Quotes of the Day:
"My father was born on Christmas Day in 1934. He grew up in what is now part of North Korea. When the Korean War began, my father was 16, and he found passage on an American refugee ship,thinking he'd be gone for just a few days, but he never saw his mother or his sister again."
- Min Jin Lee
"General Bradley said that we must draw the line [against communist expansion] somewhere. The President stated he agreed on that. General Bradley said that Russia is not yet ready for war. The Korean situation offered as good an occasion for action in drawing the line as anywhere else."
- From the official minutes of President Harry S. Truman's meeting with his top military and foreign-policy advisers at the Blair House on the evening of June 25th, 1950
"I will defend Korea as I would my own country—just as I would California."
- Gen. Douglas MacArthur to Dr. Syngman Rhee, president of the two-month-old South Korean Republic, October 1948
1. What the Experts Think: Why North Korea Wants Tactical Nuclear Weapons
2. Axios World: North Korea nuke limbo
3. On Korean War anniversary, S. Korea vows stern response to N. Korean provocations
4. Nasty Rhetoric and Fearsome Displays Aside, Expect China and North Korea To Stand Pat
5. New U.S. ambassador to S. Korea to arrive in Seoul on July 10
6. New COVID-19 infections fall below 7,000 amid virus slowdown
7. N. Korea's new suspected COVID-19 cases fall below 10,000: state media
8. Japanese PM says no plan to meet Yoon during NATO summit
9. South Korean leader's informal media events are a break with tradition
10. N. Korea discusses revising operational plans with a map of S. Korea
11. Koreans' love-hate relationship with Samsung
12. House panel advances 2023 defense bill maintaining US troop level in S. Korea
13. North Korea restarts anti-US propaganda day it stopped under Trump
14. South Korea is trying to double the range of its K239 rocket launcher
15. The real-life Maverick who took on 7 Soviet jets in a classified Korean War dogfight
1. What the Experts Think: Why North Korea Wants Tactical Nuclear Weapons
Harry Kazianis interviewed a number of us:
Bruce Bechtol
Bruce Bennett
Daniel Davis
Markus Garlauskas
Wallace Gregson
James Holmes
Robert E. Kelly
Bruce Klingner
David Maxwell
What the Experts Think: Why North Korea Wants Tactical Nuclear Weapons
The North Korea rumor mill has been running rampant here in Washington, DC over the last few months that North Korea will test some sort of nuclear weapon at any moment. While the DPRK has still not lit the atomic match just yet, many experts assume that the Kim family now wants smaller, battlefield-compatible, tactical nuclear weapons. There is even talk in the North Korea expert community that recent comments by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that such weapons would be forward deployed rather quickly.
As we like to do, 19FortyFive reached out to a range of experts to get a deeper sense of why North Korea wants these weapons and what their intentions might be.
Below is a sampling of what the North Korea expert community had to say to us about North Korea’s tactical nuclear weapons aspirations.
Please check back frequently as we will keep updating this article as more responses role in:
Dr. Bruce Bechtol, Angelo State University: “It’s an interesting question and I’m not sure if there is any evidence of this or if this is something the press came up with.
I saw recently where the North Koreans stated they were testing tactical weapons capable of carrying nuclear weapons (an Iskander missile would be one example). By tactical I assume SRBM?
North Korea has had nuclear-capable Scuds since the 1980s. But now, with these newer SRBM’s they got from the Russians (or at least with Russian assistance), they have SRBM’s that are much more accurate – almost pinpoint as we have seen from the same missiles being fired in the Armenian-Azerbaijani war and the war in Ukraine. None of those missiles were used for nuclear attacks. Rather, they were used largely to target buildings and nodes important for their respective combat actions.
Now, if North Korea is going to attack South Korea with nuclear-armed SRBM’s (since that is the only set of targets in range), that means a change of plans. The plan has been to take and hold ground as they move south with conventional forces. If this plan change has occurred then it could mean that in any future war North Korea is planning on a more (literally) scorched earth set of operations because they see this as the clearest path to victory.”
Bruce Bennett, RAND Corporation: “Actually, I find this subject a bit mystifying.
If we look at the estimates of North Korean nuclear weapons, we find that many of the academics say maybe enough materials for 50, whereas some are thinking more like materials for 100 nuclear weapons.
With 50-100 nuclear weapons, they are like the United States in the late-1940s: The U.S. concluded that strategic-operational use of nuclear weapons was first priority, and therefore that it did not have enough for battlefield nuclear weapon use. It is not until 1951-1952 when the U.S. has hundreds of nuclear weapons that it is building tactical nuclear weapons, and even then the U.S. concluded that it did not have enough tactical nuclear weapons for use in Asia—they were reserved for use in Europe.
So I look at North Korea and with 50-100 nuclear weapons, I would guess that they would hold 20-30 for regime survival, end of conflict purposes. And the other 30-70 would not be enough to hit all the political targets (e.g., the ROK Presidential offices), ROKAF airfields (fighter airfields and airfields supporting US force flow), ROK Navy ports, and command and control facilities.
Moreover, tactical nuclear weapons have very limited effectiveness against ground force targets unless the targets are out in the open attacking, and even then pretty limited:
– 1 Kt (some US artillery shells go this big): lethal radius of about 0.8 km against attackers, half that against dug-in defenders,
– 10 Kt (big for a tacnuc): lethal radius of about 1.2 km against attackers, half that against dug-in defenders.
This radius is relevant against defenders because it has to create a hole both in width and depth. Remember that the US planned tactical nuclear weapons use against Soviet attackers, hoping to stop their advance. So you need a fair number of such weapons to affect much of a front. And if you want to create a breakthrough on the offense, using tactical nuclear weapon ground bursts will leave craters that will slow the advance of any vehicles and enough fallout to be a concern. Why not just use artillery? Aren’t 8,000 or so NK artillery pieces (counting MRLs) in the forward area enough?
My bottom line is that North Korean discussion of battlefield nuclear weapons is actually political hype, seeking to grab media attention (with which they have been very effective). That combined with ROK over-reaction. Unless NK is very concerned about ROK counterbattery capability against the NK artillery (and there are other ways to deal with it), why take nuclear weapons away from more important targets.
After all, the ROK have been plowing much of their Defense Capability Improvement monies into ROK fighter aircraft, located on just 12 airfields. Yes, most are defended by missile defense, but NK SOF ought to be able to take out much of that. Why not hit these high-value targets with nukes?”
Daniel Davis, Senior Fellow, Defense Priorities and a retired LT. Colonel, U.S. Army -“Reports that North Korea has or will soon have operational tactical nuclear weapons comes as no surprise and is in part, further evidence of the failure of the Western approach to Kim Jong Un’s nuclear program.
For decades the United States has, at various times, sanctioned the Kim regimes, ignored them, threatened them with “fire and fury,” and tried economic incentives to entice them to denuclearize.
All too often we have accused North Korea of breaking promises, but failing to note that, especially in the 1990s and early 2000s, we likewise failed to deliver on all our promises.
After observing the fate of non-nuclear states falling to American attack and regime-change operations – such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya – Kim knows that his conventional force could never withstand a concerted U.S. military attack. He likely concluded that having a nuclear deterrent was the only thing that could ensure North Korea’s security.
The reality is that the nuclear Rubicon has been irrevocably passed and nothing is going to reverse it. Fortunately, U.S. security isn’t dependent on North Korean denuclearization, but on our own conventional and nuclear deterrent. Kim will never use a nuclear weapon in a first strike because he correctly understands that nuclear retaliation from the United States would obliterate his state.
The best policy the Administration could pursue would be to foster better North-to-South Korean engagement with the goal of eventual normalization of relations. That path has worked for 70 years with the USSR, China, and now Russia. It can work with Pyongyang too.”
Markus Garlauskas, Former National Intelligence Officer for North Korea, National Intelligence Council: “Pyongyang’s regime almost certainly knows it cannot survive an all-out nuclear exchange, but I expect it to see greater viability for limited nuclear use once it has proven tactical nuclear capability.
In an escalating conflict, Pyongyang could take the calculated risk of a limited nuclear strike—backed by threats of further nuclear escalation—to end it on acceptable terms. Such a scenario would pose a tough dilemma for Seoul, Washington, and even Beijing, and could spiral out of control.
Such employment would also be the first since 1945, setting a dangerous new precedent globally undermining non-proliferation and US extended deterrence.”
Wallace Gregson, Former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Defense: “In these days of war in Ukraine and high U.S. domestic political drama, North Korea bids to regain access to the news cycle.
A nuclear test has long been rumored and anticipated. The North Korean nuclear weapons program is apparently unhindered despite sanctions often described in terms more powerful than facts support. The Covid pandemic has apparently had no effect.
Now, as reported by the Associated Press and other new agencies, North Korea is signaling changes to duties and plans for units on the border with South Korea. The implication, aided by other boasts, is that North Korea will deploy tactical nuclear weapons forward, taking advantage of their development of solid fuel missiles on mobile launcher systems.
The clear intent here is political, well before we get to any assessments of the military situation. Absolute rulers hate stable conditions. They need a proximate cause to pursue, preferably against identifiable demons, foreign or domestic. Such conditions restrain potentially ambitious internal opponents seeking regime change.
This will raise anew the question of nuclear weapons in South Korea. There is no purely military reason for this. But if South Korea determines that such weapons are necessary for reassurance and deterrence, the only answer is that they be U.S. weapons, under U.S. control.”
Dr. James Holmes, U.S. Naval War College: “Kim Jong Un doesn’t tell me why he does things, but I would guess he sees a gap in U.S. extended deterrence at the tactical level. And he may be right about that.
It’s become a common talking point in Washington as Congress debates whether to keep funding the development of the SLCM-N, a new sea-based, tactical, nuclear-tipped cruise missile. This is a capability we used to have in the fleet in the form of a nuclear-tipped Tomahawk, the TLAM-N, but that lapsed during the post-Cold War drawdown.
The logic would be that a North Korean tactical nuclear weapon would be a usable weapon against the South or against Japan, not just a deterrent or a coercive implement. A U.S. response with strategic nuclear weapons would be implausible because it would be so disproportionate, or at least that’s the thinking. This may well be Putin’s thinking in Ukraine as well; he might think he could get away with tactical nukes to break a stalemate.
He and Kim could be right.”
Dr. Robert E. Kelly, University of Pusan: “North Korea has been suspected for the last few years of developing tactical or low-yield nuclear weapons. These release energy less than even the small weapons used against Japan in World War II.
North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un spoke of his interest in these tactical nukes several years ago. North Korea has likely achieved the large intercontinental nuclear missiles needed for strategic deterrence against the US. With that accomplished, it can now experiment with putting nuclear weapons on other platforms, such as submarines or artillery.
The value of tactical shells in artillery would be their powerful battlefield effectiveness. Even a small nuke used against enemy formation would do tremendous damage. Because the Korean peninsula is narrow with little room to maneuver, these would be especially potent weapons against South Korean and American forces.
Tactical nukes also help equalize the conventional competition with the South and America. North Korea is conventionally far behind, its weapons technologically outclassed by its opponents. Deploying small nuclear weapons as battlefield weapons helps to reduce that gap.”
Bruce Klingner, former CIA Deputy Division Chief for Korea: “The US and South Korea have assessed for a decade that North Korea had tactical nuclear warheads for its Scud and No Dong missiles. Pyongyang is now striving to develop its next generation of tactical nukes to equip an array of more sophisticated mobile missiles, some of which have greater ability to evade allied missile defenses.
Some experts interpreted Kim’s April 2022 speech as hinting at a new more offensive nuclear doctrine. But Pyongyang has declared since at least 2013 that its nuclear arsenal had dual objectives of deterrence and preemptive attack against the United States and its allies. In 2016-17, Kim Jong-un oversaw missile exercises simulating preemptive nuclear air bursts against South Korean and Japanese targets.
Pyongyang’s continuing development of nuclear and missile programs beyond the necessary requirements for deterrence suggests that the regime strives for a true warfighting capability.”
David Maxwell, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies: “It is likely North Korea views nuclear weapons simply as another tool with which to win a war and does not associate it with the same kind of nuclear taboo we in the US do.
The regime likely plans to incorporate nuclear use from the time Kim decides to initiate an attack on the South in order to achieve its objective of rapid occupation of the South before South Korea can mobilize its forces and the U.S. can reinforce the peninsula.
The regime likely believes the use of all capabilities, including tactical nuclear weapons, as well as the possible use of nuclear weapons against the seven UN bases in Japan, will improve the chances of victory.
In addition, these capabilities may also support the regime’s political warfare strategy and blackmail diplomacy by increasing tension to coerce political and economic concessions.
Lastly, I would say that what Kim Jong Un needs to know is that the use of any weapon of mass destruction, to include especially a nuclear weapon of any type, will result in a decisive response from the US that will lead to the end of the Kim family regime.”
Harry J. Kazianis (@Grecianformula) serves as President and CEO of Rogue States Project, a bipartisan national security think tank. He has held senior positions at the Center for the National Interest, the Heritage Foundation, the Potomac Foundation, and many other think tanks and academic institutions focused on defense issues. His ideas have been published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, CNN, CNBC, and many other outlets across the political spectrum. He holds a graduate degree focusing on International Relations from Harvard University and is the author of the book The Tao of A2/AD, a study of Chinese military modernization.
Note: This piece has been updated multiple times to include new expert analysis. Latest update was 2:59PM EST.
2. Axios World: North Korea nuke limbo
Interesting assessments. The author is on a fellowship in South Korea.
Buried lede:
By the numbers: A new Pew poll of 17 countries, most of them U.S. allies in Europe and Asia, finds that confidence in Biden to "do the right thing regarding world affairs" fell everywhere but South Korea between 2021 and 2022.
Axios World: North Korea nuke limbo
June 23, 2022
Good morning from Seoul.
- I'm here on a fellowship organized by the Atlantic Council and Korea Foundation. We've been meeting this week with senior officials, business executives and foreign policy experts, many of whom spoke to us on the condition of anonymity to offer their candid views.
- It's an interesting time to be here: President Yoon Suk-yeol took office just six weeks ago, and he's now preparing for a likely North Korean nuclear test. That's where tonight's edition (1,848 words, 7 minutes) begins.
New arrival?
1 big thing: U.S. and South Korea wait for bad news from the North
Watching coverage of a 2017 North Korean missile launch from a Seoul train station. Photo: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
SEOUL, South Korea — Officials and experts in Washington and Seoul agree that North Korea is set to conduct its seventh nuclear test and its first since 2017 — likely quite soon.
The big picture: Kim Jong-un's regime continues to develop its nuclear arsenal and rebuff offers from both the U.S. and South Korea for dialogue or COVID aid.
- Neither ally is prepared to offer unilateral concessions to break the deadlock. That's effectively rendered them bystanders, waiting for bad news.
In response to the rising threat, South Korea's hawkish new President Yoon Suk-yeol is focusing on strengthening Seoul's defenses and its alliance with the U.S.
- "The seventh nuclear test is most likely. Our response will be very tough and hard, and that will heighten tensions on the Korean Peninsula," says Moon Chung-in, chair of the Sejong Institute think tank.
- Moon says the U.S. and South Korea have little leverage to prevent a test and almost nothing left to sanction in response, leaving steps like joint military exercises and the deployment of additional U.S. military assets in the region.
- "North Korea will respond in kind," says Moon, who served as a top adviser to Yoon's predecessor. The test for leaders in Washington and Seoul will be to break out of that cycle, he says, but that won't be easy.
The backstory: Former President Moon Jae-in repeatedly pursued diplomacy with Kim but ultimately failed — along with former President Donald Trump — to secure any significant progress on the nuclear issue.
- Now, both Yoon and President Biden appear pessimistic about reaching any nuclear agreement.
- "The Yoon government is open to dialogue with North Korea, but that does not mean that we're hurrying up to make a breakthrough," an adviser who worked on Yoon's campaign says. "We will be patient."
- A ruling party lawmaker notes that both carrots and sticks were tried over the previous five years and "nothing worked."
Between the lines: The current limbo isn't entirely new. North Korea has combined diplomatic silence with nuclear provocations before, including during the "fire and fury" period that preceded the Trump-era summits.
- But Pyongyang has already conducted a record number of missile tests this year and further alarmed South Korea by announcing the pursuit of tactical nuclear weapons, which could lower the threshold for a nuclear strike.
-
A recent poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that 71% of South Koreans now support developing nuclear weapons domestically, rather than relying on the American nuclear umbrella. That won't happen anytime soon, but the poll reflects the sense of insecurity within the population.
The other side: Some experts in Seoul think Kim felt burned or even deceived by the U.S. after his summits with Trump yielded no sanctions relief.
- The U.S. will likely have to take the lead if there's to be a breakthrough, a senior South Korean opposition lawmaker says, because Kim's appointments and rhetoric suggest he's emphasizing his dealings with Washington over Seoul.
-
Thus far, Biden has not prioritized North Korea or offered much beyond a standing offer for talks with no preconditions.
- Meanwhile, China vetoed additional North Korea sanctions at the UN earlier this month and appears unlikely to join forces with the U.S. to ratchet up the pressure on its nuclear-armed neighbor.
What to watch: The North Korean regime may eventually return to the negotiating table, perhaps when it feels threatened or believes it has the upper hand.
- But even if those talks do begin, few in Seoul will expect them to end with Kim surrendering his nuclear arsenal.
2. What South Korea's power transfer means for China and Japan
Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi (right) delivers a letter from Prime Minister Fumio Kishida to South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol. Photo: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
For the first time on record, polls suggest Koreans now feel more unfavorably toward China than they do toward Japan, a fellow U.S. ally and the country's former colonial ruler.
Why it matters: Yoon has sent early signals that he intends to mend relations with Japan and take a more critical approach to China — just what the Biden administration wants to hear. But for historical reasons in Japan's case and trade considerations in China's, both shifts will be difficult to execute.
South Koreans' backlash against China has been driven by Beijing's response to Seoul's deployment of a U.S. missile defense system in 2017 — which included unofficial bans on K-pop acts, TV shows and a variety of products.
- Yes, but: While China's trade practices and growing geopolitical assertiveness are a source of considerable unease, even Yoon's allies don't think he can afford to pick fights with a regional giant that accounts for one-quarter of South Korea's trade.
- That helps explain why Yoon is talking about putting the U.S.-Korea alliance at the core of his foreign policy, while maintaining a relationship of "mutual respect" with China.
Between the lines: Yoon's desire to improve relations with Japan is genuine, "but will go slower than expected because we need a consensus within Korea, not just between Korea and Japan," the foreign policy adviser to Yoon's campaign says.
- Both of Korea's major parties have used tensions with Japan to their political advantage in the past, notes the lawmaker from the conservative ruling party. Yoon will have to move cautiously to avoid exposing himself to criticism, he says.
- Still, prospects of warmer relations seem far more realistic under Yoon and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida than under their predecessors, Moon Jae-in and Shinzo Abe, whose contentious relationship caused several headaches for Washington.
What to watch: Even if the leaders of America's two East Asian allies see eye to eye, animosity among the general public — inflamed in recent years by rulings about colonial-era sexual slavery and forced labor — remains a potent political force.
3. Gender divide between young people shakes South Korean politics
An anti-feminism protest in Seoul in October 2021. Photo: Jean Chung/Getty Images
Yoon's election in March by just 0.7% of the vote highlighted the sharp divisions in Korean society between generations, income levels and, perhaps most starkly, between genders.
Breaking it down: Yoon benefited from deep discontent among young men, winning 59% of men in their 20s vs. just 34% of women in that age group — by far the largest gender gap in any age group.
-
During the campaign, Yoon said feminism was warping relationships between men and women, claimed men were being treated like “potential sex criminals," and denied the existence of systemic discrimination against women.
- He was appealing to the anti-feminist backlash among young men in South Korea that has been driven at least in part by fierce competition for jobs and university places.
The big picture: South Korea has one of the world's most-educated populations, but as the country's once-explosive economic growth has slowed, many have been left unemployed or underemployed.
-
While gender inequality in the South Korean economy has historically been unusually high for a rich country, more women than men are now attending college, and the most prestigious employers are hiring many more women than before.
- The fact that men are required to serve around two years in the military, while women aren't, has become a potent political issue.
Yes, but: Women are also facing the same cutthroat career competition in a system that's still largely run by men.
- South Korea has the lowest birth rate in the world, due in part to career pressures and the high cost of child care.
What they're saying: Politicians from both parties contend that the primary driver of the tension is economics.
- "If you get down to the root cause of the problems among the younger generation, when they have a lack of opportunities to be successful, they have to fight against each other," says the opposition lawmaker.
- The generation that's currently in power in politics and business enjoyed all the fruits of South Korea's democratic and economic development, the ruling party member added, while younger people today risk being left behind.
4. Data du jour: Confidence in Biden slips among allies
Confidence in Biden appears to be waning among some of America's closest allies.
By the numbers: A new Pew poll of 17 countries, most of them U.S. allies in Europe and Asia, finds that confidence in Biden to "do the right thing regarding world affairs" fell everywhere but South Korea between 2021 and 2022.
- The survey authors cite the chaotic U.S. exit from Afghanistan, which just 33% of those polled think was handled well, as one likely factor.
- Trust in Biden (median of 60%) across the 17 countries is on par with French President Emmanuel Macron (62%) and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (59%), and far ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping (18%) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (a record-low 9%).
- Biden also far exceeds Trump. He didn't top 25% in any of the 12 countries polled in 2020.
3. On Korean War anniversary, S. Korea vows stern response to N. Korean provocations
While the north Korean threat is more dangerous in 2022 than in 1950, fortunately the ROK/US alliance is even stronger.
My suggestion: rather than vowing stern responses, I think President Yoon and President Biden should simply be stating that the Kim family regime will not be successful. No matter what kind of provocation Kim conducts he will not be successful in his political warfare strategy and blackmail dimiplacy. he will not get what he desires. And most importantly he cannot be successful in his campaign to dominate the Korean peninsula either through subversion or warfighting.
(LEAD) On Korean War anniversary, S. Korea vows stern response to N. Korean provocations | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: RECASTS slug, lead; UPDATES with Yoon's remarks in paras 1-4; ADDS photo)
SEOUL, June 25 (Yonhap) -- South Korean leaders vowed Saturday to reinforce the nation's defense posture against North Korea as the nation observed the 72nd anniversary of the outbreak of the 1950-53 Korean War.
In a Facebook post, President Yoon Suk-yeol pledged to put in all efforts to defend freedom and peace through strength.
"Peace is not something that can be achieved by submission. It can only be kept by force," Yoon said.
Yoon expressed his respects to South Korean veterans and foreign veterans who fought under the U.N. flag, saying that the "freedom, peace and prosperity that the South enjoys today were built on the foundation of their sacrifice and dedication."
He also pledged to build a robust defense posture based on the country's firm alliance with the U.S. and advanced technologies.
Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo vowed a stern response to North Korean provocations during his speech at a ceremony marking the anniversary.
He said the North's recent missile launches and nuclear preparations have escalated tensions beyond the Korean Peninsula and are posing a threat to international peace.
"The government will strengthen its defensive posture based on the firm alliance between South Korea and the U.S., and respond swiftly and sternly using all means necessary," he said.
"The government will never forget peace can be achieved on the basis of strong defense and security," Han said.
South Korea will also seek diplomatic efforts to gain cooperation from the international community to achieve peace on the peninsula, and to provide humanitarian assistance to the North, he added.
Han expressed gratitude to the veterans of the Korean War and pledged to protect the Korean Peninsula in its path toward peace and prosperity just like the veterans fought for the freedom of the country.
(END)
4. Nasty Rhetoric and Fearsome Displays Aside, Expect China and North Korea To Stand Pat
Never forget Sun Tzu: "Never assume the enemy will not attack. Make yourself invincible."
Excerpts:
There’s no doubt that Beijing is waging a campaign of intimidation, but at this stage whatever the Chinese are doing is no more worrisome to most people on Taiwan than North Korean threats to South Koreans on the streets of Seoul.
“People don’t really feel anything and don’t even care about it,” one Taiwan contact told me. “China is going to strengthen its cognitive warfare through the internet and those pro-Chinese media in Taiwan before taking real military actions.”
A Columbia University professor, Andrew Nathan, confirmed as much in Foreign Affairs: “Fears of an imminent Chinese attack are misplaced.” Looking back “for decades,” he wrote, “China’s policy toward Taiwan has been characterized by strategic patience, as has its approach to other territorial claims and disputes — from India to the South China Sea.’
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may have provoked the question of whether China might follow its example and wage war for Taiwan, but Mr. Nathan believes, “Far from spurring China to … an imminent military assault on Taiwan, the war in Ukraine will reinforce Beijing’s commitment to playing the long game.”
Nasty Rhetoric and Fearsome Displays Aside, Expect China and North Korea To Stand Pat
However dark, the storm clouds over Free China and the Korean peninsula are not expected to burst into armed conflict.
Taiwan’s minister of foreign affairs, Joseph Wu, in December 2019. AP/Chiang Ying-ying
Friday, June 24, 2022
01:23:09 pm
SEOUL — Clouds of war hang over both Free China and the Korean peninsula in a challenge to democratic regimes backed by America against Communist China and its North Korean protectorate.
However dark, the storm clouds are not expected to burst into armed conflict despite all the nasty rhetoric and the fearsome weaponry that both China and North Korea might deploy.
In the case of Taiwan, the foreign minister, Joseph Wu, warned there’s “no chance” that it “will cave in and surrender its sovereignty and democracy to the big bully.” If that claim seems rather bold for an island province of 23.6 million people, China, population 1.4 billion, is not likely to try to disprove Mr. Wu any time soon.
Sure, China this week sent 29 warplanes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone, as it’s done several times this year, and Taiwan again scrambled jets to chase them away. Still, a former American defense secretary, Robert Gates, reiterated in a podcast “the likelihood of a full-scale invasion is very low.” The Chinese “have never undertaken an amphibious operation,” he noted. “It would have to be huge, and it would require a lot of softening up.”
The ceaseless vows by China to recover Taiwan bear certain similarities to North Korea’s undying claims to South Korea.
North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, this year has repeatedly ordered tests of North Korea’s missiles, including a long-range intercontinental ballistic beauty, and may well be planning to order a seventh underground nuclear test. Still, there’s no sign he’s going to fire his missiles at South Korea, much less mount a conventional infantry and artillery attack reminiscent of the invasion launched by his grandfather, Kim Il-sung, 72 years ago, on June 25, 1950.
Mr. Kim, however, still has South Korea in his sights. At a meeting of the military commission of the ruling party, he “set forth the clear-cut practical action guidelines for bolstering the military muscle” and spoke of the need to “consolidate in every way the powerful self-defense capabilities for overwhelming any hostile forces,” according to Pyongyang’s Korean Central News agency.
Writing in English for the world to take note, KCNA said the commission “decided to supplement the operation duties of KPA (Korean People’s Army) frontline units with an important military action plan.” The commission, KCNA said, “examined and approved an important issue of providing a military guarantee for further strengthening the country's war deterrent.”
Similarly, China isn’t about to let up on Taiwan even if its People’s Liberation Army isn’t quite marshaling an invasion force on the mainland for the 100-mile voyage across the Taiwan Straits to the nearest beachheads. The sense is that China is going to pressure Taiwan “without firing a shot through cyber and economic measures,” Mr. Gates said. President Xi, he surmised, believes Taiwan would then “have a very different attitude toward China.”
Intimidation flights, however, are hardly as frightening as Beijing imagines. China’s air force is still far behind that of America, from which Taiwan acquires planes and much other weaponry. Although no American military units are on Taiwan, American planes are within easy range on bases in Japan and Guam, and also from aircraft carriers patrolling regional waters.
There’s no doubt that Beijing is waging a campaign of intimidation, but at this stage whatever the Chinese are doing is no more worrisome to most people on Taiwan than North Korean threats to South Koreans on the streets of Seoul.
“People don’t really feel anything and don’t even care about it,” one Taiwan contact told me. “China is going to strengthen its cognitive warfare through the internet and those pro-Chinese media in Taiwan before taking real military actions.”
A Columbia University professor, Andrew Nathan, confirmed as much in Foreign Affairs: “Fears of an imminent Chinese attack are misplaced.” Looking back “for decades,” he wrote, “China’s policy toward Taiwan has been characterized by strategic patience, as has its approach to other territorial claims and disputes — from India to the South China Sea.’
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may have provoked the question of whether China might follow its example and wage war for Taiwan, but Mr. Nathan believes, “Far from spurring China to … an imminent military assault on Taiwan, the war in Ukraine will reinforce Beijing’s commitment to playing the long game.”
Mr. Nathan’s logic is much the same as that of Mr. Gates, who wrote: “The price Moscow has paid, both militarily and in the form of international isolation, is but a fraction of what China could expect if it were to attempt to take Taiwan by force. Better to wait patiently for Taiwan’s eventual surrender than to strike now and risk winning the island at too high a cost—or losing it forever.”
A Taiwan writer, Yang Chien-Hao, believes China has too much to lose. To Beijing, “flying over the air-defense identification zone is merely a show which can be manipulated/used by Beijing domestically and internationally,” he told me. “It’s a way to enhance the cohesion of nationalism internally and to the world to emphasize Taiwan is a part of China.”
Beijing’s “attitude toward Taiwan is getting stronger,” Mr. Yang said, but “China, which shares the biggest market in the world, several times bigger than Russia, has seen how devastating its economy will be affected when it takes real actions against Taiwan.”
DONALD KIRK
Mr. Kirk, based in Seoul and Washington, has been covering Asia for decades for newspapers and magazines and is the author of books on Korea, the Vietnam War and the Philippines.
Commenting is available to Sun Readers , Sun Members and Sun Founders only. Comments are reviewed and, in some cases, edited before posting. Chances of a comment being posted are increased if the comment is polite, accurate, grammatical, and substantive or newsworthy.
5. New U.S. ambassador to S. Korea to arrive in Seoul on July 10
New U.S. ambassador to S. Korea to arrive in Seoul on July 10 | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, June 25 (Yonhap) -- Philip Goldberg, the new U.S. ambassador to South Korea, will arrive in Seoul on July 10 to begin his term, the U.S. Embassy here said Saturday.
"The entire team at the U.S. Mission to Republic of Korea looks forward to welcoming Ambassador-designate Philip Goldberg to Seoul on July 10th," the embassy said on its Twitter page.
Goldberg will fill the vacancy left by his predecessor, Harry Harris, since January 2021, when U.S. President Joe Biden took office.
The career diplomat previously served as ambassador to Colombia and worked as a coordinator for the implementation of U.N. Security Council resolutions on North Korea from 2009-2010.
(END)
6. New COVID-19 infections fall below 7,000 amid virus slowdown
(2nd LD) New COVID-19 infections fall below 7,000 amid virus slowdown | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: UPDATES with latest figures in paras 5-6; CHANGES headline)
SEOUL, June 25 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's new COVID-19 cases dropped below 7,000 on Saturday, marking a moderate downtrend amid the easing omicron wave.
The country added 6,790 new COVID-19 infections, including 85 from overseas, bringing the total caseload to 18,319,773, the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) said.
The KDCA reported 18 more deaths from COVID-19, raising the death toll to 24,516. The fatality rate stood at 0.13 percent.
The number of critically ill patients came to 50, down from Friday's 52, marking the lowest figure since mid-November 2020.
As of 9 p.m., the country had reported 5,893 new infections, down 507 from the same time a day earlier, according to local governments and health authorities.
Daily infections are counted until midnight and announced the following morning.
Daily infection numbers have declined at a steady clip to stay below 10,000 since June 10, after hitting more than 620,000 in mid-March.
Saturday's infection tally is down from Thursday's 7,497 cases and Friday's 7,227.
Of the 6,705 locally transmitted cases, Seoul accounted for 1,551 cases, with the surrounding Gyeonggi Province reporting 1,713 cases. There were 334 infections in Incheon, 40 kilometers west of Seoul.
Despite the downtrend, health authorities remain cautious that relaxed virus curbs could prompt another resurgence of the virus.
South Korea removed most social distancing restrictions, except for the indoor mask mandate, in mid-April but extended the self-isolation mandate for COVID-19 patients until July 17.
(END)
7. N. Korea's new suspected COVID-19 cases fall below 10,000: state media
Will the north soon report better numbers than. the South? Of course all numbers from the north are suspect.
N. Korea's new suspected COVID-19 cases fall below 10,000: state media | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, June 25 (Yonhap) -- North Korea's new suspected COVID-19 cases dropped below 10,000, according to its state media Saturday.
More than 9,610 people showed symptoms of fever over a 24-hour period until 6 p.m. the previous day, the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said, citing data from the state emergency epidemic prevention headquarters.
It did not provide information on whether additional deaths have been reported.
The total number of fever cases since late April came to over 4.7 million as of 6 p.m. Friday, of which more than 4.68 million have recovered, and at least 17,300 are being treated, it added.
On May 12, North Korea disclosed its first COVID-19 case after claiming to be coronavirus-free for over two years. The country's daily fever tally has been on a downward trend after peaking at over 392,920 on May 15.
(END)
8. Japanese PM says no plan to meet Yoon during NATO summit
It is disappointing to read such comments from Japan. Reading between the lines there is no plan to meet because Japan does not want to meet.
Japanese PM says no plan to meet Yoon during NATO summit | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, June 25 (Yonhap) -- Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said Saturday he does not plan to meet South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in Spain next week.
"There is no scheduled summit (with Yoon) at the moment. We will think about what step we will take in line with (Japan's) consistent stance (towards Korea-Japan relations)," he told reporters in Tokyo.
The two leaders are set to attend the NATO gathering in Madrid scheduled from June 29-30.
South Korea is not a member of the military alliance but has been invited as a partner nation, along with countries such as Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
(END)
9. South Korean leader's informal media events are a break with tradition
He is a populist in the true positive populist sense - a man of the people and not a career professional politician.
South Korean leader's informal media events are a break with tradition
Such wide-ranging access to the president of South Korea was previously unheard of
SEOUL, South Korea – South Korean leader Yoon Suk-yeol has departed from years of tradition by holding informal daily media events to field questions on topics ranging from inflation and ties with neighboring North Korea to the first lady and even boyband BTS.
Such wide-ranging access to the president was previously unheard of. It stems from Yoon’s decision to move his office out of the official Blue House, whose previous occupants largely steered clear of such interactions over more than seven decades.
“It’s apparently helping Yoon dispel worries about his lack of political experience and giving him a sense of where public opinion is at,” said Eom Kyeong-young, a political commentator based in the capital, Seoul.
Yoon, a former prosecutor-general, entered politics just a year ago, before winning the presidency in March by a margin of just 0.7%, the narrowest in South Korea’s history.
Upon his inauguration in May, Yoon moved the presidential office to the compound of South Korea’s defense ministry, describing the official residence as the symbol of an “imperial presidency”, and vowing not to “hide behind” his aides.
His liberal predecessor, Moon Jae-in, had rarely held news conferences, and almost always filtered his communication with the media, and the public, through layers of secretaries.
Analysts see Yoon’s daily freewheeling sessions as part of a broader communications strategy that lets him drive policy initiatives and present himself as a confident, approachable leader.
The campaign has also allayed public suspicions about the newcomer to politics, they say.
Polls show the new strategy helping to win support and much-needed political capital for Yoon in his effort to hasten recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, in a parliament dominated by the opposition Democratic Party.
Although Yoon’s approval rating dipped to 47.6% in a recent survey, slightly lower than the disapproval figure of 47.9%, another June poll showed communication was the reason most frequently cited by those who favored him.
“The sweeping victory of Yoon’s conservative party in June local elections shows the public is not so much against the new administration,” said Eom.
Incumbents from Yoon’s People Power Party (PPP) defeated challengers for the posts of mayor in the two biggest cities of Seoul and the port city of Busan in that contest, while its candidates won five of seven parliamentary seats.
Eom attributed Yoon’s low approval rating from the beginning of his term to inflation risks that threaten to undermine an economic recovery and his lack of a support base as a new politician.
But some critics say Yoon’s sessions raise the chances that he could make mistakes.
“He could make one mistake a day,” Yun Kun-young of the opposition party wrote on Facebook last week, saying the new practice could be “the biggest risk factor” for the government.
The presidential office could not immediately be reached for comment.
Yoon has already faced criticism for controversial remarks made during the morning briefings, such as one in defense of his nominee for education minister, who has a record of driving under the influence of alcohol years ago.
But the daily meetings and public reaction would ultimately help the government to shape policy better, said Shin Yul, a professor of political science at Myongji University in Seoul.
“It might be burdensome for his aides for now, but will be an advantage in the long term,” Shin said. “A slip of the tongue cannot be a bigger problem than a policy failure.” – Rappler.com
10. N. Korea discusses revising operational plans with a map of S. Korea
We must not overreact to north Korean propaganda as the editorial writers seem to be doing.
We can develop new plans much faster than in a few years! Updating/revising operational plans is the most important action we can take to ensure the defense of South Korea. Sure the Extended deterrence Working Groups is useful and important but it is not a silver bullet. We need comprehensive defense plans (which we have and they will continue to evolve).
But everyone should know that despite all the talk and criticism we have sufficient plans in place to defend South Korea. And what is equally important to plans is training and readiness (no plan survives contact so in actuality a well trained force that can adapt to the emerging conditions is what is critical to victory).
Yes, we will always strive to improve plans but we are not going to be vulnerable due to not having a new plan for a few months or years (but again we can revise plans based on changing conditions as fast as necessary).
Excerpts:
In order to respond to the North’s nuclear threats, South Korea and the U.S. are devising a new operational plan to replace Operational Plan 5015. However, this will take several years as they have to revise many areas ranging from changing threat analysis, military buildup, and restructuring. However, they need to speed up considering the North’s move. The two allies should resume meetings of the Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group (EDSCG) as soon as possible. If not, it won’t be easy to defend South Korea from ever-sophisticating nuclear capabilities of North Korea.
N. Korea discusses revising operational plans with a map of S. Korea
Posted June. 25, 2022 07:25,
Updated June. 25, 2022 07:25
N. Korea discusses revising operational plans with a map of S. Korea. June. 25, 2022 07:25. .
North Korea recently approved an important issue of strengthening the regime’s war deterrent after deliberation at a Meeting of the 8th Central Military Commission. At the meeting, the North added operation missions while revising operational plans of front-line military units. The state-run Korean Central News Agency released a photo of the North’s military leadership with a map of what appeared to be the east coast of the Korean Peninsula. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un revealed the Party Central Committee’s strategic view and determination while presiding the three-day meeting.
North Korea’s rare mention of revising its war plan with a photo featuring the map of South Korea is an obvious attempt to show that its intention is to target South Korea. The blurred map showed Pohang, North Gyeongsang Province. The revision seems to have a connection to its plan to deploy a new type of tactical guided weapon, which was test-fired in April. It stated that the short-range missiles have "great significance in enhancing the efficiency in the operation of tactical nukes.” It could mean that the North, in actual fact, has become capable of threatening the South with tactical weapons.
This is a huge threat in that the North fundamentally changes the military landscapes of the Korean Peninsula. By emphasizing its tactical weapons, the North is trying to overcome its inferiority to the South with regards to conventional weapons. It is only a matter of time before the regime decides to go ahead with the seventh nuclear test, which is expected to be a series of missile launches. Some analyzes that the important issue of strengthening the regime’s war deterrent could be approving the seventh nuclear test.
North Korea’s development and deployment attempt of tactical nuclear weapons are problematic because it clearly takes advantage of fears of a new Cold War. The U.S. has invited leaders of Asian countries including South Korea to the NATO summit, which will be held in Spain at the end of this month, to expand ways to keep the influence of China and Russia in check. The two countries have responded by expressing their solidarity among BRICS nations. With the 19 rounds of missile launches this year, North Korea keeps engaging in military provocations while the international community is busy with geopolitical tensions, being unable to even discuss imposing sanctions.
In order to respond to the North’s nuclear threats, South Korea and the U.S. are devising a new operational plan to replace Operational Plan 5015. However, this will take several years as they have to revise many areas ranging from changing threat analysis, military buildup, and restructuring. However, they need to speed up considering the North’s move. The two allies should resume meetings of the Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group (EDSCG) as soon as possible. If not, it won’t be easy to defend South Korea from ever-sophisticating nuclear capabilities of North Korea.
11. Koreans' love-hate relationship with Samsung
Excerpts:
How is Samsung working to improve its image?
Given that many financial crimes committed by the Lee family were engineered to transfer control over to Lee Jae-yong, the vice chairman vowed to not hand over managerial power to his son or daughter.
In a public mea culpa in 2020, Lee admitted to misconduct.
“Samsung has grown to become a top-tier company on the global stage,” Lee said, “But we sometimes failed to meet public expectations since [Samsung] didn’t strictly follow the law and ethical standards. […] This is my fault. I apologize.”
Another notable move was establishing a committee in 2020 consisting of outside legal panels to monitor the company’s compliance with the law, after the bribery scandal under the Park Geun-hye administration.
The committee oversees the compliance at Samsung’s affiliates with Lee Chan-hee, former head of the Korean Bar Association, at the helm.
Saturday
June 25, 2022
[WHY] Koreans' love-hate relationship with Samsung
The Taegeukgi, or Korean national flag, and the Samsung Electronics flag fly outside the company’s office in Seocho District, southern Seoul. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]
Comments on a recent YouTube video featuring Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong conjure up thoughts of comment sections under popular K-pop music videos.
With over 10,000 comments, many flocked to praise Lee for welcoming U.S. President Joe Biden during his visit to Korea in fluent English, calling the 54-year-old businessman the “pride of Korea” and “a true patriot.”
But in another alley, called the civic group community, Lee, son of late Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Kun-hee, is labelled an aggressor, disrupting the country’s order and legal system due to his history of violating the law.
Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong shakes hands with U.S. President Joe Biden on May 20 at the company's chip plant in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi. [YONHAP]
The contrasting views over just one person encapsulate the mixed emotions that Koreans have toward the country’s largest company, which could be best summarized as a love-hate relationship.
If you ask a Korean about their thoughts on Samsung, you likely won't get a crystal clear answer because Samsung’s path to becoming the world’s leading tech manufacturer came with both fair successes and shady mishandling.
On one hand, Samsung Electronics is widely recognized in Korea for having played an integral role in the country’s dramatic transformation from a war-torn nation into the world’s 10th largest economy by gross domestic product.
The tech giant’s annual net profit accounted for 18.2 percent of the entire net by all listed companies last year, while its market capitalization took up 22 percent on the main Kospi bourse in May, according to the Korea Financial Investment Association.
Over 5 million Korean people, roughly a tenth of the population, own some amount of Samsung Electronics stock, meaning the moves and performance of the company matter not only to those in the business circle but also to the average person on the street.
At the same time, the founding family of Samsung, including the vice chairman, has long been the subject of criticism for their involvement in a wide range of crimes including tax evasion, breach of trust and bribery.
The cases are entangled within the shadows of Korean corporate culture, shaped by cozy relations with the government and companies, cronyism and an immature law enforcement system, often considered a byproduct of rapid economic development driven by aggressive state-led projects and interventions.
What are Koreans' general thoughts toward Samsung?
Reliable data covering the Korean public’s perception toward Samsung is few and far between, but a set of archived surveys offer meaningful insights.
Realmeter, a leading public opinion research firm based in Seoul, conducted a survey of 1,000 people in 2020 after the death of Lee Kun-hee, the youngest son of Samsung founder Lee Byung-chull and a business magnate credited with turning Samsung into the world’s leader in chips, smartphones and appliances.
Late Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Kun-hee writes a message commemorating the 30th anniversary of the company's entry into the semiconductor business in 2014. [NEWS1]
Asked to assess his achievement, 54.3 percent of the respondents answered that his legacy is “very great,” with another 30 percent answering “great.” Only 11.5 percent of people said that his achievement was not big.
As for his misconduct, 21.7 percent said that the wrongdoing was “very grave,” followed by 27.6 percent choosing “grave” and 43.2 percent saying his wrongdoing was not that serious.
The survey agency analyzed the results, explaining that the chairman’s achievement was recognized across all age groups and political ideologies, but when it comes to misconduct, those in their 30s and 40s and those who identified themselves as liberal tended to be more critical.
Lee Kun-hee was convicted of tax evasion and breach of trust in 2009 after he issued warrant bonds of Samsung SDS at lower-than-market price to his son and two daughters. He was also found guilty of running secret bank accounts to hide about 4.5 trillion won ($3.4 billion) that he inherited from his father Lee Byung-chull.
The Samsung chairman was granted a special pardon in 2009 after the court gave him a suspended jail term.
As an entity, Samsung Electronics has topped the rankings of the most admired companies in Korea. For young people fresh out of college, the company is considered to be one of the best companies to work for due to its high salaries and strong brand reputation.
How do Koreans feel about Lee Jae-yong?
After his father went into a coma following a heart attack in 2014, the younger Lee took over the leadership position. Koreans seem to have a positive view on the successor’s overall business management but take a more cautious stance when it comes to his trustworthiness, apparently due to his track record of bribery.
The vice chairman scored 94 out of 100 in a poll measuring his ability to come up with a corporate vision and strategy, in a survey of 1,000 people conducted by Brand Reputation Research Institute in March.
The scores fell a bit in other categories, recording 87 in trustworthiness and 88 in social responsibility as more respondents gave lukewarm answers to questions about Lee's honesty and ethical standards.
Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong apologizes over his wrongdoings in 2020 during a press conference held at the company's office in southern Seoul. [JOONGANG PHOTO]
Vice Chairman Lee was convicted of bribing former President Park Geun-hye in exchange for favorable approval in a controversial merger between Samsung C&T and Cheil Industries, a deal widely considered to be part of a scheme to transfer power to the younger Lee.
He was sentenced to two years and six months in prison last January but released on parole last August as the government took into account “economic conditions” at home and abroad.
Some say such lenient measures are needed to ensure economic growth whereas others disagree with giving such soft penalties only for certain people.
Lee has been thrown into the center of the dispute again as people are divided on whether he should be pardoned, a step that wipes an offender's record clean and frees them of any remaining penalties.
Korea Society Opinion Institute, a public policy research and survey center, found last month that 68.8 percent of 1,012 respondents agreed to a pardon while 23.5 percent disapproved.
The support rate for Lee was far higher than that for politicians in jail including former President Lee Myung-bak.
Analysts deduced that favorable views toward the conglomerate or the chief stem from high-flying profits and their contribution toward national economic growth and employment, while the skepticism is linked with their practice of violating laws and putting first the interests of family members over those of the shareholders.
“The [Korean] markets recognize the benefits of family members leading the corporations and enhancing corporate value,” wrote Lee Chang-min and Choi Han-soo, researchers at the Economic Reform Research Institute, in a report.
“But at the same time, they also perceive that the unfair handling of illegal cases could generate a negative impact on corporate value,” the report read.
Korea has many big conglomerates, like Hyundai Motor, SK and LG. What's so special about Samsung?
There are two distinctive features that distinguish Samsung Electronics from other big players. The electronics maker holds the top global market position in various sectors including televisions, memory chips and smartphones while others inevitably rank lower. Although Hyundai Motor and LG Electronics are leading manufacturers, it is hard to say they claim an undisputed dominant position in the global markets.
And holding the top position means a lot to Koreans — especially for the older generations, who lived in an era characterized by economic backwater after the 1950-53 Korean War when the country's gross national income and other key economic metrics were lower than those of Ghana or Gabon.
This is the primary reason there are so many anecdotes about Koreans feeling proud or even touched when they see Korean advertisements or products outside of the country, because the success is synonymous with the country's transformation.
Another reason people connect national pride to Samsung is that Samsung Electronics has become the top player in sectors once dominated by Japanese tech companies like Sony, Panasonic and Toshiba. The Japanese colonial ruling gave Koreans a combined feeling of hatred and envy toward Japan, and the stellar performance by Japanese companies once seemed unbeatable.
But as Samsung Electronics outsold Sony’s televisions or Toshiba’s chips entering into the 1990s through 2000s, the company became the symbol of success and the economic miracle of the country.
"Japanese companies were not just industry rivals, but an enemy to conquer," according to a book released in 2002 titled "Samsung Rising," authored by a group of Korean reporters.
What kind of role does the public expect Samsung to play?
With the outsized influence of the company, Koreans in general and possibly even the government expect the company to become a sort of “problem solver” in many areas not directly related to its business.
When the country is hit by natural disasters, such as the pandemic, Samsung Electronics is typically the first company to make a donation, often with the highest amount, prompting other companies to follow suit. When Covid-19 broke out in 2020 and there was a shortage of masks, the company dispatched its engineers to local mask manufacturers to help enhance companies' manufacturing techniques.
An engineer from Samsung Electronics instructs workers at a local facial mask manufacturer on how to improve production capacity. [YONHAP]
Vice Chairman Lee also met with the executives of biotech company Moderna to discuss the supply and contract manufacturing of Covid-19 vaccines in Korea.
Those activities also invited mixed reactions. Some say it was all worthy of praise and recognition, but critics maintain that the company’s social contribution is not something to be appreciated because of its history of receiving political favors. A source from a Korean conglomerate said that the activities also benefit Samsung Electronics' business, leaving doubt as to whether helping others was the genuine intent.
How is Samsung working to improve its image?
Given that many financial crimes committed by the Lee family were engineered to transfer control over to Lee Jae-yong, the vice chairman vowed to not hand over managerial power to his son or daughter.
In a public mea culpa in 2020, Lee admitted to misconduct.
“Samsung has grown to become a top-tier company on the global stage,” Lee said, “But we sometimes failed to meet public expectations since [Samsung] didn’t strictly follow the law and ethical standards. […] This is my fault. I apologize.”
Another notable move was establishing a committee in 2020 consisting of outside legal panels to monitor the company’s compliance with the law, after the bribery scandal under the Park Geun-hye administration.
The committee oversees the compliance at Samsung’s affiliates with Lee Chan-hee, former head of the Korean Bar Association, at the helm.
12. House panel advances 2023 defense bill maintaining US troop level in S. Korea
I think many of us will be writing about the requirement for the SECDEF to provide a briefing on efforts to reinforce the US security commitment to South Korea. This is a significant and far reaching requirement. It will not be a comprehensive briefing unless it includes not only deterrence and defense but also an alliance superior form of political warfare, strategic influence, cyber, counter proliferation, counter-illicit activities, defense against asymmetric activities (in the gray zone), as well as contingency planning for internal instability and regime collapse, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, :loose nukes" and other WMD, internal civil war, Chinese intervention across the spectrum of instability and conflict, and more.
Excerpts:
The bill also mentioned that the presence of the approximately 28,500 members of the US Forces Korea serves "not only as a stabilizing force to the Korean Peninsula but also as a reassurance to all our allies in the region."
"The United States should continue to ... maintain its existing robust military presence in South Korea to deter aggression against the United States and its allies and partners," the bill's text reads.
A new addition to the annual bill is the call for the Pentagon chief to provide a briefing on Washington's efforts to reinforce its security commitment to South Korea.
The briefing should include the scope and scale of combined military exercises and training on and around the peninsula, as well as efforts to enhance security measures and identify new steps to reinforce deterrence against the North's "destabilizing" activities, according to the text.
In addition, the briefing should include efforts to counter threats to South Korea's security by Russia and China.
House panel advances 2023 defense bill maintaining US troop level in S. Korea
The US House Armed Services Committee has endorsed an annual defense policy bill for the fiscal year 2023 maintaining the current level of around 28,500 American troops in South Korea, according to media reports Friday.
The proposed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 also directs the defense secretary to brief the committee no later than March 1 next year on how the Pentagon will continue to strengthen its long-term security commitment to South Korea.
The NDAA bill, which is now heading to a floor vote, comes as the South and the United States are striving to sharpen deterrence against North Korea's military threats amid concerns of the regime conducting a nuclear test.
Posted on the committee website, the bill stated it is the "sense of the Congress" that the US troop presence in the South serves as a "strong deterrent" against North Korean aggression and a "critical" support platform for national security engagements in the Indo-Pacific region.
The bill also mentioned that the presence of the approximately 28,500 members of the US Forces Korea serves "not only as a stabilizing force to the Korean Peninsula but also as a reassurance to all our allies in the region."
"The United States should continue to ... maintain its existing robust military presence in South Korea to deter aggression against the United States and its allies and partners," the bill's text reads.
A new addition to the annual bill is the call for the Pentagon chief to provide a briefing on Washington's efforts to reinforce its security commitment to South Korea.
The briefing should include the scope and scale of combined military exercises and training on and around the peninsula, as well as efforts to enhance security measures and identify new steps to reinforce deterrence against the North's "destabilizing" activities, according to the text.
In addition, the briefing should include efforts to counter threats to South Korea's security by Russia and China.
The Senate Arms Services Committee has also advanced a similar defense policy measure for the fiscal year 2023, according to reports. (Yonhap)
13. North Korea restarts anti-US propaganda day it stopped under Trump
North Korea restarts anti-US propaganda day it stopped under Trump
North Korea has restarted its June 25 “Day of Anti-U.S Struggle” celebrations, a day of anti-American messaging it had held annually but had paused during former President Donald Trump’s term.
North Korean media reports, which were translated and reshared by KCNA Watch, show the country opened up a new art exhibit on Wednesday ahead of the June 25 “day of struggle against U.S. imperialism.” Additional translated North Korean media reports described North Korean workers and trade union members meeting “to vow revenge on U.S. imperialism” in what appears to be a widespread return to these anti-U.S. celebrations.
According to the translated North Korean media reports, the new anti-U.S. art exhibit includes more than 70 artworks “dealing with the crime-woven history and brutal atrocities of the U.S. and Japanese imperialists and class enemies who inflicted untold misfortune and sufferings upon the Korean people.”
“The works disclose the atrocities of the U.S. imperialists who massacred patriots and innocent inhabitants in the most brutal and cruel ways during the period of the strategic temporary retreat of the past Fatherland Liberation War,” the North Korean media report added. “They reflect the heroic struggle of our army and people who mercilessly annihilated the U.S. imperialists and class enemies, and miserable plight of the aggressors.”
June 25 marks the anniversary of the start of the Korean War which lasted from 1950 to 1953. North Korea has traditionally marked that day with mass rallies and airings of grievances against the U.S. During the 2017 celebrations, North Korea issued commemorative stamps depicting the destruction of the U.S. government, the Washington Post reported.
In June of 2018, the Washington Post reported North Korea would forego its annual anti-U.S. “day of struggle.” This decision to forego the traditional anti-U.S. propaganda rallies and messaging came as the U.S. and North Korea had begun to ease tensions and begin discussions around the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. On June 12, 2018, President Donald Trump met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Hanoi, Vietnam, moving forward in this easing of tensions just days before North Korea would have begun its annual anti-U.S. celebrations for 2018.
The return of North Korea’s anti-U.S. struggle days is just the latest escalation as tensions between the two countries return to where they were before the brief period of denuclearization talks under Trump.
14. South Korea is trying to double the range of its K239 rocket launcher
More is better.
South Korea is trying to double the range of its K239 rocket launcher
The Agency for Defense Development announced its research and development project at a seminar last month, a key part of which is the application of ducted rocket propulsion technology. The agency is now looking at adding an air inlet to the K239′s rockets to enable longer combustion time.
Ducted rockets absorb external air and combine it with a gas generator for combustion, thus producing thrust and a longer range. (The MBDA-made Meteor is one example of a rocket that uses ducted technology.)
Combustion efficiency is further improved with the addition of a valve that controls the flow of gas for maneuvering.
The longer range is meant to serve as a countermeasure to North Korea’s multiple rocket launchers, which can target bases 150-200 kilometers away.
South Korea’s missile force has more than 600 Hyunmoo-2 short-range ballistic missiles with a range of 300-800 kilometers; 400 Hyunmoo-3 cruise missiles with a range of 500-1,500 kilometers; and the newly developed Hyunmoo 4-4 submarine-launched ballistic missile. However, the Army lacks a transporter erector launcher, which would help it strike North Korean military targets in the event of a conflict.
The Agency for Defense Development anticipates the longer-range K239 to help the Army offset its insufficient missile arsenal. For example, if the agency’s efforts are successful, the K239 MLR could simultaneously attack 12 enemy targets, providing a long-range strike capability and allowing the military to use its ballistic missiles for high-value targets instead.
15. The real-life Maverick who took on 7 Soviet jets in a classified Korean War dogfight
The real-life Maverick who took on 7 Soviet jets in a classified Korean War dogfight
The existence of the improbable dogfight remained under wraps for decades, yet the details of what happened are the stuff of legends.
SHARE
On Nov. 18, 1952, during the Korean War, Navy Lt. Royce Williams, along with three other pilots from his fighter squadron, VF-781, launched from the USS Oriskany into the stormy skies over the Sea of Japan. There were more than 250,000 sorties flown by the Navy during the conflict, but the ensuing engagement would end in one of the great feats of aerial combat, even if it was covered up for decades due to the tense political environment of the Cold War.
On this mission, Williams squared off against seven pilots from the Soviet Air Force, flying one of the most advanced jet fighters of the time, and walked away with three confirmed kills and one probable that was later confirmed. While Williams kept the incident under wraps at the behest of the Navy, there is now an effort underway to see him awarded the Medal of Honor for his actions that day. And while Top Gun: Maverick is in the news these days for breaking box office records, this is the actual story of one real-life Maverick and a dogfight that would seem improbable if it hadn’t actually happened.
The Oriskany was part of Navy Task Force 77, striking at logistics centers in North Korea. The target that day was the city of Hoeryong, right along the Yalu River where the borders of China, North Korea, and what was then the Soviet Union met. That made the bombing missions a risky proposition, given the possibility of violating each nation’s airspace.
Williams, on his second mission of the day, was flying as part of the combat air patrol in a Grumman F9F-5 Panther.
A U.S. Navy Grumman F9F-2 Panther of Fighter Squadron 24 (VF-24) “Corsairs” flies over ships of Task Force 77 during operations off North Korea on 4 July 1952. (Wikimedia Commons)
“We started to rendezvous with each other as we climbed out of the clouds,” Williams recalled in an interview with Task & Purpose, “And that’s when we heard from the combat information center that there were inbound bogeys from the north.”
Pulling above the clouds at more than 12,000 feet, Williams spotted seven contrails high in the sky above him. They were MiG-15s.
Comparable to the U.S. Air Force F-86, the MiGs outclassed Williams’ Panther in speed, maneuverability, climb rate, and the weapons range. While the Navy had scored some early kills against the MiGs, their mission had switched to one of mostly ground attack. Williams had been training as a Navy fighter pilot since 1944, but the primary mission of the Panthers in Korea was air-to-ground engagements.
The aerial combat was generally confined to the western half of the Korean peninsula, where the Air Force’s F-86 Sabres would patrol the approaches from China known as “MiG Alley.” This was one indication that let Williams know the planes he was facing were almost certainly launched from the Soviet Union.
A MiG-15 built in 1952 for the Polish Air Force, originally as a single-seat aircraft and was later rebuilt as a two-seat SBLim-2. Seen here at the 2017 Duxford Air Festival, Cambridgeshire, UK. (Wikimedia Commons)
Williams fired a quick burst to test his guns, but at the same moment, his flight leader reported a warning light flashing for his fuel pump and headed back toward the fleet. Before the engagement began, it was down to seven MiGs vs. two Navy Panthers.
As Williams and his wingman climbed past 26,000 feet, the MiGs split into two formations, with four of them diving and firing towards the Navy jets from Williams’ 10 o’clock. Williams turned and pulled towards the MiG formation, firing a short burst at the “tail-end Charlie” of the group. It fell away, marking Williams’ first kill of the day.
As the two MiG formations gained altitude to make their attacking dives, Williams found himself on the tail of one and downed a second aircraft.
Because the Panther carried less ammunition than the MiGs, Williams had to choose his shots carefully.
“In the moment I was a fighter pilot doing my job,” said Williams. “I was only shooting what I had.”
The five remaining Soviet jets were now taking turns climbing and then making passes at Williams. He could only twist and turn the Panther to the limits of its abilities, engaging a Soviet jet when it passed in front of his sights or rapidly turning to face them head on.
Williams fired at another MiG and it banked out of the fight. As that Soviet pilot’s wingman turned towards Williams, he fired a long burst as the two jets passed belly-to-belly, with the Soviet aircraft crashing into the sea.
In more than 30 minutes of aerial combat, Williams had downed at least three of the MiGs, with a fourth one heavily damaged.
His plane, though, had suffered plenty of damage of its own.
“I was turning and one guy hit me with the 37mm cannon that knocked out my hydraulics,” said Williams.
With no ammunition and a plane that could barely fly, Williams was headed back towards the Oriskany, using his remaining flight controls to maneuver the aircraft.
Diving low into the clouds, Williams considered ejecting but decided to keep flying.
“I knew in that weather I wouldn’t have survived in the time it took to find me,” he said.
As Williams approached the Navy task force, the ships at first fired on him, mistaking him for an enemy aircraft. Coming around for a second attempt to land, Williams couldn’t keep the aircraft below 170 knots — which made the approach precarious considering the Panther’s normal landing speed was 105 knots, or roughly 120 miles per hour. Still, he managed to land the jet.
Lt. Royce Williams observes some of the damage his F9F-5 Panther sustained in combat with 7 Soviet MiG-15s on November 18 1952. (Photo courtesy of U.S. Naval Institute)
On deck, there were 263 holes counted in Williams’ Panther, although he never saw it again. It was supposedly pushed off the deck into the sea, with the gun camera footage being taken away for analysis.
It was then that the national security implications of the encounter began to take hold. While Soviet volunteers were known to be flying in Korea, Williams had engaged the actual Soviet Air Force. Furthermore, his flight had been made aware of the Soviet jets based on intelligence from a small detachment from the National Security Agency — then less than a year old — operating on one of the other ships in the task force.
Williams was informed by Navy Adm. Robert Briscoe, commander of Naval Forces Far East, that while it was confirmed he had shot down three and possibly four MiGs, he was not to discuss the engagement with anyone, ever.
Which is what Williams did. Through the rest of his career — another 23 years including 110 missions in Vietnam — the only official record of the engagement was Williams’ one confirmed kill and a Silver Star. Two of the other pilots in Williams’ flight that day also received credit for downing enemy aircraft.
Four decades later, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, records began to emerge from Moscow confirming the engagement. The dogfight was covered in a 2014 book by Russian historian Igor Seidov, “Red Devils Over the Yalu: A Chronicle of Soviet Aerial Operations in the Korean War.”
But because the incident officially didn’t happen, finding the necessary documentation is still an uphill battle. However, if you’re looking for the real life Maverick, he’s still out there.
The latest on Task & Purpose
Max Hauptman has been covering breaking news at Task & Purpose since December 2021. He previously worked at The Washington Post as a Military Veterans in Journalism Fellow, as well as covering local news in New England. Contact the author here.
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
