Tag Archives: Kim Jong Un

Government, History, North Korea, Politics, South Korea, United Nations, United States

North Korea: Can Kim Jong-un really be trusted?

KOREAN PENINSULA

WHEN Ronald Reagan was locked in crucial talks with the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War, the former US president liked to rely on a favourite adage of his: ‘Trust, but verify.’

In the wake of North Korean president Kim Jong-un’s extraordinary peace overtures, the Western world is being asked to trust a tyrant who has murdered his people in their thousands.

As of now, though, we have no way to verify whether he is acting in good faith.

It is, after all, only a few months since Kim’s reckless missile tests, which included firing one rocket capable of bearing a military payload over Japan and into the sea on the other side.

That single reckless act brought us as close to a new Korean War as we have been for some time.

Such relentless belligerence makes his sudden grinning overtures to South Korea’s leader all the more astonishing. The events of the past few days – the hand-holding, the warm speeches, and the language of peace – were all intended to dazzle us. But we cannot afford to be naïve.

Yet, if it is impossible to trust Kim, we should at least attempt to understand his aims. That will help us gauge whether this attempt at rapprochement between North Korea and South Korea is more than superficial. It is claimed by the North Korean leader to be the end of the conflict that stems back to 1950.

The enmity that has riven the Korean peninsula dates to the end of the Second World War, when America and the Soviet Union agreed to split control of the former Japanese colony.

That quickly led to a power grab by North Korea, which invaded the South. American troops led the UN fightback and, although the war ended in 1953, no peace treaty was officially signed.

Since then, North Korea has become ever more isolated, as the Kim dynastic line tightened their grip as dictators. Whatever Kim Jong-un said about peace in the last few days, he has no intention of giving up power now.

 

HIS grandfather, Kim Il-sung, and his father, Kim Jong-Il, dominated their people, but the latest in the family line has shown himself more ruthless – and, some would say, dangerous – than either.

Family rivals have been brutally disposed of. His uncle was savagely executed. He had one cousin burnt alive with a flame thrower, according to South Korean reports. His half-brother, Kim Jong-nam, was assassinated with a nerve agent in February last year.

Many in the West would say we should not deal with such a man, and that any attempt at diplomacy would be immoral. Yet there are historical precedents which suggest otherwise. In 1972, US President Richard Nixon amazed the world by opening diplomatic discussions with China, whose leader Mao Tse-tung was responsible for at least 60million deaths.

Mao was a monster, but by negotiating with him Nixon laid the groundwork for an end to the Vietnam War, and usher in economic changes in China that eventually saw the introduction of capitalism there.

Today, President Donald Trump regards Nixon as a role model, a president who was willing to think the unthinkable. And like Nixon before him, Trump finds it easier than a Democratic president might to engage with Communists, because he will not be suspected of naïve Left-leaning sympathies.

There’s little doubt that Trump’s bombastic dealings with North Korea in recent months have had a part to play in the events of recent days.

His brand of ‘diplomacy’ might have been comical if it were not so inflammatory. His outbursts on Twitter, dubbing Kim the ‘little rocket man’, used the language of the playground. Some might suggest that if there is one thing that unsettles a lunatic, it’s being confronted by an even more powerful lunatic.

The US President’s rationale was that calmly reasoned rhetoric had got his predecessors in the White House precisely nowhere with Pyongyang. The only way of getting through, he felt, was to stick a megaphone against his opponent’s ear, and shout insults. After months of knockabout threats on both sides, Trump suddenly announced last month that he would be willing to meet Kim in May or June to discuss ‘de-nuking’ the Korean peninsula.

That was not the only indication that change was afoot. Mike Pompeo, at the time CIA director, made a secret visit to North Korea over the Easter period when he met Kim, a few days after the North Korean leader visited China for talks.

So, while Kim’s startling proclamations came as a genuine surprise, there have certainly been clues it was becoming a possibility.

In the short term, no doubt, the reduction of tension in the region must be a good thing.

 

THE Japanese will be watching with concern, however, because both North and South Korea view some of Japan’s islands as disputed territory and might wish to reclaim them.

The American have worries, too. Like Trump the Korean leaders talked about ‘denuclearisation’ of the peninsula. But that would also mean the removal of any nuclear weapons the US may have in the region, or even America being asked to dismantle its military bases in the South altogether.

And while Kim might be willing to allow American inspectors in to check that work at his known nuclear facilities has been shut down, it’s ludicrous to suppose he would welcome US oversight across his entire, vast military machine.

As long as some of his Army, comprising more than one million troops, is unseen, we cannot be certain that he is not hiding another atomic weapons programme, as was the case after a similar deal was struck in 1994.

And what about the question of reuniting the two nations, as we saw with East and West Germany in 1990.

The South Koreans want reunification – but not yet. They could certainly never accept Kim as ruler of both countries. And though they are a wealthy nation, the cost of absorbing the destitute North could be economically crippling. Before the two halves of the peninsula are joined up, the South will want to see the establishment of a successful capitalist economy in the North. Can Kim accept an opening up of his backward nation to Western influences, including the internet – which would allow his repressed people to understand for the first time how appallingly they have been treated?

At present, the unrelenting hardship and constant conditions of near-starvation help keep Kim Jong-un’s populace under control. And while he will hope to see Western sanctions on his regime lifted, that doesn’t mean he plans or intends to make his people’s lives any easier.

The West should make an offer to lift sanctions in return for a cast-iron promise to stop his nuclear programme. (In fact, his reckless nuclear testing has made it unsafe for him to detonate another H-bomb at his northern underground test site because it could collapse.)

If Kim Jong-un agrees, then his regime will be allowed to survive – however arduous and horrific that may be for his people.

What the North Korean leader will want to do is welcome President Trump to his capital with a glorious cultural and military spectacle. The American leader will be received by cheering crowds, just as China’s Chairman Mao made sure Richard Nixon was treated like a megastar. We can trust Kim to do that much. The question is, can he be trusted to keep the peace?

Standard
China, Government, North Korea, United Nations, United States

The West’s options in dealing with North Korea

NORTH KOREA

Intro: President Donald Trump says, “all options are on the table”. But which would neutralise Kim without risking a world war?

NORTH KOREA, a small, poor but reckless and belligerent nuclear-tipped country is testing not only the resolve of President Trump and the United States, but the UN Security Council, which has continued to meet in emergency session.

It is one thing for global leaders to say, “all options are on the table”, quite another to choose a line of action that stops North Korea without setting off a nuclear war in East Asia – and, quite probably, World War III.

But at some point, President Trump – and his four generals in his top team – must act to teach North Korea and any other rogue regime with nuclear capabilities or aspirations not to push it too far.

The Kim dynasty has invested everything it has to obtain nuclear weapons to safeguard its regime.

Some in Washington have begun to think the unthinkable. For the moment, however, other options that stop short of triggering Armageddon are more likely. This article looks at what those options are:

. Diplomacy

For some analysts, Kim Jong-un’s provocative actions are what a psychiatrist might call a ‘cry for recognition’. He is a small boy behaving very badly so that the biggest boy on the block, the U.S., will take him seriously.

Treat North Korea as an equal not a rogue, say these analysts.

The problem is that both Kim’s grandfather (Kim Il-sung, who led the invasion of South Korea that started the Korean War of 1950-1953) and father (Kim Jong-il who turned North Korea into a nuclear power) charmed delegations from Washington into reporting back on their plans for reform, when what they were actually doing was relentlessly pursuing their nuclear agenda.

Appeasement has a poor track record in Pyongyang.

In any case, the Trump administration would demand a verifiable halt to further missile development – and Kim won’t willingly give up his only card.

. Sanctions

If Kim can’t be sweet-talked into seeing sense, then even tougher economic sanctions would force him to choose between North Korea’s economic viability and its nuclear prowess. The UN Security Council, which includes China and Russia, has backed sanctions repeatedly since Pyongyang started its nuclear and missile tests a decade ago.

Last month, the UN beefed up existing sanctions with an international ban on key exports from North Korea amounting to $1billion. China and Russia are North Korea’s lifeline to the outside world and could strangle the regime if they acted in tandem to cut all trade and transport links.

However, with more than 90 per cent of North Korea’s trade going through China, the Chinese would take a hit financially, while a chaotic economic collapse in North Korea could see millions of refugees heading for the Chinese border.

A desperate Kim might even, in a last act of defiance, turn his fire on Beijing and Moscow itself.

Even if prepared for that outcome, Presidents Xi and Putin would demand a high price from Trump for that kind of high-risk help. And, the U.S. has recently imposed mandatory sanctions of its own on Russia. Would Congress swallow its pride and repeal them to get Putin on board?

In reality, sanctions are slow to deliver. Decades of sanctions were needed to prod Iran into doing a deal, which Trump and Israel still don’t trust. Would a North Korean deal be any more believable?

. A Limited Strike

A10

A-10 warplanes lined up for takeoff from the United States Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, South Korea. The U.S. has been conducting joint exercises with Seoul in the Korean Peninsula.

The U.S. has a range of airbases in South Korea, Japan and on the Pacific island of Guam from which to strike, with B1 bombers, cruise missiles, bunker-busting bombs, plus its fleet of nuclear aircraft carriers (each with more attack planes than the entire RAF).

While this firepower would, ultimately, destroy much of North Korea’s military nuclear infrastructure and 10,000 artillery sites, the country is more prepared than ever against an air attack.

It has mobile launchers to move and hide missiles, while the newer North Korean missiles are solid-fuelled (not liquid-fuelled) so can be launched much more quickly in retaliatory strikes at Seoul, the capital of U.S. ally South Korea, where 10 million people live.

There is no safe or full proven way to neutralise Kim Jong-un’s nuclear warheads by a massive airstrike. Simultaneous special forces’ attacks would be required – and all-out war might well result.

. Full Invasion

Despite being far better equipped than North Korea, the U.S. would require the bulk of its military manpower to be deployed to Korea to ensure a rapid and decisive win, leaving it exposed elsewhere in the world.

War in Korea would tie down the U.S. army and marines – unless South Korea’s 650,000 troops also took part. But South Korea is reluctant to engage in a pre-emptive war that would threaten Seoul with instant destruction.

China is a factor, too. It is vehemently hostile to the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defence system that was recently deployed in South Korea.

Beijing’s fear is that the real target of any American military action in the region is ultimately China. For the U.S. to act without being sure of Chinese neutrality runs the risk of a wider and far more perilous conflict.

Even if China was ready to accept the fall of the Pyongyang regime, a conventional invasion would not be swift enough to stop Kim Jong-un’s regime launching some kind of nuclear strike, as well as firing off his stockpile of chemical and biological weapons.

According to U.S. intelligence, North Korea has between 20 and as many as 60 nuclear bombs. If only a couple were successfully launched at South Korean cities, the scale of the casualties would be horrendous.

. Assassination

Taking out Kim Jong-un and his commanders in a so-called decapitation strike is arguably the cheapest and least devastating option in terms of military and civilian casualties.

Unfortunately, a successful assassination wouldn’t stop a barrage of artillery and rockets being fired in instant retaliation against South Korea and Japan.

It might also require a U.S.-South Korean occupation of North Korea that would be faced with guerrilla resistance deploying Kim’s stockpile of chemical and biological weapons. Nor would China – faced with the prospect of millions of refugees heading to its territory – be pleased by a speedy collapse of Kim’s regime.

And if it failed, Kim’s revenge would be indiscriminate attacks aimed at South Korea, Japan and any U.S. bases within range. In reality, a decapitation strike would probably mean all-out war.

. A U.S. Nuclear Strike

The ‘first strike’ option is the “unthinkable” that some in Washington are now considering, using America’s massive nuclear superiority to “eliminate” North Korea.

North Korea Test Sites

Map indicating recent test sites from within North Korea.

But such an attack would kill millions of North Koreans, alarm America’s European allies, and trigger massively increased defence spending by nuclear superpowers China and Russia.

. Pressure on China

China’s rivalry with the U.S. has been a key determining factor in its relationship with North Korea in recent years.

North Korea has served a useful purpose because its nuclear antics required Washington to go cap in hand to Beijing in the hope it would restrain its protégé and stop the region exploding into war.

And China has done well out of its dealings with North Korea. In return for hard currency – which it uses to buy components and expertise for its nuclear programme – North Korea provides cheap labour and raw materials to Chinese businesses.

China, however, has been finding increasingly that the Kim dynasty is not a cosy client. The grisly slaughter of Kim Jong-un’s uncle – reportedly fed to dogs – who had been the regime’s pointman with Beijing back in 2013, was a warning that there were limits to what China could make Kim do.

Without the Chinese support, Kim Jong-un’s militarised economy would suffocate quickly, so why doesn’t China do more than cut oil supplies and stop buying Kim’s coal?

The truth is that Beijing is wary. Kim’s nuclear deterrent can be pointed at China, too; while a regime collapse would mean a flood of refugees into Chinese territory.

Worse still, an American invasion of North Korea might advance to the Yalu River border with China, as it did briefly in 1950. Such a humiliation could turn Chinese nationalist sentiment against their Communist rulers.

Nor does China want U.S. bases in North Korea. It wants a neutral Korean peninsula and for the U.S. to back off from challenging Beijing’s claims to big swathes of the South China Sea.

Only if Washington can offer China a cast-iron deal would Beijing risk pulling the plug on Pyongyang. But can Washington swallow such concessions?

Rex Tillerson, the U.S. Secretary of State, has hinted he could live with some concessions. But can he persuade Trump? Kim is betting there will be no deal with China.

Standard
Asia, Government, North Korea, United Nations, United States

America threatens ‘annihilation’ following North Korea’s detonation of H-bomb

NORTH KOREA

Intro: President Trump opens door to an attack after Korea’s most powerful nuclear test.

US officials have said that threats from North Korea will be met with a “massive military response”, after the rogue state announced it had carried out its most powerful nuclear test yet.

America had “many options” which could lead to the “annihilation” of North Korea, Defence Secretary General Jim Mattis said.

“Any threat to the United States or its territories, including Guam, or our allies will be met with a massive military response, both effective and overwhelming,” Mr Mattis said.

“Kim Jon-un should take heed of the UN Security Council’s unified voice. We are not looking to the total annihilation of a country, namely North Korea, but as I said, we have many options to do so.”

Earlier, when asked if he planned to attack Pyongyang, President Trump replied, “We’ll see”, and said he was holding meetings with his military leaders.

Mr Trump also said that talk of appeasement was pointless because North Korea “only understands one thing”, as the state promised further tests.

His hard-line rhetoric was prompted by Pyongyang’s announcement that it had successfully tested a weapon seven times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.

The regime described its testing of the hydrogen bomb as a “perfect success”. Kim Jong-un was pictured inspecting the peanut-shaped device – the design and scale of which indicated it had a powerful thermonuclear warhead. State media said it was a bomb intended for an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In July, North Korea tested two ICBMs that are believed to be capable of reaching the US mainland.

Analysts say the claims should be treated with caution, but the state’s nuclear capability is clearly advancing. The UN Security Council has been meeting in session to discuss North Korea’s latest test.

The announcement that North Korea had carried out an H-bomb test prompted international condemnation. Prime Minister Theresa May criticised the “reckless” act and is urging a speeding-up of sanctions. Mrs May said North Korea’s actions posed an “unacceptable further threat to the international community” and is calling for “tougher action”.

The British Prime Minister added that she had discussed the “serious and grave threat these dangerous and illegal actions present” with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe during her visit to the country last week.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said the announcement represented “a new order of threat” before stating that “all options are on the table”. Yet he cautioned there were no easy military solutions, saying North Korea could “basically vaporise large sections of the South Korean population” if the West attacks.

South Korean president Moon Jae-in said claims of North Korea’s sixth nuclear test should be met with the “strongest possible” response, including new sanctions. Japan’s chief cabinet secretary Yoshihide Suga said measures should include restrictions on the trade of oil products.

Meanwhile, China, North Korea’s only major ally, declared its “resolute opposition and strong condemnation” of the announcement, saying the state had “ignored” widespread opposition.

Russia, which has also backed the state, said the test defied international law and urged all sides involved to hold talks.

Mr Trump originally responded to the news by firing off a series of tweets hinting at military action.

“Appeasement with North Korea will not work, they only understand one thing,” he said. He also branded the country a “rogue nation” whose “words and actions continue to be very hostile and dangerous to the United States”. Mr Trump later announced that he would consider suspending trade with countries that “do business” with North Korea – which includes China.

Last month, he resolved to respond to North Korea’s nuclear threats with “fire and fury like the world has never seen”.

The White House said Mr Trump’s national security team was “monitoring [the situation] closely”. But any military action will be opposed by China and Russia, who share a border with the state and will not accept US-backed neighbours.

News of the state’s sixth nuclear test emerged after South Korea reported a magnitude 5.7 earthquake, which the North said was triggered by the detonation of the thermonuclear device. The earthquake was several times stronger than from previous blasts and reportedly shook buildings in China and Russia.

It came a decade after North Korea’s first nuclear test and represents a significant escalation of its programme. North Korea last carried out a nuclear test in September 2016. A week ago, Pyongyang fired a missile over Japanese territory in its most provocative test before the latest announcement.

Although the earthquake and release of photographs of Kim suggest the device was real, there has been no independent verification. North Korea said there would be no radioactive materials to prove the hydrogen bomb’s existence because it was detonated underground.

But intelligence experts have said there is no reason to doubt that the state tested “an advanced nuclear device”.

A spokesperson for the James Martin Centre for Non-proliferation Studies, said: “There is no way of telling if this is the actual device that was exploded in the tunnel – it could even be a model – but the messaging is clear.

“They want to demonstrate that they know what makes a credible nuclear warhead.”

  • Appendage:

The blast from a primary fission component triggers a secondary fusion explosion in a thermonuclear bomb.

How its explosive power is harnessed:

. An ordinary high explosive trigger compresses plutonium into a critical state, causing initial reaction known as “nuclear fission” as atoms are split.

. This “primary” explosion detonates the second device within the warhead. A secondary core is ignited by more plutonium. It also includes hydrogen isotopes – atoms which have a different number of neutrons – which begin a “fusion” reaction. At the same time, a uranium core begins a second “fission” reaction.

. With a split second the resulting explosion releases huge amounts of energy – leading to a devastating blast.

– Also known as a thermonuclear weapon, the hydrogen bomb [H-bomb] is so called because it uses the common element in a process called “nuclear fusion”, in which atoms fuse together.

– H-bombs are far more powerful and complex than ordinary atomic bombs, which rely on atom-splitting – known as “fission”.

Standard