|
Quotes of the Day:
“Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hist a target no else can see.”
- Arthur Schopenhauer
“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root”
- Henry David Thoreau
“Great leaders are almost always great simplifiers, who can cut through argument, debate and doubt, to offer a solution everybody can understand.”
- Colin Powell
1. Pyongyang's 7th nuclear test to be real test for Sino-North Korea ties
2. JCS chief to meet with US, Japanese counterparts in Washington amid NK threats
3. S.Korea begins major Hoguk field training exercise amid N.Korea’s saber-rattling
4. S. Korea, US to revive large-scale aerial drills as tensions grow
5. Talk of tactical nuke redeployment 'irresponsible': US ambassador
6. South Korean lawyers voice solidarity with women in Iran
7. Arrest sought of Moon’s ex-defense chief in North Korea killing
8. North Korea fires artillery shells near border with S. Korea
9. Accusations that U.S. provoked N. Korean missile tests 'baloney': State Dept.
10. Japan’s warning system needs changes after ‘meaningless’ North Korean missile alerts, officials say
11. The U.S. Will Trade Seattle for Seoul
12. Moon partly responsible for Korea's failure to keep UN Human Rights Council seat: expert
13. In war, Japan will be our ally
1. Pyongyang's 7th nuclear test to be real test for Sino-North Korea ties
We should seriously ponder this analysis from Dr. Bruce Bennett from Rand.
Excerpts:
Bennett speculated that North Korea's motives for its military buildup might go beyond the reclusive state's self-defense to protecting itself from foreign invasion.
"China has threatened North Korea about invading the Republic of Korea; Kim is likely stockpiling nuclear weapons to deter Chinese intervention either in that case or if internal turmoil develops in North Korea," he said.
...
"There are many circumstances in which China could potentially intervene militarily in North Korea and if it does, the North's current doctrine and strategy of nuclear weapon defense would likely be applied to a Chinese intervention just as much as the North would apply such a strategy against a Republic of Korea-U.S. intervention," he said. "Some in China appear to understand this, but by and large, the Chinese government apparently has yet to appreciate this possibility."
As China recognizes that North Korea also poses a threat to it, Bennett said Xi may adjust his policies accordingly.
Pyongyang's 7th nuclear test to be real test for Sino-North Korea ties
The Korea Times · October 18, 2022
In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, Chinese President Xi Jinping delivers a speech during the opening ceremony of the 20th National Congress of China's ruling Communist Party in Beijing, China, Sunday. AP-Yonhap
By Kang Hyun-kyung
Chinese leader Xi Jinping emphasized the continuity of China's assertive foreign policy in a televised speech during the Chinese Communist Party's week-long Congress, which opened on Sunday in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.
Xi said China has taken a clear-cut stance against a U.S.-led hegemony and power politics and is opposed to unilateralism and bullying.
His remarks hint at the lingering confrontation between U.S.-led democracies and autocracies represented by China, Russia and North Korea, which has been evident particularly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, in Xi's third term as leader.
Experts say that the seventh nuclear test North Korea has been preparing for will be a real test for Sino-North Korea ties.
"China appears to be in the early phases of recognizing that North Korean nuclear weapons could also affect China, either indirectly or directly," Bruce Bennett, an adjunct researcher at The RAND Corporation and a professor of the Pardee RAND Graduate School, told The Korea Times. "North Korea likely has sufficient nuclear material for 50 or so nuclear weapons, and it likely needs no more than about 20 for self-defense against the Republic of Korea and the United States ― it has begun building the nuclear forces for offensive operations, as Kim Jong-un has been saying."
Bennett speculated that North Korea's motives for its military buildup might go beyond the reclusive state's self-defense to protecting itself from foreign invasion.
"China has threatened North Korea about invading the Republic of Korea; Kim is likely stockpiling nuclear weapons to deter Chinese intervention either in that case or if internal turmoil develops in North Korea," he said.
China reacted furiously whenever North Korea conducted a nuclear test. As seen in its reaction to the North's fourth nuclear test conducted in January, 2016, China's foreign ministry issued a statement addressing that it firmly opposed to a nuclear test and urging the North to honor its commitment to denuclearization.
Some experts, however, say things may turn out very differently this time.
Cheong Seong-chang, director of the Center for North Korean Studies at The Sejong Institute, pointed to an intensified U.S.-China rivalry as a reason behind his skepticism about China's intervention to restrain the North.
"In the past when U.S.-China relations were not as bad as they are today, and there was room for cooperation between them with regard to North Korea," he said.
"What we see now is that the U.S.-China relations couldn't be worse and there is literally no room for the two sides to find common interests. So what's happening is that even though North Korea goes for provocation, like the firing of nuclear-capable missiles, China won't deter its neighbor from going further because China is sort of enjoying the situation as an observer."
Robert Kelly, a professor of political science at Pusan National University in the southern port city of Busan, presented a similar view and said he thinks China will say little about North Korean threats in the future.
"The U.S. and China are sliding into a cold war. And countries like North Korea and Russia are informal partners in that struggle," he said. "So, China will not criticize the war in Ukraine nor North Korea's nuclear test."
Kelly said a tougher test will be China's response to a seventh nuclear test which Korean and U.S. officials think can happen any time.
"That will be harder to ignore than the recent missile tests, but my guess is that China's response to that will be quite muted, too," he said. "It's a shame actually. I think China, the United States, South Korea and Japan all share an interest in slowing North Korea's weapons of mass destruction march. But the politics are just so complicated."
An undated photo released on 10 October 2022 by the official North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un overseeing a military drill carried out to check and assess the war deterrent and nuclear counterattack capability of the country, amid ongoing joint military exersizes involving US and South Korean forces in the waters near the Korean Penninsula. EPA-Yonhap
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un ratcheted up his rhetoric, characterizing a series of nuclear-capable missile launches over the East Sea between South Korea and Japan during the past couple of weeks as "tactical nuclear drills."
To date, North Korea has fired a total of 27 missiles this year alone ― 24 of them were ballistic missiles and the remaining three were cruise missiles. The North test-fired its missiles 13 times since President Yoon Suk-yeol was inaugurated on May 10.
North Korea's latest provocations demonstrated that the regime's show of force has evolved from a single event to a hybrid one using a mix of conventional weapons and missiles.
It flew 10 warplanes near the inter-Korean border on Oct. 13, which was followed 130 artillery shells being fired from the West Sea between South Korea and China and a short-range ballistic missile the next day.
Ellen Kim, deputy director and senior fellow at Korea Chair of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and Andy Lim, associate fellow at Korea Chair, said that North Korea's latest provocations show new patterns.
"First, North Korea is increasingly carrying out its provocations at night, which indicates that its military action can take place at any time of the day or night," they said in a commentary released to the media. "Second, the attacks are orchestrated to take place on all fronts (water, land and air) and one after the other. Third, from what used to be a single missile event, North Korea's provocation seems to be evolving into a multiple (or hybrid) event using a mix of conventional weaponry and missiles."
Together with the reclusive state's continued firing of missiles, despite international condemnation, Kim's unprecedentedly provocative rhetoric regarding its nuclear program has caused some ruling South Korean party politicians to harbor skepticism toward existing policy options, which are designed to counter the North.
In China, Bennett said, some have begun to voice worries about the North Korean nuclear weapon threat to China.
"There are many circumstances in which China could potentially intervene militarily in North Korea and if it does, the North's current doctrine and strategy of nuclear weapon defense would likely be applied to a Chinese intervention just as much as the North would apply such a strategy against a Republic of Korea-U.S. intervention," he said. "Some in China appear to understand this, but by and large, the Chinese government apparently has yet to appreciate this possibility."
As China recognizes that North Korea also poses a threat to it, Bennett said Xi may adjust his policies accordingly.
Jeffrey Lewis, an expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey and director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at CNS, predicts that China's support for North Korea will continue during Xi's third term.
"The Ukraine War has deepened the conflict between democracies and autocracies, with North Korea benefitting from more Russian and Chinese support as a loyal member of the camp of autocracies," he said.
An undated photo released on 10 October 2022 by the official North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows the units of the Korean People's Army (KPA) for the operation of tactical nukes staging a military drill carried out to check and assess the war deterrent and nuclear counterattack capability of the country, amid ongoing joint military exersizes involving US and South Korean forces in the waters near the Korean Penninsula. EPA-Yonhap
The Korea Times · October 18, 2022
2. JCS chief to meet with US, Japanese counterparts in Washington amid NK threats
Trilateral cooperation.
JCS chief to meet with US, Japanese counterparts in Washington amid NK threats
The Korea Times · October 18, 2022
South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) chairman Kim Seung-kyum salutes during a parliamentary audit at the National Assembly in western Seoul, Oct 6. Korea Times file
South Korea's top military officer left for Washington on Tuesday for talks with his U.S. and Japanese counterparts, officials here said, as the three sides seek to boost security cooperation against evolving North Korean threats.
Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Chairman Gen. Kim Seung-kyum will meet with his U.S. counterpart, Gen. Mark Milley, on Wednesday at the 47th Military Committee Meeting, according to the JCS.
The two sides are set to assess the security situation of the Korean Peninsula and the region, and discuss strengthening the allies' combined defense posture. it said.
They will also discuss the planned "conditions-based" handover of the wartime operational command (OPCON) from Washington to Seoul.
Kim will attend the Trilateral Chief of Defense (Tri-CHOD) meeting the next day, involving Milley and his Japanese counterpart, Gen. Koji Yamazaki, for talks on multilateral defense cooperation and training, and regional security challenges.
On Friday, Kim will visit the U.S. Strategic Command in Nebraska and the U.S. Space Command in Colorado to discuss ways to strengthen coordination against North Korea's nuclear and missile threats. (Yonhap)
The Korea Times · October 18, 2022
3. S.Korea begins major Hoguk field training exercise amid N.Korea’s saber-rattling
Recognize, understand, expose, and attack (with a superior political warfare strategy) Kim Jong'un's political warfare, blackmail diplomacy, and advanced warfighting strategies.
And never ever back down in the face of north Korea threat and provocations - never cancel readiness exercises.
Excerpts:
During his visit to the JCS’ battle control center, South Korea’s Defense Minister Lee Jong-sup on Sunday warned that North Korea’s recent military actions and “far-fetched claims” and denunciation of the South Korean military’s legitimate artillery exercise could show North Korea’s intent to carry on further provocations.
Lee emphasized that North Korea’s continuing ballistic missile launches and flagrant violations of the Sept. 19 inter-Korean military agreement “could be meticulously planned provocations and the beginning of the intended scenario to conduct a series of provocations.”
Lee underscored the significance of maintaining a “firm military readiness posture against any kind of North Korean provocations and threats,” calling for the South Korean military to “take decisive initial countermeasures as a self-defensive action without hesitation if North Korea makes direct provocations.”
S.Korea begins major Hoguk field training exercise amid N.Korea’s saber-rattling
koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · October 17, 2022
The South Korean military kicked off the annual major Hoguk field training exercise to enhance its combat readiness and joint force capabilities to counter North Korea’s escalating missile and nuclear threats, the Joint Chiefs of Staff announced on Monday.
The 12-day Hoguk exercise will continue until Oct. 28 with the participation of the Army, Navy and Air Force and Marine Corps amid simmering tensions between the two Koreas.
The Hoguk theater-level field training exercise has been annually conducted in the second half of the year with a focus on “maintaining military readiness and improving joint operational capabilities” among forces, according to the JCS.
The joint forces aim to “master both wartime and peacetime mission performance capabilities by conducting real-world, day and night field training exercises which simulate countering North Korea’s nuclear, missile and other various threats.”
The US forces also were set to take part in the Hoguk field training exercise led by South Korea’s JCS to enhance interoperability with South Korean counterparts.
South Korea’s JCS spokesperson Kim Jun-rak said Monday morning that the military would stage the Hoguk exercise based on a comprehensive assessment of the recent security situation when asked about the chances of North Korea making provocations.
Kim underscored that the South Korean military has been “closely tracking and keeping close tabs on related moves and maintaining firm readiness posture.”
South Korea’s Unification Ministry said Monday it “has been preparing for all possibilities in coordination with related ministries” when asked about chances of North Korea tentatively halting its provocations during the Chinese Communist Party's weeklong congress.
This year’s Hoguk exercise began after North Korea repeatedly sought to justify its banned ballistic missile launches and artillery firing in violation of the inter-Korean military agreement as counteractions against South Korea’s regular and defense-oriented military drills.
North Korea fired around 560 artillery shells on Friday from inter-Korean border areas into maritime buffer zones which the two Koreas agreed on under the military tension reduction deal. The South Korean government said the artillery firing violated the Sept. 19 Comprehensive Military Agreement.
Pyongyang concurrently fired a short-range ballistic missile off its east coast from the capital city of Pyongyang on the same day. In addition, North Korean warplanes crossed the South Korean military’s tactical action line between late Thursday night and early Friday.
But North Korea claimed that its artillery firing, ballistic missile launch, and flying of warplanes near the inter-Korean border were military counteractions against live-fire drills conducted by South Korean and US forces in Cheorwon County, Gangwon Province. South Korean military officials confirmed that the US Forces Korea fired artillery shells from multiple launch rocket systems during the drills.
A spokesman for the General Staff of the Korean People’s Army said Friday that the North Korean military took “strong military countermeasures” against the “South Korean military’s provocative action in the front-line area” in a statement.
The General Staff of the Korean People’s Army on Saturday warned that it will take “thorough and overwhelming military countermeasures” against South Korea by issuing another statement.
North Korean state media on Oct. 10 claimed that the military conducted the seven discrete ballistic missile launches from Sept. 25 and Oct. 9. in response to bilateral naval drills between South Korea and the US and trilateral maritime exercises among South Korea, the US and Japan.
During his visit to the JCS’ battle control center, South Korea’s Defense Minister Lee Jong-sup on Sunday warned that North Korea’s recent military actions and “far-fetched claims” and denunciation of the South Korean military’s legitimate artillery exercise could show North Korea’s intent to carry on further provocations.
Lee emphasized that North Korea’s continuing ballistic missile launches and flagrant violations of the Sept. 19 inter-Korean military agreement “could be meticulously planned provocations and the beginning of the intended scenario to conduct a series of provocations.”
Lee underscored the significance of maintaining a “firm military readiness posture against any kind of North Korean provocations and threats,” calling for the South Korean military to “take decisive initial countermeasures as a self-defensive action without hesitation if North Korea makes direct provocations.”
North Korea has historically made local and direct provocations against South Korea during the Hoguk exercise. In November 2010, North Korea fired artillery shells at the island of Yeonpyeongdo when the South Korean military staged the Hoguk exercise. The artillery bombardment killed two soldiers and two civilians, injured many others, and devastated villages.
By Ji Da-gyum (dagyumji@heraldcorp.com)
koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · October 17, 2022
4. S. Korea, US to revive large-scale aerial drills as tensions grow
Strength and resolve. I know this upsets those who seek engagement and arms control but it is imperative that deterring war comes first and the most important deterrent capability is the demonstration of strength and resolve. Kim Jong Un is not stupid. He, like his father and grandfather, will not attack into strength. They seek weakness. Their provocations are designed to weaken the alliance to obtain advantageous conditions to support their strategy . This is one contribution to showing KJU that his strategy is failing.
S. Korea, US to revive large-scale aerial drills as tensions grow
240 combat aircraft including F-35 stealth fighter jets will be mobilized
koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · October 18, 2022
South Korea and the United States will publicly stage large-scale aerial drills, involving their F-35 stealth fighters, to enhance combat readiness and train for wartime contingencies amid mounting threats from North Korea. Unlike previous years when the allies sought to keep a low profile, the publicized air combat exercise would be an apparent warning message to North Korea.
The South Korean and US air forces are set to conduct their combat readiness training exercise from Oct. 31 to Nov. 4 in the South Korean airspace, the South Korean military confirmed on Tuesday.
“The exercise, which has been conducted annually since 2015, aims to verify systems to conduct combined air operations of the South Korean and US air forces in wartime as well as improve combat readiness and capabilities,” South Korea’s Air Force said.
Seoul and Washington will mobilize a total of 240 combat aircraft, according to South Korean military sources.
The South Korean Air Force plans to dispatch 140 aircraft such as F-35A stealth fighters and F-15K and KF-16 fighter jets.
The US Air Force will deploy around 100 aircraft, including F-35B stealth fighters and F-16 Fighting Falcons, on the Korean Peninsula for the upcoming combined aerial drills.
F-35B fifth-generation, multirole combat aircraft -- which have short takeoff and vertical landing capabilities -- are based at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, in Japan.
South Korea’s F-35A stealth fighters and the US’ F-35B stealth fighters will team up for the first time.
The South Korean and US air forces will practice detecting North Korean targets and infiltrating enemies during the training exercise that will present real-world scenarios. The two forces will also aim to master executing the pre-positioned air tasking order, or ATO, devised by the US.
The ATO provides detailed tasking for a specific execution time frame, normally 24 hours, and articulates how to fly, fight and win during joint air operations. The US-written pre-positioned ATO contains the breakdown of the mission of each South Korean and US combat aircraft in wartime.
Publicize aerial drills
The four-day combined air combat exercise will be staged during the period when North Korea is believed to have a relatively strong chance of conducting a seventh nuclear test.
The South Korean spy agency said in September that North Korea could conduct a nuclear test after China’s one-week party congress that ends Oct. 22 but before the US midterm elections on Nov. 17.
North Korea has continued to launch missiles in violation of the 2018 inter-Korean military tension reduction deal.
North Korea has fired 13 ballistic missiles and two cruise missiles in nine discrete launches in 20 days from Sep. 25 to Oct. 14. North Korean state media later claimed that the launched ballistic and cruise missiles can carry tactical nuclear weapons.
Around 560 artillery shells were fired on Oct. 14 from inter-Korean border areas into maritime buffer zones which the two Koreas agreed on under the Sept. 19 Comprehensive Military Agreement.
The South Korea-US large-scale aerial exercise will be publicly conducted for the first time since December 2017 amid simmering tensions. The exercise, previously dubbed “Vigilant ACE” from 2015 and 2017, had been scaled down or deliberately conducted low-key, in the wake of the first US-North Korea summit in June 2018.
The South Korean and US air forces mobilized around 230 warplanes for the Vigilant ACE exercise in December 2017, months after North Korea conducted a sixth nuclear test and launched an intercontinental ballistic missile respectively in September and November. At that time, a B-1B Lancer supersonic bomber, F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, and F-35 stealth combat aircraft, among others, were deployed on the peninsula.
Allies take action
The revival of the large-scale air combat exercise is in line with the commitment by South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol and US President Joe Biden to further strengthen deterrence by reinforcing combined defense posture.
During the May 21 summit, Yoon and Biden also agreed to “initiate discussions to expand the scope and scale of combined military exercises and training on and around the Korean Peninsula,” citing the “evolving threat” posed by North Korea as the reason. The South Korean and US militaries have taken follow-up measures.
As part of their efforts, F-35 stealth fighters from the South Korean and the US air forces teamed up for the first time for four days of combined aerial drills in July. But around 30 combat aircraft were mobilized for the air combat exercise.
US dismisses claims
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday assessed that North Korea’s recent saber-rattling would be its response against the joint move by the US, South Korea, and Japan to enhance their deterrence and readiness against “any kind of North Korean aggression.” Blinken cited the US efforts to bring back large-scale exercises both with South Korea and Japan after years of suspension as one of the examples.
“I think that Kim Jong-un saw that and didn’t like it, and it’s a response to that,” Blinken said during a discussion with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Stanford, California.
The US State Department also dismissed attempts by North Korea, China and Russia to justify North Korea’s ballistic missile launches and other military actions as countermeasures to defense-oriented military exercises between the US and its allies as nonsense.
“When there was a UN Security Council hearing on this, you saw the PRC and Russia and other countries parrot this false claim that US provocations were the origination of these ballistic missile launches or anything like that,” Vedant Patel, the State Department’s principal deputy spokesperson, told a press briefing on Monday.
“That’s baloney and absolutely not the case.”
By Ji Da-gyum (dagyumji@heraldcorp.com)
koreaherald.com · by Ji Da-gyum · October 18, 2022
5. Talk of tactical nuke redeployment 'irresponsible': US ambassador
Most people talking about redeployment cannot answer the basic questions such as what is the concept of employment in war, will the US change the policy of not confirming or denying the presence of nuclear weapons (how would it contribute to deterrence if we do not acknowledge their presence), are we prepared for and willing to accept the inevitable sustained protests at the US basees where such weapons would likely be stored? And much more, including how do we think KJU will be deterred by tactical nuclear weapons? Aren't we mirror imaging our nuclear taboo and projecting that on Kim? Will our tactical nuclear weapons really make him fear our capabilities any more than he already does? And will KJU be able to exploit the redeployment to support his political warfare and blackmail diplomacy (as counterintuitive that may seem for some).
Talk of tactical nuke redeployment 'irresponsible': US ambassador
koreaherald.com · by Jo He-rim · October 18, 2022
US Ambassador to South Korea Philip Goldberg said Tuesday all talk related to tactical weapons is "irresponsible" and "dangerous," as the idea of redeploying tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea resurfaces following a string of provocations from North Korea.
Speaking at a forum organized by a journalist group to mark his 100th day in office, Goldberg also said the US' extended deterrence, which includes the country's nuclear capabilities, is the measure to handle North Korea's increasing provocations.
"All we can do in the face of provocations, threats to peace, security and stability on the Korean Peninsula is respond with determination, with resolve with extended deterrence, which includes all capabilities that the United States possesses." Goldberg said in the forum held by Kwanhun Club, a journalist organization based in Seoul.
"We have a huge commitment to Republic of Korea and its security and to the people of South Korea," he said.
According to Goldberg, extended deterrence means the protection provided by the US in all areas, including nuclear security. And nobody should doubt that the US has an "iron-clad" commitment to extended deterrence, he added.
"All this talk about tactical nuclear weapons, whether it comes from Putin, or Kim Jong-un is irresponsible and dangerous, and escalation of those kinds of threats or speculations, I don't think help the situation," he said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin and the North Korean leader.
Goldberg also stressed that "everything" that the North does is illegal and not only violates United Nations resolutions, but also its own commitments. What the US and its allies are doing in response are all within the framework of "accepted international norms and laws," he added.
Regarding the ongoing dispute on the impacts of the US' Inflation Reduction Act against Korean electric vehicle makers selling products in the American market, Goldberg said the US administration is making efforts to address the concerns. He also said Korean companies would benefit from the law in the long term.
"With regard to the Inflation Reduction Act, Korea has voiced serious concerns about electric vehicle incentives outlined in the legislation, and we are committed to continuing discussions on ways to address them," the ambassador said.
"I would add that we believe that many Korean companies stand to benefit from the various investment incentives in the act."
The IRA, which aims to provide incentives to electric vehicles made exclusively in North America was signed into law by US President Joe Biden on August 16. Since South Korean EV makers, mainly Hyundai motor and Kia, produce their flagship models in Korea to export them to the US market, they immediately lost their subsidies, losing competitiveness in price.
"I disagree with anyone who attempts to characterize our bilateral economic relationship as a zero-sum game in which if American companies are winning, Korean companies will lose," Goldberg said.
"This completely neglects the fact that Korean and American businesses are working together and collaborating across every sector of the economy. "
His remark appears to implicitly refer on how China has accused the US of exploiting the alliance with South Korea for its own benefits, while warning Seoul not to be too dependent on Washington.
A day earlier, Goldberg, speaking in a video interview, underscored how the US continues to call for Pyongyang to engage in "unconditioned" talks, but that there is "little room for negotiations" when the regime refuses to talk.
The US also seeks for China to play a role in deterring North Korea's military provocations, as it serves no interest to any country, including Beijing itself, the ambassador said in the video released on YouTube late Monday.
"We've offered humanitarian aid and COVID assistance (to North Korea). They don't seem to want it," Goldberg said. He was interviewed by Kim Ji-yoon, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Democracy Studies and Education who runs the YouTube channel Kim Ji-yoon's JisikPlay.
"It seems that missiles are more important than the people of North Korea and there isn't much we can do about that except to work with our alliance partners here and elsewhere in the region, but particularly here to deter and convince the DPRK that we are serious about the defense of this country (South Korea), an allied country and a very good ally." DPRK refers to North Korea's official name, Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
As the world faces a series of crises, including the Ukraine-Russia war, North Korea and its nuclear program is still a top priority for the US, the ambassador said. The US is committed to building up extended deterrence to protect South Korea from the North's nuclear threats, he added.
Last month, South Korea and the US held a joint naval drill, where a US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan took part in the exercise for the first time in five years in response to the consecutive missile launches by the North.
When asked about the US’ expectations for South Korea should China invade Taiwan, Goldberg explained how the commitment of the alliance of the two countries is centered on the peninsula, and anything else would be “hypothetical.”
“Korea and the US have a very strong alliance. I think that our security relationship is centered here on the peninsula. That is the commitment and the commitments that we carry out,” Goldberg said.
“That's our primary role and partnership is here and keeping the peace on this in the Korean Peninsula. Anything else would be very hypothetical.”
By Jo He-rim (herim@heraldcorp.com)
koreaherald.com · by Jo He-rim · October 18, 2022
6. South Korean lawyers voice solidarity with women in Iran
Good. Maybe they can use this to help motivate their fellow Koreans to support their work for Korean women in the north too. Human rights is a national security issue in addition to a moral imperative.
Tuesday’s gathering was organized by member lawyers of North Korean Human Rights, an organization dedicated to advancing human rights in North Korea and assisting victims of North Korean abuses.
“We condemn the Iranian authorities for violating the human rights of Iranian people, just as we condemn the North Korean regime for violating the human rights of North Korean people,” they said.
[Newsmaker] South Korean lawyers voice solidarity with women in Iran
koreaherald.com · by Kim Arin · October 18, 2022
By Kim Arin
Published : Oct 18, 2022 - 18:29 Updated : Oct 18, 2022 - 18:33
South Korean lawyers gathered outside the Iranian embassy in Yongsan, central Seoul, in a show of support for Iran’s nationwide protests that erupted after the death of 22-year-old Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini. Amini died Sept. 16 after she was arrested by Iran’s morality police for allegedly breaking the country’s strict dress rules for women. Lawyers for Human Rights and Unification of Korea organized Tuesday’s gathering. (Yonhap)
Human rights lawyers gathered outside the Iranian embassy in Seoul on Tuesday in a show of support for women in Iran.
“We stand with the women of Iran who are courageously fighting against appalling repression, and urge the Iranian government to stop the violent crackdown of protesters and respect the freedom of women and girls,” the lawyers said in a joint statement.
“Today we join people around the world who have taken to the streets to support the women in Iran, who are risking death as they resist the regime.”
The lawyers said Islamic theocratic rule was “forcing a strict dress code in a country where women were once free to choose how they dress.”
They said Iran was among only three countries in the world alongside Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan that force women to wear the hijab.
Holding up a sign that read “Women, Life, Freedom” -- words that came to symbolize the protests in Iran -- lawyers called mandatory compliance with wearing the hijab as “discriminatory.” “Women and girls have the right to be free,” they said.
Tuesday’s gathering was organized by member lawyers of North Korean Human Rights, an organization dedicated to advancing human rights in North Korea and assisting victims of North Korean abuses.
“We condemn the Iranian authorities for violating the human rights of Iranian people, just as we condemn the North Korean regime for violating the human rights of North Korean people,” they said.
About a month ago, a Kurdish woman named Mahsa Amini died under suspicious circumstances after being arrested for breaking strict dress codes enforced by the morality police. She was 22 years old.
Her death sparked unrest across Iran, with security forces cracking down on protests with arrests and violence.
By Kim Arin (arin@heraldcorp.com)
7. Arrest sought of Moon’s ex-defense chief in North Korea killing
Just an ugly situation that will continue to be ugly.
Arrest sought of Moon’s ex-defense chief in North Korea killing
koreaherald.com · by Kim Arin · October 18, 2022
By Kim Arin
Published : Oct 18, 2022 - 18:18 Updated : Oct 19, 2022 - 01:07
Prosecutors on Tuesday said they were seeking the arrest of Seo Wook, ex-national defense minister, (left) and Kim Hong-hee, ex-coast guard commissioner. (Yonhap)
Seoul prosecutors on Tuesday sought an arrest warrant for former chiefs of national defense and maritime police in an investigation surrounding the killing of South Korean fisheries official Lee Dae-jun by North Korean soldiers two years ago.
The Seoul central prosecutors’ office said in a message to reporters that they were seeking an arrest warrant for Seo Wook, who served as minister of national defense in the Moon Jae-in administration, over several charges including abuse of authority, falsifying documents and destroying electronic records of a public office.
According to the Board of Audit and Inspection of Korea’s Oct. 14 report, Seo ordered the deletion of some 60 military intelligence reports in the early hours of Sept. 23, 2020, immediately after learning in a 1 a.m. meeting called by Cheong Wa Dae that Lee had just been killed.
Seo had an official in charge of the military intelligence management system to come into work and delete the reports, the BAI said.
Kim Hong-hee, who as commissioner of the Coast Guard Korea oversaw the search operations and the investigations that followed, also faces charges of abuse of authority and falsifying official records.
According to the BAI, he is suspected of covering up evidence that appear to disprove the coast guard determination that Lee was defecting to North Korea.
The Coast Guard characterized Lee as a North Korea defector in its press briefings using unverified evidence and stories about his personal life such as his financial situation, over which his family sued, while withholding facts that point to the country, the BAI said in the same report.
For instance, the Coast Guard did not disclose its internal interviews which revealed that Lee’s crewmembers stated that they believed it was unlikely Lee was attempting to defect to North Korea.
Until the BAI report it also remained unknown that when North Korean soldiers found Lee, he was also wearing a foreign life jacket that wasn’t the fisheries ministry’s, suggesting that he did not leave the vessel voluntarily -- something that the Coast Guard was aware of but kept hidden.
Prosecutors have been investigating the possible mishandling by South Korean authorities in the circumstances leading to and after Lee’s death. The investigations opened in July after the maritime and military authorities announced there was no evidence to prove Lee was a North Korea defector, correcting their previous conclusion.
Prosecutors said they decided to request arrest warrants after Seo and Kim over the gravity of the criminal suspicions facing them and concerns they might tamper with evidence. Both were summoned for questioning last week.
The arrest warrant requests Tuesday may be just the beginning of the widening investigations. It was Cheong Wa Dae’s Office of National Security that orchestrated the Defense Ministry and maritime police’s public announcements that depicted Lee’s case as an attempted defection to North Korea, according to the BAI’s latest findings. The BAI said the Cheong Wa Dae office asked the two institutions to respond with “one voice.”
In a phone call with The Korea Herald, Kim Ki-yun, the lawyer representing Lee’s family, said based on what’s been revealed so far he believed it was “beyond justified” that the top authorities who were in charge would be arrested.
“I think it is absolutely outrageous that one of the first actions taken by the national defense minister just hours after a citizen was murdered by North Korean soldiers was expunging the related intelligence reports,” he said.
In related investigations, Suh Hoon and Park Jie-hoon, who were then-directors of Cheong Wa Dae’s Office of National Security and the National Intelligence Service, respectively, are among those suspected of having a key role in the alleged cover-up.
By Kim Arin (arin@heraldcorp.com)
8. North Korea fires artillery shells near border with S. Korea
Continued violation of the CMA.
North Korea fires artillery shells near border with S. Korea
The Washington Post · by Associated Press · October 18, 2022
SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea says North Korea has fired artillery shells near the rivals’ sea border in its latest weapons test.
South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff says North Korea fired about 100 shells off its west coast and 150 rounds off its east coast on Tuesday night.
It says the shells fell inside maritime buffer zones the two Koreas established under a 2018 inter-Korean agreement on reducing tensions.
In recent weeks, North Korea has conducted a spate of missile and artillery launches in what some experts call an attempt to expand its weapons arsenal and boost its leverage in future negotiations with its rivals.
The Washington Post · by Associated Press · October 18, 2022
9. Accusations that U.S. provoked N. Korean missile tests 'baloney': State Dept.
"Baloney." A new term of art in international relations. Seriously, the spokesman is right to call out this BS (a stronger IR term of art)
(LEAD) Accusations that U.S. provoked N. Korean missile tests 'baloney': State Dept. | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by 변덕근 · October 18, 2022
(ATTN: UPDATES with remarks from Secretary of State Blinken in paras 10-17; ADDS photo)
By Byun Duk-kun
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (Yonhap) -- A spokesperson for the U.S. state department on Monday dismissed a claim made by North Korea and its friendly nations that the North's recent missile tests had been provoked by the United States, calling it "baloney."
Vedant Patel, principal deputy spokesperson for the department, also reiterated that the North's recent missile tests and other provocative actions are "condemnable."
"As it relates to the DPRK, I think you saw last week when there was a U.N. Security Council hearing on this. You saw the PRC, Russia and other countries parrot this false claim that U.S. provocations were the origination of these ballistic missile launchers or anything like that," the spokesperson said, referring to North Korea and China by their official names -- the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China."
"That's baloney and absolutely not the case," he added.
North Korea staged eight rounds of ballistic missile tests in less than three weeks from late last month.
Pyongyang blamed joint military exercises of South Korea and the U.S. for causing it to conduct such tests in response.
China and Russia, both veto power-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, repeated the North Korean claim at the U.N. Security Council meeting, effectively blocking U.S.-led efforts to impose additional sanctions on North Korea.
"You saw me speak to this quite clearly last week that the recent ballistic missile launches the other kinds of aggravation and provocation that we're seeing are condemnable," said Patel.
"These specific ballistic missile launches are in clear violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions, and beyond the violation of resolutions, these kinds of activities, they pose a very serious threat to the region and to the world more broadly," he added.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the North may be trying to draw the U.S.' attention, as it always has.
"They think, from the leadership's perspective in North Korea, part of what we are seeing is (it) doesn't like to be ignored," Blinken said when asked about North Korea in a special conversation with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on the importance of technology, diplomacy and national security in Stanford, California.
"And so when the world is focused elsewhere, this is a reminder that we (North Korea) are still here. We are still a problem. You have to deal with it," he added.
The top U.S. diplomat noted the joint military exercises of South Korea and the U.S. could not have been the reason for North Korea's missile provocations, saying they have been held for years.
"Over the last months, going back about a year, we have significantly increased our own work with our allies and partners in the region -- South Korea, Japan -- both on a bilateral basis where we, for example, renewed exercises that we have had for years," said Blinken.
He argued the real reason for the North's recent missile provocations may instead have been the growing cooperation between the U.S., South Korea and Japan.
"We brought them back -- military exercises -- to make sure that we can defend and hopefully deter any kind of North Korean aggression, as well as work that's being done now, in ways that it hadn't been in recent years among the United States, Japan, Korea together, which has lots of benefits including bringing Korea and Japan closer together," the secretary said.
"I think that Kim Jong-un saw that and didn't like it. And it's a response to that," he added.
Patel said the U.S. will continue to take necessary actions, together with its allies.
"So what the United States is going to continue to do is we are going to continue to stay engaged with our allies, the Republic of Korea and Japan. We are going to continue to have diplomatic engagements with them and take appropriate actions as necessary," he said.
bdk@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by 변덕근 · October 18, 2022
10. Japan’s warning system needs changes after ‘meaningless’ North Korean missile alerts, officials say
In addition, we need an integrated missile defense system in nNortheast Asia - the ROK, Japan, and the US.
Japan’s warning system needs changes after ‘meaningless’ North Korean missile alerts, officials say
Stars and Stripes · by Hana Kusumoto · October 17, 2022
North Korea launches a missile from a submarine in this image released by the state-run Korean Central News Agency on Oct. 10, 2022. (KCNA)
TOKYO — Members of the Japanese government questioned how effective their country’s early warning system is after it provided flawed messaging when North Korea launched a ballistic missile over Japan earlier this month.
An alert was issued to Hokkaido and Aomori prefecture in northern Japan after the launch Oct. 4, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said in the Diet’s upper house three days later. But the system caused confusion by also broadcasting an unnecessary alert to islands near Tokyo, he said.
Kishida said he takes the issue “seriously” and that the system has already been fixed.
“We will make efforts in preventative measures, so that this will not happen in the future,” he said.
The J-Alert early warning system sends out emergency messages and disseminates emergency information in the event of a missile launch, earthquake, tsunami or other event.
It sent out a first alert to Hokkaido and to nine towns and villages on islands not far from Tokyo at 7:27 a.m. Oct. 4, urging people to take shelter. The alert mistakenly included Tokyo because data on where to send warnings was not erased after it was used in a previous drill, Yomiuri Shimbun reported Oct. 5.
The newspaper reported that the alert was broadcast over loudspeakers on the islands and some schools delayed their classes.
Aomori prefecture, where the missile passed over, was not warned until a second message went out at 7:29 a.m., when the missile had already gone by. A message that the missile had passed over Japan was sent out 13 minutes later at 7:42 a.m.
“It’s hard to secure the time to evacuate with the current J-Alert,” Shun Otokita of the Japan Innovation Party said during a meeting of the upper house Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense on Thursday.
“There are many people who are concerned that the system protects the lives and property of the citizens,” he said.
A number of Liberal Democratic Party members suggested improving J-Alert during the ruling party’s defense committee meeting on Wednesday, Mainichi Shimbun reported that day.
The alert system issued a “meaningless” message after the missile passed over Aomori prefecture, legislators said, according to the newspaper.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno at a news conference Wednesday said the Japanese government is considering a survey asking people’s thoughts on the early warning system and how they reacted after they received the latest message.
A similar survey five years ago found that only about 5% of the people actually evacuated, Matsuno said. More than half said they did not evacuate or thought that they did not have to evacuate, he said, according to a TV Asahi report on Wednesday.
Stars and Stripes · by Hana Kusumoto · October 17, 2022
11. The U.S. Will Trade Seattle for Seoul
Consider this history and how Mr. Keck applies it.
Excerpts:
Notably, the South Korean left has similar views on many of these issues. Internationally, South Korean liberals and progressives are best known for having dovish views toward North Korea. But they are also defense hawks who favor more strategic autonomy, which is partly based on a form of Korean nationalism. It’s hardly unthinkable that, once secure with a nuclear arsenal, a left-leaning South Korean administration would assert strategic autonomy by removing U.S. troops from the country, much as France did.
Losing access to South Korea would be a devastating blow to the United States’ military posture in the Indo-Pacific and far more impactful than de Gaulle’s action. NATO’s multilateral nature allowed Washington to relocate its forces to Belgium and Germany, but this option would not be available in today’s Indo-Pacific, given the U.S. “hub and spoke” alliance system in the region. Put simply, if Seoul demanded a U.S. withdrawal, these forces could not be easily relocated somewhere else in the region.
Despite today’s unprecedented North Korean nuclear threat, a closer look at Cold War history suggests South Korean nuclear weapons aren’t necessary to deter Kim. The U.S.-South Korean alliance, backstopped by the U.S. nuclear deterrent, is capable of defending South Korea.
Furthermore, as it deepens its engagement in the Indo-Pacific, the United States will have an even greater incentive to maintain its presence in South Korea. Despite this assurance, the alliance should carefully heed the lessons of history. If Seoul were to one day acquire nuclear weapons, it is unlikely to make South Korea or the United States safer. On the contrary, doing so would undermine their alliance and weaken the United States’ military posture in the Indo-Pacific.
The U.S. Will Trade Seattle for Seoul
Cold War archives reveal why South Korea doesn’t need its own nuclear weapons to deter the North.
OCTOBER 17, 2022, 12:13 PM
Foreign Policy · by Zachary Keck · October 17, 2022
By Zachary Keck, a defense analyst and a former staffer on the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee.
As if the world weren’t messy enough, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is back to his usual antics with a flurry of recent missile tests, prompting various responses from the United States, South Korea, and Japan. Adding a new twist to a familiar story, North Korea flew bombers and fighter jets close to South Korean airspace, forcing Seoul to scramble its own aircraft.
In truth, although it has faded from global headlines, North Korea’s nuclear advances have quietly reshaped regional security dynamics since the “fire and fury” days of 2017. This is especially true when it comes to the question of whether South Korea should build its own nuclear weapons. The South Korean public has long supported this option: Recent polls have found that 71 percent of South Koreans favor a nuclear capability.
They are increasingly joined by South Korean leaders who question whether the United States will come to Seoul’s defense now that North Korean missiles can reportedly reach any U.S. city. As Lee Baek-soon, a former South Korean ambassador to Australia, put it, “the reliability of [the U.S.] nuclear umbrella is in question as North Korea possesses intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking the U.S. mainland.”
As if the world weren’t messy enough, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is back to his usual antics with a flurry of recent missile tests, prompting various responses from the United States, South Korea, and Japan. Adding a new twist to a familiar story, North Korea flew bombers and fighter jets close to South Korean airspace, forcing Seoul to scramble its own aircraft.
In truth, although it has faded from global headlines, North Korea’s nuclear advances have quietly reshaped regional security dynamics since the “fire and fury” days of 2017. This is especially true when it comes to the question of whether South Korea should build its own nuclear weapons. The South Korean public has long supported this option: Recent polls have found that 71 percent of South Koreans favor a nuclear capability.
They are increasingly joined by South Korean leaders who question whether the United States will come to Seoul’s defense now that North Korean missiles can reportedly reach any U.S. city. As Lee Baek-soon, a former South Korean ambassador to Australia, put it, “the reliability of [the U.S.] nuclear umbrella is in question as North Korea possesses intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking the U.S. mainland.”
Other South Korean politicians and military leaders are even more explicit. “Either American extended nuclear deterrence is formidable and credible, or South Korea acquires its own nuclear weapons,” Chun In-bum, a former commander of South Korea’s special forces, told the Financial Times, before adding, “I have never doubted an American soldier. But I would be foolish to place my nation’s security in the hands of an American politician.” A growing number of Western analysts seem to agree.
However, the arguments supporting this move all rely on historical examples of nuclear deterrence from another place and another time: a flawed understanding of the security dynamics of Cold War Europe. A closer look at this context demonstrates that South Korea doesn’t need its own arsenal—and that acquiring one will actually harm U.S. interests in the short and long term.
Proponents of a nuclear South Korea argue that its security challenges are analogous to those of U.S. allies in Cold War Europe. When the Soviet Union acquired long-range nuclear missiles, European leaders questioned the United States’ willingness to defend them. As French President Charles de Gaulle famously quipped to U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1961, would the United States really be willing to trade New York for Paris? Writing in these pages, Robert E. Kelly argues, “That same logic is at work in East Asia today. The United States will not sacrifice ‘Los Angeles for Seoul.’” Other American and South Korean analysts make the same analogy.
As I discuss in my book, Atomic Friends: How America Deals With Nuclear-Armed Allies, the two situations are not as comparable as they may seem on the surface. During the Cold War, NATO believed it couldn’t mount a conventional defense of Europe. Instead, the alliance’s war plans required the United States to use nuclear weapons to offset Moscow’s conventional superiority. Once the Soviet Union gained the capability to attack the United States with nuclear weapons, European leaders questioned whether a U.S. president would be willing to use the bomb to defeat a Soviet conventional attack.
In explaining what he meant by trading New York for Paris, according to a summary of the conversation sent to U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk, de Gaulle told Kennedy that his concern was the United States would not be the “first to use nuclear weapons if Soviets launch [a] purely conventional attack.”
The concerns on the Korean Peninsula today are quite different. The United States and South Korea enjoy conventional superiority over North Korea’s military. Seoul alone spends about 10 times as much on its military as Pyongyang, and the technology gap is even wider. Unlike in Cold War Europe, U.S. and South Korean forces could repel a purely conventional invasion.
Therefore, questions about U.S. credibility on the Korean Peninsula are premised on two conditions. First, if North Korea invades, will the United States mount a conventional defense of South Korea knowing Kim could resort to nuclear weapons to forestall defeat on the battlefield? Second, would the United States be willing to use nuclear weapons to retaliate against North Korean nuclear attacks on South Korea?
With a unified NATO command, and millions of U.S. troops on the front lines, European officials knew the United States would fight an invading Soviet force. The same is true in Korea today.
European leaders did not doubt either of these things during the Cold War, and South Korean officials shouldn’t today. With a unified NATO command, and millions of U.S. troops on the front lines, European officials knew the United States would inevitably fight an invading Soviet force using its conventional capabilities. The same is true in Korea today, given the unified command and large U.S. troop presence there.
Many are concerned that the United States might withdraw from the Korean Peninsula if Donald Trump, or someone with similar views, becomes president again. This is understandable, but it ignores the nearly unanimous bipartisan support for maintaining a U.S. troop presence in South Korea. During Trump’s presidency, Republican members of Congress were consistently willing to stand up to him on this issue.
In fact, Congress put a provision in its annual defense policy legislation forbidding the president from withdrawing from South Korea. There is a robust bipartisan consensus that the Indo-Pacific is America’s priority region, which provides an even stronger basis to support maintaining a large U.S. troop presence on the Korean Peninsula in the future.
European leaders also believed the United States would use nuclear weapons if the Soviet Union launched nuclear attacks on Western Europe. According to a memo of Kennedy’s visit to Paris in 1961, de Gaulle himself said he “fully believes that if the Soviets start atomic warfare, the US will retaliate.” So should South Korean leaders today. If North Korea used nuclear weapons against South Korea, U.S. troops on the peninsula and Americans living there would be caught in the crossfire.
A document that chronicles U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s conversation with French President Charles de Gaulle in Paris in 1961.
The first two pages of a document that chronicles U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s conversation with French President Charles de Gaulle at the Élysée Palace in Paris on the morning of June 2, 1961. Read the full memo.
The United States is hardly known for acting with restraint when its military or citizens are attacked. The tragedies of Pearl Harbor and 9/11—in which thousands of Americans were killed—would numerically pale in comparison to Kim using nuclear weapons in South Korea, where tens of thousands of U.S. troops and civilians would almost certainly be killed.
Any U.S. president would be under at least as much pressure to retaliate as Franklin D. Roosevelt and George W. Bush were in their respective historical contexts. The bottom line is, whether resorting to the nuclear arsenal or not, U.S. political leaders couldn’t allow Kim or his regime to survive if it used nuclear weapons against South Korea.
Managing extended deterrence will always be an incredibly fickle, uncertain business. To do it successfully, the United States must continuously make its commitments clear to both South Korea and North Korea, just as it did with NATO and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Compared with deterring a conventional attack on West Germany using nuclear weapons during the Cold War, deterring a nuclear attack from North Korea today is a far easier task. South Korean defense planners should feel some level of assurance from this, combined with the United States’ strong and growing interest in their country’s security.
Managing extended deterrence will always be an incredibly fickle, uncertain business.
Besides suggesting that South Korea should trust the United States’ security guarantee, Cold War Europe also shows the dangers that a South Korean nuclear weapons program could pose to the United States. Once Britain and France acquired the bomb, they both slashed their conventional forces—decisions that London and Paris explicitly tied to their possession of nuclear arms.
With nuclear forces ensuring their defense, British and French leaders wanted to spend less on guns and more on butter. Washington chafed at British and French military cuts because they forced the United States to shoulder a greater share of the defense burden. Not much has changed since, as the United States similarly needs its Indo-Pacific allies to strengthen their conventional forces instead of allowing them to atrophy to create redundant strategic arsenals.
An even more alarming possibility is that a nuclear-armed South Korea could order U.S. forces off its territory. Once France had an operational nuclear deterrent, de Gaulle withdrew Paris from NATO’s unified command and removed U.S. and NATO troops from French territory. De Gaulle tied this decision to France having the bomb, but it was also rooted in his preexisting views on French nationalism, the value of alliances, and U.S. involvement in European affairs.
Read More
People walk past replica missiles at the War Memorial of Korea in Seoul.
South Korea and Japan can decide their own destinies.
Notably, the South Korean left has similar views on many of these issues. Internationally, South Korean liberals and progressives are best known for having dovish views toward North Korea. But they are also defense hawks who favor more strategic autonomy, which is partly based on a form of Korean nationalism. It’s hardly unthinkable that, once secure with a nuclear arsenal, a left-leaning South Korean administration would assert strategic autonomy by removing U.S. troops from the country, much as France did.
Losing access to South Korea would be a devastating blow to the United States’ military posture in the Indo-Pacific and far more impactful than de Gaulle’s action. NATO’s multilateral nature allowed Washington to relocate its forces to Belgium and Germany, but this option would not be available in today’s Indo-Pacific, given the U.S. “hub and spoke” alliance system in the region. Put simply, if Seoul demanded a U.S. withdrawal, these forces could not be easily relocated somewhere else in the region.
Despite today’s unprecedented North Korean nuclear threat, a closer look at Cold War history suggests South Korean nuclear weapons aren’t necessary to deter Kim. The U.S.-South Korean alliance, backstopped by the U.S. nuclear deterrent, is capable of defending South Korea.
Furthermore, as it deepens its engagement in the Indo-Pacific, the United States will have an even greater incentive to maintain its presence in South Korea. Despite this assurance, the alliance should carefully heed the lessons of history. If Seoul were to one day acquire nuclear weapons, it is unlikely to make South Korea or the United States safer. On the contrary, doing so would undermine their alliance and weaken the United States’ military posture in the Indo-Pacific.
Foreign Policy · by Zachary Keck · October 17, 2022
12. Moon partly responsible for Korea's failure to keep UN Human Rights Council seat: expert
An interesting post-mortem.
[INTERVIEW] Moon partly responsible for Korea's failure to keep UN Human Rights Council seat: expert
The Korea Times · October 17, 2022
Then President Moon Jae-in, right, and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un walk toward the welcoming ceremony venue at the inter-Korean truce village of Panmunjom, in this April 27, 2018, file photo. Korea Times photo by Ko Young-kwon
Ex-president 'shamefully walked away' from roles to address rights abuses of North Koreans, Human Rights Watch official says
By Jung Min-ho
Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's Asia divisionRuling party lawmakers have blamed the previous Moon Jae-in administration for South Korea's recent failure to keep its seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council, accusing it of shutting its eyes to North Korea's gross and obvious violations of human rights while seeking to improve inter-Korean relations throughout his five-year term.
Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's Asia division, said he believes they were right to point out that Moon is not free of responsibility for the seat loss. Though he is not the sole reason, the international human rights expert believes his failures to do "even the minimum" on the rights of ordinary North Koreans by U.N. standards affected members' voting decisions.
"Moon shamefully walked away from any sort of leadership to address the rights abuses and suffering of the North Korean people, taking an extreme position that he would not even acknowledge, much less act on, Pyongyang's systematic human rights violations," he told The Korea Times in an interview. "The huge policy swings between the Moon and Park [Geun-hye] administrations were certainly noticed by the international community, and it was not appreciated. It appears that some governments at the U.N. were whipsawed by the massive changes in South Korean government policy toward the DPRK (North Korea) and some apparently decided that meant Seoul is an unreliable partner when it comes human rights issues."
In a vote of the U.N. General Assembly to elect 12 members to the council last week, South Korea landed fifth among seven Asia-Pacific countries competing for membership, coming in behind Bangladesh, Maldives, Vietnam and Kyrgyzstan. It was the first time South Korea had been turned down for membership since the council's establishment in 2006.
The Moon administration's 2019 decision to repatriate two North Korea fishermen against their will, along with allegations that it neglected its duties and distorted information surrounding the death of a South Korean fisheries official who was killed by the North Korean military in 2020, were the cases that drew the most criticism from human rights activists.
Children perform as North Korea marks the 77th anniversary of the founding of the Workers' Party of Korea in Pyongyang, Oct. 10. AFP-Yonhap
Nevertheless, South Korea not getting reelected to the U.N. Human Rights Council came as a shock to many experts, given its relatively better human rights record and the size of its financial contributions to the U.N. The country is the ninth-largest donor to the 2022-2024 U.N. regular and peacekeeping budgets.
"There is certainly a high degree of shock in New York that South Korea performed so poorly in running for a seat on the Human Rights Council," Robertson noted. "Some of the reasons are procedural, such as failing to have a strategic approach, which was seen in the decision to run for many seats on many different U.N. bodies instead of concentrating efforts on a couple of key positions. Compounding this problem, the ROK (South Korean) diplomats were apparently sluggish in their efforts to lobby other governments, meaning they were unable to keep pace against the very vigorous and focused lobby efforts by other governments, like Vietnam and Bangladesh."
His analysis is in line with the explanation by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which attributed the failure to the country angling for too many leadership posts in international organizations simultaneously.
This photo taken on Oct. 11 shows a plenary meeting of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, as participants prepare to elect the members of the Human Rights Council. Yonhap
Robertson also said the U.N.'s decision-making system is not perfect and that South Korea needs to be more strategic to achieve its goals on the platform.
"While I wish that only governments with good human rights records could be elected to the HRC, that is simply not the reality. Votes at the U.N. are very political, and involve horse-trading between governments that go beyond just the rights record of a particular government. For example, Vietnam has presided over a massive crackdown on political dissidents, violated core civil and political rights and refuses to allow any media freedom ― yet it got more votes than South Korea, which has a significantly better rights record. So quite clearly, South Korea needs to raise its game politically as well as respect human rights at home," he said.
"Obviously, President Yoon Suk-yeol and his team need to go back to the drawing board and figure out what went wrong, and how to address it. This will require serious internal analysis, collaborative approaches and placing a priority on protecting human rights both north and south of the 38th parallel as well as inculcating rights policies into South Korean foreign policy."
The Korea Times · October 17, 2022
13. In war, Japan will be our ally
It is good to read this in the Korean press.
Tuesday
October 18, 2022
dictionary + A - A
In war, Japan will be our ally
https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2022/10/18/opinion/columns/In-war-Japan-will-be-our-ally/20221018111032563.html?utm_source=pocket_mylist
Lee Ha-kyung
The author is the chief editor of the JoongAng Ilbo.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the United States and the Soviet Union had a 13-day standoff seemingly on the brink of nuclear war. Eyeball-to-eyeball with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, U.S. President John F. Kennedy said the possibility of a nuclear war was between one-in-three or one-in-two. Co-authors Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow wrote in their book, “Essence of Decision,” that millions of the people in Europe, in addition to over 100 million Americans and 100 million Soviets would have died if there was a nuclear war.
Sixty years later, two leaders are threatening to push nuclear buttons. They are Vladimir Putin of Russia and Kim Jong-un of North Korea. The North even legalized its right to launch a preemptive nuclear strike. Kim also completed an emergency plan that nuclear weapons would be launched automatically and immediately after his unforeseen death. It means that he has no intention to succumb to the “decapitating strike” strategy.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un watches a recent missile test at an undisclosed location and date in this photograph released by Pyongyang’s state-controlled Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). [YONHAP]
A Bloomberg report said some in the Biden administration are arguing that engineers should be evacuated and infrastructure be destroyed to prevent China’s invasion of Taiwan and control of TSMC. If the United States and China clash in Taiwan after the launch of Xi Jinping’s one-man rule, the United States will likely mobilize its troops in Korea and Japan. There is a possibility that Korea will be embroiled in the U.S.-China war. The absence of the U.S. Forces Korea is what North Korea wants for its provocation.
Russia, China and North Korea are nucleararmed states. “We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” U.S. President Joe Biden recently said. South Korea, confronting the North, is the first to face this potential disaster.
During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union confronted each other when they were 5,500 kilometers apart. The Korea-U.S. alliance, however, is much closer to Kim’s weapons. The United States has long maintained ambassador-level diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and Russia as well as hotlines. With desperate communication, it was able to stop a disaster by activating a balance of terror. But the South and the United States do not have diplomatic relations with the North nor hotlines. If the North, a reclusive country that lacks outside information and communication abilities, makes a wrong judgment, the Korean Peninsula will become a living hell.
It is urgent that politicians make bipartisan efforts to maintain a meticulous, robust security posture and establish communication channels to prevent a misjudgment. But Democratic Party (DP) Chairman Lee Jae-myung recently criticized the Yoon Suk-yeol administration’s decision to participate in a South Korea-U.S.-Japan military exercise to counter a possible North Korean nuclear attack, calling it an “extreme proJapan act and pro-Japan defense policy.” While keeping silence toward the North’s Kim, who threatens the South, Lee tried to fuel anti-Japan sentiments in the South.
DP Rep. Kim Byung-joo also supported Lee by saying, “It is possible that the Japanese SelfDefense Forces may be stationed in Korea, like the U.S. troops.”
The trilateral military exercise was agreed to by defense ministers from Seoul, Washington and Tokyo in 2017 during the Moon Jae-in administration. When Rep. Kim was the deputy commander of the Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command, such joint military exercises took place six times.
Immanuel Kant said in “Perpetual Peace” that a republic favors peace because the people are against a war. Liberal international political theory says democratic countries do not engage in wars against one another. When threats from the North, China and Russia grow, cooperating with Japan is a key to survival for the South.
The late President Kim Dae-jung supported normalization of relations with Japan in 1965. He was a giant politician who had chosen national interests over his party’s stance. After he was elected president, he also forged a joint declaration with Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi to upgrade the two countries’ relations.
DP Chairman Lee’s anti-Japan sentiment is anachronistic. It is a clear contrast to President Yoon’s mature attitude.
Without Japan’s help, the South and the United States cannot counter the North’s provocations. During the Korean War, 1 million soldiers were dispatched from U.S. bases in Japan to the Korean Peninsula and 700,000 tons of bombs were dropped. For the Incheon Landing Operation, 10,000 soldiers were mobilized. “Without Japan, the United States would not have been able to wage war in Korea,” said Robert Murphy, the first postwar American ambassador to Japan.
Why is DP Chairman Lee trying to instigate anti-Japan sentiments that are against Korea’s national interest? Probably to weaken the prosecution’s investigation of him.
De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Senior Advisor, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647
email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com
| 
