North Korea Orders Artillery to Be Combat Ready, Targeting U.S. Bases

I think it is worth recalling Dr. Bruce Bechtol's assessment of the north's standard provocation pattern that I have previously shared:

1. Intentionally initiated when they are most likely to attract most attention on the regional and international stage
2. They initially appear to be relatively small, easily contained, and quickly “resolved” incidents
3. They involve ever changing tactics and techniques
4. North Korea ensures plausible deniability, and denies responsibility for the incident

I would slightly add to the fourth point:  The north will also act when it can pin blame on the ROK or US as in the Y-P Do artillery firing when it blamed the ROK's provocative actions (its artillery exercise on the island firing toward the South) and then claimed it shelled the island in "self defense."

The other condition the north usually needs is surprise. In some ways we might be somewhat reassured by the rhetoric we are hearing because they are (usually) less likely to conduct an attack when they cannot achieve surprise or if they are attacking against a ready force and I would submit the ROK military is at a very high state of readiness.  

However, I do very much worry about Kim Jong-un's inexperience and potential hubris based on the idea that his western education and experience gives him superior insights into how the US in particular might react.  Combine this will poor military advice from Generals who will be basing their assessments not only on what they think Kim Jong-un wants to hear but on their assessment of ROK/US Alliance actions over the past 6 decades (and I think that both the ROK and US are not going to react in accordance with historical patterns) and we do have the potential for miscalculation by the Kim and his regime.

V/R

Dave

March 26, 2013

North Korea Orders Artillery to Be Combat Ready, Targeting U.S. Bases

By REUTERS

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/03/26/world/asia/26reuters-korea-north-combat.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea said on Tuesday its strategic rocket and long-range artillery units have been ordered to be combat ready, targeting U.S. military bases on Guam, Hawaii and mainland America after U.S. bombers flew sorties threatening the North.

The order, issued in a statement from the North's military "supreme command", marks the latest fiery rhetoric from Pyongyang since the start of joint military drills by U.S. and South Korean forces early this month.

South Korea's defense ministry said it saw no sign of imminent military action by North Korea.

"From this moment, the Supreme Command of the Korean People's Army will be putting into combat duty posture No. 1 all field artillery units, including long-range artillery units and strategic rocket units, that will target all enemy objects in U.S. invasionary bases on its mainland, Hawaii and Guam," the North's KCNA news agency said.

The North previously threatened nuclear attack on the United States and South Korea, although it is not believed to have the capability to hit the continental United States with an atomic weapon. But the U.S. military's bases in the Pacific area are in range of its medium-range missiles.

South Korea's defense ministry said it had detected no signs of unusual activity by the North's military but will monitor the situation. The South and the U.S. military are conducting drills until the end of April, which they have stressed are strictly defensive in nature.

(Continued at the link below)

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/03/26/world/asia/26reuters-korea-north-combat.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

S. Korea, U.S. sign combined operational plan against N. Korea

Very good news here. Although it may be counterintuitive to some this actually supports President Park's "trustpolitik."  Everything that President Park does in regards to north Korea must rest on the foundation of ROK/US Military Alliance.  The north has to know that there is no daylight in the Alliance and that its strategy to split the Alliance has not and will not work.  This is a first step toward attacking the north's strategy to split the Alliance.  Every time the north ratchets up tension or conducts a provocation must be have a response that shows the strength of the Alliance is only enhanced by the north's action.  Not everything requires a direct military response (though I am happy to see the ROK  military response described in the excerpt below) but careful thought must be given in each case to show the strength of the Alliance and that the north's strategy is failing.  Only then can President Park's "trustpolitik" policy have a chance of working.  Every action the ROK takes must be from a position of "rock solid" strength and that strength is derived from the ROK/US Alliance.

    Gen. Jung said the North's military threats are for real. 

   "We are ready to sternly retaliate North Korea's provocations as this plan was completed," he said. "This plan allows South Korean and U.S. forces to respond more strongly than when they had separate plans." 

    According to the new plan, South Korea's military is set to play a more active role in taking any counteractions against "the origin of North Korean provocation and surrounding forces in the first stage."

This last sentence is key because when the north conducts a military provocation that is a direct attack on the South such as what happened at Y-P Do in 2010, the ROK military must "win" the tactical engagement and that means a rapid response at the point of provocation – time and place.

   "The South Korean military's operational plan now calls for striking the origin of the enemy's provocation and supporting and command forces," a senior South Korean defense ministry official said. "Depending on the type of provocations and operational circumstance, the U.S. with its weapons can strike North Korean territories."

V/R

Dave

S. Korea, U.S. sign combined operational plan against N. Korea

2013-03-24 12:00

Normal FontLarge Font

http://m.yna.co.kr/mob2/en/contents_en.jsp?cid=AEN20130322011000315&domain=3&ctype=A&site=0100000000   

The militaries of South Korea and the United States said Sunday they have worked out a new joint operational plan that details how they should cooperate to deal with North Korean provocations.

   The Combined Counter-Provocation Plan, signed between South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Chairman Gen. Jung Seung-jo and Gen. James Thurman, the commander of the U.S. Forces in South Korea, went into effect immediately.

   "By completing this plan, we improved our combined readiness posture to allow us to immediately and decisively respond to any North Korean provocation," the Combined Forces Command (CFC) of the two allies said in a statement. "The completed plan includes procedures for consultation and action to allow for a strong and decisive combined Republic of Korea-U.S. response to North Korean provocations and threats."

    The allies have been working on the plan since 2010 when North Korea torpedoed the South Korean warship Cheonan and bombarded the South's border island of Yeonpyeong in the Yellow Sea. A total of 50 South Koreans, 48 of them soldiers, were killed.

   The need to strengthen military cooperation between South Korea and the U.S. has gained new urgency amid heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula following a series of North Korean military provocations.

   North Korea has recently been ratcheting up war rhetoric almost daily in response to new U.N. sanctions for its third nuclear test in February and recent joint South Korea-U.S. military exercises which it denounced as invasion preparations.

    Gen. Jung said the North's military threats are for real.

   "We are ready to sternly retaliate North Korea's provocations as this plan was completed," he said. "This plan allows South Korean and U.S. forces to respond more strongly than when they had separate plans."

Park ready to widen inter-Korean exchanges without provocations by North: official

President Park is maintaining the moral high ground here and making sure the ball is in the north's court.  The blame for tension and conflict on the Korean Peninsula (past, present, and future) rests squarely on the shoulders of the Kim Family Regime.

V/R

Dave

(LEAD) Park ready to widen inter-Korean exchanges without provocations by North: official

2013-03-24 16:46

http://m.yna.co.kr/mob2/en/contents_en.jsp?cid=AEN20130324000351315&domain=3&ctype=A&site=0100000000   

The Park Geun-hye administration will actively engage with North Korea with more support and exchange projects if the communist neighbor strives to follow international norms, a senior official at Seoul's presidential office said Sunday.

   "Support for North Korea and diverse inter-Korean exchange programs will be expanded as long as the North cooperates with peace efforts on the Korean Peninsula by refraining from provocations and joining the international community," said a high-ranking official at Seoul's presidential office Cheong Wa Dae. He requested anonymity.

   His remarks echo Park's "Korean Peninsula trust process" vision that calls for greater exchanges and dialogue between the two sides so as to build trust and reduce tensions across their heavily fortified border.

   Citing the approval of a shipment of tuberculosis medicine by a private South Korean charity group to the North, the first aid package under the Park government, the official stressed the differences in how Park will deal with the communist North compared to former President Lee Myung-bak.

   "Park's key principle is that any political incidents will not wholly suspend humanitarian aid and inter-Korean exchange programs," he said, "It's certain that Park's policy toward Pyongyang will be different from that of Lee."

   Seeking peace and stabilization of the Korean Peninsula, the Park administration that took office late last month has embraced a "trustpolitik" doctrine to normalize inter-Korean relations that have been rocked by uncertainties in the past.

   "The key to more support and exchanges is how transparent the North Korean regime is," said the senior official, calling for patience and cooperation between the two sides.

(Continued at the link below)

http://m.yna.co.kr/mob2/en/contents_en.jsp?cid=AEN20130324000351315&domain=3&ctype=A&site=0100000000 

The Saturday Special with Michael Zwerling- Guest Host: Rebecca Costa- Dealing with a Rogue Nuclear Threat- Colonel David S Maxwell- Guest

My first talk radio interview (case of beer for all my SF brothers I know). I discussed north Korea in some depth for an hour with Rebecca Costa. You can download the podcast at this link.

http://ksco.com/saturday-special-2/33338-the-saturday-special-with-michael-zwerling-guest-host-rebecca-costa-dealing-with-a-rogue-nuclear-threat-colonel-david-s-maxwell-guest

The Saturday Special with Michael Zwerling- Guest Host: Rebecca Costa- Dealing with a Rogue Nuclear Threat- Colonel David S Maxwell- Guest

on 23 March 2013.

Stream Live from our website: 

 Download from our website: Download this Podcast here

Dealing with A Rogue Nuclear Threat.  Is America Behind the Curve?

Rebecca fills in for Michael Zwerling and invites Colonel David S Maxwell to discuss the growing threat posed by North Korea.  Growing instability in the Korean Peninsula is causing concern amongst world leaders.  What is the next step?

Why the United States should ‘lead from behind’ in East Asia

A unique assessment.  I am sure that whomever in the Obama Administration coined the term leading from behind regrets it as it is fodder for political opponents.  However, I am not sure that a "tri-lateral" negotiation with the US, China, and north Korea is "leading from behind."  

While I think the Kim Family Regime is always receptive to "carrots" it is very unlikely that it will reciprocate.  In six decades the north has broken virtually every agreement it has ever entered into.  If the north was serious it should honor the 1992 Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-aggression,  and Exchanges (ARNE) it made with the Republic of Korea.  Let's offer that agreement up as the start point for negotiations since it has already been signed we should implement.  I am sure that President Park's policy of "trustpolitik" would support implementation of the agreement and the ROK would surely live up to its part of the agreement.  Could we expect north Korea to do the same?

Leading from behind?  Let's let north Korea deal with South Korea and have the Koreas take the lead in bringing their civil war to a conclusion.  But the ball is in the north's court because every country in the region including Russia, China, Japan, the ROK, and the US have lived up to their ends of agreements until the north broke theirs.  
V/R
Dave

Why the United States should ‘lead from behind’ in East Asia

March 23rd, 2013

Author: Jeong Lee, Pusan

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/03/23/why-the-united-states-should-lead-from-behind-in-east-asia/

In the United States, the much-dreaded budget cuts known as the sequester went into effect on 1 March 2013.

Despite Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s gloomy assessment that cuts to the defence budget will ‘harm military readiness and disrupt each and every investment program’, the sequester will neither cripple America’s geopolitical strategy nor its ability to project its hard power abroad.

But the Obama administration should still seriously rethink its ‘pivot’ strategy in Asia in light of the drastic budget cuts. The United States has a vital role to play in the region as a stabilising force, but America’s new pivot strategy must reflect geopolitical realities. The United States should focus on ‘leading from behind’ by prioritising cooperation with other regional powers and by exercising leadership in a more indirect manner.

The Pentagon has already readjusted its priorities through its recent military involvement in Africa. The Pentagon’s official position is that it is merely seeking to monitor terror threats in Northern Africa. Yet some analysts believe that the United States is trying to counter China’s trade and investment in Africa, which currently outstrips its own. If this is the case, such moves are unlikely to help America’s Asia pivot. This is partly because, according to Gen. David Rodriguez, the incoming commander of the US Africa Command (AFRICOM), the United States already hastrouble meeting its logistical needs in Africa. But more importantly, America’s covert attempts to contain China’s influence in Africa may backfire by provoking the Chinese into taking countermeasures. There are already some indications that Beijing has interpreted French intervention in Mali as a gateway for further Western intervention.

Thus, in order to achieve stability in East Asia and elsewhere around the globe, the United States should first seek to lead from behind by cooperating with China. Most importantly, the United States should pursue a trilateral dialogue with Beijing to ensure stability on the Korean Peninsula. This may provide insight into Chinese assessments of North Korean political stability, which will be particularly importantin light of signs that Beijing may have shifted its policy on North Korea’s nuclear testing since its latest launch.

The United States should also consider formally recognising the DPRK as a sovereign state. Despite opposition from hardliners and the fact that the DPRK has proven to be anything but predictable, normalisation may help to avert a costly, fratricidal war between two Koreas. It would also ease South Korea’s economic burden by fostering trade with the North, and it would help to turn Kim Jong-un away from China by keeping him accountable to international norms. US basketballer Dennis Rodman’s visit to Pyongyang in late February showed that Kim Jong-un may respond positively to carrots.

(Continued at the link below)

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/03/23/why-the-united-states-should-lead-from-behind-in-east-asia/

N. Korean leader Kim Jong-un inspects special forces unit

The importance of nK SOF to the Regime might be illustrated here.  Excerpt:

The visit occurred Friday, with the North's official news wire service stressing there was "profound meaning" in Kim checking of the unit, although it did not elaborate on details.

So does that mean the next provocation will be conducted by nK SOF?

But this excerpt from Adrian Buzo's book, Guerrilla Dynasty, helps to explain the reason for the emphasis on SOF and the reason for the "profound meaning" of the visit (and also explains a lot about nK culture):

In the course of this struggle against factional opponents, for the first time Kim began to emphasize nationalism as a means of rallying the population to the enormous sacrifices needed for post-war recovery.  This was a nationalism that first took shape in the environment of the anti-Japanese guerrilla movement and developed into a creed through the destruction of both the non-Communist nationalist forces and much of the leftist intellectual tradition of the domestic Communists.  Kim’s nationalism did not draw inspiration from Korean history, nor did it dwell on past cultural achievements, for the serious study of history and traditional culture soon effectively ceased in the DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea].  Rather, DPRK nationalism drew inspiration from the Spartan outlook of the former Manchurian guerrillas.  It was a harsh nationalism that dwelt on past wrongs and promises of retribution for “national traitors” and their foreign backers.  DPRK nationalism stressed the “purity” of all things Korean against the “contamination” of foreign ideas, and inculcated in the population a sense of fear and animosity toward the outside world.  Above all, DPRK nationalism stressed that the guerrilla ethos was not only the supreme, but also the only legitimate basis on which to reconstitute a reunified Korea. (emphasis added)

V/R

Dave

2013/03/23 10:00 KST

N. Korean leader Kim Jong-un inspects special forces unit

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2013/03/23/17/0401000000AEN20130323000900315F.HTML

SEOUL, March 23 (Yonhap) -- North Korean leader Kim Jong-un inspected a special forces unit and was briefed on its mission and training status, state media reported Saturday.

   The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) monitored in Seoul said Kim, who holds the rank of Marshal in the Korean People's Army, toured the headquarters element of Unit 1973.

  

The visit occurred Friday, with the North's official news wire service stressing there was "profound meaning" in Kim checking of the unit, although it did not elaborate on details.

   It said the commanding officer briefed Kim, with the leader emphasizing that all service personnel be fully prepared to defend the country and remain faithful to the goal of national unification.

   "Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il attached importance to this unit and it is the unit he regards as the most important and the Party trusts," the KCNA quoting the leader said. Kim Il-sung is the founder of North Korea and the incumbent leader's grandfather, while Kim Jong-il is his son, who died in late 2011 and left power to Kim Jong-un.

   The North Korean leader has been making regular trips to military units and overseeing drills as well as giving instructions on preparedness of troops as the communist country has ratcheted up tensions on the Korean Peninsula after it detonated its third nuclear device on Feb. 12.

(Continued at the link below)

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2013/03/23/17/0401000000AEN20130323000900315F.HTML

North Korea warns that U.S. bases in Guam, Japan are within range

A few comments on deterrence because some have mentioned that perhaps we should put Patriots on Guam to protect the bases and deter north Korea just as we are increasing the interceptors in Alaska to deter north Korea.

I would not think of defensive weapons as a deterrent to north Korea in the same sense that anti-ballistic missile defense would be a deterrent in the Cold War and as part of the nuclear stand off with the USSR.  I am not knowledgable enough to judge the efficacy of using Patriots to defend Guam against north Korean missiles.  However, I think neither Patriots in Guam nor interceptors in Alaska do much for deterrence against the north.  What deters the north is offensive military power (and I use power vice capabilities deliberately).  Defensive measures, while prudent of course from a military standpoint for protecting our forces and the ability to conduct operations, do not alone deter the north.  Demonstrated power and commitment to the Alliance are what deters the north and I am very confident that our B-52 overflights had a very powerful effect on the north's thinking.  Patriots in Guam and interceptors in Alaska can never have the same effect by themselves.

As an aside, I think the north is probably having a chuckle about the controversy it has read about regarding the amount of money spent on the stationing of the interceptors as well as the criticism of the system and the idea that it is not proven and may have little effect.  But more importantly the north looks at our defensive measures (and some might interpret them as desperate defensive measures because we are willing to spend a huge amount of money on a not fully proven system) as a sign of our fear of the north's capabilities.  They think they are they ones deterring us and that their actions are having a positive effect for their strategy.  And our defensive reaction is very important to support their internal domestic propaganda because of course they spin this as the north's nuclear and missile capability is making America tremble.

We should take defensive measures that we judge to be prudent to protect our interests and our forces but we should not consider those defensive measures by themselves as a deterrent.  For deterrence we need to demonstrate offensive military power.  And I would recommend that whenever we judge it necessary to take defensive measures we need to demonstrate offensive military power (and this needs to include Alliance military power so that the Alliance is shown to be strong and not being weakened by the north's actions which is a key part of its strategy) so as to strengthen our position, provide a credible deterrent, and undercut the legitimacy of the regime and the regime's actions.

I would add that where I would really like to see more Patriots is in Korea.  I would like the ROK military to buy Patriot PAC 3's to defend their bases.

V/R
Dave

North Korea warns that U.S. bases in Guam, Japan are within range By Jethro Mullen , CNN updated 8:41 PM EDT, Thu March 21, 2013

CNN.com

(CNN) -- The North Korean military issued a fresh burst of ominous rhetoric Thursday, warning that U.S. bases in Guam and Japan are within its "striking range."

The statement from the Supreme Command of the Korean People's Army, carried by the North's state-run news agency, follows the announcement by the United States this week that its B-52 bombers were making flights over South Korea as part of annual military exercises.

"The U.S. should not forget that the Andersen Air Force Base on Guam where the B-52s take off and naval bases in Japan proper and Okinawa where nuclear-powered submarines are launched are within the striking range of the DPRK's precision strike means," the North Korean military said Thursday.

Despite Pyongyang's rhetoric, no U.S. Navy submarines are based in Okinawa or anywhere else in Japan, although they may make calls at U.S. bases there. DPRK is short for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, North Korea's official name.

Interactive: Nuclear weapons: Who has what?

Citing what it called the United States' "nuclear blackmail and threat," the North said it that it, too, would "take corresponding military actions."

Pyongyang had already reacted angrily to the B-52 flights, warning Wednesday of "strong military counteraction" if the planes made more sorties over the Korean Peninsula.

Angry words after new sanctions

Tensions have spiked in the region since North Korea carried out its latest underground nuclear test last month, the first under its new young leader Kim Jong Un, prompting the United Nations Security Council to respond by toughening sanctions on the secretive regime.

The sanctions enraged the North further, and during the week when the Security Council was voting on them, it ratcheted up its threats, suggesting it could carry out a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the United States and South Korea.

Although analysts and American officials say Pyongyang is still a long way from being able to carry out such an attack on the U.S. mainland, the United States' bases in Japan and Guam appear to be within range of the North's conventional weapons.

In its comments Thursday, "the Kim Jong Un regime is just firing back" at its enemies in response to the B-52 flights and the military exercises of which they're a part, said Lee Jung-hoon, a professor of international relations at Yonsei University in Seoul.

He said that the U.N. sanctions were also likely to be fueling the North's ire, but that the regime's threats were largely driven by domestic concerns.

"They're doing all this to prop up the regime," Lee said.

The military first strategy

Since Kim took over from his father as the head of the North Korean government in late 2011, he appears to have maintained the pursuit of a stronger military deterrent rather than adopting a more conciliatory approach to relations with South Korea and the United States.

(Continued at the link below)

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/20/world/asia/north-korea-threats