Bottom line
first: This
is a bad situation with no easy way out. We cannot give the North what they
want. They may not be able to back down. The big danger is not that they will
launch a nuclear attack (although there is a small possibility that might
happen) or even a major ground assault on the South. The big danger is they
might launch a limited conventional attack that killed thousands of South
Koreans and Americans. Then we would have a land war on our hands that we are
not prepared to fight. And we might get there not through calculation or even
mis-calculation but by accident. Finally, there is another possibility – remote
but real – that would post a threat to the survival of the United States. So this is not a problem we can “hope” away.
I
will try to be short, but the situation is complex. North
Korea:
·
Has
a large, well equipped land army. But if they lay it out in the open in order to attack, the US will destroy it with
precision weapons. Good start . . . but how do you finish it without the
massive commitment of ground troops?
·
Has
a respectable air force, although without much flying time and experience. We
could sweep it from the skies. Then
what? Forgive and forget? How do you punish a dictator without hurting innocent
people?
·
Has some submarines – quiet enough to have
sunk a South Korean ship 3 years ago. They might hit a US or Japanese
ship. We would probably respond by
taking out most military targets. Surely they know that – so how have they
planned to respond?
·
Probably has thousands of agents prepared to infiltrate or already
in South Korea - they
could not win a war, but they could create a lot of havoc and kill many
people. Our victory would look like a
loss.
The really big deal in this situation is
that North Korea has many artillery tubes buried in the mountains – all within
range of Seoul and other populated parts of South Korea. They could easily
cause tens of thousands of deaths and injuries and taking them out would be
difficult and time consuming.
They probably do not have a nuclear weapon
yet – but they might.
They probably could not reach the US with
a missile – but they might.
And IF they have a nuclear weapon – they
might reach South Korea or Japan with a
missile or in some other way.
South Korea:
·
Has
a large military – much larger than the US forces in Korea, although in theory
under US Joint Command. They were hit twice in the last 3 years and have vowed
to retaliated this time – or even preempt if they see an attack forming. The reputation of the new Prime Minister hangs
on the ability to deter North Korea from attack, and the ability to wage a
sharp, quick response if deterrence fails.
Might they do this without coordinating with the US?
Japan:
·
Has
powerful self-defense forces in the area, but would be hard pressed to hurt
North Korea.
·
Still
– if they are hit, would their leaders stand by and wait for the US to act, or
take action of their own?
·
And
if US bases there were hit, there would be new pressure for them to be moved.
China:
·
Always
plays both sides against the middle.
·
Shows
no indication that they want war, but they are happy to see the US distracted,
powerless, and with its shoelace in the sprocket.
·
Also,
China is at odds with Japan over island claims. They might tell us they would
help convince their ally North Korea to back down, if we lean on our ally Japan
to surrender the islands. The would put
the US in an even worse jam.
Why would North
Korea cause this crisis?
·
They
stage some sort of crisis every year during annual US/South Korea military
exercises.
·
But
this year sounds and feels different.
·
The
new leader, Kim Jung Un, is young and inexperienced. He may be trying to prove
himself to his generals. Or someone may be controlling him behind the scenes.
Or he may really think he can get what he wants. He may believe he can hurt the
US or cause it to back down, making his country a world power. We don’t know.
What does North
Korea want?
Well . . . that’s not clear either.
·
What
they say they want is respect and a good economy, and they think the route to
those two things is a program to build (and share) nuclear weapons technology.
·
Kim
Jung Un appears to be trying to move forward with this plan – maybe for
internal consumption - by testing missiles and warheads.
·
The
US coordinated new UN sanctions as a result, and he may regard this as a direct
threat to his rule – humiliation in front of his generals may be unacceptable.
So he feels driven to make the US back down to reinforce his position.
·
It is also possible that
US secret negotiations (the North has demanded direct negotiations for years) and
the US military drawn down have left him with the impression that we would not
respond if he pushes the envelope. Our President keeps saying that force is
never the answer and the only road to peace is diplomacy. (He said this again
last week in Israel.) If Kim Jung Un
took us at our word, and moved offensively expecting us to bend to his will
in negotiations, then he is now exposed
with no way out except a humiliating withdrawal. So he probably wants a
way out of this jam and forward with his plan at the same time.
OK -- now what?
·
The US top priority is
preventing a nuclear threat from developing from North Korea, or any place
where they share their technology (like Iran). And our announced strategy is
negotiation and sanctions coupled with military withdrawal and drawdown. Given
our budget situation, this would not be easy to change.
·
While the US searches
for something to give, and North Korea tries to decide what it will accept,
somebody could make a mistake that pushes everybody over the edge.
Sounds challenging, but
like nobody wants war. That’s good. Is
there a possible interpretation that is worse?
Oh yes.
·
Electromagnetic Pulse
(EMP) is a flash of energy released by a nuclear detonation that overwhelms and
destroys electronic circuits. IF it works as advertised, then a single nuclear
weapon detonated over a large city might destroy every electronic device for
many miles around.
·
The North Koreans have
apparently detonated some type of nuclear device.
·
The do have a multistage
rocket that has put some type of “package” in orbit.
·
If the North Korean plan
is not to create nuclear weapons and missiles for leverage, but a couple of EMP
weapons for attack, then the United States might be facing a real threat to its
survival.
This last point is
unlikely but a real possibility, and explains why the US is moving additional
forces into the region. It cannot afford to let this challenge go unanswered.
(By the way, the US does have a defense against
this specific threat – a type of missile interceptor based in the US as an
outgrowth of the old Ronald Reagan “Star Wars” plan. Whether we have enough to
cover all types and directions of attack from North Korea is questionable, and
additional interceptors were scheduled for purchase in 2009 and deployment this
year. President Obama canceled the
additional interceptors when first elected to office. The new Secretary of
Defense has ordered a replacement buy to begin immediately. Those weapons will
be deployed in 2017. The money for these
additional West Coast interceptors has been diverted from plans to field
similar interceptors in Europe to protect against Iranian attack.)
Is there a
lesson here?
Yes. Talking is better than fighting. But we have been talking with North Korea for
60 years – three generations. Diplomacy without military power behind it is a
waste of time. And eventually you run out of time.
I think the only logical response is to tell them face-on that if they launch any kind of attack, we will strategically bomb their leadership out of existence. Then,if they disregard the notice and launch an attack of any kind, do what we promised to do!
ReplyDeleteGood analysis Dave, well articulated and very thorough. I always value your insight. James Acly
ReplyDelete