Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"When you fear something, learn as much about it as you can. Knowledge conquers fear."

- Edmund Burke

"I would rather be ashes than dust!

I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant bale than it should be stifled by dry-rot.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

The function of man is to live, not to exist.

I shall not waste my days trying to prolong them.

I shall use my time."

- Jack London's Credo

"People born in the 50's have lived in 8 decades, 2 centuries & 2 millenniums.

We had the best music, fastest cars, Drive-in theaters, soda fountains, & happy days.

And we are not even that old yet, we're just that cool."

- Oldtimers9.com Internet Meme

1. Why US policy on North Korea should prioritize nonproliferation, not denuclearization

2. Biden, Kishida call for denuclearization of N. Korea, reaffirm cooperation with S. Korea

3. Ukraine, Japan and the Korean War’s 21st-Century Parallel

4. S. Korea's advanced Army unit, U.S. Stryker team hold joint drills near border with N. Korea

5. South Korean President Takes Aim at North Korea, U.S. With Nuclear Comments

6. US quickly downplays Yoon’s ‘nuclear prospect’

7. CNO Gilday: Expanding Military Cooperation Between South Korea, Japan 'A Necessity'

8. ＜Inside N. Korea＞Why are food prices skyrocketing at the start of the new year? Anxiety over food shortages leads to hoarding and even people wandering around after falling into financial ruin

9. Seung-Whan Choi: What could bring the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war

10. North Koreans struggle to escape, thanks to covid and Kim

11. South Korea vows to fix name errors of soldiers at US memorial

12. Why Biden is wrong about North Korea

13. 'Outrageous': South Korean President Under Fire for Considering Nuclear Weapons

14. South Korea: Mixed Progress on Rights

1. Why US policy on North Korea should prioritize nonproliferation, not denuclearization

Preventing proliferation is critically important but the proposal here plays into Kim Jong Un's desire to be a nuclear power. Kim will assess his political warfare and blackmail diplomacy strategies as successful.

Here is my outline for a new policy focus:

Although denuclearization of the north remains a worthy goal, it must be viewed as aspirational as long as the Kim family regime remains in power. The conventional wisdom has always been that denuclearization must come first and then unification will follow and that there should be no discussion of human rights out of fear that it would prevent Kim Jong Un from making a denuclearization agreement. Today even a blind man can read the tea leaves and know that Kim Jong Un will not denuclearize despite the fact that his policies have been an abject failure. His political warfare and blackmail diplomacy strategies completely failed in 2022 because Presidents Yoon and Biden, like their predecessors, refused to make the political and economic concessions he demanded just to come to the negotiating table: namely to remove sanctions. It is time for the U.S and the ROK/U.S. alliance to execute a political warfare strategy that flips the conventional wisdom and seeks unification first and then denuclearization. Everyone must come to the understanding that the only way to end the nuclear program and the human rights abuses is through unification of the Korean peninsula. The ROK and U.S. must continue to maintain the highest state of military readiness to deter war and then adopt a human rights upfront approach, a comprehensive and sophisticated information and influence activities campaign, and focus all efforts on the pursuit of a free and unified Korea- ultimately a United Republic of Korea (UROK).

Why US policy on North Korea should prioritize nonproliferation, not denuclearization

By Jordan Chase, Eliana Reynolds | January 13, 2023

thebulletin.org · by François Diaz-Maurin · January 13, 2023

By | January 13, 2023

North Korea said it test-launched a newly developed tactical guided weapon from an undisclosed location on April 17, 2022. (Photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency - KCNA).

While total denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula remains a security objective of the United States, the idea of North Korea relinquishing its nuclear weapons looks increasingly unrealistic. North Korea’s refusal to cooperate diplomatically, increased missile launches near US-allied territory, aggressive rhetoric, and expected seventh nuclear test signify blatant hostility toward disarmament discussions, especially those that demand its complete denuclearization. Given this reality, the United States’ strategic emphasis must shift away from denuclearization.

North Korea’s accelerated nuclearization. Since the dawn of the Atomic Age, policymakers and citizens alike have regarded thermonuclear weapons as the sinister culmination of humanity’s worst tendencies for violence and destruction. Without regard for the humanitarian consequences of developing these weapons, North Korea has emerged in recent years as a prominent threat to the global nonproliferation regime. Despite widespread counterproliferation and disarmament efforts, North Korea has relentlessly pursued nuclearization to facilitate regime survival, legitimacy, and coercive diplomacy. Years of negotiation with the United States and regional parties proved futile when North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in 2006.

This landmark development shifted international attention toward preventing further development of strategic, high-yield thermonuclear weapons and accompanying delivery vehicles. Despite these efforts, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has since overseen the accelerated production of nuclear warheads, leading to the nation’s sixth, and largest, nuclear test in 2017, with estimates placing the yield over 100 kilotons. Given the current rate of fissile material production, North Korea can likely produce up to 12 new warheads annually depending on the warhead design and existing stockpile of fissile material.

North Korea has dedicated significant resources to developing intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to effectively deliver these high-yield weapons globally. Some of these missiles, such as the recently tested Hwasong-17, will likely be capable of housing multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (also commonly referred to as MIRVs), which dramatically increases the destructive power of a North Korean nuclear attack and reduces the effectiveness of current missile defense systems.

A shift toward tactical nuclear weapons. After years of emphasis on strategic nuclear capabilities, in January 2021, Kim Jong-un declared his intent to develop tactical nuclear weapons. If North Korea can successfully develop, test, and operationalize a smaller nuclear warhead, this would present greater challenges to nuclear security, stability, and nonproliferation than strategic weapons. Although they rarely have the destructive power of strategic nuclear weapons, nuclear warheads designed for potential use in artillery or other short-range delivery vehicles significantly lower the threshold for escalation to nuclear first use. To ensure the effective delivery of these weapons, Kim could delegate launch authority to battlefield commanders positioned to respond to rapidly evolving threat scenarios. While this delegation would be a significant departure from the traditionally centralized North Korean command and control structure, it would be an effective way for Kim to reinforce a credible deterrent and ensure the survival of North Korea’s nuclear system in case of decapitation or if communications were compromised during an attack.

Rhetoric in Ukraine has reinforced the fallacy of limited nuclear exchange

Possible evidence of this strategy can be drawn from the presence of unit commanders at the April 16, 2022 testing of a short-range ballistic missile and the subsequent Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) statement that the missile boosts the country’s frontline long-range artillery units and increases “the operation of tactical nukes and diversification of their firepower missions.” Additionally, on September 8, 2022, Pyongyang codified a new nuclear doctrine and noted for the first time that “in case the command and control system over the state nuclear forces is placed in danger owing to an attack by hostile forces, a nuclear strike shall be launched automatically and immediately” in accordance with an “operation plan decided in advance.” These operational and policy changes could indicate movement towards a first-use nuclear strategy and potentially the implementation of a delegation framework that could be executed in wartime or crisis. If launch authority were delegated, the number of individuals who could decide to deploy a nuclear weapon would multiply, leaving substantial room for miscalculation, misperception, or misuse. This becomes particularly concerning given North Korea’s lack of sophisticated intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities and subsequent lack of strategic situational awareness.

Kim may also believe that comparatively less-damaging tactical nuclear weapons could be deployed without fear of guaranteed retaliation by the United States, whose nuclear deterrent is extended to South Korea. Because North Korea possesses the theoretical capability to strike the continental United States with a strategic nuclear weapon—provided that the missiles aren’t destroyed in the midcourse phase and survive atmospheric reentry—the risk would be far greater for the United States to intervene militarily after North Korean tactical nuclear use. If no major US population centers, troops, or military facilities are targeted, the United States could be reluctant to enter a foreign conflict that puts its mainland at risk of a nuclear attack. Escalation from conventional conflict to nuclear first use through a preemptive or retaliatory strike on South Korean ports, missile launch facilities, command and control systems, or groups of naval vessels could be a viable strategic option for North Korea to gain an advantage in a limited conflict, especially considering South Korea’s and the United States’ vastly superior conventional capabilities.

New proliferation risks. While the main threat of tactical nuclear weapons revolves around their potential use in a conflict, they also bear significant proliferation risks. North Korea is a known proliferator of chemical, biological, missile, and conventional weaponry to finance its own nuclear program. North Korea’s development of tactical nuclear capabilities would provide additional opportunities to export nuclear technology and information to nefarious actors, thereby generating increased revenue to expand its nuclear arsenal further while contributing to global instability through the potential manifestation of other countries’ nuclear ambitions. Designs and technologies for potentially more portable nuclear weapons with a smaller yield could entice malicious buyers as North Korea grapples with perpetual economic turmoil and a dearth of hard currency. Further, in a major blow to North Korea’s foremost rival, tactical nuclear proliferation would directly threaten American promotion of non-proliferation, complicating key US national security objectives.

NPT Review Conference: Will it rise to the proliferation challenges?

To further emphasize North Korea’s ongoing commitment to expanding its nuclear program, Kim Jong-un declared in September 2022 that North Korea will not abandon its nuclear weapons but rather continue to diversify its nuclear capabilities. It is increasingly plausible that Kim Jong-un could be motivated to authorize the use of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons against a perceived threat without fear of significant retaliation. The more capabilities that North Korea develops, the higher the potential for these weapons to find their way to other dangerous actors around the world that engage in illicit arms trade with North Korea. North Korea’s nuclear program is a significant threat to regional and global security, but for reasons that are continuously evolving and often neglected by security experts and policymakers.

New risks, new strategy. Considering North Korea’s latest developments, policymakers have an opportunity to relinquish an archaic and unrealistic focus on total denuclearization—at least for the time being. The United States should reinvigorate the focus on collaborating with regional allies to emphasize cooperative threat reduction measures and counterproliferation strategies that address North Korea’s destabilizing actions as a proliferator state. Such measures could include strengthening the relationship with South Korea’s newly elected government to prevent further miscommunication on policy objectives and present a more unified approach to the evolving situation.

The term “denuclearization” is not only ambiguous, but it fundamentally compromises the Kim regime’s perceived source of security. North Korea’s threat perception is valid; the United States and South Korea must attenuate Kim’s incentive to use a nuclear weapon in the first place. If the United States can set aside the goal of denuclearization, at least for the immediate term, it could help foster stability on the Korean Peninsula as the risk continues to grow with North Korea’s expanding arsenal. To convince North Korea to constructively re-engage with the United States, denuclearization cannot be the basis or objective of the conversation.

Jordan Chase

Jordan Chase is an associate fellow at the National Defense Industrial Association’s Emerging Technologies Institute, where he researches and... Read More

Eliana Reynolds

Eliana Reynolds is a research associate for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, where she researches the status... Read More

thebulletin.org · by François Diaz-Maurin · January 13, 2023

2. Biden, Kishida call for denuclearization of N. Korea, reaffirm cooperation with S. Korea

Yes, denuclearization must be the objective. However, it is time to recognize that Kim Jong Un will never denuclearize. Therefore we need to reverse the conventional wisdom of denuclearization first and then solving the "Korean question" (the unnatural division of the peninsula). It is time to focus on a free and unified Korea and then denuclearization.

Biden, Kishida call for denuclearization of N. Korea, reaffirm cooperation with S. Korea | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 변덕근 · January 14, 2023

By Byun Duk-kun

WASHINGTON. Jan. 13 (Yonhap) -- U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida reaffirmed their commitment to completely denuclearize the Korean Peninsula in their bilateral summit held here in Washington on Friday.

The leaders also reaffirmed their commitment to further enhancing trilateral cooperation among their countries and South Korea to that end, according to their joint statement, released by the White House.

"We reaffirm our commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolutions,' said the released statement.

"President Biden reaffirms U.S. commitment to the immediate resolution of the abductions issue," it added, referring to the issue of Japanese nationals believed to have been abducted by North Korea decades ago.

U.S. President Joe Biden meets Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on Jan. 13, 2023, in this AP photo. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)

Biden and Kishida highlighted the importance of working with other like-minded countries to tackle various challenges facing their countries in the Indo-Pacific region that they said included "provocations by North Korea."

To this end, the two leaders committed to working closely with other U.S. allies and partners in the region, including South Korea.

"We commit to strengthening vital trilateral cooperation among Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States, in security and other domains," they said, referring to South Korea by its official name.

The U.S.-Japan summit, the first of its kind since the Japanese leader took office last year, followed the U.S.-Japan Security Consultative Committee meeting held earlier this week in Washington, in which the countries' top diplomats and defense chiefs underscored the importance of trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan and the U.S. to counter any potential North Korean aggression.

"In the face of the DPRK's unlawful and reckless missile launches, including the launch of a long range ballistic missile over Japan in October, we are deepening our trilateral cooperation with the Republic of Korea to deter and, if necessary, defend against aggression," Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during a joint press briefing that followed the two-plus-two meeting in Washington on Wednesday.

North Korea fired 69 ballistic missiles, including eight intercontinental ballistic missiles, in 2022, setting a new annual record of ballistic missile launches that far exceeded the previous record of 25.

bdk@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 변덕근 · January 14, 2023

3. Ukraine, Japan and the Korean War’s 21st-Century Parallel

The long shadow of the Korean War. As an aside, this week I participated in a 2 hour documentary that will be broadcast on Fox News Channel (Brett Baier narrating) around Memorial Day on the Korean War and its long term effects.

Excerpts:

Herein lies a final lesson from this history: By provoking the U.S. to put steel into the spine of the NATO alliance, North Korea inadvertently bolstered deterrence in Europe. In this way, a tragic blow-up in Northeast Asia probably helped keep the Cold War from turning hot elsewhere—saving Moscow and the West alike from worse cataclysms.

Ukraine, Japan and the Korean War’s 21st-Century Parallel

As in 1950, destabilizing war is forcing the West to get serious about defense a continent away.

By Vance Serchuk

Jan. 12, 2023 1:24 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-japan-and-the-korean-wars-21st-century-parallel-kishida-russia-defense-spending-military-strategy-11673523175?mod=itp_wsj&ru=yahoo

Tokyo

When Russian forces surged into Ukraine in February 2022, the conflict seemed to spell calamity for the U.S.-led order in Asia. Just as Washington was turning its attention to the Indo-Pacific, a conflagration in Europe promised to distract America from the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party. But nearly a year later, the Ukraine war hasn’t doomed the balance of power in Asia; instead, it may be stabilizing it.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Japan, whose prime minister, Fumio Kishida, visits the White House Friday following historic changes in Tokyo’s national-security and military strategies. Among the bold moves announced last month: a pledge to double defense spending to 2% of gross domestic product by 2027 and to add powerful new capabilities such as long-range missiles to its arsenal. This means that Japan, currently the world’s ninth-largest military spender, could move to third place within five years, behind only the U.S. and China. Already this year its defense budget is due to grow more than 25%.

Tokyo’s embrace of realpolitik is a gift to the free world. It’s also been anything but abrupt. Japan has been slowly modernizing its military and national-security institutions over the past decade with an eye toward an increasingly assertive China. But officials say Russia’s attack on Kyiv helped accelerate these efforts in ways unthinkable 12 months ago. As Mr. Kishida warned last year in previewing the shift: “Ukraine today could be East Asia tomorrow.”

Japan’s response echoes something that happened at the dawn of the Cold War, when North Korea’s invasion of South Korea unexpectedly supercharged the West’s defense of Europe. Before Pyongyang’s surprise attack across the 38th parallel in June 1950, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was essentially a bluff. Although Washington had sworn to protect its NATO allies against the Soviets, it had neither developed the war plans nor deployed the troops necessary to do so. The U.S. was still on a peace footing in the most important and dangerous theater of its contest with the Kremlin.

But with the onset of the Korean War, the threat of communist armies marching across borders was no longer a mere abstraction. The appointment of the first NATO supreme allied commander and the creation of an allied military headquarters soon followed. The Truman administration also undertook a massive arms buildup—the cost of which it previously balked at—and approved a secret policy paper called NSC-68, which provided a blueprint for a much tougher approach to Moscow.

The biggest loser of the Korean War thus ended up being Stalin. The adventurism of a Soviet client state in a peripheral corner of the Cold War backfired against the Kremlin on its central front in Europe. One U.S. strategist later said, “Thank God Korea came along.” Today, America’s Asian allies increasingly cite Russian aggression as a vital wake-up call that has spurred new military and geopolitical seriousness across the Indo-Pacific.

There are of course differences between the present moment and the early 1950s. North Korea was a Soviet satellite, whereas Russia is a great power in its own right. And if Ukraine is to change the West’s geopolitical strategy in the Indo-Pacific as profoundly as the Korean War did Europe’s, Japan’s leadership has to become the rule, not the exception.

In the U.S., the conflict has been an impetus to increase munitions stockpiles and add surge capacity to the defense-industrial base. In both cases, military deficiencies exposed by the war are starting to be tackled with an eye toward China.

But these are still modest steps relative to the scope and urgency of the challenge in Asia. They likewise pale in comparison with the U.S. response to Korea 70 years ago, when American defense budgets nearly tripled as a percentage of GDP.

Herein lies a final lesson from this history: By provoking the U.S. to put steel into the spine of the NATO alliance, North Korea inadvertently bolstered deterrence in Europe. In this way, a tragic blow-up in Northeast Asia probably helped keep the Cold War from turning hot elsewhere—saving Moscow and the West alike from worse cataclysms.

If the conflict in Ukraine boosts military strength and preparedness in the Indo-Pacific, it too may contribute to the conditions for great-power stability in the long run. Rather than foreshadowing deadlier and more destructive wars to come, Ukraine’s struggle could provide the path to averting them.

Mr. Serchuk is executive director of the KKR Global Institute and an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

4. S. Korea's advanced Army unit, U.S. Stryker team hold joint drills near border with N. Korea

Excellent. "Keep up the fire!" I remember these training areas fondly.

Alliance strength and resolve.

S. Korea's advanced Army unit, U.S. Stryker team hold joint drills near border with N. Korea | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 채윤환 · January 14, 2023

SEOUL, Jan. 14 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's advanced Army unit armed with cutting-edge weapons has staged a joint field exercise with a Stryker Brigade Combat Team from the U.S. 2nd Infantry Division near the inter-Korean border.

The practice kicked off on Jan. 2 for a two-week run in the border city of Paju, about 30 kilometers north of Seoul, involving various weapons systems including the South Korean Army's K808 wheel-type armored vehicles, called "Baekho," the Stryker combat vehicles as well as reconnaissance drones and anti-tank missile Hyungung.

Around 800 troops from South Korea's TIGER Demonstration Brigade and the Stryker brigade, deployed here in November last year as rotational force, have been taking part in the battalion-level drills aimed at bolstering their combined operational capabilities against North Korea's military threats.

Soldiers from the South Korean Army's TIGER Demonstration Brigade and the Stryker Brigade Combat Team from the U.S. 2nd Infantry Division stage joint drills at the Mugeon-ri training ground in Paju, Gyeonggi Province, on Jan. 13, 2022. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

It marks their first combined training. On Friday, the allies opened to media some parts of field drills at the Mugeon-ri training ground close to the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).

"Through this training, (we) were able to make the Army TIGER Demonstration Brigade's operational method more concrete and verify its inter-operability with combined forces," Lt. Col. Lee Jae-yong, battalion commander of the TIGER unit, said, according to the Army.

An eight-wheeled U.S. Stryker combat vehicle rolls down a hill during a joint exercise with the South Korean Army's TIGER Demonstration Brigade at the Mugeon-ri training ground in Paju, Gyeonggi Province, on Jan. 13, 2022. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

It launched the TIGER brigade in June last year as the vanguard of a campaign to prepare for future warfare by expanding the use of cutting-edge weapons systems, such as artificial intelligence-powered drones, high-tech combat gear for soldiers and highly mobile armored fighting vehicles.

TIGER is short for the transformative innovation of ground forces enhanced by the Fourth Industrial Revolution technology.

This file photo, taken June 10, 2022, shows troops and weapon systems of the South Korean Army's TIGER Demonstration Brigade at the 25th Infantry Division's headquarters in Yangju, Gyeonggi Province. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 채윤환 · January 14, 2023

5. South Korean President Takes Aim at North Korea, U.S. With Nuclear Comments

President Yoon is clearly showing strength and resolve. He is taking the north Korean threat seriously.

South Korean President Takes Aim at North Korea, U.S. With Nuclear Comments

Yoon Suk-yeol has grown more confrontational with Pyongyang in recent weeks

https://www.wsj.com/articles/south-korean-president-takes-aim-at-north-korea-u-s-with-nuclear-comments-11673608334?mod=Searchresults_pos4&page=1

By Dasl YoonFollow

Jan. 13, 2023 6:12 am ET

SEOUL—For years, most of the fiery rhetoric has been coming from North Korea. Now it’s coming from Seoul.

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol has grown more confrontational with Pyongyang in recent weeks. On Wednesday, he raised the prospect of the country developing its own nuclear weapons, the first time a South Korean leader has done so in decades. Last week, he threatened to suspend an agreement aimed at preventing clashes between North and South Korea.

His comments are partly a reflection of how high tensions have escalated on the Korean Peninsula. Both sides have fired hundreds of artillery shells. They have sent jet fighters close to their shared border. An incident that particularly set off Mr. Yoon was in late December, when five North Korean drones crossed into South Korean territory.

South Korea scrambled jet fighters and attack helicopters in response, but the incident raised questions about Seoul’s defenses against such incursions. The South Korean spy agency told lawmakers last week that it couldn’t rule out the possibility that one of the drones had filmed the presidential office. In response, Mr. Yoon said last week that he would consider suspending a 2018 pact that bars hostile acts in border areas if North Korea violated South Korean airspace again, blaming the prior administration in part for relying on the agreement and failing to prepare for such incursions.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

What’s News

Catch up on the headlines, understand the news and make better decisions, free in your inbox every day.

Preview

Then, during a discussion following a meeting with defense officials this week, Mr. Yoon suggested South Korea could explore developing its own nuclear assets or bringing U.S. tactical nuclear weapons back to the country if the nuclear threat from North Korea became more serious. South Korea’s presidential office released his remarks on Thursday, while stressing that the country wasn’t changing its policy of abiding by the Nonproliferation Treaty.

Nonetheless, the remarks raised the rare prospect of a nonnuclear state seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, potentially destabilizing disarmament efforts and further inflaming tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Mr. Yoon’s comments didn’t mean that South Korea was actively considering nuclear armament as an option, said Yang Uk, a military expert at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, who was in the room when the president made the remarks. He said Mr. Yoon’s comments were aimed at letting both Pyongyang and Washington know that Seoul is ready to do more as a deterrent.

South Korean soldiers prepared for a drill in Paju earlier this month.

PHOTO: YONHAP NEWS/ZUMA PRESS

“With sole authority over the use of nuclear weapons, Washington is reluctant to get South Korea more involved and Yoon is frustrated that more isn’t being done to strengthen deterrence measures,” Mr. Yang said.

Mr. Yoon, a former prosecutor, ran for president last year promising to be tougher on North Korea than was his predecessor, Moon Jae-in. On the campaign trail, though, Mr. Yoon said he would give priority to diplomacy in resolving the North’s nuclearization, and would request the deployment of nuclear weapons in South Korea only if national security is threatened.

But after North Korea fired off a record number of missile tests last year and flew drones into South Korean territory, Mr. Yoon decided that he couldn’t sit idly by, Mr. Yang said.

“South Korean citizens expect Yoon to take a firm stance when North Korea’s threats are so palpable,” he said.

South Korea has made it clear it isn’t seeking nuclear weapons, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said on Thursday. He said the U.S. remains committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and that Washington is working with Seoul to improve their extended deterrence capabilities.

Washington and Seoul plan to conduct a range of military drills this year, at a larger scale and for longer periods than before, to enhance defenses against North Korean threats.

Mr. Yoon isn’t the first South Korean leader to take a more confrontational approach to relations with the North. In some ways, the recent rise in tensions fits a historical pattern that has played out on the Korean Peninsula, in which tensions escalate when conservative South Korean leaders are in office and then ebb under liberal administrations.

The two countries signed the pact barring hostilities that Mr. Yoon is now threatening to suspend in 2018. The deal was struck by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Mr. Moon in Pyongyang.

The day it was signed, Mr. Moon made the first-ever speech by a South Korean leader to the North Korean public. Hundreds of thousands of North Koreans cheered as Mr. Moon, speaking in Pyongyang, proposed eliminating the threat of war between the two countries.

In contrast, Mr. Yoon has labeled North Korea the country’s “main enemy,” language that mirrors that of a fellow conservative, former President Lee Myung-bak. In turn, North Korea used to fling personal insults back at Mr. Lee, calling him a “bastard.”

While Mr. Lee was president, tensions between North and South Korea hit their most severe point since the end of the 1950-to-1953 Korean War. In 2010, an explosion caused by a North Korean torpedo attack sank a South Korean ship, killing 46 sailors. That same year, North Korea opened fire on Yeonpyeong Island, which lies about 2 miles south of the disputed inter-Korean maritime border, in response to shell fire from South Korean military drills. That attack was considered the fiercest since the end of the Korean War.

Suspending the agreement would mean the return of guard posts at the Demilitarized Zone, propaganda broadcasts across the border and live-fire drills in the no-fly zone. Some of Mr. Yoon’s critics say that suspending the 2018 agreement would risk a return to open conflict with the North.

“Under Yoon’s tit-for-tat policy the agreement is nothing but a piece of paper,” said Moon Jang-ryul, a presidential policy adviser during Mr. Moon’s time in office. “We are now on the verge of military conflict with North Korea.”

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un in Pyongyang earlier this month.

PHOTO: KCNA/VIA REUTERS

But the Yoon administration no longer sees the benefit of abiding by an agreement that has failed to stop the North from escalating tensions, said Cha Du-hyeogn, who was a security adviser to Mr. Lee, the former president. Pyongyang has violated the agreement 17 times, according to the Yoon administration.

“By suggesting suspending the agreement, Yoon is trying to signal to the Kim regime that he will not tolerate its threats, and that Seoul will abide by the agreement under the condition that Pyongyang abides,” Mr. Cha said.

Mr. Yoon has argued that the only way to prevent war is to stand up to the North Korean regime and make sure Seoul has the firepower to prevail in any conflict.

“In order to attain peace, we must make overwhelmingly superior war preparations,” he told officials at a state-run arms developer last month.

Write to Dasl Yoon at dasl.yoon@wsj.com

6. US quickly downplays Yoon’s ‘nuclear prospect’

Excerpts:

Yoon’s office responded by saying Yoon had meant “bolstering extended deterrence,” referring to US support involving its nuclear umbrella and strategic assets like bombers and fighters -- all meant to prevent outside aggression, including North Korea, South Korea’s biggest security threat.

The South Korean and US defense chiefs first officially discussed the term at their annual security meeting in October 2006 following North Korea’s first nuclear test that month. Since then, the two allies have routinely reaffirmed the commitment to remind an increasingly belligerent Pyongyang of their superior firepower. And that is not about to change, according to the White House.

“What we are going to seek, jointly together with them, are improvements in extended deterrence capabilities,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said at a press briefing.

US quickly downplays Yoon’s ‘nuclear prospect’

koreaherald.com · by Choi Si-young · January 13, 2023

Published : Jan 13, 2023 - 16:24 Updated : Jan 14, 2023 - 14:42

President Yoon Suk Yeol speaks during a New Year policy briefing held at Cheong Wa Dae, the former presidential office, on Wednesday. (Yonhap)

The US said Thursday it is still committed to a completely denuclearized Korean Peninsula and that South Korea has made it clear it is not seeking nuclear weapons, a day after President Yoon Suk Yeol openly backed a nuclear buildup if North Korea poses a bigger threat than now.

Yoon’s remarks about South Korea arming itself with nuclear weapons against North Korea, a nuclear state, were made public Wednesday when his defense minister briefed him on the ministry’s plan for this year. Inter-Korean tension is expected to escalate as Pyongyang shows no signs of dialing down its aggression, which reached a peak last year when it conducted an unprecedented number of missile tests.

Yoon’s office responded by saying Yoon had meant “bolstering extended deterrence,” referring to US support involving its nuclear umbrella and strategic assets like bombers and fighters -- all meant to prevent outside aggression, including North Korea, South Korea’s biggest security threat.

The South Korean and US defense chiefs first officially discussed the term at their annual security meeting in October 2006 following North Korea’s first nuclear test that month. Since then, the two allies have routinely reaffirmed the commitment to remind an increasingly belligerent Pyongyang of their superior firepower. And that is not about to change, according to the White House.

“What we are going to seek, jointly together with them, are improvements in extended deterrence capabilities,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said at a press briefing.

Gen. Pat Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, struck a similar chord that same day, saying the US seeks denuclearization in the region and that South Korea “falls under that extended deterrence umbrella.” Such US deterrence “has worked very well to date,” Ryder noted without elaborating.

This was the first time a South Korean leader openly floated a nuclear prospect. Former President Park Chung-hee, who was assassinated by his own spy chief in 1979, had to abandon nuclear ambitions in the face of strong opposition from the US.

By Choi Si-young (siyoungchoi@heraldcorp.com)

koreaherald.com · by Choi Si-young · January 13, 2023

7. CNO Gilday: Expanding Military Cooperation Between South Korea, Japan 'A Necessity'

The event referenced in this article is from the Institute for Corean-American Studies (ICAS). It can be viewed at this link: https://www.icasinc.org/2023/2023v/v230112a.html

It was a wide ranging discussion with the CNO from irregular warfare (my first question) to integrated missile defense (my second question) to home porting US Navy ships in Korea (my third question).

The discussion heavily emphasized trilateral (ROK, Japan, US) and multinational cooperation and strategic competition with China.

CNO Gilday: Expanding Military Cooperation Between South Korea, Japan 'A Necessity' - USNI News

news.usni.org · by John Grady · January 13, 2023

Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Mike Gilday delivers testimony at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the fiscal year 2023 defense budget request on May 12, 2022. US Navy Photo

The Navy’s top officer stressed the need for “a forward-looking relationship” between Japan, South Korea and the United States. “It’s no longer a luxury but a necessity” that the three nations work together, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday said Thursday.

Examples of the improved trilateral relationship include information and intelligence sharing, participating in joint exercises in different regions of the Indo-Pacific and the interoperability of platforms and systems.

During a conversation at a Korean-American security group online forum, Gilday acknowledged that there are still historic grievances between the two nations that can disrupt a planned exercise or throw into question continued intelligence sharing. Tokyo and Seoul have “to get beyond poking each other in the eye” over these issues.

Gilday said the two nations are in “deeper discussions of unmanned systems,” mentioning the expansion of clandestine mine-laying as an example He also mentioned the work Japan is undertaking on its amphibious carriers to carry helicopters, F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters and marines as important developments in expanding the options to strengthen its defenses.

If Tokyo holds to this goal, Japan will be behind only Washington and Beijing in defense spending.

Recently, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s met with President Joe Biden to discuss mutual security concerns over China’s heightened threats to invade Taiwan and North Korea’s accelerated missile testing.

In December, Kishida announced that Japan will double its spending on defense over the next five years to address new threats in Northeast Asia. A key part of that new investment will be in building Aegis-equipped destroyers that will field 400 to 500 Tomahawk missiles, as well as boosting cyber capabilities and expanded development of unmanned systems.

On integrated missile defense among the three, Gilday said, “we’re on the precipice of something really important” in sharing targeting data and other information.

Gilday said the extended deterrence the United States provides against attack on its two allies includes “the nuclear umbrella.” He cited the National Defense Strategy released in October that says North Korea’s use of nuclear weapons would “result in the end of that regime.”

In the case of defending South Korea, he cited Biden’s spring trip to Seoul and Vice President Kamala Harris’ more recent visit to the Demilitarized Zone as demonstrations of the importance the United States places on the alliance.

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol said this week that if the North Korean threat to use nuclear weapons increases, Seoul may develop its own nuclear arsenal or ask the United States to redeploy these weapons to the peninsula.

The New York Times quoted the president as saying, “we can have our own nuclear weapons pretty quickly, given our scientific and technological capabilities.”

For South Korea, Gilday said that United States’ close collaboration in all five domains of warfare “demonstrates that we are working together.” He added, “I remain an optimist … on building multi-domain operations.”

He called the relationship between the two navies “a watertight alliance.”

When asked if homeporting U.S. warships in South Korea was under consideration, he said “I would never take any option off the table.” He said something similar when a questioner wondered if the United States would conduct freedom of navigation operations in the Yellow Sea.

Gilday said the point of deterrence is “to convince any particular adversary it’s not worth it to make a move.” He added, “we should not lose our nerve” in that commitment while trying not to escalate tensions in a crisis.

Any decision for Japan to build a nuclear-powered submarine is a huge step that would require the nation’s support politically and financially for years, Gilday said. That decision must be made with the understanding of “the totality of the ecosystem” for the initiative and that it will take decades to complete. Change “eco-system” for such a project requires “the right people, the right training, the right platforms, the right workforce” and sustainment, he said.

Gilday, using the agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States – known as AUKUS – as a possible model, said it will be “well into the 2040s” before Canberra launches its first nuclear-powered attack submarine.

Australia is expected to announce this quarter which submarine design it will choose to follow.

news.usni.org · by John Grady · January 13, 2023

8. ＜Inside N. Korea＞Why are food prices skyrocketing at the start of the new year? Anxiety over food shortages leads to hoarding and even people wandering around after falling into financial ruin

This is probably one of the most important and insightful statements coming out of north Korea in recent days. We need to be very observant for indications and warnings of internal instability. And continued and increasing provocations (missile test and even a 7th nuclear test) may be indications of internal failure and threats to the regime. Kim must sustain an external threat to justify the suffering and sacrifice of the Korean people. But there is no relief valve for them and we could see conditions worse than the Arduous March of 1994-1996.

Excerpt:

“Propaganda and agitation officials cry as they lecture about how we all need to work together to protect socialism, but people know that they can’t survive that way. They can’t do their businesses because of harsh state intervention, and they don’t have any more cash income. People can’t live that way if they want to survive,” one of the reporting partners told ASIAPRESS.

＜Inside N. Korea＞Why are food prices skyrocketing at the start of the new year? Anxiety over food shortages leads to hoarding and even people wandering around after falling into financial ruin

asiapress.org

(FILE PHOTO) An elderly person gleaning grains from a farm field. Taken by ASIAPRESS in a rural village in Sinuiju, North Pyongan Province, in November 2012.

◆ Nobody trusts motivation behind Kim Jong-un’s efforts to monopolize the food supply

The price of North Korean corn, a staple food in the country, is skyrocketing. According to a recent ASIAPRESS investigation of market prices in the northern region of the country, corn prices leaped 20% with the start of 2023, leading to considerable and increasing discontent among ordinary people. (KANG Ji-won)

◆ N. Koreans hoard corn

ASIAPRESS conducted a market survey in cities in Yanggang Province and North Hamgyung Province from January 5-6. The price of corn in those two regions stayed around 2,800 won per kilograms in November and December of last year; however, the price skyrocketed more than 20% to 3,400 won in the initial days of 2023. The price of white rice, which had been around 6,000 per kilogram, fell to just 5,600 won per kilogram. Why, then, did only the price of corn increase?

※ 100 South Korean won equals around 670 North Korean won. All prices are per one kilogram.

A reporting partner in Yanggang Province who took part in the market survey said that anxiety around the price of food has increased, so much so that an increasing number of people are trying to hoard as much corn at cheaper prices as possible.

“The harvest didn’t go well last year, so there are rumors that white rice would reach 10,000 won (per kilogram) if (North Korea) failed to receive food aid from China or other countries. People are anxious and are hoarding corn. Corn is much more inexpensive than white rice and can be eaten as noodles (in addition to being cooked and eaten as is). With the start of the new year, there’s a lot of people worried about how they’ll get by.”

◆ Some people turning to wandering around the country…anxiety increases amid people going into financial ruin

Another reporting partner in North Hamgyung Province told ASIAPRESS the following:

“Despite the fall harvest, the price of food didn’t fall, leading many people to prepare themselves for the worst this year. There are people who have gone missing after going into financial ruin and others who have abandoned their families to become wanderers in the mountains. Everyone is very anxious because many terrible things are happening around them. Meanwhile, the authorities are screeching about punishing mass hoarders of food and people spreading false rumors.”

◆ The Kim Jong-un regime exerts strong control over food distribution network

Moreover, the government’s intensifying control over the food supply is making people worried. The Kim Jong-un regime began running state-run food stores in 2019 and launched full-fledged operations of these stores starting in 2021.

At the end of last year, white rice sold in the markets for 6,000 won, while corn cost 3,000 won; however, state-run stores sold white rice and corn for set prices of 4,200 won and 2,200 won, respectively.

That being said, people weren’t able to buy as much food as they wanted. The state-run food shops only allowed people to buy food once a month, and only five kilograms of food for each person in a single household. This amount of food amounted to only around a weeks’ worth. People without money to spare welcomed the sale of food at the state-run shops because they were cheaper than that sold in markets. However, they weren’t able to buy enough food and were forced to make up the loss by purchasing food in markets. The Kim Jong-un regime seems to be suppressing sales of food in markets with a view to implement a “monopoly” on the food supply.

◆ Distrust in Kim Jong-un’s government is spurring skyrocketing prices.

A reporting partner told ASIAPRESS that, “The government had informed everyone that all food would soon be purchased in state-run food shops, but that never materialized. That’s why there’s no one who believes that’ll happen.” In short, the government is failing to acquire enough food that would allow it to monopolize the food supply.

It remains unclear when state-run food shops will stop selling food. The poor harvest last year has led many anxious people to hoard food as insurance against food shortages that could lay ahead.

“Propaganda and agitation officials cry as they lecture about how we all need to work together to protect socialism, but people know that they can’t survive that way. They can’t do their businesses because of harsh state intervention, and they don’t have any more cash income. People can’t live that way if they want to survive,” one of the reporting partners told ASIAPRESS.

※ ASIAPRESS communicates with its reporting partners through Chinese cell phones smuggled into North Korea.

Map of North Korea ( ASIAPRESS)

asiapress.org

9. Seung-Whan Choi: What could bring the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war

Excerpts:

Putting the Korean fear into perspective leads me to think of what factors may incentivize the North to have a direct military confrontation with the South. There are three factors that could lead to a heightened conflict.

....

The first is Russia’s military success in Ukraine.

...

The second factor is China’s economic frustration.

....

The third factor is South Korea’s security vulnerability.

....

It does not matter how advanced the South’s military technology is when the civilian leadership appears to neglect to do its homework — such as learning what military technology is available and how South Korea can use it against the enemy. Why are eight months not long enough for Yoon and his advisers to finish their job training on security and defense? How soon can those rookies get their act together?

In the meantime, the South’s inept leadership is likely to embolden Kim to escalate South-North conflicts to the highest level.

Seung-Whan Choi: What could bring the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war

Chicago Tribune · by Seung-Whan Choi

Chicago TribuneJan 13, 2023 at 11:32 am

Since conservative Yoon Suk Yeol became president of South Korea eight months ago, North Korea has drastically increased military provocations. In an incident last month, at least five North Korean drones freely crossed into South Korea’s airspace. One drone infiltrated the northern end of a no-fly zone surrounding the president’s office. Many South Koreans fear that the North’s heightened aggression is a precursor to a second Korean War.

Putting the Korean fear into perspective leads me to think of what factors may incentivize the North to have a direct military confrontation with the South. There are three factors that could lead to a heightened conflict.

The first is Russia’s military success in Ukraine. At the moment, Vladimir Putin appears to be not very successful in the Russia-Ukraine war. However, if Putin can control four regions of Ukraine — Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia — that were annexed by Russia last September, he may claim victory and likely gain popular approval for his mission to rectify perceived injustices and regain lost Russian lands and Russian communities.

Putin’s military adventures are, if successful, likely to encourage Kim Jong Un of the North to undertake a military assault against Yoon who has tried to back Kim into a corner since May. Yoon’s full-court press is odd given that he has no authority to maneuver his soldiers in case of war. The four-star U.S. general of ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command will maintain wartime operational control. Nevertheless, Yoon has been pursuing the strategy of an eye for an eye by insisting on preemptive strikes on the North. Kim seems convinced that Yoon is bluffing, so he is willing to raise the bet with more actions including nuclear weapon tests and direct military clashes.

There is a historical precedent of a relationship between the North’s military aggression and the South’s bluffing. Then-President Kim Il Sung of the North invaded the South after learning that Syngman Rhee, South Korea’s founding president, was advocating marching north and capturing Pyongyang for the unification of the Korean peninsula when he had little military capabilities.

That bluffing — and, of course, Kim’s political ambitions — cost the lives of nearly 5 million people during the Korean War.

The second factor is China’s economic frustration. Since its economic opening in 1978, China has enjoyed a high rate of gross domestic product growth. However, President Xi Jinping faces an economic slowdown due to tepid productivity growth and stiff international competition. Xi is particularly displeased with President Joe Biden, who wants to hobble China’s progress in the semiconductor industry. If Xi continues to feel hopeless about getting out of economic trouble and trapped by the Biden initiative to isolate China’s chip industry, the chances are that he will search for aggressive ways to open foreign markets.

Nineteenth-century French economist, Frederic Bastiat once prophesied: “When goods do not cross frontiers, armies will.” Japan’s 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor is consistent with the Bastiat prediction. The U.S. exported most of its gasoline and machine tools before it imposed a series of stringent economic sanctions on imperial Japan. Then-Prime Minister Hideki Tojo decided to confront the U.S. challenges by attacking and occupying U.S. territories.

No one can guarantee that Xi will shy away from taking a militaristic approach when China loses its competitive edge in the global market from rising economic nationalism among major trading partners. Xi may be willing to use force to secure markets for Chinese products. If he initiates war in the Pacific, he is likely to prod his key ally, Kim, to attack South Korea to create a multitheater war.

The U.S. is prepared to simultaneously fight two major conflicts in different parts of the world, but it is likely to run into trouble if it has to deal with the Russia-Ukraine war in Europe and potentially ominous conflicts in Asia. Kim is unlikely to miss the opportunity to advance his security interests in the Korean Peninsula.

The third factor is South Korea’s security vulnerability. Although the South’s military power is superior to the North’s, excluding nuclear weapons, its civilian leadership is not yet up to standard. It may be a moot point to debate whether Yoon is a draft dodger or lacks military expertise since he was elected by popular vote. However, it remains questionable whether Yoon makes his security decisions with the aid of experts with a proven record.

In their 20s, Yoon’s national security advisers refused to fulfill military duty. . They betrayed the public trust by letting North Korean drones spy over Seoul. Amid public uproar, Yoon and his advisers blamed the former president by asserting that Moon Jae-in’s inadequate military drills brought about the crisis. Yoon then vowed to install a defense system for capturing North Korean drones. But Yoon did not know that such a system was already created and run by the Moon government up until he became president eight months ago.

It does not matter how advanced the South’s military technology is when the civilian leadership appears to neglect to do its homework — such as learning what military technology is available and how South Korea can use it against the enemy. Why are eight months not long enough for Yoon and his advisers to finish their job training on security and defense? How soon can those rookies get their act together?

In the meantime, the South’s inept leadership is likely to embolden Kim to escalate South-North conflicts to the highest level.

Seung-Whan Choi teaches Korean politics and international relations at the University of Illinois at Chicago. A retired Army officer, he is also the author of four books.

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.

Chicago Tribune · by Seung-Whan ChoiChicago TribuneJan 13, 2023 at 11:32 am

10. North Koreans struggle to escape, thanks to covid and Kim

Most of these escapees were helped by a single organization. But we should not name it and I'm glad the Washington Post did not name it.

Excerpts:

“The drop in defection has nothing to do with better living conditions inside the country, as it is purely because of tightened control and repression,” said Yoon Yeo-sang, director of the Seoul-based Database Center for North Korean Human Rights.

Crackdowns along the China-North Korea border have become more pervasive than ever because of a high-tech surveillance system, making it hard for defection numbers to rebound to pre-pandemic levels even after coronavirus-related restrictions are lifted, he said.

Despite the heightened security, some North Koreans are still risking their lives to attempt an escape, according to Daily NK, a Seoul-based news outlet that runs an informant network inside the country. Sources inside North Korea and China told Daily NK that two men were caught attempting to escape in December and that a woman successfully crossed in November.

North Koreans struggle to escape, thanks to covid and Kim

Only 67 North Koreans made it to the South last year, as pandemic controls compound a regime crackdown

By Michelle Ye Hee Lee and Min Joo Kim

January 13, 2023 at 1:00 p.m. EST

The Washington Post · by Michelle Ye Hee Lee · January 13, 2023

SEOUL — Just 67 North Koreans arrived in South Korea last year, the Unification Ministry announced this week, marking the second year of record-low refugee arrivals as North Korea remains shuttered and more reclusive than ever in the coronavirus pandemic.

Most of those who arrived in the South in 2022 were not escapees fleeing North Korea directly but instead were people who were in China or Russia, according to groups who support defectors upon entering the country.

It is unclear how many people were able to flee North Korea in the past three years. The government data does not disclose where the North Koreans were living before their arrival.

The new figures are the latest example of an increasingly isolated North Korea, which sealed its border with China to tourists in January 2020 with the outbreak of the coronavirus. It also halted trade with China, its economic lifeline, sparking an acute shortage of food and medical supplies.

Those moves compounded efforts by Kim Jong Un’s regime to crack down on North Koreans’ escapes across the long border into China in search of food or freedom.

North Koreans typically escape by crossing the border into China. But both countries have imposed strict control measures, though some limited trade has resumed. North Korea also has cracked down on people traveling within the country, making it more difficult for people to reach the border. And now China is struggling with another dramatic covid-19 surge.

Although countries around the world are finding their way back to normalcy three years into the pandemic, North Korea has shown no sign of easing its border measures anytime soon.

As a result, firsthand information from those who enter and leave the totalitarian country — including defectors — has dried up. Most international aid workers and foreign diplomats stationed there have since left.

Human rights advocates say they are increasingly concerned about the situation inside the country, one of the poorest in the world and one that struggles with chronic food shortages.

“The drop in defection has nothing to do with better living conditions inside the country, as it is purely because of tightened control and repression,” said Yoon Yeo-sang, director of the Seoul-based Database Center for North Korean Human Rights.

Crackdowns along the China-North Korea border have become more pervasive than ever because of a high-tech surveillance system, making it hard for defection numbers to rebound to pre-pandemic levels even after coronavirus-related restrictions are lifted, he said.

Despite the heightened security, some North Koreans are still risking their lives to attempt an escape, according to Daily NK, a Seoul-based news outlet that runs an informant network inside the country. Sources inside North Korea and China told Daily NK that two men were caught attempting to escape in December and that a woman successfully crossed in November.

In 2021, more men than women entered South Korea for the first time since 2001. Of the 63 defectors that year, 23 were women and 40 were men. The same trend held in 2022, new data shows: In 2022, 32 were women and 35 were men.

Sparked by North Korea’s deadly famine in the 1990s, the flow of escapees from the North continued to swell over the years and peaked in 2009, with nearly 3,000 arrivals in the South that year.

But in 2012, the number of defectors arriving in the South was nearly halved from the previous year to 1,502. The drop correlated with the beginning of Kim Jong Un’s rule as the country’s leader, said Kim Seok-hyang, North Korean studies professor at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. The leader sharply tightened controls on the North’s long border with China and increased surveillance, erecting fencing and setting traps, she said.

The cost of defecting soared because the journey became more dangerous, the professor said. Yet the number of escapees entering South Korea continued to exceed 1,000 every year until the pandemic hit in 2020 — then it plummeted to double digits.

Elizabeth Salmón, the U.N. special envoy for North Korean human rights, estimated that as many as 2,000 North Korean escapees were detained in China. On top of those, some are held at North Korean consulates in other countries amid prolonged border closures, she said in a speech in September.

The escapees are trapped in poor detention conditions and face the risk of repatriation when North Korea reopens its border, said Kim Suk-woo, who oversaw inter-Korean affairs as former vice minister of unification in South Korea.

On top of official and unofficial efforts to help the detainees, the South Korean government should publicly confront Kim Jong Un’s regime on such human rights violations, he said. “In order not to anger Pyongyang while pursuing diplomacy, Seoul has long sidelined human rights issues, and the widespread abuses in North Korea only worsened over the years,” he said.

Kim Suk-woo worked in the late 1990s on the establishment of the Hanawon resettlement center, where North Korea defectors get a crash course on life in the capitalist South. The state-run center with a capacity for more than 1,000 people currently accommodates only 30 or so North Korea escapees, according to government data.

While some South Korean lawmakers called for the downsizing of Hanawon because of the low occupancy, Kim Suk-woo said it should be sustained as a symbol that North Korea defectors are welcome in democratic South at all times.

The Unification Ministry said this week that Hanawon will maintain its operations, citing the possibility of recovery in arrivals from North Korea. It said the center provides not only onboarding support to newcomers but also vocational training and other care services to North Korea defectors who have already settled in the South.

Hanawon represents South Korea’s “welcoming and inclusive attitude towards escapees and current residents of North Korea,” the ministry said in a statement.

The Washington Post · by Michelle Ye Hee Lee · January 13, 2023

11. South Korea vows to fix name errors of soldiers at US memorial

South Korea vows to fix name errors of soldiers at US memorial

militarytimes.com · by Zamone Perez · January 13, 2023

South Korea’s Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs said Tuesday that it would correct misspelled and missing names at the Korean War Veterans Memorial’s newest focal point: a remembrance wall with the names of U.S. and Korean soldiers killed in action during the Korean War.

The Wall of Remembrance displays the names of 36,634 American soldiers who died during the war and 7,174 Korean Augmentation to U.S. Army personnel, according the Korean Yonhap News Agency.

“There must not be even a single error on the Wall,” the ministry said in a statement to Yonhap. “By taking an exhaustive review in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Defense and South Korea’s defense ministry, [we] will swiftly confirm any errors and rectify them if there are any.”

The New York Times first reported that the Wall of Remembrance includes 1,015 misspelled names and 245 names of service members who didn’t die from circumstances of the war, while leaving out around 500 names of service members that should be listed.

Initial concerns about the possible errors, however, came well before the structure’s completion. Military Times reported that the advocates from the Korean War Veterans Memorial Foundation questioned the reliability of the Defense Casualty Analysis System database, which the Pentagon used to provide the list of the names to the foundation.

At the time, researchers from the Korean War Project estimated that there were more than 2,000 name discrepancies in the government database list made available by the National Archives and Records Administration.

Latino service members were also impacted by the erroneous list. Many Puerto Rican service members used both paternal and maternal last names, Noemi Figueroa-Soulet, a Puerto Rican veterans advocate, wrote in a letter to foundation officials.

Army Pvt. Nelson Galarza-Lebron, she said, was listed as “Nelson G. Lebron” in the database, making it difficult — if not impossible — for family members to find his name. Galarza-Lebron died in October 1952 after sustaining wounds in combat.

This is not the first time that exact figures on those killed during combat in the Korean War have come into question. For years, the Pentagon claimed that U.S. forces sustained more than 50,000 battle deaths during the conflict. That number appeared to be inflated, but not before the statistic was etched into the original Korean War Memorial in the 1990′s.

In 2000, the Pentagon corrected the record, stating that a clerk in the department added together all battle deaths with deaths marked as “other.” The official figure for battle deaths in the war now stands at 36,516.

Work on the addition of the wall began in March 2021 and cost an estimated $22 million, according to the National Park service. Fundraising efforts for the addition began after Congress passed the Korean War Veterans Memorial Wall of Remembrance Act in 2016 — and finished after the foundation raised the money through American and South Korean private citizens and corporations.

About Zamone Perez

Zamone “Z” Perez is a rapid response reporter and podcast producer at Defense News and Military Times. He previously worked at Foreign Policy and Ufahamu Africa. He is a graduate of Northwestern University, where he researched international ethics and atrocity prevention in his thesis. He can be found on Twitter @zamoneperez.

12. Why Biden is wrong about North Korea

Again, here is my outline for a new policy focus:

Why Biden is wrong about North Korea

Newsweek · by Darragh Roche · January 13, 2023

President Joe Biden will welcome Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida to the White House on Friday as the two countries look to strengthen their alliance amid concerns about China and North Korea.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin met Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi and Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada to reaffirm the countries' alignment on issues including the recent North Korean missile launches.

Blinken accused North Korea, which is ruled by dictator Kim Jong Un, of "unlawful and reckless missile launches – including the launch of a long-range ballistic missile over Japan in October" and said the U.S. was "deepening our trilateral cooperation with the Republic of Korea to deter and, if necessary, defend against aggression."

Those missile launches are likely to be on the agenda on Friday, but the Biden administration may be taking the wrong approach, according to Frank Aum, the senior expert on Northeast Asia at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

The U.S. Institute of Peace is a nonpartisan, independent institute, founded by Congress.

"Over the last decade, various U.S. administrations have grown tired of Pyongyang's propensity for brinkmanship and its unwillingness to denuclearize. Today, Washington appears to have resigned itself to managing the North Korea problem rather than trying to solve it," Aum told Newsweek

He said that the Biden administration's "policy has been ineffective when measured against national security goals."

Diplomatic Relations

"North Korea is advancing its nuclear weapons capabilities both quantitatively and qualitatively through unabated missile testing and fissile material production," Aum warned. "Kim Jong Un has even called for an 'exponential increase' in the country's nuclear weapon arsenal."

At the same time, the U.S. is "failing at improving diplomatic relations and enhancing mutual understanding with North Korea."

"Between 1992 and 2008, the United States and North Korea used to have consistent, productive engagement at many levels – diplomatic, humanitarian, academic, cultural, and even parliamentary. Today, there is no diplomatic engagement and U.S. citizens are banned from going to North Korea with few exceptions," Aum said, noting that "there have been zero U.S. congressional delegations to North Korea since 2008."

"The U.S. military likes to define 'threat' as a function of intent and capabilities. If North Korea's capabilities have become intractable, then it is crucial that Washington intensify its efforts to mitigate North Korea's negative intent," he said.

Building Mutual Trust

Aum told Newsweek that Washington should be less focused on "hardline elements" of policy and show more openness to dialog.

"Since Pyongyang is insecure, isolated, and impoverished - but also nuclear armed - the United States should be doing everything it can to strengthen engagement, reduce misperceptions, and build mutual trust to lower the risks of a nuclear war," Aum said.

"For these goals, isolation, pressure, and deterrence are ill-suited tools. But it seems like Washington is overly focusing on these hardline elements – to poor effect," he said.

U.S. President Joe Biden in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on January 12, 2023, in Washington, DC, and a file photo of North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un from April 25, 2019. Tensions are running high in Asia. Getty

"The administration has stated that it is seeking diplomacy and deterrence with North Korea, and that it has reached out to Pyongyang multiple times to no avail," he went on.

"But U.S. outreach may appear disingenuous to North Korea when the overall U.S. posture signals hostility, " Aum said.

He pointed to the May 2022 summit between Biden and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol in Seoul, explaining that "the United States and South Korea agreed to expand the scale and scope of combined military exercises and redeploy U.S. strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula, measures that Pyongyang finds threatening."

"When asked during the May summit if he had a message for the North Korean leader, Biden replied tersely, 'Hello. Period.' This is a confusing way for the United States to express an interest in dialogue," Aum said.

"Of course, the blame does not lie only with Washington – Pyongyang deserves blame as well for not returning to talks when the United States has imposed no preconditions," he added.

An Olive Branch

When asked what the Biden administration could do better, Aum emphasized the need for diplomacy.

"The Biden administration needs to offer North Korea a more full-throated, less equivocal olive branch to transform the vicious cycle of provocation into a virtuous cycle of accommodation," Aum said.

"The administration could begin by announcing a new approach that explicitly reinvigorates the two countries' commitment in the 2018 Singapore Statement to establish new U.S.-North Korean relations," he suggested.

"This policy should be accompanied by unambiguous conciliatory gestures—for example, a moratorium on the deployment of U.S. strategic assets. Washington could also temporarily reduce military exercises, show a willingness to declare an end to the Korean War, offer sanctions relief in exchange for commensurate denuclearization measures, end the ban on U.S. citizens traveling to North Korea, and provide humanitarian aid and COVID-19 vaccines," he said.

A Summit With Kim

Former President Donald Trump met Kim Jong Un in 2019 and stepped inside North Korean territory, while Biden has previously said he would consider meeting Kim if the North Korean leader was "sincere" and "serious" about talks relating to the country's nuclear program.

Aum told Newsweek that Biden "could convey good faith and dangle the offer of a summit in a letter to Kim."

"Most of these measures were already implemented or on the table during the Trump negotiations, and none would materially undermine U.S. national security. This approach would also keep denuclearization as a long-term U.S. goal but would not require it as an immediate concession for U.S. accommodation," he said.

Aum said a "body of literature suggests that unilateral conciliatory gestures can help dissolve mistrust and spur rapprochement, especially when offered first by the stronger country."

He went on: "In the present case, the United States has the strongest diplomatic, economic, and military foundation in the world, especially when combined with South Korea's. This should allow it to take diplomatic risks."

The U.S.-Japan Relationship

Biden will meet Prime Minister Kishida on Friday and will almost certainly reaffirm the close relationship between the countries and their agreement when it comes to dealing with North Korea.

"The current governments in Washington and Tokyo seem fairly aligned in terms of how to deal with North Korea," Aum said. "They want to strengthen deterrence to prevent North Korean nuclear threats and use. They also want to use isolation, pressure, and sanctions to coerce North Korea back to the negotiating table on favorable terms."

"If Washington adopts a more conciliatory approach to North Korea, this would put it at odds with Tokyo," he said. "But ultimately, I think Tokyo would grudgingly go along with it – like it did during the engagement period between Trump and Kim in 2018-2019 – because it knows that it has no real leverage on the North Korea issue."

Aum said that the U.S.-Japan relationship "would remain strong because it is grounded in many other areas of common interest."

A National Security Council (NSC) spokesperson told Newsweek in a statement on Friday: "As we have said, we are committed to the defense of our Allies, the Republic of Korea and Japan.

"We are working closely with the international community, including with our allies and partners at the UN Security Council, to limit the DPRK's ability to advance its unlawful weapons programs that threaten regional stability.

"We continue to seek serious and sustained dialogue with the DPRK, but the DPRK refuses to engage," the statement added.

Update 01/14/23 3.03a.m. E.T.: This article was updated to include more information and a statement from the NSC.

Newsweek · by Darragh Roche · January 13, 2023

13. 'Outrageous': South Korean President Under Fire for Considering Nuclear Weapons

A very select look at all the critiques of President Yoon's statements (some of which he has walked back) from all those opposed to nuclear weapons.

'Outrageous': South Korean President Under Fire for Considering Nuclear Weapons

commondreams.org · by Jessica Corbett · January 12, 2023

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol arrives for a G20 summit in Nusa Dua, on the Indonesian island of Bali, on November 15, 2022.

(Photo: Mast Irham/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

"More nukes means a more dangerous world—period," said Global Zero. "We need diplomacy now."

Jan 13, 2023

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol stoked global alarm on Wednesday by suggesting for the first time that his country would consider building nuclear weapons or asking the United States to redeploy them in response to the threat posed by North Korea.

"It's possible that the problem gets worse and our country will introduce tactical nuclear weapons or build them on our own," Yoon said during a policy briefing with his defense and foreign ministries, according toThe New York Times. "If that's the case, we can have our own nuclear weapons pretty quickly, given our scientific and technological capabilities."

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire."

South Korea, which previously had a nuclear program in the 1970s, would have to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to develop such arms. The United States—one of the nine official nuclear-armed nations—withdrew its nukes from the country in 1991.

That same year, both Koreas signed a joint declaration agreeing not to "test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy, or use nuclear weapons," but, as the Times noted, the North has since "reneged on the agreement by conducting six nuclear tests since 2006."

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN)—which was awarded the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for its efforts related to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons—responded to the South Korean leader's comments on Thursday.

"Suggestions that rejecting agreed [international] law and norms to develop nuclear weapons are outrageous, and must be globally condemned," ICAN tweeted. "President Yoon Suk Yeol's remarks should be condemned, as should all nations that threaten to leave the NPT and develop nukes."

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire," ICAN continued. "All it does is increase the chances of a nuclear escalation."

Eliana Reynolds, a research associate for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), stressed that "nuclear weapons are not necessary to deter nuclear weapons. Entertaining this discussion does more harm than good, especially since South Korea would be the second state to ever withdraw from the NPT to build nuclear weapons, the first of which was (you guessed it) North Korea."

Tom Z. Collina, director of policy at Ploughshares Fund and co-author, with former U.S. Secretary of Defense William J. Perry, of The Button: The New Nuclear Arms Race, said: "So, let's say the U.S. redeploys nuclear weapons to South Korea. Then North Korea responds by upping its arsenal, actions, and threats. What has been gained? There is no good end to this."

\u201cPresident Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea said that South Korea could consider building nuclear weapons of its own or ask the United States to redeploy them on the Korean Peninsula.\n\nMore nukes means a more dangerous world - period. We need diplomacy now.\n\nhttps://t.co/6hCwjlBkoi\u201d

— Global Zero (@Global Zero) 1673543730

Multiple experts called on the United States—which has the world's second largest nuclear arsenal, after Russia, and is a key ally of South Korea—to dissuade Yoon's government from pursuing nukes.

Yoon's comments were "a signal to the United States, and also to fellow [South Korean] conservatives who've wanted to see this option on the table," said Ankit Panda, a senior fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The "U.S. must be clear that extended deterrence and [South Korean] nukes cannot coexist."

James Acton, co-director of the Carnegie program, tweeted that "I think the U.S. should make clear that allies that develop their own nuclear weapons in violation of their nonproliferation obligations shouldn't expect to continue benefiting from U.S. security guarantees."

After another expert noted that South Korea may first ditch the NPT before pursuing nuclear arms, Acton highlighted possible commitments to the U.S. and "the legal dubiousness of using equipment acquired under the treaty," then said that "the big point is that I'd support withdrawing extended guarantees from any ally that withdrew from the NPT."

Dartmouth College professor Nicholas Miller, author of Stopping the Bomb: The Sources and Effectiveness of U.S. Nonproliferation Policy,suggested Thursday that Yoon may have made his nuclear remarks to influence negotiations.

"If South Korea decided to go nuclear, it would damage the NPT, trigger sanctions, threaten the alliance with the U.S., and provoke China and North Korea," Miller said. "Hence why I still tend to think it's unlikely and that these comments are for bargaining purposes."

"If South Korea decided to go nuclear, it would damage the NPT, trigger sanctions, threaten the alliance with the U.S., and provoke China and North Korea."

The Korea Heraldreported Thursday that a presidential official signaled South Korea's intention to continue abiding by the NPT and said that Yoon's remarks should be understood as the president "stating his firm commitment amid the escalating threat of North Korea's nuclear weapons."

"The most important part of his comments yesterday was that, as a realistic measure at the moment, it's important to effectively strengthen extended deterrence within the security alliance between South Korea and the United States," the official said. "However, when it comes to security, the worst-case scenario must always be taken into consideration and from that perspective, he was making his commitment and determination ever clearer to protect the people as commander-in-chief against the escalating threat of North Korea's nuclear weapons."

During an Associated Pressinterview Tuesday at the presidential office in Seoul, Yoon also asserted that North Korean missile tests and nuclear ambitions pose a "serious threat," saying that "North Korea could have its own internal reasons, but there's no way for our country or any other country to know exactly why they are conducting such provocations."

According to the AP, "The conservative leader reiterated his call for closer security cooperation with the United States and Japan to counter the 'dangerous situation' being created by North Korea as he played down the prospect for direct negotiations like those pursued by his liberal predecessor."

"We've seen a miscalculation leading to serious wars many times in history," Yoon said. "These unlawful North Korean provocations can only result in the strengthening of [South Korea's] security response capabilities and a further strengthening of the security cooperation between South Korea, the United States, and Japan."

As the AP detailed:

In a recent newspaper interview, Yoon cited discussions with the U.S. about joint planning potentially involving U.S. nuclear assets.

Asked for further clarity Tuesday, he said the proposed plans include "tabletop exercises, computer simulations, and drills... on delivery means for nuclear weapons."

"The discussions are under way over the so-called joint planning and joint execution, and I think it's right for South Korea and the United States to cooperate because both of us are exposed to the North Korean nuclear threat," Yoon said.

After the Wednesday briefing that featured Yoon's nuclear comments, Lee Jong-sup, South Korea's defense minister, confirmed that his country and the United States are "planning to hold tabletop exercises in February between defense officials on operating means of extended deterrence under the scenario of North Korea's nuclear attacks."

Reutersreported that Lee also said the countries plan to scale up annual joint field training this year and that the U.S. is willing to "drastically expand" the scope of sensitive information shared because of the "need for it between the two sides, given that North Korea's nuclear threat has become serious not only to South Korea but also to the United States."

Meanwhile, peace advocates worldwide continue to demand diplomatic efforts. Last month, civil society groups called on Yoon, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and U.S. President Joseph Biden "to stop the destructive arms race, take steps now to prevent a potentially catastrophic war, and set the table for peace talks," arguing that "diplomacy is the only way to resolve this conflict."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Jessica Corbett

Jessica Corbett is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

North Korea Nuclear Weapons international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons nuclear nonproliferation treaty yoon suk yeol South Korea

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire."

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire," ICAN continued. "All it does is increase the chances of a nuclear escalation."

\u201cPresident Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea said that South Korea could consider building nuclear weapons of its own or ask the United States to redeploy them on the Korean Peninsula.\n\nMore nukes means a more dangerous world - period. We need diplomacy now.\n\nhttps://t.co/6hCwjlBkoi\u201d

— Global Zero (@Global Zero) 1673543730

"If South Korea decided to go nuclear, it would damage the NPT, trigger sanctions, threaten the alliance with the U.S., and provoke China and North Korea."

As the AP detailed:

In a recent newspaper interview, Yoon cited discussions with the U.S. about joint planning potentially involving U.S. nuclear assets.

Asked for further clarity Tuesday, he said the proposed plans include "tabletop exercises, computer simulations, and drills... on delivery means for nuclear weapons."

"The discussions are under way over the so-called joint planning and joint execution, and I think it's right for South Korea and the United States to cooperate because both of us are exposed to the North Korean nuclear threat," Yoon said.

Jessica Corbett

Jessica Corbett is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire."

"Adding more nuclear weapons into an already tense region is like pouring oil onto a grease fire," ICAN continued. "All it does is increase the chances of a nuclear escalation."

\u201cPresident Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea said that South Korea could consider building nuclear weapons of its own or ask the United States to redeploy them on the Korean Peninsula.\n\nMore nukes means a more dangerous world - period. We need diplomacy now.\n\nhttps://t.co/6hCwjlBkoi\u201d

— Global Zero (@Global Zero) 1673543730

"If South Korea decided to go nuclear, it would damage the NPT, trigger sanctions, threaten the alliance with the U.S., and provoke China and North Korea."

As the AP detailed:

In a recent newspaper interview, Yoon cited discussions with the U.S. about joint planning potentially involving U.S. nuclear assets.

Asked for further clarity Tuesday, he said the proposed plans include "tabletop exercises, computer simulations, and drills... on delivery means for nuclear weapons."

"The discussions are under way over the so-called joint planning and joint execution, and I think it's right for South Korea and the United States to cooperate because both of us are exposed to the North Korean nuclear threat," Yoon said.

North Korea Nuclear Weapons international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons nuclear nonproliferation treaty yoon suk yeol South Korea

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

Support Common Dreams Today

Journalism that is independent, non-profit, ad-free, and 100% reader-supported.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

commondreams.org · by Jessica Corbett · January 12, 2023

14. South Korea: Mixed Progress on Rights

Excerpts:

South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk-yeol, has refocused the government on human rights issues in North Korea since taking office in May 2022, but has not addressed important domestic rights concerns,...

Not eithe/or but both/and.

South Korea: Mixed Progress on Rights

Protect Women and Girls, Marginalized Groups

hrw.org · January 12, 2023

Click to expand Image

(Jakarta) – South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk-yeol, has refocused the government on human rights issues in North Korea since taking office in May 2022, but has not addressed important domestic rights concerns, Human Rights Watch said today in its World Report 2023. His failure to tackle South Korea’s pervasive discrimination against women and marginalized groups has been critical.

“President Yoon Suk-yeol’s administration should adopt a more comprehensive human rights agenda domestically while promoting rights in the region and globally,” said Lina Yoon, senior Korea researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Failing to address human rights issues at home weakens South Korea’s credibility to raise human rights globally.”

In the 712-page World Report 2023, its 33rd edition, Human Rights Watch reviews human rights practices in close to 100 countries. In her introductory essay, acting Executive Director Tirana Hassan says that in a world in which power has shifted, it is no longer possible to rely on a small group of mostly Global North governments to defend human rights. The world’s mobilization around Russia’s war in Ukraine reminds us of the extraordinary potential when governments realize their human rights obligations on a global scale. The responsibility is on individual countries, big and small, to apply a human rights framework to their policies, and then work together to protect and promote human rights.

President Yoon filled the long-vacant position of special ambassador for North Korean human rights and pledged to establish the North Korean Human Rights Foundation, mandated by law, to fund further investigations and action on rights abuses. President Yoon also proposed meetings between Korean families separated by the Korean War and offered humanitarian aid to North Korea in the context of its Covid-19 outbreak. In November, South Korea co-sponsored the annual resolution at the UN General Assembly Third Committee, condemning North Korean human rights violations for the first time since 2019.

Domestically, the government continued to lag in addressing rampant discrimination against women and girls, migrants, foreigners, older people, people with disabilities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. In early 2022, the National Assembly considered a draft anti-discrimination law introduced by the previous president but did not adopt it.

The Economist reported that South Korean women earn 38 percent less than their male counterparts, the largest gender pay gap of any Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member country.

Topics like feminism and sexism have become more divisive in South Korea in recent years. During his campaign for president, President Yoon made frequent appeals to anti-feminist male voters, blamed feminism for the decline in the birth rate, and pledged to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, which he is currently trying to dismantle.

Key developments in South Korea’s LGBT rights movement included the election to parliament of Cha Hae-young, the first openly LGBT elected official. The Supreme Court of Korea overturned the military convictions against two gay soldiers who had been prosecuted for same-sex conduct under article 92-6 of the Military Criminal Act. Nevertheless, LGBT people in South Korea have continued to face hostility and discrimination. When approximately 13,000 members and supporters of the LGBT community assembled for Seoul’s first LGBT Pride festival in three years, they were outnumbered by 15,000 anti-LGBT protesters who assembled nearby.

With growing criticism of common workplace abuses, including bullying, harassment, and retaliations against organizing workers, the National Assembly debated a bill limiting employers from seeking damages for losses incurred during strikes. Despite continuing pressure from unions and civil society groups, the government has not ratified Convention No. 190 of the International Labour Organization, which promotes measures to end harassment and violence in the workplace.

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Senior Advisor, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

V/R

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Phone: 202-573-8647

Personal Email: d avid.maxwell161@gmail.com

Web Site: www.fdd.org

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Subscribe to FDD’s new podcast, Foreign Podicy

FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website

Why US policy on North Korea should prioritize nonproliferation, not denuclearization

Biden, Kishida call for denuclearization of N. Korea, reaffirm cooperation with S. Korea | Yonhap News Agency

Ukraine, Japan and the Korean War’s 21st-Century Parallel

As in 1950, destabilizing war is forcing the West to get serious about defense a continent away.

S. Korea's advanced Army unit, U.S. Stryker team hold joint drills near border with N. Korea | Yonhap News Agency

South Korean President Takes Aim at North Korea, U.S. With Nuclear Comments

Yoon Suk-yeol has grown more confrontational with Pyongyang in recent weeks

US quickly downplays Yoon’s ‘nuclear prospect’

CNO Gilday: Expanding Military Cooperation Between South Korea, Japan 'A Necessity' - USNI News

Related

＜Inside N. Korea＞Why are food prices skyrocketing at the start of the new year? Anxiety over food shortages leads to hoarding and even people wandering around after falling into financial ruin

◆ Nobody trusts motivation behind Kim Jong-un’s efforts to monopolize the food supply

◆ N. Koreans hoard corn

◆ Some people turning to wandering around the country…anxiety increases amid people going into financial ruin

◆ The Kim Jong-un regime exerts strong control over food distribution network

◆ Distrust in Kim Jong-un’s government is spurring skyrocketing prices.

Seung-Whan Choi: What could bring the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war

North Koreans struggle to escape, thanks to covid and Kim

Only 67 North Koreans made it to the South last year, as pandemic controls compound a regime crackdown

South Korea vows to fix name errors of soldiers at US memorial

Why Biden is wrong about North Korea

Diplomatic Relations

Building Mutual Trust

An Olive Branch

A Summit With Kim

The U.S.-Japan Relationship

​'Outrageous': South Korean President Under Fire for Considering Nuclear Weapons

"More nukes means a more dangerous world—period," said Global Zero. "We need diplomacy now."

Support Common Dreams Today

South Korea: Mixed Progress on Rights

'Outrageous': South Korean President Under Fire for Considering Nuclear Weapons