Quotes of the Day:
"Political action is the highest responsibility of a citizen."
- John F. Kennedy
“I think of a hero as someone who understands the degree of responsibility that comes with his freedom."
- Bob Dylan
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."
- Socrates
1. N. Korea asserts need for nuclear deterrence, citing war-torn countries 'tricked' by U.S.
2. S. Korea's military team leaves for Hawaii to join U.S.-led RIMPAC exercise
3. N. Korea's food shortages estimated at 860,000 tons: CIA data
4. AUSA LANPAC Symposium - Panel Discussion: Deterring Aggression through Joint and Coalition Readiness
5. Civic groups, foreign envoys stage joint campaign against N. Korea over 'enforced disappearance' of persons
6. As cases surge in the U.S., Army units in South Korea are commended for fighting COVID
7. Good Luck Not Accidentally Hiring a North Korean Scammer
8. Russia ousts North Korea to claim title of least-liked country
9. South Korea to upgrade Patriot missile defence system to deter North Korea's belligerence
10. US Air Force to deploy B-1B bombers in Guam in several weeks
11. Seven out of 10 Koreans believe ‘nuclear power is necessary’
12. North Korea’s Kim Jong-un has closer ties to South Korea than he likes to admit
13. Yoon Suk-yeol says South Korea will no longer ‘appease’ North, but are Seoul’s policies and China impacting future talks?
14. Tokyo issues complaints over Seoul’s Dokdo marine survey amid efforts to thaw relations
1. N. Korea asserts need for nuclear deterrence, citing war-torn countries 'tricked' by U.S.
Deterrence is one thing but coercion, subversion, and blackmail diplomacy as well as offensive warfighting operations are the real purposes for Kim's nuclear program.
We must make Kim understand our extended deterrence - we will respond with nuclear weapons if Kim Jong-un employs weapons of mass destruction. We will not be deterred by the regime's nuclear program.
N. Korea asserts need for nuclear deterrence, citing war-torn countries 'tricked' by U.S. | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, May 31 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Tuesday said it has learned its lesson from countries that were lured into surrendering their war deterrence by the United States, as Pyongyang has long sought to justify its own nuclear development as being intended for self-defense.
The North made the claim in a book covering the military and diplomatic achievements of its leader Kim Jong-un in the past decade, published by the Pyongyang Publishing House. The book was released on Uriminzokkiri, a North Korean propaganda website.
"The invasion tactic of the U.S. is to force (a country) to surrender its self-defensive capabilities," it said. "The U.S. has relentlessly laid out sugarcoated words, saying that it will help the country to prosper if it gives up its military buildup and takes a different path."
The book also said the North has learned its lessons from other countries, including the 2011 military intervention in Libya, which leaves them with no choice but to resort to war deterrence.
It then introduced leader Kim's accomplishments in summit meetings with China, Russia and the U.S. In particular, the book praised Kim for "not giving in a single step" to protect the sovereignty and rights of his country at the Hanoi summit in 2019, though his meeting with former President Donald Trump ended without any agreement.
julesyi@yna.co.kr
(END)
2. S. Korea's military team leaves for Hawaii to join U.S.-led RIMPAC exercise
KoSouth Korea continues to "step up" executing President Yoon's intent.
Is this also preparing for OPCON transition? Admiral An will command a portion of the training.
Excerpt:
During the exercise, An plans to command the Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) training, marking the first time for South Korea to lead the segment involving amphibious landing operations and other combined security maneuvers.
(LEAD) S. Korea's military team leaves for Hawaii to join U.S.-led RIMPAC exercise | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: UPDATES with team's departure in lead, 2nd para; CHANGES photo; ADDS photo)
By Song Sang-ho
SEOUL, May 31 (Yonhap) -- A South Korean fleet of warships, maritime aircraft and around 1,000 troops departed for Hawaii on Tuesday to participate in a U.S.-led multinational maritime exercise set to begin late next month, the Navy said.
Led by Rear Adm. An Sang-min, the fleet left a naval base on the southern resort island of Jeju to join the biennial Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC) scheduled to run from June 29 through Aug. 4.
During the exercise, An plans to command the Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) training, marking the first time for South Korea to lead the segment involving amphibious landing operations and other combined security maneuvers.
Aboard the USS Essex amphibious assault ship, An will guide the training where 13 warships from eight countries and around 1,000 Marine personnel from nine countries are expected to take part.
The Korean fleet includes the 14,500-ton Marado amphibious landing ship, the 7,600-ton Sejong the Great destroyer, the 4,400-ton Munmu the Great destroyer, the 1,800-ton Shin Dol-seok submarine, a P-3 maritime surveillance aircraft, two Lynx helicopters and nine amphibious assault vehicles.
The fleet marks South Korea's largest contingent to the RIMPAC since the country first joined the exercise in 1990, according to the officials.
"By successfully completing the given responsibilities, we will enhance capabilities to operate combined forces and execute combined operations, and eventually contribute to strengthening our military readiness posture on the Korean Peninsula," An was quoted as saying.
Launched in 1971, the RIMPAC exercise is designed to enhance cooperation among participating countries in securing sea lines of communication and countering potential security challenges at sea.
South Korea is participating in the event for the 17th time this year.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
3. N. Korea's food shortages estimated at 860,000 tons: CIA data
Excerpt:
The CIA put the North's population this year at 25.96 million, with 3.13 million, or 12 percent of the total, living in the capital city of Pyongyang. The average life expectancy in the nation is estimated at 71.77 years, it said.
N. Korea's food shortages estimated at 860,000 tons: CIA data | Yonhap News Agency
By Chae Yun-hwan
SEOUL, May 31 (Yonhap) -- North Korea is in urgent need of food imports or assistance as many of its people continue to suffer from food shortages and malnutrition, with the gap estimated at 860,000 tons, data from the U.S. intelligence community showed Tuesday.
The country's food gap is equivalent to around two to three months of food use, with the woes deepening in the midst of economic constraints attributable to its ongoing antivirus fight, according to the data posted on the online World Factbook of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
"Due to low food consumption levels, poor dietary diversity, and economic downturn -- a large portion of the population suffers from low levels of food consumption and very poor dietary diversity," it read. "The economic constraints, particularly resulting from the global impact of the COVID‑19 pandemic, have increased the population's vulnerability to food insecurity.
"If this gap is not adequately covered through commercial imports and/or food aid, households could experience a harsh lean period," it added.
The North imposed stringent border controls against the pandemic in early 2020. It even implemented nationwide lockdowns after admitting to a virus outbreak earlier this month.
The CIA put the North's population this year at 25.96 million, with 3.13 million, or 12 percent of the total, living in the capital city of Pyongyang. The average life expectancy in the nation is estimated at 71.77 years, it said.
yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr
(END)
4. AUSA LANPAC Symposium - Panel Discussion: Deterring Aggression through Joint and Coalition Readiness
The video of the panel can be viewed at the link. Below are Dr.Duyeon Kim/s prepared remarks.
AUSA LANPAC Symposium - Panel Discussion: Deterring Aggression through Joint and Coalition Readiness
HONOLULU, HI, UNITED STATES
05.18.2022
Courtesy Video
Speaker(s):
LTG Willard M. Burleson COL W. M. Bochat Dr. Duyeon Kim Lt Gen Andrew Harrison LTG In-Bum Chun
Deterring Aggression Through Joint and Combined Readiness Duyeon Kim
Center for a New American Security Land Forces Pacific (LANPAC) Symposium
May 18, 2022 | Honolulu, Hawaii Prepared Remarks
Thank you LTG Burleson and AUSA for the invitation to participate in my first LANPAC symposium. It’s a real pleasure and honor to join this distinguished panel: 8th Army Commander Burleson, UN Command Deputy Commander Harrison, LTG Chun (Ret.), and 2nd Infantry Division Chief of Staff Colonel Bochat—thank you all for your service.
The security landscape, and in turn deterrence, has become increasingly complicated and challenging. Deterrence strategy was, in many respects, easier during the Cold War era than today. Back then, the United States had unquestionable military, economic, and soft power
dominance and we were dealing with only one other nuclear state, the Soviet Union. So it was easier for many countries to “choose a side.”
Today, the landscape is more complex. Many Asian countries in particular, but European countries as well, rely—or depend—on China to serve their economic interests while continuing to depend on the United States to serve their security interests. And some Western European countries depend on Russia for their oil and gas. Such dual dependency makes it challenging for these states to stand up to China and Russia, or even impose penalties on them for bad behavior and coercion.
And today, the U.S. needs to deal with not only one nuclear adversary, but three—Russia, China, and North Korea. This raises the question of whether Washington is able to deal with multiple crises caused by or involving more than one nuclear adversary.
America’s Asian and European allies and partners have been increasingly pressured by the question of “Whose side are you on?” since the U.S.-China strategic competition picked up steam, but the need to take a stand has become much more pronounced and important since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Further complicating the security and traditional deterrence landscape is the rise in gray zone
tactics by all three regimes. They highlight the limitations of military force to deter such actions. In other words, deterrence that is based only on military—nuclear or conventional—will not be effective because U.S. competitors and adversaries are using a wide range of tools beyond the
military realm, but with the same or similar degree of consequences, to advance their own
national interests. In other words, America’s nuclear adversaries will explore various pathways to
achieve their objective, not just one. This means that they will not be deterred just because we imposed costs on one pathway. This means we cannot think of or utilize tools like nuclear
deterrence or military strategy in isolation from other strategic considerations.
And this also means that we cannot think of one problem country in isolation from the other problem countries because they impact each other in many ways. And we cannot approach to solve a problem through one lens or one issue. The approach needs to be a comprehensive one.
The geopolitical and security environment I outlined above makes it more challenging for the
U.S. and its Asian and European allies and partners to stand up to and compete with countries who are challenging the rules-based order—or attempting to rewrite it—while seeking
cooperation with those regimes on shared security challenges like North Korea, for example. The Korean Peninsula is a case that demonstrates the deterrence challenges and complexities we face regionally and globally.
The backdrop I mentioned thus far is the environment in which the U.S., South Korea, and Japan need to operate when they deal with North Korea. The North Korean nuclear issue has never been a singular “North Korea” problem or a “nuclear problem” in isolation. The national
interests of six different countries—the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Japan, and Russia— converge in this issue. That’s why we once saw the Six Party Talks in the early 2000s try to freeze, disable, and dismantle North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, but failed for many reasons.
North Korea’s tools or pathways to achieve its goals are largely nuclear weapons, conventional weapons, and cyberattacks, and (cyber) crimes. And their provocations are not always about the United States nor are they just about getting U.S. attention. They have domestic imperatives that have apparently been the key drivers of the pace and scope of weapons tests and advancements
that we have witnessed these past few years.
We are discussing Deterring Aggression through Joint and Combined Readiness in this session on the peaceful and serene shores of Waikiki. But the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia, where all of us panelists are based, is far from serene.
When we ask ourselves whether deterrence has worked or is working or how it should work, it’s important to first define what our target of deterrence is. The target of deterrence has evolved and expanded over time with Pyongyang’s development of its military and nuclear weapons
capabilities. We went from trying to deter another North Korean invasion and acts of terrorism, to the acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability, to deter the testing of weapons, to deter the
proliferation of WMD parts and technology, to deter nuclear use, and finally, to deter illicit cyber and financial activities.
Our deterrence record on North Korea is spotty. So far, the main deterrent against another North Korean invasion remains the U.S.-South Korea alliance—operationalized by the stationing of
U.S. troops and UN Sending States on and around the peninsula, the provision of the U.S. nuclear umbrella over South Korea and Japan, and the conducting of joint and combined defensive military exercises every year. These components constitute a deterrence strategy by
providing the capability to impose costs in the event North Korea acts aggressively (e.g., invades or attacks the South), and they demonstrate America’s resolve and political will to act (e.g.,
threat of retaliation) in the event of North Korean aggression.
But the jury is still out on whether we can continue to deter another North Korean invasion and prevent nuclear use.
Deterrence, however, has failed to prevent Pyongyang from engaging in numerous provocations (limited, calculated acts of aggression beyond nuclear and missile tests) and failed to deter acts of terrorism after the Korean War that have resulted in the deaths of American and South Korean civilians and soldiers.
In particular, U.S.-South Korean joint military readiness has deteriorated over the past five years. Donald Trump unilaterally canceled annual military exercises at the Singapore summit, which is what both North Korea wanted as well as the previous progressive South Korean government whose policy was essentially one of appeasement. During this time, North Korea has been
accelerating the pace and scope of its nuclear weapons development, focusing particularly on what they call “tactical weapons,” which are the ones that Trump condoned and ones that can confound missiles defense; directly threaten South Korea, Japan, and Americans living there; and be used in conflict or even start a conflict. I certainly do not need to tell this audience how dangerous those weapons can be.
While our large-scale drills and field exercises were replaced with smaller-scale command post exercises and computer simulations to supposedly provide space for diplomacy, they have not led to material changes to North Korea’s military posture or readiness, nor prevented provocations, nor incentivized Pyongyang to take meaningful denuclearization measures.
For the past five years, Pyongyang has also further complicated matters with its exploitation of the gray zone between war and peace by engaging in aggressive and coercive actions that narrowly skirt the border between provocation of escalation and conflict.
Deterrence also failed to prevent North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear technology for military purposes. Deterrence failed to prevent Pyongyang from developing far more advanced nuclear weapons and parts than anyone has ever imagined in the 1990s or the early 2000s. They include thermonuclear weapons, solid fuel road-mobile ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, hypersonic glide vehicles, tactical nuclear weapons, satellite launch vehicles, cruise
missiles, and multiple reentry vehicles.
It does not matter right now whether these weapons are reliable or operational. Kim Jong Un’s pursuit of them, and explicit marching orders last year to develop them, mean it’s only a matter
of time until these weapons will become reliable and operational. And North Korea plays the
long game, especially when Kim Jong Un is most likely calculating at least four decades ahead as long as his health serves him.
Deterrence has also failed to prevent nuclear and missile tests, horizontal proliferation, asymmetric provocations such as cyberattacks and illegal cyber and financial activities.
Still, there’s some good news in all of this, but with some caution. The United States under the Biden administration now has a new, conservative South Korean ally as of May 10 that is eager to strengthen and reinvigorate the alliance, return to normal military readiness, and strengthen
the U.S. extended deterrent. Here, the assurance part is just as important, if not more, than the deterrence part for many South Koreans. Issues regarding extended deterrence and assurance are fundamentally driven by increasing fears of abandonment and skepticism of the credibility of Washington’s security commitment against the backdrop of North Korean nuclear weapons advancements and continued threats.
So, the alliance will now run more smoothly, but Yoon’s advisors will want a greater voice as equal partners in alliance matters—no longer as the younger brother needing permission—which could cause some tension. And it may be difficult or impossible for Washington to support some of Seoul’s wishes.
For example, some conservatives want the return of tactical U.S. nuclear weapons to Korea; the NATO model of “nuclear sharing”—although there is no consensus in Korea on what that means or looks like—the greenlight to instantly retaliate with force after kinetic North Korean actions; and some even want South Korea’s own nuclear deterrent. President Yoon has also talked about preemptive strikes during the campaign.
Specifically, Yoon’s advisors want U.S. strategic assets deployed to the peninsula—not next week or next year or next month but like, yesterday—and more strategic assets deployed at times of North Korean provocation cycles. In general, strengthening the U.S. extended deterrent in visible ways will make South Koreans feel more assured, but North Korea could misperceive
them as offensive actions aimed at Pyongyang or use them as a pretext to further up its ante. Some measures that strengthen the U.S. extended deterrent could also upset China, especially if there are components that build up America’s regional missile defense systems, which Beijing believes are aimed at undermining China’s deterrent.
Some conservative South Korean politicians, military officials, pundits, and media outlets want South Korea to develop its own nuclear deterrent or even a latent nuclear capability like Japan. These voices will likely expand and crescendo if South Koreans perceive that Washington is not being proactive enough to solve the North Korea problem, particularly during provocation
cycles.
Some proponents of nuclear weaponization argue that South Korea should have them so that the two Koreas can hold arms control negotiations to reach nuclear zero together.
And, to some conservative South Koreans and military officials, precision-guided munitions are not enough to satisfy their standards for extended deterrence and assurance. They still believe
that nukes need to be met with nukes. So what should we do?
First, the U.S. and South Korea need to strengthen their military readiness. At the least, we need to get back to normal exercises and training. I know I’m preaching to the choir at LANPAC. But this is particularly important if North Korea wages another conventional attack similar to the ones we saw in 2010 with the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island and sinking of the Cheonan. Even
in 2010 when the allies were presumed to be more ready than they are now—thanks to continued practices, training, and exercises—reliable sources told me at the time that there was some confusion and disarray in the immediate aftermath of the shelling on what to do.
Nevertheless, some advisors in the Yoon administration and military officers may want to
immediately retaliate with force in a similar scenario in the future. This means that, second, the allies will need to have both the policy and operational conversation soon on how they might respond to any kinetic North Korean actions.
And because of the possible ideas that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has given North Korea, the U.S. and South Korea could hold regular deterrence exercises that include simulations of North Korean nuclear coercion in addition to contingency planning. Gaming out this scenario
among both military officers and government officials could prompt South Korea to want a frank conversation on the circumstances under which Washington might use nuclear weapons against North Korea.
Third, the United States should continue to use diplomatic negotiations as its main foreign policy tool to denuclearize North Korea and the allies should continue to offer COVID vaccines and humanitarian aid while maintaining a robust deterrence posture to prevent another war, prevent nuclear use, and readily respond to any North Korean provocation or limited attack.
Strengthening deterrence will come with South Korean demands for more visible measures and exercises to reassure South Koreans of U.S. commitment and resolve. Here, the allies should hold frank conversations soon on what exactly South Korea means by arrangements like “nuclear sharing” and why Washington could not support it or the deployment of nuclear weapons to Korea.
Strengthening deterrence will also require strengthening interoperability—technical, human, and procedural—among the U.S., South Korea, and Japan vis-à-vis North Korea and even China.
Fourth—to bring it back full circle—if the object of deterrence is to dissuade all bad behavior by North Korea—including but not limited to further nuclear and missile testing, a military attack or invasion of South Korea, disruptive cyber operations, illicit financial activities, acts of terrorism, production and use of chemical and biological weapons, and conventional military provocations short of war—then the United States needs to employ a comprehensive policy that incorporates a spectrum of tools spanning diplomacy, economic, political, modern and tailored and integrated deterrence, and gray-zone tactics.
As North Korea’s military arsenal and offensive gray zone capabilities expand and become more sophisticated with the incorporation of new technologies, America’s toolkit and policy must also evolve.
Thank you very much and I look forward to the discussion.
5. Civic groups, foreign envoys stage joint campaign against N. Korea over 'enforced disappearance' of persons
It is good to see civil society returning to public events to condemn the human rights abuses and crimes against humanity by the Kim family regime.
Civic groups, foreign envoys stage joint campaign against N. Korea over 'enforced disappearance' of persons | Yonhap News Agency
By Chae Yun-hwan
SEOUL, May 31 (Yonhap) -- A group of nongovernmental organizations in South Korea and abroad condemned North Korea on Tuesday for its "systematic abduction, denial of repatriation and subsequent enforced disappearance of persons from other countries."
During a press conference, joined by several foreign ambassadors in Seoul as well as a representative from a U.N. agency, they issued a joint declaration urging South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol to establish "accountability measures" for relevant crimes committed by the North.
In the declaration, the organizations expressed their "deep concern that the DPRK government has engaged in the systematic abduction, denial of repatriation and subsequent enforced disappearance of persons from other countries as a matter of state policy and creates large numbers of victims related to the Republic of Korea including South Korean abductees, prisoners of war and ethnic Korean displaced from Japan under the paradise on earth operation." The DPRK is the acronym for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
They urged Pyongyang to confirm the fates and identities of South Koreans detained in the secretive nation due to its enforced disappearance crimes and their descendants.
They also called on South Korea to sign and ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances.
The envoys who joined the campaign were French Amb. Philippe Lefort, Argentine Amb. Alfredo Carlos Bascou, Dutch Amb. Joanne Doornewaard and British Amb. Colin James Crooks. Among other participants in the event held at the French envoy's official residence was Imesh Pokharel, representative ad interim of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Seoul.
Almost 100,000 South Korean civilians were abducted by the North during the 1950-53 Korean War, while at least 516 South Koreans were taken after the war, according to the Citizens' Alliance for North Korean Human Rights.
yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr
(END)
6. As cases surge in the U.S., Army units in South Korea are commended for fighting COVID
Kudos to 8th Army (and USFK and all units in Korea).
As cases surge in the U.S., Army units in South Korea are commended for fighting COVID
The award comes as the Army reports more mandatory separations for soldiers refusing the COVID vaccine.
SHARE
The members of the United States’ 8th Army, along with other Army units stationed in South Korea were just given the Army Superior Unit Award for their fight against COVID-19. The Army announced the commendation on Thursday, May 26, citing their efforts to contain and prevent the spread of the virus during the earliest days of the pandemic in 2020.
Cases in South Korea were reported in January 2020, the same time the first infections were discovered in the United States. In the weeks after cases first appeared, they quickly soared, and it turned the country “into the second epicenter of the global pandemic,” according to the Army’s release. One viral hot spot was the city of Daegu, whose metropolitan area was home to four Army stations housing thousands of U.S. service members.
“As South Korea’s number of confirmed cases continued to increase, the 11,000 troops, dependents, and civilians in Daegu became the first large U.S population to confront COVID-19,” the Army said in its release on the award.
On Feb. 26, 2020 the first COVID-19 case was reported in an active-duty soldier serving in South Korea. In response to spreading cases, the 8th Army initiated quarantines for potentially exposed soldiers, enacted strict hygiene measures and some lockdowns. It also began monitoring troops’ travel to enact contact tracing. It was one of the first responses by the U.S. military to the pandemic.
The award, created in 1985 to honor units that perform extraordinary service or challenging missions during peacetime. Soldiers awarded the honor can permanently wear the lapel pin. The citation for the 8th Army and other units covers the period from Jan. 28-April 30, 2020.
The news comes the same week as the Army reported new numbers on its vaccination efforts. As of May 26, 97% of active-duty troops are fully vaccinated, and 98% are at least partially inoculated. 742 soldiers have been separated as a result of refusing to get vaccinated against the virus. There have been a total of 4,428 requests for a permanent religious exemption to the COVID vaccine and 732 medical exemption requests. Only 31 exemptions have been granted by the Army. Vaccinations were made mandatory in August. The total number of soldiers punished is at 3,418, up by more than 400 since January. These are in the form of general officer memorandums of reprimand, or GOMORs, which can be permanent or temporary. If permanent, the reprimand can prevent promotions.
The awards for the forces stationed in South Korea also comes as cases are surging in the United States. The rate is four times as high as it was last year when vaccinations were just rolling out. As the country heads into the Memorial Day weekend, approximately 100,000 new cases are being reported each day in the United States. More than one million Americans have died from the virus.
The Army Reserve and National Guard are on a different vaccination timeline than active-duty soldiers; their deadline is the end of June.
The latest on Task & Purpose
7. Good Luck Not Accidentally Hiring a North Korean Scammer
Excerpts:
“The issue is always, whose responsibility is it to protect against these attacks? That’s on individuals and businesses, which often sorely lack the ability to ingest this type of information and make actionable improvements,” says David Kennedy, CEO of the corporate incident response consultancy TrustedSec. “Large companies that have dedicated security teams can use these warnings, but I do really feel that there needs to be a shift toward security for all and helping smaller organizations with defensive positions.”
The alert and other recent government disclosures about North Korean hacking and financial crimes do help raise awareness and likely indicate that the activity is a real and urgent threat. But as Jake Williams, director of cyber threat intelligence at the security firm Scythe puts it, “They have been what I believe to be intentionally vague in recommendations. The more specific they get to businesses, the easier it is for businesses to say that they followed the letter of the instructions and hence have no liability.”
Good Luck Not Accidentally Hiring a North Korean Scammer
DPRK hackers are tricking their way into jobs with Western firms. A US government alert reminds employers they're on the front lines—and potentially on the hook.
LILY HAY NEWMAN SECURITY MAY 30, 2022 7:00 AM
Wired · by Condé Nast · May 30, 2022
For more than a decade, North Korean hackers and digital scammers have run wild, pilfering hundreds of millions of dollars to raise funds for the Hermit Kingdom and often leaving chaos in their wake. But while the United States and other governments regularly call out North Korea’s digital espionage operations and issue indictments against their hackers, it has proved more difficult to bring charges for rogue theft and profiteering. North Korea has been under extensive sanctions by the US and other governments for years, but efforts to address the regime’s financial crimes have met with obstacles.
Last week, the US Treasury, State Department, and Federal Bureau of Investigation jointly issued a 16-page alert warning businesses to guard against a particular scam in which North Korean IT workers apply for freelance contracts—often with wealthy North American, European, and East Asian firms—to generate revenue for their country. The workers pose as IT workers of other nationalities, pretending to be remote workers from South Korea, China, Japan, Eastern Europe, or the US. The alert notes that there are thousands of North Korean IT workers taking on such contracts. Some conduct their work from North Korea itself and others work overseas, mainly out of China and Russia, with small contingents in Southeast Asia and Africa. In some cases, the North Korean scammers themselves sub-contract with other more legitimate workers to enhance their credibility.
“DPRK IT workers can individually earn more than USD 300,000 a year in some cases, and teams of IT workers can collectively earn more than USD 3 million annually,” the alert warns. “DPRK IT workers provide a critical stream of revenue that helps fund the DPRK regime’s highest economic and security priorities, such as its weapons development program.”
When US businesses unknowingly contract with North Koreans, they are violating government sanctions and face legal risk. But the scams are challenging to deal with, since workers typically complete the assignments to earn their compensation. Without vigilance, businesses could be unaware that anything shady is going on.
The alert emphasizes that while businesses need to be aware of the issue so they can comply with sanctions, North Korean IT contractors also sometimes use their access to plant malware and facilitate espionage and intellectual property theft.
“There have been a lot of cases where we’re seeing North Korean actors interviewing for jobs and using that to try to ultimately deploy malware or get into an environment,” says Adam Meyers, vice president of intelligence at the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. “The reason this is important is a lot of people don’t consider this threat or write it off as, ‘Oh, North Korea, they’re crazy. They’re not sophisticated.’ And if you’re talking to an actual person, it feels like there’s not going to be a cyber threat in that, but these are human-enabled operations that the North Koreans have gotten really good at, so bringing awareness to this issue is really important.”
North Korean IT workers have thorough training, making detection more difficult, and the alert notes that they have developed software, websites, and other platforms for a variety of sectors, including health and fitness, social networking, sports, entertainment, and lifestyle, along with cryptocurrency and decentralized finance. The workers have the expertise to do IT support and database management, build mobile and web apps, develop cryptocurrency platforms, work in artificial intelligence and virtual reality or augmented reality, and develop facial recognition and biometric authentication tools.
The alert lists a number of “red flag indicators” of a North Korean IT worker scam. Many overlap with general best practices for avoiding online scams, like monitoring for unusual logins or IP addresses and contractors who use suspicious digital accounts to collect payments or require payment in cryptocurrency, submit formulaic job applications and documents rather than personalized ones, and have perfect reviews on hiring websites that were all written within a short time span.
Incident responders note that while the US government alert offers a helpful level of detail and transparency, it’s still difficult for potential victims to respond meaningfully.
“The issue is always, whose responsibility is it to protect against these attacks? That’s on individuals and businesses, which often sorely lack the ability to ingest this type of information and make actionable improvements,” says David Kennedy, CEO of the corporate incident response consultancy TrustedSec. “Large companies that have dedicated security teams can use these warnings, but I do really feel that there needs to be a shift toward security for all and helping smaller organizations with defensive positions.”
The alert and other recent government disclosures about North Korean hacking and financial crimes do help raise awareness and likely indicate that the activity is a real and urgent threat. But as Jake Williams, director of cyber threat intelligence at the security firm Scythe puts it, “They have been what I believe to be intentionally vague in recommendations. The more specific they get to businesses, the easier it is for businesses to say that they followed the letter of the instructions and hence have no liability.”
Wired · by Condé Nast · May 30, 2022
8. Russia ousts North Korea to claim title of least-liked country
Only in Canada. I wonder about how people feel throughout the rest of the world? Who is the worst? Putin or Kim?
Russia ousts North Korea to claim title of least-liked country
Twice a year, Research Co. and Glacier Media ask Canadians about their impressions of 15 different countries.
Since we started tracking this question in 2019, it has become customary to see North Korea – a nation that has practically no bilateral relations with Canada – at the bottom of the list. The absence of true democratic institutions, as well as growing concerns about nuclear proliferation and human rights, have given rise to negative views.
In our latest survey, only 13 per cent of Canadians have a positive opinion of North Korea, down one point since our previous poll completed in December 2021. Still, and for the first time in six different surveys, this country is not the least-liked by Canadians.
This dubious distinction, in May 2022, belongs to the Russian Federation. Only 12 per cent of Canadians (down 12 points) hold favourable views of Russia. This country also elicits the highest proportion of “very negative” ratings (63 per cent, ahead of North Korea at 56 per cent).
There is no discernible demographic group in Canada where at least one in five respondents have a positive opinion of the Russian Federation. The numbers are particularly low among residents of Saskatchewan and Manitoba (five per cent), Canadians aged 55 and over (six per cent) and supporters of the federal New Democratic Party (NDP) (nine per cent).
Our previous poll was completed before the start of the year, and when the prospect of an invasion of Ukraine was not in our collective minds. In late February, we reported that only one per cent of Canadians wanted to see our federal government supporting Russia in what was then a dispute that had not developed into an armed conflict.
Another country that, along with North Korea and Russia, has not been particularly liked by Canadians is China. The past six months brought, finally, an official decision to ban Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. from Canada’s 5G-network infrastructure.
China’s standing in the minds of Canadians did not change. We continue to see only 20 per cent of Canadians expressing a positive opinion of the country; those numbers drop to 14 per cent in both Alberta and Atlantic Canada and to 10 per cent among those aged 55 and over.
There are four other countries that cannot clear the 50 per cent threshold of favourable views in Canada. India (37 per cent, unchanged) and Venezuela (31 per cent, up three points) score higher than Saudi Arabia (24 per cent, up one point) and Iran (16 per cent, unchanged). The numbers have been relatively stable for these countries since December.
Closer to home, we see an improvement in the way Canadians feel about our North American free trade partners. Half of Canadians (50 per cent, up five points) hold positive opinions of Mexico, and a larger proportion (56 per cent, up six points) feel the same way about the United States.
The turnaround for our American neighbours is remarkable, considering that almost two years ago – in July 2020 – only 32 per cent of Canadians held a favourable view of the United States. Plenty of that animosity had to do with Donald Trump occupying the White House, and with what was perceived as a dismal performance in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Over the past two years, the change in the way Canadians feel about the United States is significant. The country experienced double-digit increases in favourability in every region of Canada, including Ontario (59 per cent, up 21 points) Quebec (54 per cent, up 19 points), Alberta (57 per cent, up 18 points) and British Columbia (48 per cent, up 22 points).
Our views have also become more positive about South Korea (59 per cent, up four points) and remain high for Canada’s remaining partners in the G7. More than two-thirds of Canadians have a favourable opinion of France (69 per cent, up one point), Japan (also 69 per cent, unchanged), Germany (70 per cent, up one point), Italy (73 per cent, up four points) and the United Kingdom (also 73 per cent, up two points).
It is important to note that our positive views of the United Kingdom have not been directly affected by our relationship with the monarchy. In February, practically half of Canadians (49 per cent) expressed a desire to have an elected head of state instead of a king or queen – the highest proportion in 13 years. This skepticism does not represent a desire to fully abandon our heritage, but a wish to examine the future of the institution, particularly due to our misgivings about the first in line to the throne.
The biggest fluctuations of this survey, when compared to what we learned late last year, show how our perceptions are shaped in the era of immediate information. The Russian Federation is now the least-liked country for Canadians because of what it has done. The United States has climbed the charts because of what it no longer represents.
Mario Canseco is president of Research Co.
Results are based on an online study conducted from May 22 to May 24, 2022, among 1,000 adults in Canada. The data has been statistically weighted according to Canadian census figures for age, gender and region. The margin of error, which measures sample variability, is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
9. South Korea to upgrade Patriot missile defence system to deter North Korea's belligerence
We have been advocating for this for probably 20 years. South Korea has long needed more Patriot PAC 3 missiles.
South Korea to upgrade Patriot missile defence system to deter North Korea's belligerence
Last Updated: 30th May, 2022 16:01 IST
Seoul’s ramping up its defense capabilities comes after North fired three ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) last week.
Written By
IMAGE: AP
South Korea on Monday has approved 750 billion (US$605 million) worth project to upgrade its Patriot missile defence system, Seoul’s arms procurement agency said, according to the state affiliated Korean agency Yonhap. The project is expected to be completed by 2027, and aims to deter North Korea’s belligerence and its recent missile provocations. South Korea is also in the process of procuring an unspecified number of Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile interceptors. It will upgrade the PAC-2 launchers into more advanced PAC-3 launchers, country’s Defence Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) notified in a statement on May 30.
"This project is expected to ensure the Patriot system's effective air defense with regard to the Seoul metropolitan area and key national facilities, and enhance its ballistic missile interception capabilities," DAPA said in a press release.
Seoul’s ramping up its defence capabilities comes after North fired three ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) last week in an efforts to diversify its nuclear capabilities. Seoul’s PAC-2 system uses a blast-fragmentation warhead that can intercept and destroy the hostile targets at an altitude of approximately 20 kilometers. PAC-3 deploys "hit-to-kill" technology that can intercept incoming missile at altitude of 40 kilometres. South Korea also approved a mine-sweeping helicopter that could neutralize the mines in the sea. The country will invest 970 billion won to procure the helicopters by 2030.
North fired ballistic missiles with irregular trajectory
Just this week, North Korea tested a ballistic missile with irregular trajectory never seen before which is being investigated by the US intelligence. DPRK's projectiles flew in a ‘double arc' trajectory to an unknown target, while one of the missiles flew in an unusual manner, Japan’s Defence Minister said in a statement. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, South Korean Foreign Minister Park Jin and Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi said in a joint statement that the United States, the ROK, and Japan was deeply concerned about DPRK launches of an intercontinental ballistic missile and shorter-range ballistic missiles. Due to their ‘double arc trajectory’, the missiles were seen ascending and descending twice. The officials claimed that with the test, the Kim administration aimed to test DPRK’s ability to fire a missile and then have it re-enter the earth’s atmosphere to reach a target.
First Published: 30th May, 2022 16:01 IST
10. US Air Force to deploy B-1B bombers in Guam in several weeks
In the Korean press. The Bone goes to Guam.
US Air Force to deploy B-1B bombers in Guam in several weeks
Posted May. 31, 2022 08:03,
Updated May. 31, 2022 08:15
US Air Force to deploy B-1B bombers in Guam in several weeks. May. 31, 2022 08:03. by Sang-Ho Yun ysh1005@donga.com.
With the signs of North Korea’s imminent nuclear test detected on the radar one after another, the United States is poised to make a forward stationing of its B-1B bombers in Guam within the next several weeks. According to multiple sources of flight tracking websites, the U.S. Air Force will remove three or four B-1B bombers from the Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota to Guam. “There is a high probability that the B-1B bombers will stay ready in Guam before being instantly deployed to the Korean Peninsula in the event the North should conduct a nuclear test,” said a military source.
Dubbed the “Swan of Death,” the B-1B is a military aircraft heavily loaded with guided weapons with the capability to launch precision strikes on missiles and nuclear bases and the command center from hundreds of miles away. During the North’s nuclear and missiles provocations in 2017, the U.S. bombers flew across the NLL in the West Sea, flying all the way up to the Punggye-ri nuclear test site to make an armed protest. After the brief détente between the two Koreas in late 2017, the B-1B bombers have not been deployed to the Korean Peninsula, not showing up for ROK-US joint military drills. With President Yoon Suk-yeol declaring an extended deterrence against North Korea during the Seoul-Washington summit meeting on May 21, pundits are closely monitoring if the B-1B bombers will return to the peninsula in five years to play a check-and-balance role against the North.
Washington is mobilizing all reconnaissance resources available to monitor Pyongyang. On Monday, the E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or Joint STARS, was reportedly to have departed from the Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, to fly down the East Sea. The surveillance aircraft is known to be capable of thoroughly detecting the movements of TELs and soldiers from 250 kilometers away. It appears that Joint STARS is tracking the signs of nuclear and missiles provocations in Punggye-ri test site and elsewhere.
“We are closely following and monitoring the facilities and areas concerned under a steadfast coordination between Seoul and Washington,” said a South Korean military official when asked about the possibility of the North conducting a nuclear test on the U.S. Memorial Day.
11. Seven out of 10 Koreans believe ‘nuclear power is necessary’
The previous administration was tone deaf on this issue. South Korea is a "nuclear power."
Seven out of 10 Koreans believe ‘nuclear power is necessary’
Posted May. 31, 2022 08:01,
Updated May. 31, 2022 08:01
Seven out of 10 Koreans believe ‘nuclear power is necessary’. May. 31, 2022 08:01. by Teuk-Gyo Koo kootg@donga.com.
According to a survey on the necessity of nuclear powerplant in Korea, 70% of the respondents believe the country needs nuclear energy. Four out of 10 respondents say the share of nuclear powerplant in energy sector needs to be improved. While the former Moon Jae-in administration pursued nuclear power phase-out policy, the level of voices supporting for more nuclear power generation has been on the rise every year.
The statistics from ‘2021 research on the brand image of Korean Hydro & Nuclear Power Company (KHNP),’ which KHNP provided to Han Moo-Kyung of the ruling People Power Party, show that 53.3 % of Korean people support nuclear powerplant, a 5.0 percentage point jump from last year. The level of nuclear powerplant support is calculated based on average value of opinions of ‘necessity of nuclear powerplant’ and ‘nuclear power generation needs to be increased’. A total of 1,500 adults from 17 cities and provinces across Korea are the samples for the survey.
Although the level of nuclear powerplant support was 39.3% year of former President Moon Jae-in administration’s inauguration, it has been growing since. The reason for such change is analyzed to be increasingly heightened importance of nuclear energy amid the current world-wide energy crisis on top of the stronger criticism toward Moon’s phase-out policy.
For the survey, 69.2% of the respondent said nuclear powerplant is “necessary,” 12.7% up from 2017 (56.5%). In addition, 37.3%, up by 15.2% from 2017 (22.1%) of the surveyed said, “The portion of nuclear powerplant in energy generation needs to be increased”.
12. North Korea’s Kim Jong-un has closer ties to South Korea than he likes to admit
Interesting history. Perhaps useful for developing themes and messages.
North Korea’s Kim Jong-un has closer ties to South Korea than he likes to admit
- At a cemetery on South Korea’s Jeju island, there are 13 tombstones bearing the Ko family name, Kim’s relatives through his mother, Ko Yong Hui
- Kim’s mother grew up in Osaka, Japan, but her family moved to North Korea in the 1960s as part of a decades-long repatriation programme by Pyongyang
+ FOLLOW
Published: 3:50pm, 31 May, 2022
North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un has threatened Seoul with fiery destruction, but as a remote graveyard on a resort island shows, he has closer links to the South than he might like to admit.
At a cemetery in a hard-to-find corner of South Korea’s Jeju island, there are 13 tombstones bearing the Ko family name – Kim’s relatives through his mother, Ko Yong Hui.
Jong-un is the third member of the Kim family to rule North Korea, following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather – what official hagiography calls the “Paektu bloodline”.
But the Jeju graves tell a wider story.
Photo shows the entrance of a graveyard with tombstones bearing the Ko family name, relatives of North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un through his mother, Ko Yong Hui, at a remote area on the resort island of Jejju. Photo: AFP
Kim’s mother was born in Osaka in 1952 to a native Jeju islander who emigrated to Japan in 1929, when the Korean peninsula was under Tokyo’s colonial rule.
Many of her family, including Kim’s maternal great-grandfather, are buried on Jeju, their overgrown graves a stark contrast to Pyongyang’s Kumsusan Palace of the Sun, where the embalmed bodies of Kim’s father and grandfather Kim Il-sung lie in state.
After Kim came to power in 2011 following the death of his father Kim Jong-il, many experts highlighted his mother’s South Korean and Japanese heritage. Pyongyang has never confirmed it.
The regime “must have feared confirmation would undermine its legitimacy”, Cheong Seong-chang of the Center for North Korea Studies at the Sejong Institute said.
The Kim dynasty bases its claim to power on Kim Il-sung’s role as a guerilla fighter driving out Japan and winning Korea its independence in 1945.
“Korea-Japan heritage runs directly counter to the North Korean myth of its leadership,” Cheong said.
Kim’s mother grew up in the Japanese port city of Osaka, but her family moved to North Korea in the 1960s as part of a decades-long repatriation programme by Pyongyang.
The scheme urged ethnic Koreans living in Japan to move to North Korea, part of a drive to “claim supremacy” over the South, said Park Chul-hyun, a novelist and columnist in Tokyo.
“The North saw the Korean-Japanese community as a strategic battleground,” he said, and managed to convince nearly 100,000 ethnic Koreans to relocate to the “socialist paradise”.
The Ko family answered the call, and lived a relatively normal life in the North until their eldest daughter caught the eye of the country’s heir apparent.
Experts believe that Ko, who was a performer with the Mansudae Art Troupe of musicians and dancers, first met Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang in 1972.
She would become his partner in 1975, experts say, and although there is no official record of their marriage the pair had three children. She died in 2004.
“There has been nothing about Ko Yong Hui in official state media,” said Rachel Minyoung Lee, a non-resident fellow with the 38 North Program at the Washington-based Stimson Center.
North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un has threatened Seoul with fiery destruction, but as a remote graveyard on a resort island shows, he has closer links to the South than he might like to admit. Photo: AFP
There is not much in state media about Kim Jong-un’s background and heritage generally beyond attempts to show he is the legitimate heir to the Mount Paektu legacy, she added.
South Korean media discovered the Ko family graves on Jeju in 2014 – one of the first real confirmations of Kim Jong-un’s South Korean ancestry.
At that time, there was a plaque – known as an “empty grave” in the South – honouring Kim’s maternal grandfather Ko Gyong Taek, even though he died and was buried in the North.
“Born in 1913 and moved to Japan in 1929. He passed away in 1999,” read the plaque, a custom which allows family members to perform ancestor rites even if the body is not present.
The plaque was not there when Agence France-Presse visited the Jeju graveyard in April 2022.
It had been removed by a distant relative of Kim Jong-un, who was shocked by the media attention and feared the grave would be vandalised, the daily Chosun newspaper reported.
He said his family “knew nothing about the relation to Kim Jong-un” before the media discovery, the report said.
13. Yoon Suk-yeol says South Korea will no longer ‘appease’ North, but are Seoul’s policies and China impacting future talks?
Yoon Suk-yeol says South Korea will no longer ‘appease’ North, but are Seoul’s policies and China impacting future talks?
- Yoon Suk-yeol said Seoul will no longer ‘appease’ the North, and any talks must be initiated by Pyongyang, as analysts warn rising tensions could spark new war
- Yoon also said his predecessor Moon Jae-in’s soft stance on North Korea turned out to be a ‘failure’ because it failed to rein in Pyongyang’s nuclear build-up
+ FOLLOW
Published: 12:54pm, 31 May, 2022
South Korea’s new president was talking tough on North Korea in his first international sit-down interview since taking office on May 10, but for all of Yoon Suk-yeol’s bravado, his conservative government’s policy may keep the situation on the Korean peninsula in a “deadlock”.
Yoon Suk-yeol told CNN last week “appeasement” toward North Korea is over and any talks must be initiated by Pyongyang, as some analysts warn rising tensions could spark a new war on the Korean peninsula.
“I think the ball is in Chairman Kim’s court – it is his choice to start a dialogue with us,” Yoon said, referring to the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un.
Political Science Professor Andrei Lankov of the Kookmin University said South Korea’s conservative governments have been making the same demand since 2008 that the North should abandon nuclear programmes first before being rewarded.
“Of course, the North has no intention to move first and give up nukes, therefore, this conservatives’ policy line results in a deadlock,” he said.
Yoon was quoted by his presidential office during the same interview that his predecessor, liberal former president Moon Jae-in’s “appeasement” turned out to be a “failure”.
Moon met Kim Jong-un three times in 2018 and helped arrange unprecedented summits between Kim and then US President Donald Trump before denuclearisation talks ended without a deal.
North Korea fired three ballistic missiles last week, including what is believed to be an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), marking the 17th missile launch this year.
The North is also believed to be preparing for a nuclear test, which, if conducted, will mark the first test since September 2017, and seventh overall.
Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul said Pyongyang is pushing ahead with military modernisation despite pandemic challenges and is likely “emboldened by division” among major powers as a result of China’s rivalry with the United States and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“A lesson of the latest conflict in Europe is the need for more diplomacy on the Korean peninsula, but the Kim regime continues to boycott negotiations,” Easley said.
Some of President Yoon’s conservative supporters have called for additional THAAD missile defences, pursuing alliance nuclear sharing, and even redeploying US tactical nuclear weapons, he added.
South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol says he will no longer ‘appease’ the North, and any future talks must be initiated by Pyongyang. Photo: EPA-EFE/Yonhap
The South’s decision to deploy the highly sophisticated US anti-missile defence system in 2017, seen as a direct security threat by China, sparked painful economic reprisals from Beijing.
“Beijing may criticise the Yoon administration’s tougher foreign policy, but China is enabling the Kim regime by shielding it from UN sanctions and providing aid under the table,” Easley said.
“It is up to Kim when North Korea will escalate tensions further with another nuclear test, but it is largely China that is setting the geopolitical stage,” he added.
At their first summit earlier this month, Yoon agreed with US President Joe Biden to initiate discussions to “expand the scope and scale of combined military exercises and training on and around the Korean peninsula” which had been scaled back amid the pandemic and as part of previous efforts to engage the North.
The massive joint exercises by the two allies are scheduled for August. North Korea condemns such drills as rehearsals for an invasion.
Choi Kang of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies said Yoon is seeking to “force chances to the North’s strategic calculations” by heaping pressure through sanctions and strengthening its alliance with the United States in the face of growing nuclear and missile threats after “Moon’s soft stance failed to rein in its nuclear build-up”.
But former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun who served under former president Kim Dae-jung said pressure tactics will never work with North Korea, recommending incentives such as food and fertilisers to lead it back to dialogue.
Since the first nuclear crisis broke out in 1993, policies toward the North have blown hot and cold, alternating between sticks and carrots, only resulting in the expansion of the North’s nuclear capabilities, Jeong said.
Returning to dialogue is the best option, “Otherwise, we could see a war break out during Yoon’s [five-year] official tenure,” Jeong said on Tuesday on YTN TV.
He cautioned North Korea tends to push ahead with whatever is necessary for its own interest, no matter how China and Russia view it.
“We must stop daydreaming that we can restrain the North by asking China or Russia to help persuade it,” he said.
Political Science professor Yang Moo-jin of the University of North Korean Studies said when the North carries out a potential nuclear test, the Korean peninsula will be a frontline of a “new Cold War confrontation” involving world powers and the two Koreas.
Kim Yeon-chul, Moon’s ex-Unification Minister, said on Hankyoreh TV last week that Yoon and Biden were emphasising only military deterrence, “leaving the door closed shut for dialogue” in the eyes of North Korea.
“Inter-Korean tensions are likely to mount high and when this happens, possibilities are very high that the stages for China-US confrontations will move from South China Sea to Taiwan Strait and to the Korean peninsula,” Kim said.
+ FOLLOW
Park Chan-kyong is a South Korean journalist who has worked for the Agence France-Presse Seoul bureau for 35 years. He is now working for the South China Morning Post. He studied political science at Korea University and economics at the Yonsei University Graduate School.
14. Tokyo issues complaints over Seoul’s Dokdo marine survey amid efforts to thaw relations
Tokyo issues complaints over Seoul’s Dokdo marine survey amid efforts to thaw relations
Published : May 31, 2022 - 15:52 Updated : May 31, 2022 - 18:08
An aerial view of the Dokdo islets (South Korea’s Foreign Ministry)
Territorial dispute over the Dokdo islets has flared up once again, even as the governments of South Korea and Japan expressed their respective determination to reset their long-strained relationship.
The South Korean government rejected a protest from Japan on Tuesday after the neighboring country lodged a complaint against Seoul for conducting a marine survey in waters off the Dokdo islets.
“We cannot accept Japan’s claims on our legal activities which have been carried out in accordance with international laws, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and other related domestic laws,” South Korea’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Choi Young-sam said Tuesday.
On Monday, Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno raised issue with South Korea, accusing a Korean research vessel that was operating a marine survey of intruding on its self-claimed Exclusive Economic Zone around the Dokdo islets.
Matsuno said the Korean research vessel carried out a survey without making a prior request with Japan and that the action was “totally unacceptable.” According to the chief secretary, the two governments discussed the incident, but both sides maintained their stance of sovereignty over the islets.
While South Korea currently holds control over the Dokdo islets and manages it as its own territory, Japan has claimed sovereignty over the islets, which it calls Takeshima, and has further asserted the sea surrounding the islets is within its Exclusive Economic Zone.
Following the complaint from Japan, the South Korean government rejected the protest, saying its research activity was legitimately carried out in accordance with related laws.
Japanese media reports that director-general level talks could be held over the issue in Seoul on or after Friday, when Japanese officials are expected to travel for a trilateral discussion that also includes the United States.
As the Japanese government has not lodged a complaint regarding Korea’s marine surveys in the past five years according to Japanese media outlets, Monday’s protest may be a political move to secure its standing in bilateral disputes with South Korea, experts here say.
While South Korea’s Foreign Ministry did not confirm details of their diplomatic exchanges over the matter, local media in Japan reported the Japanese government has not filed a complaint against Korea’s marine survey activities since May 2017.
Choi Eun-mi, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, a Seoul-based think tank, said the Japanese government may be showing its intentions that it would not “back down” on some long-standing disputes with South Korea.
“Both governments have shown their desire to renew relations, but (the complaint) appears to show that the Japanese government does not plan to concede in some of the conflicting issues that remain between them, including the Dokdo territorial dispute,” Choi told The Korea Herald.
As South Korea and Japan welcomed new administrations in May and last October, respectively, the two governments have expressed the will to reinvigorate bilateral ties that have recently been at their weakest in decades.
Major sticking points between them include Japan forcing Koreans into labor and sexual slavery during the Japanese colonial period.
At the same time, they would not want the bilateral relations to affect their joint efforts to forge strong trilateral ties with the United States in handling the increasing nuclear threat posed by North Korea, Choi said.
The South Korean government will have to make extra efforts to persuade the public, as issues related to Japan are sensitive and taken seriously here, Choi added.
South Korea’s Foreign Ministry reiterated Tuesday that it will continue to cooperate with the US and Japan on the security front, and they all agree on a communication channel for their high-ranking officials to discuss security issues, including North Korea’s nuclear threats.
“South Korea, the US and Japan are the major countries in this region. So all three countries recognize and understand that they jointly hold the responsibility to maintain the security and prosperity of the region,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Choi Young-sam said in a regular press briefing Tuesday.
“In this sense, South Korea, the US and Japan will continue to cooperate in the security sector in the means possible.”
The special envoys for North Korea from the US and Japan will be traveling to Seoul to hold bilateral and trilateral meetings with Kim Gunn, South Korea’s special representative for Korean Peninsula peace and security affairs, Friday.
They are expected to discuss joint countermeasures to address North Korea’s recent missile launches, which include an intercontinental ballistic missile in breach of a United Nations Security Council resolution, and also of the recalcitrant regime’s potential nuclear test.
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
