Tuesday, April 16, 2013
How to avoid war in Korea
With all due respect to our Russian friend Mr. Vorontsov, the ROK/US Alliance actions are actually what is preventing war. The most important action to deter war is the presentation of a force that is capable of defending the ROK and destroying the nKPA. The regime will not deliberate decide to attack into the strength of the ROK/US military alliance. Mr Vorontsov is another in a long line of north Korean apologists who refuse to recognize that the tensions on the Korean Peninsula are the making solely of the Kim Family Regime. Although paradoxical perhaps, the ROK/US Alliance is exercising "maximum restraint" by demonstrating strength and resolve and providing no gap or seam for the regime to exploit. Most importantly is the signal to the north that if it conducts any hostile action against the ROK it will be met with an immediate decisive response (at the time and place of provocation) from the ROK military and supported by the US.
How to avoid war in Korea
April 16th, 2013
Author: Alexander Vorontsov, Russian Academy of Sciences
Since the beginning of 2013 reports from the Korean Peninsula have been disturbing and contradictory.
On the one hand, tensions continue to escalate as Pyongyang threatens to raze Seoul to the ground. This is the most severe situation since the 1968 Korean crisis, when the DPRK captured the US Navy spy ship Pueblo. Pyongyang’s suggestion that foreign diplomats be evacuated from North Korea in consideration of their safety, made on 5 April, is unprecedented.
On the other hand, on 31 March the Workers’ Party of Korea adopted a policy of economic development, to run in parallel with further build-up of the country’s nuclear forces, and the Supreme People’s Assembly re-appointed former prime minister Pak Pong-ju to head the cabinet. Pak is known as a supporter of economic reforms.
These developments suggest that, rather than unleashing an all-out war, Pyongyang is in fact keen to develop its economy. Of no less importance is the fact that, for the time being, people in both Koreas continue to live their normal daily lives.
Analysis of the current Korean escalation must focus on two major recent events: North Korea’s announcement on 8 March that it was invalidating the 1953 armistice and all associated agreements with South Korea, and its announcement that it had cut military hotlines with Seoul and Washington.
But the international media have been concentrating on Pyongyang’s increasingly belligerent statements — that an order had already been issued to deliver nuclear strikes against US military bases in different regions of the world, that North Korea is now at war with South Korea, and so on. While these statements are sensational, if we discard emotions and properly scrutinise what North Korea is saying there is less call for alarm.
First, just as was the case with similar statements made by Pyongyang in the past, the fresh threats clearly state that any military action would be entirely reciprocal, only to be resorted to if the country was subjected to outside aggression. These public statements should be seen as a strong warning to North Korea’s opponents not to cross the ‘final line’. But North Korea is most likely harbouring no plans for a pre-emptive strike on its potential adversaries.
Second, it is not just the North that is pushing the two Koreas close to the brink of open warfare. The role of all the parties involved and their contribution to the present standoff needs to be assessed. The United States and South Korea are adding fuel to the fire with just as much enthusiasm as the North. In fact, although so far North Korea has limited itself to rhetoric (admittedly it is fairly belligerent), its opponents have taken actual steps toward real conflict. Washington’s decision to deploy interceptors in Alaska as a measure against a possible North Korean missile attack is one such step. Another is the use of nuclear-capable B-52 strategic bombers (for the first time in many years) and a B-2 stealth bomber close to North Korea’s border in the ongoing joint US–South Korean exercises Key Resolve and Foal Eagle.
(Continued at the link below)
I strongly disagree with ending the "one Korea policy" As Jay Lefkowitz argues. I would submit that we have had a "one Kore...
Perhaps Tom Ricks' next book Generalship will be an analysis of the hiring, firing, and rehabilitation of north Korean General...
From an interview I did with a Korean media outlet last month. Have not seen an English translation but will post it when I do. “한국 요...
For comparison here are the NSC organizations from Reagan through Obama (Trump's that was released yesterday is pasted below). I have ...