|
Quotes of the Day:
“The capacity to learn is a gift;
The ability to learn is a skill;
The willingness to learn is a choice.”
– Brian Herbert
No man is an island,
Entire of itself;
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less,
As well as if a promontory were:
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were.
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
By John Donne
"Our power is in our ability to decide."
– R. Buckminster Fuller
1. “Trump’s 2nd term, possible reduction of US troops in Korea and readjustment of roles, focusing on suppressing China”
2. Experts: “Trump Confirms Will to Build Integrated Missile Defense with Korea… Also Responds to Threats from China and Russia”
3. Commerce secretary nominee accuses S. Korea, Japan of having 'taken advantage of' U.S.' good nature
4. misunderstandings – military aircraft
5. Acting president orders extra vigilance on U.S. policy uncertainty
6. Samsung mobile phone found among belongings of N. Korean soldier killed by Ukrainian forces
7. Navy's new Seahawk helicopters to start to arrive in S. Korea next month
8. Trump plans to disarm North Korea, but Kim wants more nuclear weapons
9. Kim Jong-un seeks negotiating leverage over Trump with new nuclear demands: analysts
10. [Expert Diagnosis] ① Klingner “Secretary Rubio will attempt to communicate with North Korea”
11. The myth of human wave attacks obscures what North Korea is learning in Ukraine
12. North Korean Human Rights Groups Also in 'Confusion' Over US Government Subsidies
13. ‘Big Problem for Kim’: DPRK Troops Suffer Heavy Losses From Ukrainian Drones
14. Seoul urges North Korea to resume separated family reunions as deaths near 100K
15. U.S. Congress completes formation of subcommittee on Korean Peninsula… Senator Ricketts and Representative Young Kim as key figures
16. South Korea’s perfect storm – and no one’s at the helm
17. Stressed Security Environment In North-East Asia And Focus On Defence Spending – Analysis
1.“Trump’s 2nd term, possible reduction of US troops in Korea and readjustment of roles, focusing on suppressing China”
Sadly the journalist (or his editor) did not deem these comments of sufficient importance so I am sharing them with you. I provided these in writing and conducted a 15 minute call with the journalists and then he used only a few minor comments.
While we should always welcome a strategic review of US force posture, it must answer the question of what are the right forces in the right numbers in the right places around the world to protect US national security interests.
In terms of Korea, preventing conflict on the Korean peninsula is a vital US national interest because of the criticality of Korea as well as our other regional allies, Japan, the Philippines, and our friend, Taiwan to US interests and these interests are both economic as well as national security. To deter war, we must ask what are the required US military forces to defend our interests which include the defense of Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan in East Asia. We may require fewer troops or we may require more. But the final decision on numbers should really be based on an assessment of the capabilities necessary to protect our interests and those of our allies. We should not be using numbers of troops as either bargaining chips or for partisan political purposes. Our national security interests are too important and too complex to use the military for purposes other than they are designed, which is to achieve the strategic end states that our national security strategy demands.
This is a Google translation of a VOA report.
“Trump’s 2nd term, possible reduction of US troops in Korea and readjustment of roles, focusing on suppressing China”
2025.1.30
An Jun-ho
https://www.voakorea.com/a/7955659.html
U.S. experts on the Korean Peninsula predict that there is a good chance that the Trump administration will consider reducing the number of U.S. troops stationed in Korea and readjusting their roles. They analyzed that the focus will be on the possibility of conflict with China. Reporter Ahn Jun-ho reports.
Sydney Seiler, former National Intelligence Council National Intelligence Analyst for North Korea
Sidney Seiler, a former North Korea analyst for the National Intelligence Council, said in a phone interview with VOA on the 28th that the discussion of reducing U.S. troops stationed in South Korea was not the first time that President Trump had raised the issue, and that it had been discussed several times before, reaching the current scale.
He went on to say that if a review of overseas stationing of troops is conducted in the future, the type of troops, mission, capacity, and nature of the war on the Korean Peninsula will be reviewed and work will be done to confirm that they are deployed in an appropriate number and type.
[Recording: Former analyst Sylar] “It's probably a good idea to review that, review the types of troops, the mission that they have and the capabilities that they bring and what the nature of the war fight on the peninsula might be and make sure that the troops are there in the appropriate numbers and appropriate types”
However, it is too early to speculate on the scale of the reduction, said former analyst Seiler.
With the inauguration of the Donald Trump administration, attention is focused on the readjustment of US troops stationed overseas, and interest is also focused on the possibility of reducing the number of US troops stationed in South Korea, which stands at 28,500.
Vice President JD Vance
“Possibility of Reduction of US Forces in Korea”
Vice President JD Vance said at the inauguration of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the White House on the 25th, “What sets President Trump apart from previous presidents is, first, his view that we should be sparing and incremental in how we deploy our most valuable resources.”
“(Those resources) are men and women who are willing to put on uniform and put their lives on the line for this country,” he continued. “We shouldn’t be sending them everywhere.”
[Recording: Vice President Vance] “You look at what has separated President Trump from so many of the people who came before him. It is the view that number one we should be sparing in how we deploy our most precious resource.”
Bruce Klingner, Senior Research Fellow, Heritage Foundation
Bruce Klingner, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former deputy director for Korea affairs at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), said in a telephone interview with VOA on the same day, “There is a possibility of a reduction in the number of US troops stationed in Korea.” He added, “That could happen if there are differences in opinion about the results of the ‘Global Force Posture Review’ conducted by the Department of Defense on the deployment of forces or the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) between the US and South Korea.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to Korea Harry Harris. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Embassy in Korea.
Harry Harris, a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea and former commander of the Pacific Command, told VOA on the 28th, “No matter which administration comes in, there is always the possibility of change,” but added, “It is still too early to predict exactly what will happen with the size of the U.S. military in South Korea.”
[Former Ambassador Harris] “There is always the possibility of change with any incoming administration. It's too early to see exactly what will happen regarding the size of USFK. It would be inappropriate to speculate. I believe the US-ROK Alliance benefits the US as much as it benefits South Korea.”
Christopher Johnston, former Director of East Asia for the National Security Council
Christopher Johnston, former director of East Asia for the National Security Council, appeared on VOA’s “Washington Talk” on the 24th and said, “It is almost certain that President Trump and his team will resume reviewing the U.S.-South Korea alliance and the U.S. Forces Korea,” adding, “This was a major concern during the first term.”
[Recording: Former Director Johnstone] “There’s almost no question that President Trump and his team will resume scrutiny on the US-ROK Alliance and the US military presence in South Korea.”
Former Director of Defense Johnston, who worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense during the first Trump administration, said that at the time, the Department of Defense reviewed the reduction of U.S. troops stationed on the Korean Peninsula and even developed practical measures, but no further progress was made due to lack of time.
Bruce Bennett, Senior Researcher, RAND Corporation
Bruce Bennett, a senior researcher at the Rand Corporation, said in a telephone interview with VOA on the same day that “there has always been a possibility of a reduction in the number of U.S. troops stationed in Korea,” but predicted that “there is a possibility of a small reduction, but there will not be a large-scale reduction.”
Regarding the claim that “South Korea can defend itself,” he said, “If North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and the United States does not respond to that threat, (South Korea defending itself) is impossible.”
[Recording: Senior Researcher Bennett] “I think if North Korea has nuclear weapons and the US is not participating in dealing with that threat, then I think that that’s not feasible.”
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth arrives for his first day at the Pentagon on January 27, 2025.
“Focus on the possibility of conflict with China”
“We will work with our allies and partners to deter Chinese Communist aggression in the Indo-Pacific,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a message distributed to all military personnel after taking office on the 25th.
[Defense Minister Hegseth] “We will work with allies and partners to deter aggression in the Indo-Pacific by Communist China, as well as supporting the President's priority to end wars responsibly and reorient to key threats.”
Elbridge Colby, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Elbridge Colby, the nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, has repeatedly told VOA that the U.S. military's capabilities are limited and it should focus on "containment of China" and that its allies should take more responsibility.
In an interview with VOA's "Washington Talk" in December 2023, Colby said, "USFK should be designed in a way that is better suited to responding to China," and "USFK should focus on the capacity to respond to the Chinese military."
[Recording: Designated Colby] “They should be designed more for dealing with the Chinese. And in the future, the forces that the Chinese are clearly developing, that they have not stopped developing since the meeting with President Biden in the slightest.”
“The idea that there could be a situation where US forces in Korea or US military bases in Korea could be used in the event of a conflict between the US and China over Taiwan is a very important issue,” said former analyst Seiler.
He added, “The current troop levels in Korea and Japan are particularly important,” and predicted, “Both regions will be reexamined with the possibility of conflict with China in mind.”
[Recording: Former analyst Sylar] “I think the current level of troops in Korea, the current level of troops in Japan in particular both of those will be looked at with an eye towards the possibility of a conflict with China in the future.”
Senior Research Fellow Klinger predicted that the Trump administration will ask its regional allies and friends to do more to counter the Chinese threat.
However, he said, “The U.S. military in Korea only has 28,500 troops, and it is mainly ground forces, so it is not necessarily advantageous in the event of a sudden change in Taiwan,” and “The U.S. Air Force and Navy stationed on the Korean Peninsula are relatively small in size.”
He also diagnosed that “USFK will not only be a symbol of deterrence against North Korea, but will also be useful as a means to facilitate the inflow of troops to respond to emergencies from North Korea or China in the Indo-Pacific or the US mainland.”
[Recording: Senior Researcher Klingner] “So it would be useful to have US forces Korea on the peninsula not only as a sign of deterrence against North Korea, but also as a way to facilitate the inflow of forces from the Indo Pacific or from the United States to deal with North Korean or Chinese contingencies.”
“Korea, the best place to defend China”
“USFK has been responsible for responding to North Korea, and Pacific Command has been responsible for responding to China,” said Bennett, adding, “If you’re worried about defending China, there’s no better place to be than Korea.”
[Recording: Senior Researcher Bennett] “If you're concerned about defending against China, what better place could you put forces than in South Korea? You can’t get them closer to China any place that the US can deploy them.”
He also suggested that, in order to deter China, rather than reducing the number of US troops stationed in Korea, it would be better to modernize the air force of US troops stationed in Korea together with South Korea.
David Maxwell, Vice President, Asia Pacific Strategy Center
“China is operating across the globe with Russia, North Korea and Iran,” said David Maxwell, deputy director of the Asia-Pacific Strategy Center and former chief of staff for operations at the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command. “You can’t separate all your strategic interests and focus on just one.”
He continued, “If we focus only on defending Taiwan, we will face a strategic dilemma,” adding, “If Taiwan is threatened, there is a very high possibility that South Korea will also be threatened, and in that case, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and other (America’s Asian allies) could all be at risk.”
[Recording: Deputy Representative Maxwell] “And I would also say that if we focus only on the defense of Taiwan, we're going to face a strategic dilemma because if Taiwan is threatened, it is very likely that South Korea will also be threatened and that will put South Korea at risk, Japan at risk, the Philippines at risk.”
He stressed that “strategic analysis must be conducted to deploy the right number of troops in the right locations and build the capabilities to protect America’s interests around the world.”
This is Ahn Jun-ho from VOA News.
2. Experts: “Trump Confirms Will to Build Integrated Missile Defense with Korea… Also Responds to Threats from China and Russia”
Again, I am not getting my point across with VOA journalists these days.
Two points I wanted to emphasize - (1) THAAD is a high demand, low density system and we do not have the resources to deploy or station everywhere we would like. I never said that additional systems would be stationed in but I said it would be prudent to focus on integrated missile defense as one way to enhance the ability to protect our troops and those of our allies.
Now if we could station additional THAAD batteries in Korea we should recall the 3 No's demand that XI made to former President Moon o 2017 in the first dispute over the stationing of THAAD in Korea. It caused XI to conduct economic warfare against the South. Xi demande of Moon that there would be no trilateral alliance of the ROK-Japan-US, no integrated missile defense, and no additional THAAD systems stationed in the ROK. One of the main reasons we likely have not stationed additional systems in the ROK is likely not because of Xi's no demand but because systems have been required elsewhere in the world. However, if we are going to improve missile defense of US forward stationed troops we should consider the strategic competition we are in with China (which is unrestricted and political warfare). We have been slowly countering the No's with the Camp David Summit in 2023, evolving missile defense that is moving toward integrated missile defense with the ROK and Japan. We should consider that the stationing of additional THAAD systems in Korea will be playing a new card in the strategic competition.
This is a Google translation of a VOA report.
Experts: “Trump Confirms Will to Build Integrated Missile Defense with Korea… Also Responds to Threats from China and Russia”
2025.1.30
https://www.voakorea.com/a/7956104.html
President Donald Trump's order to strengthen missile defense with allies was interpreted by military experts as a confirmation of his intention to build an integrated missile defense with South Korea. There was also analysis that strengthening missile defense with South Korea was intended to respond to threats from not only North Korea but also Russia and China. Reporter Ahn So-young reports.
David Maxwell, Vice President, Asia Pacific Strategy Center
David Maxwell, deputy director of the Asia-Pacific Strategic Center, said on the 29th that President Trump's order to strengthen missile defenses by allies and forward-deployed U.S. forces "signifies that we will continue to move toward building an integrated missile defense."
[Recording: Vice President Maxwell]”The implication is that we are going to continue to move towards integrated missile defense. I think the number one consideration that the US and South Korea need integrated missile defense on the Korean peninsula and ideally integrated missile defense between South Korea, The US and Japan. Our defenses would be so much stronger if we had integrated missile defense.”
“A U.S.-ROK-Japan Integrated Missile Defense System Is Necessary”
“The most important consideration is that the United States and South Korea need an integrated missile defense system on the Korean Peninsula, and ideally, an integrated missile defense among South Korea, the United States and Japan,” Maxwell, who served as the chief of staff for operations at the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command, told VOA in a phone call.
He added that once this is built, “our defense capabilities will be much stronger,” and that “one option could be additional deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system.”
[Recording: Vice President Maxwell] “One course of action could be to deploy additional THAAD resources which will improve the defense of South Korea as well as US troops in South Korea because the THAAD covers a wide area and multiple THAAD batteries would provide improved missile defense system for the entire Korean peninsula.”
The explanation is that deploying multiple THAAD batteries to defend a wide area will improve the missile defense system for the entire Korean Peninsula, thereby enhancing the defense capabilities of not only the US Forces Korea but also South Korea.
However, he said, "The U.S. Department of Defense will carefully decide where to deploy THAAD."
In response to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats, South Korea agreed with the United States to deploy THAAD in July 2016 and deployed it in Seongju, Gyeongsangbuk-do the following year.
THAAD is a system that primarily intercepts medium- to short-range and high-altitude missiles, and is capable of tracking and intercepting multiple missiles at once, making it the optimal defense system for responding to multi-stage missile attacks such as those from North Korea.
President Donald Trump signs the Laken Riley Act in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Jan. 29, 2025.
President Donald Trump signed the 'Iron Dome for America' executive order on the 27th.
In the order, President Trump emphasized that “the United States continues to work with our allies and partners on missile defense to support the defense of our people, forces, and forward-deployed U.S. forces.”
There is also interest in the impact on missile defenses for South Korea and U.S. forces in Korea, as the Secretary of Defense is directed to improve theater missile defenses for forward-deployed allies’ territories, forces, and people, and to accelerate the expansion of U.S. missile defense capabilities to allies and partners.
“Emphasizing the Need for Rapid Sharing of North Korean Missile Information”
Bruce Bennett, Senior Researcher, RAND Corporation
Bruce Bennett, a senior researcher at the Rand Corporation, told VOA on Tuesday that “the missile threat is one of the most challenging modern military threats today,” and that President Trump appears to be recognizing this when he signed this executive order.
In doing so, he recalled the part where President Trump said, “Identify ways to enhance bilateral and multilateral cooperation between the United States and its allies on missile defense,” and linked it to the need for rapid information sharing between the United States and South Korea to respond to North Korean missiles.
[Recording: Senior Researcher Bennett] “The key here is South Korea's been developing its own missile defense systems. The degree to which those get integrated with the information available to the US system is critical to their performance. With missile defense, if a missile is launched from North Korea, there are only a few minutes before it would hit a target in South Korea. You can't have the information from US systems going to some headquarters in South Korea, which then sends it down to missile defense headquarters, and then to the missile defense battery. All of that needs to be networked together so that the batteries can see exactly what is happening as soon as the satellite detects it."
“The bottom line is that South Korea has developed its own missile defense system,” said Bennett. “How well that system integrates with the intelligence coming from the U.S. system is very important.”
He continued, “In the case of missile defense, if a missile is launched from North Korea, it only takes a few minutes for it to reach its target in South Korea,” and said that all information must be connected to the network so that defense batteries can know the exact situation as soon as it is detected by satellites.
“Actively responding to Chinese and Russian missile threats”
Van Van Dieffen, former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation
Former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation Van Van Diepen interpreted the “Iron Dome for America” executive order as an intention to actively respond to missile threats from China and Russia through “integrated missile defense” with allies.
[Recording: Former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Van Diepen] “Those are peer adversaries. That's certainly an important focus of that. Both of those China and Russia have essential missile capabilities that would be targeted against US forces in any kind of conflict. It’s perfectly sensible to try to increase missile defense especially TMD”
“Both China and Russia have significant missile capabilities that could target U.S. forces in any type of conflict,” said Van Dieffen, a former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary.
He said it was “reasonable” to strengthen missile defense, particularly TMD, a missile defense system designed to counter missile attacks that could occur in specific areas.
He added that “given the Trump administration’s general focus on urging allies to do more, it’s possible that part of this effort could also be directed toward pressuring South Korea to take more responsibility for developing and deploying missile defenses.”
“US allies should share the cost”
Dr. Robert Schmucker. Photo = Technical University of Munich, Germany
Dr. Robert Schmucker, a former advisor to the German Defense Ministry’s missile program, emphasized that “the strengthening of America’s military power is built not only on offensive means such as missiles and bombers, but also on America’s missile defense capabilities.”
[Dr. Schmucker] “I think missile defense is one of the topics which will get much more attention in the future. The war experience with missile attacks in Ukraine and also in Israel shows that missile defense is firstly, a promising solution for countering missile attacks and secondly, an effective means in wartime situations. Strengthening the US military capabilities cannot be solely accomplished by offensive means - missiles and bombers - but also require the built-up of the US missile defense capabilities. This is a straight forward way to counter the growing offensive forces of Russia and PR China, not only in the US but also for all locations outside the USA where US troop are stationed”
Dr. Schmucker said missile defense is one area of defense that will receive more attention in the future, and that the lessons learned from the wars in Ukraine and Israel are that “missile defense is an effective way to respond to missile attacks and is an effective tool in wartime.”
Therefore, he added, “(Building missile defenses) is a direct way to counter growing Russian and Chinese aggression not only in the United States but everywhere where U.S. forces are stationed.”
[Dr. Schmucker] “This comprises all layers of the defense systems - to counter short range systems up to long range missiles. Since this protection will include also the US partners like South Korea and Japan or even Europe, these countries must also share some of financial burden when these systems are deployed.”
He said, “This consists of a full-layer defense system that can respond to short-range to long-range missiles, and since this defense includes our partners in Korea, Japan, and even Europe, these countries will also have to share some of the financial burden when deploying the system.”
This is Soyoung Ahn from VOA News.
3. Commerce secretary nominee accuses S. Korea, Japan of having 'taken advantage of' U.S.' good nature
Wow. The Korea Economic Institute and other Korean advocacy organizations have their work cut out for them. This nominee seems to have no clue about the ROK contributions to the US economy (in 2023 South Korea had the highest level of Foreign Direct Investment in the US.). He must be unaware of all the manufacturing jobs Hyundai and Kia have created in the US (as well as Kumho tire) And then there is SAMSUNG and chip manufacturing. And then there is the potential for cooperation on shipbuilding that even president Trump has talked about. This nominee just sounds like an alliance hater who only wants to bash allies for partisan political purposes.
Kim Jong Un likely views this as a useful contribution to his political warfare strategy because he assesses this will contribute to friction in the ROK/US and Japan/US alliances.
(LEAD) Commerce secretary nominee accuses S. Korea, Japan of having 'taken advantage of' U.S.' good nature | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Song Sang-ho · January 30, 2025
(ATTN: ADDS more remarks, details in paras 6-15)
By Song Sang-ho
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 (Yonhap) -- President Donald Trump's nominee for commerce secretary accused South Korea and Japan on Wednesday of having "taken advantage of" America's "good nature," stressing the need to work together with the allies to bring their production to the United States.
Howard Lutnick, a preeminent businessman, made the remarks during a Senate confirmation hearing, pointing to steel products from Japan and appliances from South Korea, as he responded to a senator's question over what he will do to foster an environment to encourage joint ventures with U.S. allies.
"Our great allies have taken advantage of our good nature, and they like steel in Japan and appliances in Korea ... I mean, they've just taken advantage of us. It's time for them to partner with us and bring that production back home," Lutnick told the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.
"So I think we're going to work closely with our allies to increase their manufacturing productivity at home, and I think your way of thinking about it saying let's work together to do that and bring it home ... I think it's really important for us, and really important for our workforce," he added.
Howard Lutnick, President Donald Trump's choice to be Secretary of Commerce, appears before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee for his confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on Jan. 29, 2025, in this photo released by the Associated Press. (Yonhap)
Lutnick also pointed out that he wants to bring semiconductor production back to America.
"We want to look at the supply chain and bring that back to America. We want to create those great jobs in America. So that way, we can go back to innovating, which is where we began," he said.
"Intel began the chips, right? And then the world sort of leveraged our chips. TSMC leveraged us and sort of took it from us," he added, referring to the Taiwanese tech giant.
The CHIPS and Science Act is an "excellent down payment" to begin the process of bringing semiconductor manufacturing to the U.S., he said.
"We need to study it, but we need to make sure that you get the benefit of the bargain, and (that) domestic manufacturing happens in America," he said in response to a question over whether he will continue to operate the CHIPS programs if confirmed.
Asked if he will stick to the CHIPS programs that involve distributing federal funds, Lutnick said, "We get the money out appropriately and correctly, and we build in America ... that is vital."
His remarks came amid lingering questions whether South Korean businesses, which had an agreement with the Biden administration to receive federal grants and loans for their investment in the U.S., can still get the money under the new U.S. administration.
On tariffs, Lutnick said he prefers "across-the-board," "country-by-country" tariffs rather than targeted ones as Trump is seeking to impose new tariffs on some countries to redress America's trade deficits and address other policy issues.
"I think when you pick one product in Mexico, they'll pick one product. We pick avocados, they pick white corn. We pick tomatoes, they pick yellow corn. All you're doing is picking on farmers, which is just not going to happen," he said.
He argued that in terms of trade, the U.S. needs to be treated "better" and "with respect."
"We can use tariffs to create reciprocity, fairness and respect," he said.
In November, Trump nominated Lutnick, chairman and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, as his commerce secretary, saying that if confirmed, Lutnick will spearhead the tariff and trade agenda of the incoming administration.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Song Sang-ho · January 30, 2025
4. misunderstandings – military aircraft
From one of my many great mentors on the use of military aircraft for other than military purposes (e.g., deportation), the tragic crash in DC last evening, and north Korea.
Actions create consequences
misunderstandings
military aircraft
https://cynthiawatson.substack.com/p/misunderstandings?utm
Cynthia Watson
Jan 30, 2025
I read seemingly countless sources of ideas every day, some better and others worse. Much of it relates to national security in one way or another because that’s been my scholarly focus for so long, plus as a citizen I want to know what is going on.
An exchange in a huge chatroom caught my attention early this morning amid our week of tragedy, upheaval, and day-to-day humdrum, all of which are occurring simultaneously. The primary focus of the original email message condemned the Trump administration’s choice to use U.S. military flights for the deportations being carried out across the country. Retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, a National War College student in the 1990s before rising to be a senior Army officer in Europe, wrote an article on The Bulwark about using these cargo flights to deport migrants, condemning the spectacle of parading the apprehended into the planes on military bases.
It wasn’t Hertling’s article that got my attention but another chatroom member’s note “[S]ocial media, even ’normal media’, are awash with comments like ‘Well, why not use air force planes? They’re free. They’re just sitting around doing nothing’”.
This is a misunderstanding on so many levels. Military planes are hardly free in any sense I can conjure up: they are expensive, specialized tools of national security whether the airframes or the crews. As Hertling notes, a civilian Boeing 737 costs about $100 million per plane. Air Force planes, equipped again by manufacturer Boeing, are at least twice as expensive because they fly with specialized fuel tanks, aeronautics, different landing gears, and various defensive features which we provide our pilots. That cost figure is merely for the plane, without exploring the costs of training the superb fliers who take these cargo planes into the air. That cost also ignores the maintenance costs required to keep these superb machines at their maximum capacity. Under no circumstances can one describe these as free.
Military cargo planes are enormous, expensive war machines. That is why you and I the taxpayer buy them, using them as tools of statecraft to support military operations. People probably focus more on fighters and bombers but cargo flights are utterly vital to transporting people and materiel across the globe. Those trained to fly the C-17, the C-9, or the C-130 airframes are—like all military personnel—exquisitely trained. They exercise to be the finest force in the world to be available at a moment’s notice to carry out the security needs of our country whenever required. In an era where we deploy forces so frequently, military aviation activity across the services is frequent.
If those on social media mean the cargo planes are just sitting around rather than on long-term deployment, that assumption is wrong as well. Being a pilot doesn’t mean “one and done” qualifying to fly but requires constant reappraisals of skills to assure most effective performance. Our vast array of requirements across the globe mandate the armed forces put its personnel through constant, on-going, persistent training to assure mastery and safety, both for the planes and the crews. You and I hardly want to lose a plane worth hundreds of millions dollars any more than we want to see a crew injured or killed. The constant efforts to assure the best quality force means everything is going on all of the time rather than awaiting a mission. U.S. military units are also involved around the world 24/7 every single day of the year. They are not sitting around without something to do but, whether active duty or reservists or National Guard, these fliers are hardly looking for something to do with their time.
The tragic crash less than eight hours ago between an Army helicopter and an American Airlines regional jet 400 feet over the Potomac River reflects this reality. We have no answers yet on the cause of the mid-air collision but we do know the Blackhawk was on a training mission en route from Fort Belvoir (south of Washington, D.C. in Virginia) while the commercial flight was on final approach on its flight from Wichita. Trying to find the sixty-seven people on both crafts is the immediate concern, as it should be, but we will later hear more on what the Blackhawk crew was doing last night over the Potomac.
It’s tempting to assume the military (or federal government, for that matter) operates automatically, as if there were no costs and actions involved. But the argument that the military is automatically cheaper or unencumbered with missions is just incorrect.
A response to yesterday’s column on nuclear weapons and Dr. Strangelove. A faithful paid subscriber who knows the North Korean problem better than anyone I know sent me the following comment yesterday afternoon:
4. This is the critical Strategic Assumption: North Korea will never negotiate away its nuclear capabilities as long as the Kim family regime remains in power. However, denuclearization must remain the long term goal, and the US cannot fall victim to the regime’s political warfare strategy by entering into arms control negotiations or recognizing the north as a nuclear state.
5. Recognize that it is the Kim family regime that has the hostile policy and strategy toward the ROK, the US, and the free world.
6. Recognize that north Korea is an integral part of the Axis of upheaval or Dark Quad and actually provides key support to China (as a disruptor of the ROK/US alliance and ROK/Japan/US trilateral cooperation), Russia (military support to Putin’s War), and Iran (with advanced military equipment to Iran and its proxies through its extensive proliferation activities to raise funds for regime survival). If you want to achieve effects versus China, Russia, and Iran you must attack the relationships among the four. Northeast/East Asia is the new “great game” of “strategic competition” and the South Korean political turmoil is a casualty in the game. China is playing the game but does the US recognize that such a game is taking place?
7. Therefore, given the hostile nature of the Kim family regime it is imperative to maintain a high level of combined military readiness in Northeast Asia to deter and recognize the single most important contribution to deterring the Kim family regime is the presence of US troops.
8. Recognize that while the defense of Taiwan is important to the free world, that a free Taiwan is of little value if it comes at the expense of South Korea being dominated by north Korea and China. The US must take a holistic approach to national security in the Indo-Pacific.
9. The neglected threat from north Korea is internal instability. The conditions that lead to internal instability and potential regime collapse are also the conditions that could lead Kim to make the decision to go to war as a desperate attempt to survive. It is critical to recognize that Kim Jong Un is under threat from within. He fears the Korean people in the north more than the combined ROK and US militaries. Information is an existential threat to his rule, and this must be used to US and ROK/US alliance advantage.
10. The long term strategy of the U.S. must rest on the foundation of military deterrence and “strategic strangulation” – the well-executed use of sanctions and all instruments of national power to prevent weapons proliferation, cyber-attacks, and global illicit activities to support the regime. The new strategy must consist of three pillars to support the Korean people in the north to create the conditions for change inside north Korea: (1) a human rights upfront approach (emphasize the fundamental human right of self-determination of government per the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights); (2) an information and influence campaign to inform and educate the Korean people in the north about their human rights and provide them practical knowledge for how to take collective action and create the conditions for change; (3) support to the Korean people on both sides of the DMZ as they seek to solve the Korean question and establish a free and unified Korea, a new nation, a United Republic of Korea (ROK). A Korea that is secure and stable, non-nuclear, economically vibrant, and unified under a liberal constitutional form of government based on individual liberty, rule of law, and human rights as determined by the Korean people. A free and unified Korea or in short, a United Republic of Korea (U-ROK).
11. If I could only give 12 words to the Trump administration it would be these: Unification first, then denuclearization; the path to unification is through human rights.
Tough words on a scary problem.
Not a good start to any day. My thoughts are with those lost last night in this tragedy.
5. Acting president orders extra vigilance on U.S. policy uncertainty
north Korea and China will take advantage of the political situation in Seoul and the Administration change in DC so it is prudent for South Korea to be vigilant.
But I would urge Seoul to be patient with the new administration as it works through the ongoing transition but I know that the pundits and press hang on every word uttered by the administration, especially POTUS. Be patient.
Acting president orders extra vigilance on U.S. policy uncertainty | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Oh Seok-min · January 30, 2025
SEOUL, Jan. 30 (Yonhap) -- Acting President Choi Sang-mok called for staying vigilant and maintaining the enhanced market monitoring Thursday amid growing uncertainties stemming from monetary and external economic policies by the Donald Trump administration.
Choi made the remarks during a macroeconomic meeting meant to assess new policies by the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve's rate-setting meeting Wednesday (local time), where it kept the benchmark interest rate unchanged following three consecutive rate cuts.
"External uncertainties remain high on the new U.S. government's policy and external policy measures. Each agency needs to remain vigilant and maintain a joint round-the-clock monitoring system of the financial and foreign exchange markets," Choi said.
"We will hold an investor relations session next month to actively explain our solid economic fundamentals and to hold meetings with global credit rating agencies so as to maintain the sovereign credit rating in a stable manner," he added.
Acting President Choi Sang-mok (L) speaks during a macroeconomic meeting in Seoul on Jan. 30, 2025. (Yonhap)
Bank of Korea Gov. Rhee Chang-yong and the chiefs of the Financial Services Commission and the Financial Supervisory Service attended the meeting and shared the need to closely monitor the market given recent volatilities in the U.S. and major economies.
The stock and foreign exchange markets remained closed on the final day of the extended six-day Lunar New Year holiday Thursday.
Despite Trump's call for lower policy rates, Fed Chair Jerome Powell told reporters after the latest decision that it does not "need to be in a hurry" to adjust its policy stance, pointing to the resilient economy.
The Fed's latest rate decision put the gap between the key rates of South Korea and the United States at up to 1.5 percentage points.
Earlier this month, the Bank of Korea (BOK) kept its benchmark interest rate frozen, following the back-to-back rate cuts, in the wake of the weak local currency amid political chaos and uncertainties stemming from the new Trump administration.
All of its six board members voiced a need to keep open the possibility of further rate reductions in the next three months to prop up the economy.
In this EPA file photo, U.S. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell responds to a question from the news media during a press conference at the Federal Reserve on Dec. 18, 2024. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)
graceoh@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Oh Seok-min · January 30, 2025
6. Samsung mobile phone found among belongings of N. Korean soldier killed by Ukrainian forces
Samsung mobile phone found among belongings of N. Korean soldier killed by Ukrainian forces | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Eun-jung · January 30, 2025
SEOUL, Jan. 30 (Yonhap) -- A Samsung cellphone was found among the belongings of a North Korean soldier who was killed by Ukrainian forces while fighting alongside Russian troops, according to the Ukrainian military.
Ukraine's Special Operations Forces (SSO) said in a Facebook post on Tuesday (local time) that they conducted a raid in Russia's western front-line region of Kursk, killing two North Korean soldiers.
Photos released by the SSO show that the captured items included a mobile phone that appears to be a Samsung 2G model based on its exterior design.
This photo posted on the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces' Facebook account on Jan. 28, 2025, shows the belongings of a North Korean soldier. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)
Other items included printed materials with Ukrainian phrases transliterated into Korean, such as "Drop your weapons" and "Take off your clothes," seemingly intended for use when capturing Ukrainian soldiers.
A passport from the Republic of Buryatia, a federal subject of Russia, was also discovered, along with a letter containing a New Year's message from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to deployed soldiers.
In the letter, Kim praised the soldiers for their efforts, saying, "Please never forget, even for a moment, that I am constantly wishing and praying for all of you to return safely and in good health."
During the raid, Ukrainian soldiers also captured military assets, including protective gear, military equipment, a DL-5 rangefinder, a 1PN139-1 thermal imaging sight, and an AK-12 assault rifle equipped with a 1P87 sight, according to the SSO.
A New Year's message from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is seen in this photo posted on the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces' Facebook account on Jan. 28, 2025. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)
ejkim@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Eun-jung · January 30, 2025
7. Navy's new Seahawk helicopters to start to arrive in S. Korea next month
Navy's new Seahawk helicopters to start to arrive in S. Korea next month | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · January 30, 2025
By Chae Yun-hwan
SEOUL, Jan. 30 (Yonhap) -- The Navy's new MH-60R Seahawk helicopters will begin to arrive in South Korea next month, officials said Thursday, as part of efforts to better counter threats posed by North Korean submarines.
In 2020, defense authorities approved a 960 billion-won (US$667.6 million) project to purchase 12 Seahawks from U.S. defense giant Lockheed Martin Corp. to strengthen the Navy's anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare capabilities.
Of the 12 helicopters to be introduced, the first chopper is set to arrive in the country in February, with the rest expected to be delivered in phases by the end of the year, an official at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said.
The Seahawks are expected to enter operations next year after undergoing field tests and other pre-deployment procedures, according to a Navy official.
This July 15, 2022, file photo, provided by the Navy, shows an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)
Equipped with AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, Mark 54 lightweight torpedoes, and a dipping sonar system, the Seahawks will work alongside the Navy's P-8A maritime patrol aircraft, reinforcing surveillance and defense against North Korean submarine threats.
The Seahawks are also expected to enhance the Navy's operational capabilities as they offer longer flight endurance compared with the Lynx and AW159 Wildcat choppers currently in service, according to DAPA.
North Korea is estimated to be operating a fleet of some 70 submarines, many of which are small and older models, according to South Korean officials.
Pyongyang has recently focused on advancing its submarine capabilities, unveiling what it claimed to be a tactical nuclear attack submarine in 2023.
yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · January 30, 2025
8. Trump plans to disarm North Korea, but Kim wants more nuclear weapons
These are the two points I will continue to emphasize:
This is the critical Strategic Assumption: North Korea will never negotiate away its nuclear capabilities as long as the Kim family regime remains in power. However, denuclearization must remain the long term goal, and the US cannot fall victim to the regime’s political warfare strategy by entering into arms control negotiations or recognizing the north as a nuclear state.
If I could only give 12 words to the Trump administration it would be these: Unification first, then denuclearization; the path to unification is through human rights.
Trump plans to disarm North Korea, but Kim wants more nuclear weapons
Newsweek · by Micah McCartney · January 29, 2025
The "complete denuclearization of North Korea" remains a priority for President Donald Trump, a White House official says, as Kim Jong Un renews his pledge to expand the country's atomic arsenal.
Newsweek reached out to the North Korean embassy in China and the U.S. Department of Defense with emailed requests for comment.
Why It Matters
North Korea's United Nations-sanctioned nuclear weapons program remains a major source of tension with South Korea. During Trump's first term, he met with Kim Jong Un three times in a bid to work toward North Korea's denuclearization, but the talks failed to produce any significant breakthroughs.
The country has since expanded both its ballistic and nuclear capabilities, which it maintains are necessary to deter U.S. and allied aggression. U.S. and South Korean leaders have warned any nuclear attack by Pyongyang would mean the end of the Kim regime.
What To Know
The state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on Wednesday released photos of Kim leading an undated inspection of North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Institute and a "nuclear-material production base."
During his visit, Kim said 2025 will be a watershed year for strengthening his nuclear forces in line with the five-year military development plan adopted in 2021.
The 40-year-old leader said all other priorities must be made subordinate to raising national prestige and interest, calling for "epochal successes" in producing weapons-grade nuclear material and "strengthening the nuclear shield of the country," KCNA cited him as saying.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is seen during his recent inspection of a 'nuclear-material production base' and North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Institute. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is seen during his recent inspection of a 'nuclear-material production base' and North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Institute. Korean Central News Agency
In the new images, Kim and accompanying officials can be seen walking between rows of centrifuges in a hall.
The site matches photos of a newly constructed addition to the nuclear enrichment plant at the Yongbyon, some 60 miles north of the capital, according to an analysis by researchers Sam Lair and Michael Duitsman of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.
Kim's nuclear ambitions are expected to remain a foreign policy challenge for the second Trump White House.
"President Trump will pursue the complete denuclearization of North Korea, just as he did in his first term," National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes told South Korea's Yonhap News Agency Tuesday. "President Trump had a good relationship with Kim Jong Un, and his mix of toughness and diplomacy led to the first-ever leader-level commitment to complete denuclearization."
The Federation of American Scientists has estimated that North Korea has developed around 50 nuclear warheads since carrying out its first nuclear test in 2006.
What People Are Saying
Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told Newsweek:
"Since the last administration, there has been a significant expansion in North Korea's missile capabilities, and I believe they have continued to build up their stocks of fissile material to build more nuclear weapons.
"The most salient missile development in the [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] has likely been the Hwasong-18 solid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missile, which is a more responsible and flexible system than the primarily liquid-fueled systems the DPRK fielded during the first Trump administration."
Yang Moo-jin, president of Seoul's University of North Korean Studies, told Agence France-Presse: "Trump is extending overtures for dialogue with Kim to encourage discussions from a political perspective. On the other hand, Washington's working-level officials are now making clear that they focused on negotiating with the ultimate goal of achieving complete denuclearisation."
What's Next?
Trump has said he would reach out to Kim again.
"I got along with him. He's not a religious zealot. He happens to be a smart guy," the president said In a Fox News interview last week.
Update 1/29/24, 1 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information and a comment from Sam Lair.
Newsweek · by Micah McCartney · January 29, 2025
9. Kim Jong-un seeks negotiating leverage over Trump with new nuclear demands: analysts
Both Kim and POTUS are trying to set conditions. Beware of Kim's blackmail diplomacy and political warfare strategy.
Kim Jong-un seeks negotiating leverage over Trump with new nuclear demands: analysts
Experts say Kim’s public demand for more weapons-grade nuclear material is a calculated move to take denuclearisation off the table
Park Chan-kyong
Published: 12:00pm, 30 Jan 2025
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s latest public push to expand his country’s nuclear arsenal is part of a calculated move to pressure Washington into accepting arms reduction talks instead of full denuclearisation, analysts say.
During a visit on Wednesday to what state media described as a fissile material production base and a nuclear weapons institute, Kim called for “exceeding the plan for producing weapons-grade nuclear materials and strengthening the country’s nuclear shield”.
He argued that a “long-term confrontation with the most vicious and hostile countries is inevitable”, called a robust stockpile essential for containing their enemies and described Pyongyang’s nuclear forces as “growing stronger by the day.”
“Guaranteeing peace and security by dint of strength is our mode of struggle and option,” Kim was quoted as saying by the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
Ukraine releases video of captured North Korean soldiers, says ready for prisoner swap
Kim’s demand came just days after US President Donald Trump expressed his willingness to re-engage with Kim, referring to North Korea as a “nuclear power” – a departure from Washington’s long-standing policy of refusing to recognise Pyongyang’s nuclear status, which analysts perceived as a potential shift in US doctrine.
In response to the speculation, US National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes issued a statement on Tuesday saying, “President Trump will pursue the complete denuclearisation of North Korea, just as he did in his first term”.
“President Trump had a good relationship with Kim Jong-un, and his mix of toughness and diplomacy led to the first-ever leader-level commitment to complete denuclearisation,” Hughes added.
Hong Min, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification, noted that images from Wednesday’s visit suggest Kim may have been inspecting enrichment facilities in Yongbyon or an unidentified location.
“The timing of this visit appears to be deliberate, aligning with President Trump’s recent overtures,” Hong told This Week in Asia. “It’s not a rejection of Trump’s message, but rather a way to set boundaries for any potential negotiations.”
Professor Park Won-gon of Ewha Womans University interpreted Kim’s statements as a clear indication that he would not dismantle North Korea’s nuclear facilities, even if diplomacy were to resume under a second Trump administration.
“He is making it clear that future negotiations would be about arms reduction, not complete denuclearisation,” Park said.
Similarly, Professor Lim Eul-chul of Kyungnam University’s Institute for Far Eastern Studies stated that Pyongyang remains steadfast in its position that nuclear development will continue unless Washington abandons its so-called “hostile” policies.
A picture released by the North Korean state news agency (KCNA) on Wednesday shows Kim Jong-un visiting a facility for the production of nuclear material at an undisclosed location. Photo: DPA
“This is a message pressuring President Trump toward nuclear disarmament discussions – a ‘small deal’ – while ensuring North Korea retains its nuclear arsenal,” Lim said.
In a rare public acknowledgement of internal corruption, KCNA also reported Kim’s condemnation of “bribery” and illicit drinking sessions among party officials, warning that such abuses are “crimes that cannot be condoned.”
Kim reportedly convened a party secretariat meeting on Monday to address these issues after discovering serious breaches of discipline in Onchon County near Pyongyang and Usi County in Jagang Province.
Inspection results revealed that about 40 local officials in Onchon had been “illicitly entertained” in clear violation of party rules, while agricultural inspectors in Usi County were found guilty of abusing their authority by taking bribes, inflicting hardships on residents and misappropriating public property.
Delivering a speech at the meeting, Kim described such acts as “a mega crime which can never be pardoned” and a “grave violation of party discipline and moral and cultural order.”
“It is useful for and beneficial to the revolution to boldly recognise such a grave deviation in the party and to deal with it as an especially serious case in time,” he was quoted as saying by KCNA.
As a result, the Central Committee’s Secretariat decided to dissolve the party committee of Onchon County and the agricultural inspection body of Usi County.
The crackdown on corruption comes as North Korea pursues provincial development and improved living conditions, marking the 80th anniversary of the ruling Workers’ Party’s founding.
Park Chan-kyong
FOLLOW
Park Chan-kyong is a journalist covering South Korean affairs for the South China Morning Post. He previously worked at the Agence France-Presse's Seoul bureau for 35 years. He studied political science at Korea University and economics at the Yonsei University Graduate School.
10. [Expert Diagnosis] ① Klingner “Secretary Rubio will attempt to communicate with North Korea”
Bruce Klingner covers a lot of ground.
This is a Google translation of an RFA report.
[Expert Diagnosis] ① Klingner “Secretary Rubio will attempt to communicate with North Korea”
https://www.rfa.org/korean/news_indepth/trump-2-0-north-korea-policy-denuclearization-arms-control-bruce-klingner-01292025145603.html
WASHINGTON-Seo Hye-jun seoh@rfa.org
2025.01.29
On November 4th of last year, then-US presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks with then-Florida Senator and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a campaign rally at the JS Dotton Arena in North Carolina.
/AP
00:00 / 00:00
Anchor : As U.S. President Donald Trump referred to North Korea as a “ nuclear state ” from the first day of his inauguration and expressed his intention to meet again by saying , “ I will contact General Secretary Kim Jong-un ,” Bruce Klingner, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a Korean Peninsula expert, predicted that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will play an important role in bringing North Korea to the negotiating table . He also predicted that U.S.-North Korea negotiations may not be easy given the close relationship between North Korea and Russia and the U.S.’s limited leverage .
Reporter Seo Hye-jun met with Senior Researcher Klingner, who has analyzed issues in Asia, including the Korean Peninsula, for 20 years at the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, to hear about the direction of the Trump administration's North Korea policy and the possibility of a North Korea-US summit .
“ North Korea has grown bigger than 8 years ago … The need for US-North Korea negotiations has also decreased ”
[ Reporter ] Senior Researcher Bruce Klingner , thank you for joining us today. First , US President Donald Trump recently referred to North Korea as a “ nuclear state . ” How do you interpret this statement ?
Bruce Klingner, Senior Fellow for Northeast Asia at the Heritage Foundation. / Heritage Foundation
[ Bruce Klingner ] I don’t know yet what the U.S. policy toward North Korea is. There hasn’t been an Indo - Pacific strategy review or a policy review . I think that statements about sensitive issues like North Korea and Taiwan tend to be over-interpreted or even misunderstood . People who don’t deal with these issues on an ongoing basis may not fully understand the implications of certain statements . We already know that North Korea has nuclear weapons . So assessing that North Korea has nuclear weapons and formally recognizing that they are a “ nuclear state ” are two different things . People who have been dealing with the Korean Peninsula for a long time understand these nuances , but the president may not . Similarly , Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has referred to North Korea as a “ nuclear state , ” which may seem like a major shift in policy , but it may simply be a failure to recognize the nuances of the terminology .
[ Reporter ] America's ultimate goal is ' denuclearization , ' but could this be seen as a change in policy ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] We don’t know for sure, but if they give up their ultimate goal of denuclearization , it could have serious implications . Some might argue that North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons . And some have thought that since the 1994 Agreed Framework . But the implications of giving up denuclearization are far from trivial . Complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement (CVID) is not just a U.S. goal; it is required by 11 U.N. Security Council resolutions . It is also a policy expressed in U.S. legislation and an indirect goal of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) .
Therefore, if denuclearization is excluded from the goal, it will not only reverse a policy that has been maintained for decades , but will also directly contradict UN resolutions, US law , and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty . Furthermore , ignoring UN resolutions will weaken the legal basis for various sanctions that have been used not only to punish North Korea for its violations but also to bring North Korea to the negotiating table . If the US actually gives up on denuclearization , other countries will also wonder, “ Why should we do it when even the US does not properly enforce sanctions ?” This is likely to weaken the international sanctions regime against North Korea .
[ Reporter ] President Trump expressed his intention to meet again, saying, “ I will contact General Secretary Kim . ” Do you think there is room for negotiation and dialogue between the US and North Korea ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] It’s unclear whether President Trump was simply emphasizing his friendship, but the situation is very different now than it was eight years ago when he first took office . In that time, North Korea has made significant advances in its military and nuclear missile capabilities . Any agreement would therefore be much more costly , and it would be less likely for General Secretary Kim to give up his advanced nuclear and missile programs easily . They may feel less pressure to negotiate than they did at the Singapore summit , because they are currently receiving massive aid from Russia with almost no conditions . Last August , as the U.S. presidential election was approaching , North Korea said , “ It doesn’t matter who wins . The U.S. is pursuing an inherently hostile policy , and we are not willing to talk unless they stop their military exercises and their rotational deployment of strategic assets . ” Trump has a history of unilaterally accepting these demands in the past and getting no real concessions from North Korea . Therefore, General Secretary Kim is likely to be watching to see whether President Trump will take such action again , and only then consider negotiations in some form .
U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un leave the signing ceremony for a joint statement at the Capella Hotel on Sentosa Island in Singapore on June 12, 2018. /Yonhap News
“ Rubio expected to play a key role in the coordination process … The final decision is Trump’s ”
[ Reporter ] Now, it is time for President Trump to take some meaningful action against North Korea, but I am not sure if he will have any leverage to use in the US-North Korea negotiations . In the end , wouldn’t it be possible for the situation to work in North Korea’s favor ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] My concern is that if North Korea does come out with a “ peace declaration ” or a “ peace treaty , ” that could be tied to what President Trump has said about “ ending the forever wars . ” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has talked about reducing the risk of accidental clashes between the two Koreas , and Defense Secretary Hegseth has said that we’re going to end the war responsibly . But I don’t know if that’s a signal that the United States is prepared to accept a peace declaration or a peace treaty .
If North Korea says to (President Trump ), “ You can do what no president has done . You can end 70 years of war . You can win the Nobel Peace Prize . It’s easy to sign a document , ” then they may try to sign a “ peace declaration ” or treaty without reducing their threats to South Korea, the United States, and Japan . This could have serious consequences , because it could appear to lay the groundwork for eliminating or reducing military forces in South Korea and Japan . In particular, the massive economic and military support that Russia is currently providing to North Korea further weakens the leverage that the United States has to exert pressure on North Korea . If General Secretary Kim does not feel any real pressure , it is very likely that the negotiations will be more expensive or that negotiations will be avoided altogether .
[ Reporter ] During the first Trump administration, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former National Security Advisor John Bolton opposed the meeting with General Secretary Kim . If the US-North Korea summit is resumed during the second Trump administration , how do you think Secretary of State Rubio, who has shown a hawkish stance toward North Korea, will coordinate it ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] He has a long history of taking a hard line against countries that he sees as a threat to the United States. A second Trump administration will likely see a more top - down approach to policymaking , with less internal resistance or delay . In fact , we have seen disciplinary action taken against some staffers who have been deemed not to be carrying out the president’s directives since the first week of the administration’s inauguration . Secretary Rubio will play a critical role in coordinating a range of diplomatic and military efforts, including engaging with North Korea , working with allies and partners in the Indo - Pacific and Europe to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table , and enforcing sanctions and strengthening military response . But when it comes down to it , he’s going to follow and execute the president’s directives just like anyone else .
[ Reporter ] Do you think North Korea will be one of the top priorities for the Trump administration?
[ Bruce Klingner ] North Korea, Ukraine , Russia could certainly be diplomatic priorities . But any president , including President Trump , would want to focus on the economy and domestic issues . If you look at the remarks made by Secretary of State Rubio and Secretary of Defense Hegseth in the first week of the Trump administration , they sent a message that they are going to stand up to our allies . That is very encouraging at a time when many people are concerned about troop drawdowns or weakening of allies . North Korea will certainly be seeking international attention, and given its involvement in the Ukraine - Russia war, it will be a priority , but Trump is likely to focus on bigger issues , like China, and domestic issues . In other words , he is not going to be flying straight to Pyongyang for North Korea .
Senior researcher Bruce Klingner during an interview with Radio Free Asia on the 28th. /RFA Photo
“ North Korean Human Rights May Be Pushed Back Again ”
[ Reporter ] How do you expect the Trump administration to deal with the North Korean human rights issue ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] Human rights issues often take a backseat to security issues. In particular, human rights issues in North Korea are an important issue in U.S.-North Korea relations , but in negotiations with North Korea, more urgent and substantive issues such as the nuclear issue and security issues have often taken precedence . The position of special envoy for North Korean human rights has often been vacant , and it was vacant for four years during the first term of the Trump administration . Secretary Rubio has been very active in advocating for human rights in North Korea . However, the problem is that if President Trump pursues a fast and strong path to negotiations with North Korea , advocating for human rights issues could actually become an obstacle to negotiations . In other words , although Secretary Rubio has long advocated for human rights in North Korea , if this hinders progress in nuclear negotiations, etc. , human rights issues could eventually be relegated to a backseat .
“North Korea expected to demand ‘nuclear disarmament’ in response to Trump’s mention of ‘nuclear state’”
Trump's closest aide: "Considering suspending US-ROK military exercises"
[ Reporter ] President Trump has mentioned North Korea frequently in his first week in office . What are the next steps he can take regarding the North Korea issue ?
[ Bruce Klingner ] It is very important that we review our policy. And the most important thing that we can do as a result of that review is to provide strong assurances that the United States will support and defend South Korea and Japan and that we will fulfill our treaty obligations to our allies . We need to make it clear to our allies and our enemies that we will be there for them and that we will fulfill our treaty obligations if attacked . And we need to reaffirm our resolve , maintain our capabilities , and if necessary, continue to improve them . But if we give the impression that we are reducing our military presence for any reason , that weakens our deterrence and undermines the trust of all our allies, not just South Korea and Japan . In the past, we rushed to hold the US-North Korea summit when we were not prepared , so I think it would be better to have the US-North Korea summit after we have made some real progress . And I think we need to use the US-North Korea summit as leverage to make progress on the North Korea issue .
[ Reporter ] Yes , thank you for your words . [ Expert Diagnosis ] This was a conversation with Bruce Klingner, Senior Researcher at the Heritage Foundation . This is Seo Hye-jun from RFA's Radio Free Asia .
Editor Noh Jeong-min, Web Editor Lee Gyeong-ha
11. The myth of human wave attacks obscures what North Korea is learning in Ukraine
Excerpts:
Major General Vadym Skybytskyi, deputy chief of Ukraine’s HUR military intelligence organization, said initial North Korean units “advanced in large groups across snowy fields. The next lot won’t do that. They are learning new tactics and how to fight in a drone environment.”
North Korean generals and commanders are likely studying how DPRK-made weaponry, such as Koksan howitzers, perform on the battlefield against Ukrainian forces.
Kim Jong Un’s decision to send over 10,000 troops to support Russia’s war in Ukraine appears to have been a calculated move to enhance military capabilities. Rather than mindless “human waves” fighting without strategy or reason, North Korean forces are gaining combat experience that could be applied to future conflicts on the Korean Peninsula.
Moreover, the recent news that it was Kim, not Putin, who came up with the idea of sending DPRK troops to help Russia suggests that there are long-term objectives at play for the North Korean regime. Tactical experience in modern warfare would be a decisive advantage for the North Korean side if military conflict against the South ever breaks out again on the peninsula.
The myth of human wave attacks obscures what North Korea is learning in Ukraine
Stereotypes about communist tactics risk minimizing how DPRK troops are adjusting to modern combat in Kursk
https://www.nknews.org/2025/01/the-myth-of-human-wave-attacks-obscures-what-north-korea-is-learning-in-ukraine/
Benjamin R. Young January 30, 2025
North Korean troops march in a military parade in Pyongyang in Feb. 2023. | Image: Rodong Sinmun
Editor’s note: The following article is an opinion piece by Benjamin R. Young, a researcher and analyst of North Korea and U.S.-East Asia relations. Views expressed in opinion articles are exclusively the author’s own and do not represent those of NK News.
When describing North Korean attacks in Kursk in late December, White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby referred to their use of “human wave tactics” to launch “massed dismounted assaults” on Ukrainian forces. He also called the troops “highly indoctrinated” and dismissed them as fanatical zealots who learn little from combat.
Ukraine has similarly insisted that the DPRK troops are “cannon fodder” for Russia’s invasion and emphasized their reliance on overwhelming numbers to be effective.
But while these descriptions are striking, they risk creating an overly simplistic picture of North Korea’s military, regurgitating a decades-old stereotype about Asian communist military tactics.
In particular, this language suggests the DPRK troops deployed are unsophisticated and incapable of adapting, when in fact they are learning valuable lessons that have relevance far beyond the battlefields of Ukraine.
Young North Koreans line up to receive Russian uniforms last October before being sent off to the battlefield, as part of joint DPRK-Russian efforts to obfuscate Pyongyang’s participation in the war | Image: Ukraine Ministry of Information and Culture Center for Strategic Communications (Oct. 19, 2024)
ORIGINS OF A STEREOTYPE
This “human wave” label has been used in the past to paint adversarial forces, in particular from Asia, as faceless hordes. Prominent examples include Chinese soldiers during the Korean War and communist forces during the Vietnam War.
This is a stereotype that is not only racist but also unhelpful in shaping effective U.S. military strategy. It represents the adversary as inherently barbaric and suicidal. Such characterizations risk underestimating adversaries and neglecting how battlefield experiences inform their evolving tactics and strategies.
In global military history, armies have often compensated for their lack of firepower and training with their sheer number of highly committed soldiers. Massed frontal assaults staged in rapid fashion were meant to constantly pressure and then overwhelm the enemy, even if it held technological superiority.
British and French mass assaults at the Battle of Somme during World War I could be described as “human wave” attacks. So contrary to Western stereotypes, “human wave” attacks were not a uniquely perverse communist way of fighting war.
It was during the Korean War, when U.S military leadership began using “human wave” to describe Chinese military tactics, that the term gained popularity.
In 1951, General Douglas MacArthur explained, “The enemy’s human wave tactics definitely failed him as our own forces become seasoned to this form of warfare; his tactics of infiltration are but contributing to his piecemeal losses, and he is showing less stamina than our own troops under rigors of climate, terrain and battle.”
In reality, Chinese massed attacks during the Korean War were what the People’s Liberation Army officially called “short attacks.” The Chinese forces attacked narrow enemy positions with light infantry formations to break through the front lines on the battlefield.
North Korean troops march in a military parade in Pyongyang in Oct. 2020. | Image: Rodong Sinmun
Likewise, the North Koreans fighting for Russia are not fodder for “human wave” attacks. In fact, the DPRK troops in Kursk are often better equipped and better trained than their Russian comrades. Many of them are special operations forces, presumably from the Storm Corps.
North Korean forces struggled at first, especially to adjust to Ukrainian drone attacks. One recently captured DPRK soldier told his Ukrainian interrogators that he thought he was being sent to Russia for a training exercise, not active combat.
But if initial North Korean units were not given such critical information about battlefield conditions, that appears to be changing now. The country’s soldiers appear to be quickly adapting to 21st century warfare and becoming formidable foes on the battlefield.
For instance, in an effort to minimize exposure to drone attacks, North Korean combat units are now smaller and thus stealthier. As a Ukrainian special forces commander recently said, “They are trying to get smarter, they’re not trying to be at one point like a herd of sheep.
STRATEGIC BLINDERS
When experts and governments dismiss Russian and North Korean forces with derogatory labels like “cannon fodder” or “meat,” it suggests that Western leadership has failed to internalize key lessons from Cold War-era military conflicts. Such terms portray their forces as stagnant and non-adaptive — and this undermines the strategic thinking of Western forces.
These labels also imply the enemy is incapable of learning and that Moscow and Pyongyang are just sacrificing troops to no end. However, Russia’s recent battlefield gains demonstrate that, although attritional warfare is undeniably brutal, it can ultimately achieve strategic objectives.
Handwritten notes recovered from a fallen North Korean soldier suggest that these troops are closely studying modern warfare tactics, with a particular focus on mastering drone operations.
Major General Vadym Skybytskyi, deputy chief of Ukraine’s HUR military intelligence organization, said initial North Korean units “advanced in large groups across snowy fields. The next lot won’t do that. They are learning new tactics and how to fight in a drone environment.”
North Korean generals and commanders are likely studying how DPRK-made weaponry, such as Koksan howitzers, perform on the battlefield against Ukrainian forces.
Kim Jong Un’s decision to send over 10,000 troops to support Russia’s war in Ukraine appears to have been a calculated move to enhance military capabilities. Rather than mindless “human waves” fighting without strategy or reason, North Korean forces are gaining combat experience that could be applied to future conflicts on the Korean Peninsula.
Moreover, the recent news that it was Kim, not Putin, who came up with the idea of sending DPRK troops to help Russia suggests that there are long-term objectives at play for the North Korean regime. Tactical experience in modern warfare would be a decisive advantage for the North Korean side if military conflict against the South ever breaks out again on the peninsula.
About the Author
Benjamin R. Young
Benjamin R. Young, Ph.D. has taught at Virginia Commonwealth University, Dakota State University and the U.S. Naval War College. He is currently a Stanton Foundation Nuclear Security Fellow at the RAND Corporation. He is the author of the book "Guns, Guerillas, and the Great Leader: North Korea and the Third World" (Stanford University Press, 2021).
12.
12. North Korean Human Rights Groups Also in 'Confusion' Over US Government Subsidies
The State Department and NED (National Endowment for Democracy) need to provide information on the groups they are supporting with taxpayer funds (directly from State or indirectly through NED). Some groups may not be sufficiently aligned with US interests.
This is a Google translation of an RFA report.
North Korean Human Rights Groups Also in 'Confusion' Over US Government Subsidies
https://www.rfa.org/korean/in_focus/human_rights_defector/federal-grants-freeze-north-korea-organizations-01292025151713.html
WASHINGTON-Jamin Anderson andersonj@rfa.org
2025.01.29
US President Donald Trump signs a series of executive orders after his inauguration on the 20th.
/Reuters
00:00 /03:31
Anchor : Some North Korean human rights groups are in turmoil following the White House's decision to suspend government subsidies and the subsequent decision to withdraw them . Reporter Jamin Anderson reports .
President Trump signed an executive order on the 20th to temporarily suspend federal grants for foreign aid .
Afterwards, the White House notified each government agency on the 27th that it would temporarily suspend disbursement of federal grants and loans starting at 5:00 PM on the 28th .
As a result, North Korean human rights groups that had been receiving grants from the Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the State Department's Bureau of Democracy , Human Rights , and Labor (DRL) are facing an immediate operational crisis .
“ We received notification from the State Department last Saturday (the 25th ) , ” a North Korean human rights group official who requested anonymity told Radio Free Asia (RFA) on the 28th . “ Immediately, subsidy payments were suspended for three months , and we can no longer use any subsidies we had previously received . ”
“ We are unable to pay the salaries of contracted employees with State Department funds , so unpaid furloughs or contract terminations are inevitable ,” he said .
In particular, for organizations that have difficulty raising private funds, it is unclear whether they will even be able to continue operating.
“ The 90- day period of freezing funds is too long, considering the amount of money needed to cover staff salaries and office rent , and many organizations will not be able to sustain it , ” the official said .
So the group filed an application with the State Department on the 28th requesting a waiver from the executive order .
But officials said they plan to launch a campaign to secure private donations in the meantime, given the uncertainty over how long the review will take.
The situation is no different for other groups.
Sean Kang, co-founder of North Korea Human Rights Watch (NKHRW), an Ohio-based North Korea human rights group, expressed concern that “ this suspension of aid payments will seriously disrupt mid- to long-term planned projects with North Korea . ”
He told RFA on the 28th , “ For security reasons, I cannot reveal the specifics of the business , but if the support is completely canceled, all the efforts we have made so far will be in vain and will result in even greater waste . ”
Ji Cheol-ho, head of the external cooperation team at the South Korean North Korean human rights group NAUH, told RFA on the same day, “There are concerns that the second Trump administration is moving toward diplomatic recognition of North Korea’s nuclear weapons , and that cutting off the budget for improving human rights in North Korea may be one of the means to bring North Korea to the negotiating table . ”
He pointed out that “ there is a high possibility that North Korean human rights activities will be hindered , and it will also be difficult for various groups to speak out together . ”
On the 20th, US President Trump announced an executive order suspending overseas development assistance for 90 days. / White House website capture
[North UPR Interview] ③ Former Ambassador for Human Rights Lee Shin-hwa: “We need to ask, ‘Do North Korean families know about the Russian deployment of troops?’”
North Korean human rights groups send a letter to Ukraine … “ We must stop forcibly repatriating North Korean prisoners of war ”
Bush Center proposes ‘ Comprehensive reorganization of North Korea policy centered on human rights ’
This measure is also expected to have a negative impact on the flow of external information into North Korea.
This is because there are concerns that North Korean media outlets supported by the U.S. government, such as the United Media Group (UMG), may experience disruption in their operations, which could limit North Korean residents' access to information .
“Such problems can arise if we receive funding from a specific country or through a single channel,” said a North Korean human rights group official who requested anonymity, urging attention, saying , “ We need more investors and sponsors to participate . ”
On the morning of the 29th , the State Department announced in a press release that foreign aid grants for purposes such as “ ensuring the safety of American personnel ” and “ repatriation of illegal immigrants ” would be exempt from the freeze .
However, it appears that this does not apply to support for North Korean human rights groups.
As of the afternoon of the 29th , these groups had not received any further notice regarding the possibility of exemption .
RFA has reached out to the State Department and NED for specifics on the funding for North Korean human rights groups and what the next steps will be, but has not yet received a response .
The White House announced late on the 29th that it was lifting the freeze on federal grant payments .
Earlier on the 28th , the Washington D.C. federal court ruled to temporarily suspend the payment of subsidies until the 3rd of next month .
However, the situation is still confusing, as some interpret that this does not affect subsidy freezes taken by each department , including the State Department, in accordance with White House guidelines .
Editor Park Jeong-woo, Web Editor Lee Gyeong-ha
13. ‘Big Problem for Kim’: DPRK Troops Suffer Heavy Losses From Ukrainian Drones
‘Big Problem for Kim’: DPRK Troops Suffer Heavy Losses From Ukrainian Drones
The Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation reports that North Korean troops in Kursk have temporarily withdrawn to review their mistakes with their and Russian commanders.
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/46254?utm
by Kyiv Post | January 29, 2025, 3:41 pm
This picture taken on February 8, 2023 and released from North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on February 10, 2023 shows North Korean soldiers taking part in a military parade celebrating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Army at Kim Il Sung Square in Pyongyang. (Photo by KCNA VIA KNS / AFP)
The North Korean (DPRK) troops fighting in Russia’s Kursk region have failed to counter Ukrainian drones and artillery, suffering significant losses, according to Andrey Kovalenko, head of the Center for Countering Disinformation under Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council.
Kovalenko reported on Telegram that DPRK soldiers are now conducting “work on mistakes” with Russian commanders and their own officers.
“It is too early to say they won’t continue participating actively in the war. They are still planned to be involved,” he wrote.
He also highlighted a major concern for North Korean leader Kim Jong Un: “A big problem for Kim is that North Koreans were captured, and in addition, there is clear evidence documenting the bodies of dead Koreans.”
According to Kovalenko, Russia was initially supposed to ensure maximum secrecy regarding DPRK troops’ involvement but has failed to do so.
DPRK troops have pulled back from the frontline in Russia’s Kursk region after suffering heavy casualties, according to a Ukrainian special forces commander with the call sign “Puls,” who spoke to Sky News.
Puls, who leads Ukraine’s 1st Combat Divers Battalion, observed the shift about two weeks ago. “The Russians are standing, working everywhere along the frontline, but no Koreans,” he said, suggesting they might be regrouping, tending to wounds, or awaiting reinforcements.
Other Topics of Interest
Ukraine is facing new uncertainty as the US freezes nearly all new foreign aid, affecting critical civilian programs that support reconstruction, veterans, education, and infrastructure.
He believes, based on intercepted Russian communications, that the withdrawal is temporary. “They’re still present, training or waiting for reinforcements. Something is happening – they’ll be back soon,” he said.
Pyonyang’s troops, described as highly disciplined and determined - “completely brainwashed,” in Puls’s view - have faced severe losses. British defense intelligence estimated 4,000 casualties had been suffered by mid-January, with a quarter of that figure killed in action, significantly weakening their contribution to support Russia’s offensive.
The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) predicted that, at the current rate of attrition, North Korean forces could be wiped out by mid-April.
Ukraine’s top military commander, Oleksandr Syrsky, acknowledged their discipline but said they often advance in human waves through minefields without proper armored support. Reports highlight that DPRK troops struggle to coordinate with their Russian allies due to language barriers and are treated as being expendable by Moscow’s field commanders.
14. Seoul urges North Korea to resume separated family reunions as deaths near 100K
Watch the fim Ode to My Father to see the tragedy of family separation (but also the resilience of the Korean people).
Seoul urges North Korea to resume separated family reunions as deaths near 100K
New data shows over 70% of registered South Koreans have passed away without meeting family in North
https://www.nknews.org/2025/01/seoul-urges-north-korea-to-resume-separated-family-reunions-as-deaths-near-100k/
Jeongmin Kim January 30, 2025
A photo from 2007 inter-Korean reunion of separated families | Image: Ministry of Unification
South Korea’s unification minister called on North Korea to help arrange reunions of families separated by the division of the peninsula regardless of “political and security” tensions, emphasizing that many elderly family members have already passed away.
Kim Yung-ho’s speech to mark the Lunar New Year came as new data showed over 70% of South Koreans registered to meet North Korean family members have died as of late last year without reuniting with their relatives.
“The average age of separated family members is 83, and about 3,000 pass away each year without setting foot in their hometown,” the minister said, speaking at a memorial service held at Imjingak Pavilion in Paju, north of Seoul, on Wednesday.
“Even this simple and natural act of family members asking about each other’s well-being no longer has much time left,” he added.
ROK Unification Minister Kim Yung-ho at the memorial service | Image: Ministry of Unification (Jan. 29, 2025)
The memorial service is held every Lunar New Year for displaced people and separated families who cannot return to their hometowns, allowing them to perform traditional ancestral rites together.
To mark the 80th anniversary of Korea’s liberation from Japanese colonial rule this year, “we will place the separated families issue at the center above all other matters,” Kim continued in his speech.
“Family members confirming whether their relatives are alive, exchanging news and meeting each other is a matter of natural law and basic human rights,” he said, adding that it’s “a task that both South and North must prioritize above any political or security considerations.”
“We strongly urge North Korean authorities to show a more responsible attitude toward resolving the separated families issue before it’s too late, both before history and the Korean people.”
The prolonged freeze in inter-Korean relations means that no state-level family reunions have taken place in years. The last government-organized reunion was held in 2018, under the previous Moon administration.
The two Koreas remain technically at war after their 1950-53 Korean War ended in an armistice, leaving millions of families separated across the heavily fortified border.
A photo from 2007 inter-Korean reunion of separated families | Image: Ministry of Unification
1
2
3
SURVIVOR DEMOGRAPHICS
New data published by the unification ministry last week shows that 97,350 registered separated family members had died as of the end of 2024, with 2,959 passing away in the last year alone. The number of survivors has dropped to 36,941 people.
This means that out of 134,291 South Koreans who initially registered to find their families, about 72% have now died. The number of deceased separated family members will most likely surpass 100,000 in the second half of 2025, given current mortality rates in South Korea.
Of the surviving separated family members, 31% are over 90 years old, while those in their 80s and 70s account for 35% and 18.5%, respectively. This means around 85% are aged 70 or above.
Data also shows that most survivors are seeking to reunite with their immediate family: 39% hope to meet parents, spouses or children, while 40% hope to meet siblings. The rest are searching for extended family members.
Many of the survivors originally came from what are now North Korea’s western provinces, with 20% from Hwanghae Province and 16% from South and North Phyongan. Eleven percent are from North and South Hamgyong provinces.
Three percent are from Gyeonggi Province, and 1.5% are from Gangwon, the only province that spans across the two Koreas.
Edited by Bryan Betts
15. U.S. Congress completes formation of subcommittee on Korean Peninsula… Senator Ricketts and Representative Young Kim as key figures
This is a Google translation of a VOA report.
U.S. Congress completes formation of subcommittee on Korean Peninsula… Senator Ricketts and Representative Young Kim as key figures
2025.1.30
Lee Jo-eun
https://www.voakorea.com/a/7956055.html
The U.S. Congress has completed the formation of a subcommittee to handle Korean Peninsula issues. With Republican Senator Pete Ricketts and Representative Young Kim each as the chairmen of the subcommittees, there is analysis that there will be little change in Korean Peninsula policy. Reporter Lee Jo-eun reports.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman James Risch and Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.Y., announced the names of the chairmen and ranking members who will lead each subcommittee on the 28th.
The subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, which handles Korean Peninsula issues, will be chaired by Senator Pete Ricketts, and its ranking Democratic member will be Senator Chris Coons.
The members of the subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific are Republicans Dave McCormick, John Curtis, John Cornyn, and Mike Lee, and Democrats Jeff Merkley, Chris Van Hollen, and Senate Korea Caucus Co-Chair Brian Schatz.
“The US faces many threats from North Korea, China, and Russia”
“From China and Russia to Iran and North Korea, the United States faces many threats,” Risch said in a statement. “I look forward to the work these subcommittees will do to make our country and the world safer and more prosperous.”
[Chairman Rishi] “From China to Russia and Iran to North Korea, America faces many threats. I look forward to the work these subcommittees will do to make America and the world safer and more prosperous.”
“Each subcommittee will play a critical role in strengthening American leadership and advancing American foreign policy,” Senate Democratic leader Shaheen said in a statement. “I look forward to working together to achieve these goals.”
[Shaheen, Secretary of the Democratic Party] “Each of our subcommittees will play a critical role in strengthening America’s leadership and advancing US foreign policy, and I look forward to working alongside them to achieve these goals.”
With this, the composition of the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committee subcommittees in charge of Korean Peninsula issues in the 119th Congress has been completed.
Young Kim, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific
The House Foreign Affairs Committee will continue its tenure with Rep. Young Kim and Rep. Amy Bera as the chair and ranking Democrat on the subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, respectively, which deals with Korean Peninsula issues.
This subcommittee was called the Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific in the previous session, but in the new session it was renamed the Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, just like its Senate counterpart.
Representative Michael McCaul, who served as the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the previous session, has been appointed as Honorary Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the new Congress after his term as Chairman expires, and he will be active in the East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee.
In addition, the subcommittee on readiness in charge of U.S. forces in Korea, which is a subcommittee of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, will be chaired by Senator Dan Sullivan and Representative Jack Bergman, respectively.
In the new Congress, Republicans have taken majority control of both the Senate and the House, and the leadership of the subcommittee in charge of Korean Peninsula issues has also come under Republican control.
“No major changes in Korean Peninsula policy”
However, it is expected that this change in the Congressional landscape will not have much of an impact on policies related to the Korean Peninsula.
Robert King, former State Department special envoy for North Korean human rights issues
Robert King, a former State Department special envoy for North Korean human rights issues who served in Congress for 25 years, told VOA on the 29th that the Republican takeover of Congress “does not mean any major changes” when it comes to the Korean Peninsula issue.
The explanation is that both the Democratic and Republican parties in the House and Senate have very positive perceptions of South Korea and are also very concerned about North Korea.
[Recording: Former Special Envoy King] “I’m not sure that it means any major change. There's very positive feelings about South Korea in both Democratic and Republican parties in both the house and in the Senate. There is also a very strong level of concern about North Korea in both the House and and the Senate and in both Republican and the Democratic Party. So I’m not sure that it necessarily has any particular significance in terms of change in policy or anything like this.”
Former Special Envoy King therefore said he did not see the Republican takeover of Congress as having “any particular significance” in terms of changes in policy toward the Korean Peninsula.
He added that “there won’t be any radical moves” in the House because it is so narrowly divided between Republicans and Democrats, but that “there are enough centrist voices within both parties that the overall Congress will be balanced.”
[Recording: Former Special Envoy King] “The house is not going to be moving in very radical different directions because there’s enough and moderate voices on both parties that it, I think, will tend to have a somewhat moderating effect.”
In fact, when the possibility of reducing or withdrawing US troops stationed in Korea was discussed during the first Trump administration, both the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress pushed for legislative measures that could put the brakes on the president's decision to reduce US troops stationed in Korea, and there was a bipartisan voice on the issue of the alliance with Korea.
In particular, Republican Senator Dan Sullivan, who was appointed as the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Readiness in this Congress, was one of the lawmakers who led the legislative measure to limit the president's decision to reduce U.S. troops in Korea.
Support for strengthening trilateral cooperation among the US, South Korea and Japan is also expected to be bipartisan.
Senator Ricketts, who will lead the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, recently told VOA that in relation to the trilateral cooperation between the U.S., South Korea, and Japan, he specifically mentioned the threat from China, saying, “I want to make it clear that it is important not only for South Korea, but also for the United States to maintain this relationship.”
[Recording: Rep. Ricketts] “We want to make sure whichever party is in charge in South Korea, just like here in the United States, that we continue to make sure that we have a strong relationship with the United States, and that It’s important not only for South Korea but for the United States to continue that, especially given the rise of the People’s Republic of China and their very bellicose statements.”
Rep. Berra, the Democratic ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee, also said in a recent interview with VOA, “The U.S. Congress has always been strongly supportive of the U.S.-ROK relationship in a bipartisan manner,” adding, “I hope that we will continue to build not only the U.S.-ROK bilateral relationship, but also the trilateral relationship with Japan.”
This is Lee Jo-eun from VOA News.
16. South Korea’s perfect storm – and no one’s at the helm
From Professor Robertson's renamed Substack from South Korea.
He is one of the most cynical pundits.
Free ride?
Excerpts:
However, this free ride on economics has now come to an end – and everyone knows it. This is why there are debates on securing nuclear weapons, questioning the U.S. alliance, becoming a neutral state, and increased concerns regarding China’s intentions. Whether people want to admit it or not, South Korea is going to face major challenges over the next 5-10 years. Challenges that will one day be historical markers for fundamental changes about what is “Korea”.
The immediate signs will be about guns and butter (maybe nuclear butter). The unfolding economic and security pressures on South Korea bring the dilemma into sharp focus—should the government prioritize defense spending to counter escalating threats from North Korea, or invest in economic stability and social welfare to sustain long-term growth? With U.S. threats of abandonment, increased North Korean missile tests, and regional instability, South Korea faces pressure to expand its defense budget, potentially at the cost of infrastructure projects, social services, and economic stimulus measures.
If South Korea over commits to military spending without securing a robust economic foundation, it risks exacerbating domestic discontent and financial strain. Conversely, under funding defense at a time of growing threats could expose the country to strategic vulnerabilities. Navigating this trade-off will require nuanced policy making, balancing immediate security needs with long-term economic resilience – which cannot be done during political instability. This opens the country to political populism – the greatest risk.
Commentary
South Korea’s perfect storm – and no one’s at the helm
Published by
junotane
on
2025-01-30
https://burgerflippers.com/2025/01/30/south-koreas-perfect-storm-and-no-ones-at-the-helm/?utm
South Korea stands at a precarious crossroads where economic challenges, security concerns, and shifting diplomatic alliances are converging in ways that could define its trajectory for years to come. On top of that, it’s dealing with a political crisis and potentially a looming presidential election where the candidates match the U.S. election’s lack of real choice.
In the past, South Korea has managed to navigate the turbulent waters of global trade and security through a delicate balancing act, maintaining strong ties with the U.S. while ensuring economic cooperation with China. However, the landscape is shifting rapidly, and the country now faces the risk of diplomatic and economic isolation if it cannot adapt to these evolving pressures.
These combined pressures open the potential for maverick joker-like populist politicians with grand schemes of distraction and empty promises that will only exacerbate the situation. South Korea’s sailing into a perfect storm, there’s no one at the helm, and the ones most likely to grab the helm are as competent as a puppet without a handler.
Enter Lutnick
Howard Lutnick’s nomination as U.S. Commerce Secretary signals a potential pivot toward more aggressive trade policies under a second Trump administration. Lutnick, a staunch advocate of protectionist policies, has long supported imposing high tariffs to protect American industries. Given South Korea’s heavy reliance on exports—especially in semiconductors, automobiles, and consumer electronics—any broad-based tariff increases would have a direct and detrimental impact.
In confirmation hearings, Lutnick expressed his desire to bring semiconductors, automobiles, and consumer electronics production back to the U.S. Globalization is over, there’s no cheaper labor, easier environmental regulations, or government subsidies that will keep multinationals from moving production to the U.S. Korea Inc. is not as unitary, culturally influenced, or blatantly nationalist anymore. Moving production to the U.S. is a decision that will come in the interests of shareholders (chaebol family and institutional investors) rather than the nation.
Another concern is the proposed 20% universal tariff on imports and a potential 60% tariff on Chinese goods. While these measures primarily target China, South Korea’s economy is deeply integrated into global supply chains, meaning that any restrictions on China will have indirect yet significant effects on South Korean businesses. Companies that rely on Chinese components for manufacturing could see increased costs, while restrictions on Chinese exports may disrupt demand for South Korean intermediary goods.
Further complicating matters, South Korea’s political instability weakens its ability to respond proactively to these economic threats. The impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol has thrown the country’s leadership into chaos, leaving a caretaker government with limited authority to negotiate trade policies or forge new economic strategies.
The first response of the caretaker government was to promise limitless export finance for countries facing challenges – something every supporter of protectionism in the U.S. would immediately point to and say “look at that, they’re taking the mick (if they were from the U.K). It was an incredibly stupid announcement and confirmed to every protectionist that South Korea’s government provides its exporters unfair advantage.
Without leadership that can focus on these issues but instead must focus on domestic politics, it was bound to happen – and will only get worse. Investors and businesses, both domestic and foreign, may hesitate to commit to South Korea until its political landscape stabilizes, exacerbating economic uncertainty.
No more free ride?
Countries have three goals: purpose, security, and wellbeing. South Korea’s purpose has been set in stone since the nation’s founding and has rarely wavered despite challenges from the north. Security has been all but assured by its alliance with the U.S. and the presence of U.S. troops. Since the 1970s, this has allowed successive South Korean governments to focus on the third – economic wellbeing. The ability to focus on economics and relatively ignore security (I emphasize relatively in contrast to North Korea) allowed South Korea to essentially win the right to be the legitimate representative of the Korean people – South Korea won.
However, this free ride on economics has now come to an end – and everyone knows it. This is why there are debates on securing nuclear weapons, questioning the U.S. alliance, becoming a neutral state, and increased concerns regarding China’s intentions. Whether people want to admit it or not, South Korea is going to face major challenges over the next 5-10 years. Challenges that will one day be historical markers for fundamental changes about what is “Korea”.
The immediate signs will be about guns and butter (maybe nuclear butter). The unfolding economic and security pressures on South Korea bring the dilemma into sharp focus—should the government prioritize defense spending to counter escalating threats from North Korea, or invest in economic stability and social welfare to sustain long-term growth? With U.S. threats of abandonment, increased North Korean missile tests, and regional instability, South Korea faces pressure to expand its defense budget, potentially at the cost of infrastructure projects, social services, and economic stimulus measures.
If South Korea over commits to military spending without securing a robust economic foundation, it risks exacerbating domestic discontent and financial strain. Conversely, under funding defense at a time of growing threats could expose the country to strategic vulnerabilities. Navigating this trade-off will require nuanced policy making, balancing immediate security needs with long-term economic resilience – which cannot be done during political instability. This opens the country to political populism – the greatest risk.
17. Stressed Security Environment In North-East Asia And Focus On Defence Spending – Analysis
Stressed Security Environment In North-East Asia And Focus On Defence Spending – Analysis
January 29, 2025 0 Comments
By Dr. Rajaram Panda
eurasiareview.com · January 29, 2025
With Donald Trump’s return to a second term as American President, the issue of transactional relationship with the US alliance partners is likely to figure prominently at the Oval Office. This could mean demand for greater defence burden-sharing by its allies and security partners in East Asia – Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Trump could also demand Tokyo cough up more cash for hosting US troops, besides a renewed push for it to further jack up defense spending.
During most of the post-War years, Japan and South Korea remained stable US allies. That looks threatened during Trump’s second term. With a maverick and mercurial Trump at the Oval Office, Shigeru Ishiba heading a minority government in Japan and on the edge and political instability in South Korea following the short but misguided martial law promulgation by Yoon Suk-Yeol in South Korea, there seems to be a political paralysis leaving a leadership vacuum in the Indo-Pacific.
The previous leaders of the US and Japan, along with Yoon Suk-Yeol of South Korea (now in trouble) focused on strengthening alliances and regional stability through cooperation whereas Trump’s approach to foreign policy looks prioritising transactional relationship.
During the post-War years, US security policy in Asia depended on a network of allies, with Japan and South Korea the two most reliable. These two allies remained as the most reliable allies of the US which helped it maintain peace in the Indo-Pacific and further its interests. This scenario in the present context with three new leaders in all three nations amidst domestic political priorities taking precedence means the strength of these ties is under test as well as scrutiny. This threatens to unsettle American interests and jeopardize its supremacy in the region, posing a new challenge to Trump.
The foremost in this matrix of alliance relationships, the treaty with Japan is a central pillar of US policy on Asia. Mohammed Soliman, non-resident senior fellow in the National Security Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute observes that the relationship shares similarities to the ties the UK has with America, akin to an Asian “special relationship.” He further argues that Tokyo’s strategic position in countering China’s growing regional influence is a modern-day parallel to Britain’s role in countering German dominance in Europe during the last century. It is also one of the four largest economies in the world and regularly tops foreign investment charts in the U.S., pouring in funds into at least 39 states.
Among other issues the focus on imposing tariff on its trading partners has already hit international headlines. This coincides with Trump’s isolationist stance and stress on Make America Great Again (MAGA) as his signature policy stance that threatens to spin the world upside down. Though the main target on the tariff would be China, other important trading partners shall equally face the heat.
As regards Japan, it is already facing the heat as it continues to face threats from North Korea and China and preparing itself to adapt to the new situation despite the security guarantee provided by the United States. Japan has already breached its self-imposed threshold of breaching 1 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defence spending. Japan already planned to push its defence spending to about $68 billion, or 2 per cent of the GDP in fiscal 2022, as concerns grew over Russia, Chinese and North Korean activity in the Indo-Pacific region.
In December 2024, the Cabinet approved another record $8.7 trillion ($55.1 billion) for fiscal 2025 – a 9.4 per cent year-on-year increase. By this, Tokyo took another significant step to hike defense spending to 2 per cent of the GDP by fiscal 2027. But the road ahead is looking increasingly bumpy. The government faces growing political uncertainty about how to secure future budget hikes. The government is unable to halt rising inflation and the yen’s diminishing value erodes Japan’s plans for its largest military build-up in post-war history.
Thus it transpires that with the falling yen Japan enters into a new era of crisis as it gallops in its pursuit of finding funds for increased defence spending. Japan is unlikely to be deterred from its determination to allocate more money as it faces the most severe and complex security environment since World War II. When Fumio Kishida was Prime Minister, he had pledged in 2022 to meet the 2 per cent GDP goal by fiscal year 2027. Since then the yen has plummeted in value from about 140 yen per $1 in November 2022 to about 161 per $1 in July 2024, its lowest value in nearly four decades. Currently, the $1-yen ratio hovers between 155-161 range.
Japan’s total defense budget for 2024 was approximately $56 billion, about 1.6% of its 2022 GDP. That budget was a 64% increase from its $34 billion defense budget in fiscal year 2022. Much of Japan’s defence budget is used for weapons procurement as well as aircraft, such as Tomahawk cruise missiles or F-35 Lightening II fighter jets, and other military assets. Japan imports most of these from the US in deals that are typically conducted in the stronger American dollar. Such an arrangement puts more pressure on Japan to protect the value of the yen.
Japan has been struggling for some time now to combat its weakening currency from further fall. Japan hopes to implement “greater efficiency” in its pursuit of increased defense spending by re-examining expenses, developing long-term contracts and making bulk purchases. The Japanese government also proposed tax increases to fund its military build-up, but public opinion without proper debate could dent the government’s popularity, thereby impact on political stability. The taxpayers would not definitely rejoice any proposal for hiking tax. This dichotomy between government’s need to find money through tax increase and the hesitation by people to shoulder additional tax burden is always a challenge for the government to find a middle path. The average peoples are more concerned about their own personal life and less concerned about the stressed security environment surrounding Japan.
Japan’s military build-up is billed as a defensive measure in an increasingly unstable geopolitical arena. The 2024 Defense White Paper reiterated many of the same sentiments expressed in the 2023 edition, including concerns over North Korean missile launches and possible nuclear tests, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and an increase in Chinese activity in the skies and waters around Japan. The White Paper warned that a situation similar to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine may occur in the Indo-Pacific region in future, particularly in East Asia.
There are also concerns about heightened tensions between China and Taiwan, exemplified by a series of military drills and frequent violation of Taiwan’s airspace after Taiwan President Lai Ching-te took office on May 20, 2024. The White Paper noted: “Stability in the situation surrounding Taiwan is important not only for the security of Japan, but also for the stability of the international community, and Japan must continue to monitor the situation with even greater vigilance”.
North Korea is another bother. Pyongyang is engaged with actively improving its nuclear and missile technologies and focusing more on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Additionally, North Korea’s military activities and missile firings many of which have flown over Japan’s airspace pose an even more grave and imminent threat to Japan’s security than ever before. They seriously undermine the peace and security of the region and the international community.
Japan hopes to deter these threats based on its dependence on the alliance relationship with the US, besides developing its own defence capabilities and expanding diplomatic ties with European and Asian countries. By doing this, Japan needs to adhere to its Constitution’s basic precepts of maintaining an exclusively defence-oriented policy and not becoming a military power that poses threats to other countries.
Despite hurdles and being a minority government, the Cabinet of the government headed by Shigeru Ishiba approved on 27 December 2024 a record budget worth 115.541 trillion yen ($732 billion) for fiscal 2025. The government is aware however that it could face challenges in the ordinary Diet session soon. In the past years when the Liberal Democratic Party-Komeito combine coalition government enjoyed a solid majority, it had no difficulty in passing the budget bills. The situation is not the same now since its dismal performance on 27 October 2024 elections to the Lower House. Now it needs the support of the opposition parties to pass the budget.
Managing the economy and raising funds through tax hike, issuance of new government bonds etc. are priorities for the Ishiba government. The government needs to have a revenue forecast in place for proper economic planning. Issuance of government bonds might not be enough and the government still may have to pay a quarter through government debt.
Japan has an aging population with over lakh centenarians. This means the government shall have to allocate funds for social security spending, such as pensions and medical care. These will take up about one-third of total expenditures. The bill sets aside 38.277 trillion yen for social security, an increase of 555.8 billion yen in the 2025 fiscal year. Similarly, defence spending will exceed 8 trillion yen for the first time, at 8,669 trillion yen, an increase of 751.9 billion from the 2024 budget.
However, what is eminently significant in the 2025 budget is that by approving a record 8.7 trillion ($55 billion) defence budget, Japan commits to accelerate building up its strike-back capability with long-range cruise missiles and starts deploying Tomohawks to fortify itself against growing threats from China, North Korea and Russia.
In fact, the Cabinet-endorsed draft budget marks the third year of Japan’s ongoing five-year military build-up under the National Security Strategy adopted in 2022. The defence spending is part of the more than 115 trillion yen ($732 billion) national budget bill. A parliamentary approval is needed by March for its enactment.
As planned, Japan is preparing to deploy US-made Tomahawks late in fiscal year 2025 as part of its ongoing efforts to acquire strike-back capability with long-range missiles that can hit distant targets. The budget allocates 940 billion yen ($6 billion) for the so-called “standoff” defence system that also includes long-range missiles, satellite constellation and other arsenals. The cost includes 1.8 billion yen ($11.4 million) for the purchase and addition of equipment to launch Tomahawks from an Aegis-class destroyer.
Japan has plans too to reinforce its missile defence system. For this, Japan plans to spend another 533 billion yen ($3.37 billion) that includes purchases of interceptors and a mobile reconnaissance radar to be placed on Okinawa, where more than half of About 50,000 American troops are based. Under Japan’s planned defence strategy, it aims to eventually double its annual defence sending to around 10 trillion yen ($63 billion), making it the world’s No. 3 military spender after the US and China.
eurasiareview.com · January 29, 2025
De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647
email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com
| 
