> Personal plug for Stratfor: it's almost as good a subscription investment as Army.ca -- almost.   :nod:

 

[cupper]

Couple of interesting takes on the issue on NPR today.

A View From South Korea: The North Is 'A Playground Bully'

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/09/176666103/a-view-from-south-korea-the-north-is-a-playground-bully

    "It's like a joke. It's like a playground bully," says Hong, 76, a retired shoe manufacturer who asked to be referred to by a single name. "I don't take it seriously. It's nonsense."

    Hong was strolling through the soy sauce section of a downtown Seoul supermarket, where there were no signs of panicked buying and the shelves were full.

    Hong knows North Korea well. He used to live there and fled to the South during the Korean War when he was a teenager. He thinks the North continues to threaten the South and the U.S. not because it wants to fight, but because it wants continued economic support.

    Hong says the rhetoric is a form of blackmail.

    "They are like spoiled children, asking for more and more," he says. "The party elites are doing this to feed themselves and to maintain power."

    North Korea has rarely made good on its threats. But in 2010, it was blamed for torpedoing a South Korean naval ship, killing 46 people. South Korea took no revenge, but people here seem less willing these days to turn the other cheek.

    Hong says if the North attacks again, it should pay. "We are idiots if we don't take any action" he says. "We need to fight."

    A few aisles away, Oh Jung Mi, 48, is shopping for tofu. A frilly, pink dress for her 7-year-old daughter, You Jin, sits in her grocery basket.

    Oh isn't as cavalier as Hong, but she isn't terrified either. She's heard on the news how she should prepare for a possible attack, but she doesn't really expect one.

    "I know where the evacuation bunker is in our apartments, and I know what to prepare, such as gas masks and lanterns," says Oh, a mother of three. "I know I should prepare these things, but I can't really get myself to act on it."

    Kim Soo Young, 24, is more concerned about North Korea than most. A friend's brother died in the 2010 ship sinking. Kim, a student who works at a public relations firm downtown, says North Korea is always in the back of her mind.

    "We never know when and where the next attack is coming," she says.

    Kim attends school near the command center for both the U.S. and South Korean militaries.

    "I am only being half-serious here," she says, "if North Korea shoots a missile, my school would be within the area where they will strike first."

    When Kim Jong Un became the leader of North Korea in late 2011, some South Koreans hoped he would be more reasonable than his predecessors. After all, he's young, was educated overseas and reportedly speaks at least some English. But Lee Hyun Woo, 25, who works in a duty free shop, is disappointed.

    "I don't understand why he's acting this way," Lee says. "I did think he would be more open when he first took power, but now it seems he's actually going in the opposite direction."

If I can find the other interview I will post it up, but essentially the interviewee made an interesting point. When both Kim Il Sung and Kim Jung Il did the same crap during their reigns, they both always allowed themselves an "Off Ramp" or way out of the crisis  without going past the line of no return. But Kim Jong Un may end up painting himself into a corner because of his lack of experience, and poor advice from those around him..

 

[BeyondTheNow]

I am happy that the above article made mention of what the atmosphere is accurately like among South Koreans during this time. I think it's very easy for Westerners (and/or others) to envision a society preparing for the 'certainty' of war, if one is to believe many of the current news articles and broadcasts. (Not to insinuate that there isn't truth to them, but I've often wondered where the 'hype' truly begins and ends...)

My brother and his wife are living and working in Seoul right now and have been there for almost two years. They work alongside South Koreans from all walks of life and have developed close friendships with several.  Despite the media painting a very dismal view of what is taking place, it seems that largely, yes, it is 'business as usual' and there ultimately is very little thought given to the "...rhetoric that has repeated itself before..."

I also maintain a few contacts from my own time there, and it seems to be the general consensus that while precautions do need to be taken, there isn't nearly as much concern/worry about what is taking place right now as one might expect.

It is definitely an interesting situation on the whole, and no doubt the world is watching closely--which unfortunately is fueling the fire, so to speak.

Couple of interesting takes on the issue on NPR today.

A View From South Korea: The North Is 'A Playground Bully'

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/09/176666103/a-view-from-south-korea-the-north-is-a-playground-bully

 

[wannabe SF member]

http://reuters.livestation.com/demo

Link to a Reuters livestream of the border if anyone's interested.

 

[redtom]

I went back to the start of this thread accidentally and thought I was reading the most recent posts until I realized we were talking about Il instead of Un. While it's good to know what a crazy guy is up to it doesn't pay to worry about him.

Just my .05.

Edit: typo.

 

[cupper]

If I can find the other interview I will post it up, but essentially the interviewee made an interesting point. When both Kim Il Sung and Kim Jung Il did the same crap during their reigns, they both always allowed themselves an "Off Ramp" or way out of the crisis  without going past the line of no return. But Kim Jong Un may end up painting himself into a corner because of his lack of experience, and poor advice from those around him..

Here is the second story I referenced in my earlier post:

Admiral Says US Ready If North Korea Strikes

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=176659843

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. defenses could intercept a ballistic missile launched by North Korea if it decides to strike, the top American military commander in the Pacific said Tuesday, as the relationship between the West and the communist government hit its lowest ebb since the end of the Korean War.

Amid increasingly combative rhetoric from Pyongyang, Adm. Samuel Locklear, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, said North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles represents a clear threat to the United States and its allies in the region.

The admiral said Kim Jong Un, the country's young and still relatively untested new leader, remains unpredictable after using the past year to consolidate his power.

But Locklear told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he was confident that the U.S. military can thwart North Korea if it chooses to act. He made clear that any U.S. decision would be contingent on where the missile is headed, information that the U.S. could ascertain fairly quickly.

"Do we have the capability to intercept a missile if the North Koreans launch within the next several days?" Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., asked the admiral.

"We do," Locklear answered.

He said North Korea is keeping a large percentage of its combat forces along the demilitarized zone with South Korea, a position that allows the North to threaten U.S. and South Korean civilian and military personnel.

McCain said the saber-rattling of today struck him as the greatest tension between North Korea, South Korea and the U.S. since the end of the Korean War in the early 1950s.

"I would agree that in my recollection I don't know a greater time," the 58-year-old Locklear said.

Increasingly bellicose rhetoric has come from Pyongyang and its leader, with North Korea urging foreign companies and tourists to leave South Korea and warning that the countries are on the verge of a nuclear war.

At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney brushed off the North's declaration that nuclear war was imminent as "more unhelpful rhetoric" and part of a pattern of combative statements and behavior that Pyongyang's leadership has demonstrated for years. He said the U.S. was working with Seoul and Tokyo on the issue.

"It is unhelpful, it is concerning, it is provocative," Carney said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., told Locklear that the North Korean government's threats "appear to exceed its capabilities, and its use of what capabilities it has against the U.S. or our allies seems highly unlikely and would be completely contrary to the regime's primary goal of survival."

"Nonetheless, its words and actions are not without consequences," Levin said.

The Democrat questioned the Obama administration's decision to delay a long-scheduled operational test of an intercontinental ballistic missile amid the North Korea rhetoric.

Locklear said he agreed with the decision to delay the test.

"We have demonstrated to the people of the region, demonstrated to the leadership of North Korea, our ability and willingness to defend our nation, our people, our allies and our forward deployed forces," Locklear said, citing other steps the U.S. military has taken in recent weeks.

The U.S. has moved two of the Navy's missile-defense ships closer to the Korean peninsula, and a land-based system is being deployed to the Pacific territory of Guam. The U.S. also called attention to the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercise that included a practice run over South Korea by B-2 stealth bombers.

Levin mentioned that President Barack Obama recently talked to China's new president, Xi Jinping, about the U.S. efforts to deal with North Korea. Locklear said he has not had similar conversations with his Chinese counterparts.

In an exchange with Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, Locklear acknowledged a hotline connection between Washington and Beijing similar to what existed with Moscow during the Cold War, and said both sides need to move forward in continuing conversations.

Locklear told Levin that he would explore the possibility of making direct contact with his military counterparts in China and communicate with them the seriousness of the situation on the Korean peninsula.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., insisted that North Korea's nuclear program could come to a "grinding halt" if China pressured Pyongyang.

Reflecting the uneasy relationship, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked Locklear if he considers China a "friend or a foe." Locklear said neither.

"I consider (China), at this point in time, someone we have to develop a strategic partnership with to manage competition between two world powers," Locklear said.

Locklear said Kim Jong Un has adopted pages from the playbook used by his father, Kim Jong Il, but his approach differs in a significant way. Kim Jong Un's father, as well as his grandfather, Kim Il Sung, made sure they had "off ramps" that gave them a way to exit a confrontation, particularly if the U.S. and its allies were willing to offer concessions. Kim Jong Un, Locklear said, appears not to have given himself channels that would help him ratchet down the tensions.

The admiral described Kim Jong Un as "an impetuous young leader (who) continues to focus on provocation rather than on his own people."

The scope of Locklear's responsibilities as the top officer at Pacific Command extend beyond the Korean peninsula, and he told the committee that his command is closely watching the proliferation of submarines among countries including China and Vietnam. Locklear said there are an estimated 300 submarines being operated around the world, although he noted that no country there has an undersea force as capable as the United States'.

Both Russia and China are expected soon to deploy new ballistic missile submarines capable of threatening the United States, Locklear said. India is also expanding its submarine force, and Australia, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, and South Korea have launched, or soon will, modern submarines.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The National Post has published an interesting graphic about the DPRK's conventional forces. It is far too large to reproduce here!

But, bear in mind, please, that numbers, even HUGE numbers of ships, aircraft, tanks and howitzers means little if there is no fuel, ineffective logistics, poor maintenance and indifferent training.

 

[Dissident]

The National Post has published an interesting graphic about the DPRK's conventional forces. It is far too large to reproduce here!

But, bear in mind, please, that numbers, even HUGE numbers of ships, aircraft, tanks and howitzers means little if there is no fuel, ineffective logistics, poor maintenance and indifferent training.

All I see is a target rich environment. Sure, quantity has a quality of its own and 3500 tanks sounds pretty nice, but when some of them are reportedly T55, jeez.

 

[Danjanou]

All I see is a target rich environment. Sure, quantity has a quality of its own and 3500 tanks sounds pretty nice, but when some of them are reportedly T55, jeez.

T-55s, most of those appear to be WW2 vintage T-34/85s. Don't see thsoe much outside of museums and/or movies these days.

 

[Chelomo]

Taken from: http://www.lapresse.ca/debats/votre-opinion/201304/09/01-4639183-kim-jong-un-fin-renard.php

Sorry the article is in french, but I will provide a link to a (very) rough translation in english at the end:

Publié le 09 avril 2013 à 16h40 | Mis à jour le 09 avril 2013 à 16h40
Kim Jong-un, fin renard?

ROCH BLIER
L'auteur est un globe-trotter qui fait présentement le tour de l'Amérique du Sud.

Kim Jong-un est-il aussi fou qu'il le laisse paraître ou use-t-il de moyens extraordinaires pour amorcer une révolution dans son pays et ainsi le faire entrer dans le XXIe siècle?

À la lumière de ce que je lis dans les journaux, il m'apparaît plausible que l'homme fort de la Corée du Nord, un jeune homme qui a étudié en Suisse, donc sans doute au diapason de sa génération et à coup sûr conscient du retard de son pays par rapport au reste du monde, ait concocté un plan plutôt intelligent afin de contourner les deux obstacles infranchissables à tout changement dans son pays.

Le premier: l'armée. À sa tête: les dinosaures du régime, les purs et durs, ceux de la vieille école. Des cerveaux lavés par les principes du vieux régime et avec lesquels toute négociation de réforme ou de changement est vaine.

Le deuxième: la Chine. Seul allié du régime, partenaire économique indispensable, il est impensable de faire évoluer le pays vers les valeurs démocratiques, économiques et humaines, telles qu'on en retrouve en Suisse, par exemple, sans risquer que la main qui nous nourrit nous prenne à la gorge.

Bref, le défi de Kim Jong-un est énorme, et ne se relève pas en confrontant ces deux ennemis. Lui reste donc les jeux politiques: la ruse, la manipulation et la finesse.

En bravant les États-Unis et la communauté internationale, en menaçant la planète entière d'une guerre totale, il démontre qu'il n'a pas froid aux yeux et se met ainsi dans la poche les têtes dirigeantes de l'armée.

Cette menace, qui n'aboutira jamais à un conflit armé, se soldera par la conclusion que la Corée du Nord est un régime beaucoup trop irresponsable pour posséder l'arme nucléaire. Une intervention d'ingérence dans les affaires nord-coréennes, de la part de la communauté internationale, sera alors inévitable, et du coup, le pays vient de se débarrasser de la mainmise chinoise.

La table est mise pour une révolution tranquille, à saveur européenne et/ou nord-américaine. En jouant le jeu de la victime qui priorise la sécurité de ses citoyens, Kim Jong-un conservera l'appui de son armée, la confiance de son peuple, et donc son pouvoir, tout en s'avouant, aux yeux de la Chine, impuissant face à l'invasion du modernisme.

La visite d'Eric Schmidt, patron de Google, peu avant les événements récents, n'est sans doute pas étrangère au plan de Kim Jong-un. Bien conscient du pouvoir de l'internet, tel que le printemps arabe nous l'a démontré, le web est la voie de l'ouverture du peuple nord-coréen sur le reste du monde. Or si La Presse a intitulé son article: «Que fait le patron de Google au pays de l'internet verrouillé?», le mystère risque de se «déverrouiller» avant longtemps ...

Tout ce scénario est peut-être une fabulation, mais je trouve les coïncidences assez frappantes entre un jeune homme qui a étudié dans un des pays les plus démocratiques au monde, pour ensuite se retrouver à la tête de la dictature la plus fermée au monde.

La visite mystérieuse d'un baron de l'internet, de sa fille, et d'un ancien diplomate états-unien (Bill Richardson), et l'absurdité, peu de temps après, de la menace d'une guerre nucléaire contre la première puissance au monde. Sans oublier le fait que ce jeune homme a aussi démontré une certaine ouverture aux valeurs nord-américaines, en invitant son ami Dennis Rodman (ancienne vedette de la NBA), à regarder un match de basketball avec lui à Pyongyang. Kim Jong-un, fin renard?

Here's the link to the translation: http://www.1stmarineraiders.com/index.php?showtopic=22624

It's not very good, but it does the job.

 

[dapaterson]

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here is a video of former Australian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd on North Korea and China. You don't have to agree with Mr Rudd, but he does have some (considerable) interest and knowledge about the region. I disagree, for example, with his assertion that China favours a divided Korea, but I do agree with him that Xi Jinping is off to a good start as Paramount Leader. His prescriptions for America and China are interesting.

 

[CougarKing]

link

North Korea can launch nuclear missiles - U.S. spy agency
Reuters

By David Alexander, Christine Kim and Narae Kim

WASHINGTON/SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea has the ability to launch nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, although they would likely be unreliable, a Pentagon spy agency has concluded, as the United States and South Korea kept watch on Thursday for a missile test-launch by Pyongyang.

The Defence Intelligence Agency study, dated last month, appeared to be the first time the agency had reached such a conclusion.

"DIA assesses with moderate confidence the North currently has nuclear weapons capable of delivery by ballistic missiles, however the reliability will be low," said Republican U.S. Representative Doug Lamborn, who disclosed the conclusion during a congressional hearing on Thursday.

Lamborn said the agency reached the conclusion in a mostly classified March 2013 report. He did not say what range the nuclear-capable North Korean missiles might have.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined to comment when asked if he agreed with that assessment, saying he had not seen the report.

The strong consensus inside the U.S. government is that North Korea does not yet have a nuclear device that would fit longer-range missiles which conceivably could reach U.S. territories.

Despite recent threats to attack U.S. bases and the South, North Korea started to welcome a stream of visitors for Monday's celebrations marking the birthday of its founder Kim Il-sung.

U.S. President Barack Obama said the United States would work diplomatically to reduce tensions with North Korea, while warning that Washington would take "all necessary steps" to protect America and its allies.

Obama met at the White House on Thursday with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who called for China and other nations with influence over North Korea to help calm the situation.

North Korea has stationed as many as five medium-range missiles on its east coast, according to defence assessments by Washington and Seoul, possibly in readiness for a test-launch that would demonstrate its ability to hit U.S. bases on Guam.

"There are signs the North could fire off Musudan missiles any time soon," an unnamed intelligence source in Seoul told Yonhap news agency.
Most observers say Pyongyang has no intention of starting a war that would likely bring its own destruction, but they warn of the risks of miscalculation on the highly militarised Korean peninsula.

(Additional reporting by Jack Kim and Daum Kim in SEOUL, Sui-Lee Wee in BEIJING, John Ruwitch in SHANGHAI, and Patricia Zengerle, Mark Hosenball and Jeff Mason in Washington; Writing by Peter Cooney, Editing by Jim Loney)

 

[Edward Campbell]

This report is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from The Economic Observer, a privately owned Chinese weekly newspaper:

http://www.eeo.com.cn/ens/2013/0412/242472.shtml

China Puts the Brakes on Rising Korean Peninsula Tension

2013-04-12

    Summary：The position of China's new Foreign Minister is the consistent stance of the Chinese government, namely, solving the problem through negotiation, promoting the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
    and maintaining its peace and stability. But at the same time, Wang's statement that "Beijing opposes any provocative words and actions from any party in the region and does not allow troublemaking at
    the doorsteps of China" is quite interesting.

By Sun Xingjie (孙兴杰)
Apr 8, 2013
Economic Observer Online
Translated by Laura Lin

On Apr 6, China's new Foreign Minister Wang Yi (王毅) discussed the North Korean situation on the phone with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon.

Wang made China's stance quite clear: it will not allow "troublemaking" at its doorsteps. This is the toughest talk to date from the Chinese government, and its intention is clear: to defuse North Korea's provocations.

Over the past month, North Korea has continuously ramped up its bellicose rhetoric to test the international community's bottom line.

First it cancelled both its 60-year-old armistice agreement as well as its hotline and nonaggression pact with South Korea. Then it announced it was in a "state of war" with South Korea and warned that any provocation by Seoul and Washington would trigger a nuclear-war. It then positioned its forces to attack U.S. military bases in the Pacific – Guam and Hawaii – and restarted its Yongbyon nuclear facility.

North Korea has become the focus of global media attention. Even the Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro wrote a column urging North Korea to use restraint and to refrain from embarking on nuclear war. Obviously the threat of a Korean war has reached the bottom line of world peace.

As North Korea's close neighbor, it is not possible for China to stay out of this. And as a global power it's obligated to mollify this escalating bellicose rhetoric.

Wang's position is the consistent stance of the Chinese government, which is solving the problem through negotiation, promoting the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and maintaining its peace and stability. But at the same time, Wang's statement that Beijing "opposes any provocative words and actions from any party in the region and does not allow troublemaking at the China's doorstep" (反对任何一方在这一地区的挑衅言行，不允许在中国的家门口生事) is quite interesting.

Who is "provoking" the crisis on the Korean Peninsula? The recent escalation started after North Korea launched a rocket and carried out a third nuclear test. As a consequence, the UN Security Council voted in favor of sanctions against North Korea, who responded by adopting an even tougher stance and threatening the U.S.-South Korean military alliance with preemptive nuclear strikes.

Objectively, North Korea's crude nuclear devices and rockets do not constitute a threat to the U.S., though it does pose a certain threat to South Korea and Japan. However, war is not a trifling matter. The fact that the U.S. has deployed its most advanced fighter jets and warships to the region has further escalated the conflict.

The boundary between the one provoking the crisis and the one who is being provoked is blurred.

China is worried that a mistake in this war of intimidation could lead to a real war.

Focus on War Not Peace

China, by saying it is opposed to "troublemaking at its doorsteps" (在中国的家门口生事) is stating explicitly that it will not accept a second Korean War.

The Korean War was the product of the Cold War. The most important issue for China today is to cross the "middle-income trap" and realize its goal of a Chinese Dream.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said in the opening speech at the Bo'ao Forum for Asia, this week that no one should be allowed to throw a region, and even the whole world, into chaos for selfish gains.

North Korea has been pursuing its "Songun Military First" policy for nearly 20 years. This policy prioritizes the army and military spending over the rest. Meanwhile, its economy is stagnating and its people are experiencing none of the development and improvements in quality of life that the rest of Asia and the world have been experiencing.

Though Kim Jong-un says he plans to develop his country's nuclear force parallel to economic construction, by restarting the mothballed Yongbyon nuclear facility while closing down the Kaesong industrial park, it's evident that North Korea is putting the focus on war rather than on peace.

For a regime with a closed economy that neglects its population, economic sanctions are not going to be effective. It will be like asking a skinny person to stay thin – it won't be difficult for them.

The way forward for the Korean Peninsula lies in multilateral negotiations, as advocated by Foreign Minister Wang when he called for the "restoration of six-party talks and to bring the issue back to the track of dialogue."

The fact that North Korea unilaterally ended the Korean Armistice Agreement and reactivated its nuclear facilities not only disregards the fact that China is one of the signatories of the armistice agreement, it also kicks out the legs from below the six-party talks table.

Kim Jong-un's personal message to Dennis Rodman that he would like President Obama to give him a call was his attempt at establishing a bilateral U.S.-North Korea relationship to show that North Korea is on "equal footing" with the world's most powerful country.

By insisting on six-party talks Wang quickly extinguished Kim's dream of dealing with the U.S. alone.

As befits a newspaper that aspires to be China's version of the authoritative Financial Times (the print edition is on salmon coloured paper), the article sees the issue through the lens of China's overarching objective of crossing "the "middle-income trap" and [realizing] its goal of a Chinese Dream."

But this quote from Foreign Minister Wang Yi (王毅) is interesting: "[China] opposes any provocative words and actions from any party in the region and does not allow troublemaking at the China's doorstep" (反对任何一方在这一地区的挑衅言行，不允许在中国的家门口生事). Assuming that is an accurate translation then it looks like Wang's expression of China's position allows little wiggle room for the DPRK. But the expression about "troublemaking on China's doorstep" may also be a thinly veiled warning to ROK president Park and US President Obama that any retaliation for any DPRK action must be very carefully measured.

 

[muskrat89]

This report is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/391376/North-Korea-states-nuclear-war-is-unavoidable-as-it-declares-first-target-will-be-Japan

North Korea states 'nuclear war is unavoidable' as it declares first target will be Japan

In a commentary carried by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), the communist country lashed out at Tokyo's standing orders to destroy any missile heading toward Japan, threatening such actions will result in a nuclear attack against the island nation.

If Japan executes its threat to shoot down any North Korean missile, such a “provocative” intervention would see Tokyo — an enormous conurbation of 30 million people — “consumed in nuclear flames”, KCNA warned.