|
Seventy years ago, the Korean War didn’t quite end
Quotes of the Day:
"When we revolt it’s not for a particular culture. We revolt simply because, for many reasons, we can no longer breathe."
~ Frantz Fanon
"There is no surer way to misread any document than to read it literally. As nearly as we can, we must put ourselves in the place of those who uttered the words, and try to divine how they would have dealt with the unforeseen situation; and, although their words are by far the most decisive evidence of what they would have done, they are by no means final."
~ Learned Hand
"Start with what is right rather than what is acceptable."
~ Franz Kafka
1. Don’t sacrifice progress in the name of peace (Korea)
2. North Korea calls US human rights envoy a 'political housemaid' in protest of criticisms
3. Press Statement by Spokesman for Korea Association for Human Rights Studies
4. Rallies and Demos Launched in Region of South Korean Puppets
5. Biden sees Korea-US-Japan ties as special: envoy
6. Upcoming Summit With Japan, Korea Is Latest Signal of U.S. Scramble To Deter China, as New Analysis Warns America’s Military ‘Superiority Is Gone’
7. Unification minister to meet civic group chiefs over abductees, detainees in N. Korea
8. Groups urge discussion on issue of abductees, detainees in N. Korea at Camp David summit
9. S. Korea closely monitoring impact of U.S. credit downgrade: finance ministry
10. Possible weapons trade between Russia, N. Korea shows difficulties facing Moscow: Pentagon
11. Thorough probe needed into suspicions of deliberate delay of THAAD normalization: presidential office
12. N. Korea slams France for staging joint air drills with S. Korea
13. Defense Dept. confirms North Korea responded to outreach about Travis King
14. Japan’s Counterstrike: Learn from South Korea
15. Seventy years ago, the Korean War didn’t quite end
1. Don’t sacrifice progress in the name of peace (Korea)
Good assessment from Don Kirk. Two years ago when this came up I wrote on this subject. I have pasted that article below Don's. I fear some in Congress support this action because those who are advocating have no understanding of the nature, objectives, and strategy of Kim Jong Un.
Don’t sacrifice progress in the name of peace
BY DONALD KIRK, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 08/01/23 12:00 PM ET
The Hill ·· August 1, 2023
The 70th anniversary of the truce that ended the Korean War provided a great opportunity for impassioned advocates of a “peace treaty” or “end-of-war declaration” to press their argument, with congressmen proposing a “Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act” leading to what its proponents believe would be a formal end to the Korean War.
Just because the shooting stopped July 27, 1953, they argue, the war, in the absence of a peace treaty, goes on. No, no, they maintain, don’t be fooled by silence along the Demilitarized Zone that’s divided the two Koreas since the signing of the armistice. That was just a temporary stopgap deal. They love to say the Korean War, which began with North Korea’s invasion of South Korea in June 1950, is still being fought even if you don’t hear the sound of gunfire.
It’s difficult to imagine a more specious argument. It’s as if these advocates of a peace treaty yearn for hostile forces to resume firing at each other. Then no one could argue that the Korean War, often described as America’s “forgotten war,” was really and truly “America’s longest war,” as peace treaty zealots never tire of saying.
How could more than 30 members of Congress, led by Rep. Brad Sherman (D) of California, have signed on as sponsors of the bill? The North Koreans have a long record of never abiding by any deal they’ve made, ranging from promises to give up their nuclear program to vows of regular reunions of members of millions of families divided by the Korean War.
A conference at George Washington University, the day after the anniversary of the truce, showed the degree to which supporters of the bill will go in twisting or ignoring the long history of disappointment and disillusionment in the quest for a lasting, viable deal with North Korea.
The conference capped a three-day program called Korea Peace Action: National Mobilization to End the Korean War, organized by Women Cross DMZ, which was named for a group of more than 30 women who crossed the Demilitarized Zone from North to South Korea eight years ago. Led by Christine Ahn, a fiery Korean American based in Hawaii, they have claimed ever since that they had the chance for truly frank, heart-to-heart talks with North Korean women in Pyongyang before bidding tearful farewells and departing for Seoul.
The message at the conference? America is the blame for pretty much all that had gone wrong in Korea from the start of the war onward.
In the view of University of Chicago historian Bruce Cumings, who led the keynote address, North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs were an almost inevitable response to U.S. “intimidation,” of late in the form of flights by large American bombers near North Korea and by the visit of a U.S. nuclear submarine to a South Korean port for the first time in four decades. He preferred not to dwell on the scores of missile tests ordered by North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong Un, much less on the long history of bloody incidents perpetrated by the North Koreans going back to Kim’s grandfather, Kim Il Sung. The elder Kim ordered his troops to invade the South with the approval of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin and China’s newly victorious Mao Zedong, whose Red Army had completed its conquest of the Chinese mainland the previous October.
Siegfried Hecker, with his background as a nuclear scientist, at the conference blamed the U.S. almost entirely for the impasse with North Korea. The Americans, he said, had missed one opportunity after another “to constrain North Korea’s nuclear program.” He agreed completely on the need for a peace treaty, noting that North Korea was “going back to aligning itself with China and Russia,” whom he didn’t mention had saved the Kim dynasty from annihilation in the Korean War.
Much of the criticism focused on the breakdown of the 1994 “agreed framework,” reached in October 1994 under which North Korea was to freeze its nuclear weapons program. South Korea and Japan were to spend several billion dollars on light water nuclear energy reactors for the North while the U.S. poured in half a million tons of heavy oil annually to meet its energy needs.
Peace treaty advocates blame former President George W. Bush, inaugurated in January 2001, for the breakdown of the framework. They don’t like to say that North Korea, in violation of the framework, was revealed in 2002 to be developing nukes with highly enriched uranium. North Korea steadfastly denied anything to do with highly enriched uranium — until Hecker, on a visit to the North, was shown its nuclear facility.
While castigating Bush for reversing moves at reconciliation, proponents of a peace treaty would rather not go into the North’s uranium program. For all of them, the answer lies in dialogue, in which they say the U.S. is not interested. Never mind that North Korea has spurned all requests for talks since the breakdown of the summit in Hanoi between Kim and then-President Trump in February 2019.
The pro-treaty crowd is not asking North Korea to give up anything. The assumption is, if we declare peace at last, the war will be over. They overlook not only the long history of failed deals but other, more immediate, signs of Kim’s thirst for vengeance, such as the massive parade through Kim Il Sung Square featuring the North’s latest long-range missiles along with drones and other fearsome weaponry.
In their campaigning for a peace treaty, there are topics that are taboo. One is the North’s gruesome record of human rights violations, including public executions, torture and life imprisonment in a vast gulag system. The other is the South’s rise as a global economic powerhouse and center of culture and artistic creativity, which obviously could not have happened under a harsh dictatorship that jails and kills its critics. Peace treaty advocates speak tearfully of the suffering of families divided by the Korean War, but they do not speak of the daily suffering of North Koreans living in hunger and poverty while their government wastes resources on nukes and missiles.
Can an 82-year-old lead the world’s most powerful nation? It’s happened before Biometrics are the new face of airport security
One of the central demands of the pro-treaty crowd is that the U.S. remove the ban on Americans traveling to North Korea, imposed after the arrest, imprisonment and torture of a student, Otto Warmbier, who died shortly after his return home to Cincinnati in a coma in June 2017. They do not mention, though, that North Korea has agreed to only 21 meetings of a few thousand members of divided families under terms of a deal reached by the late South Korean President Kim Dae-jung and Kim Jong Un’s father, the late Kim Jong-il, at their summit in Pyongyang in June 2000. The last family reunion was nearly five years ago.
For peace treaty advocates, any reminder of facts that do not fit their agenda is best forgotten. What’s most incredible is that some members of Congress, as well as the likes of Hecker and Cumings, have signed on to these distortions of history.
Donald Kirk has been a journalist for more than 60 years, focusing much of his career on conflict in Asia and the Middle East, including as a correspondent for the Washington Star and Chicago Tribune. He is currently a freelance correspondent covering North and South Korea, and is the author of several books about Asian affairs.
The Hill · · August 1, 2023End of Korean War Declaration: Why Just Words on Paper Won't Matter
19fortyfive.com · by David Maxwell · November 22, 2021
Let me state up front that I want peace on the Korean peninsula, and I think all Koreans and Americans want peace. The question is, will an end of war declaration contribute to peace if there is no change to the conventional, nuclear, and missile forces in North Korea? How will the security of the ROK be maintained by an end of war declaration? Paper and rhetoric do not trump steel and the amount of North Korean People’s Army steel north of the DMZ is an existential threat to the South and will remain so with a symbolic and non-legally binding end of war declaration.
This is a complicated issue for a number of reasons. President Moon Jae-in appears to have an overwhelming desire to cement his legacy as the “peace president” and an end of war declaration contributes to that. The Moon administration is also laboring under the erroneous assumption that such a declaration will show Kim Jong-un that the ROK/U.S. alliance is abandoning what Kim calls the alliance “hostile policy.” This assumption is followed by a second erroneous assumption that the declaration will lead to a jump-starting of North-South engagement and denuclearization negotiations. These assumptions illustrate a lack of understanding of the nature, the objectives, and the strategy of the Kim family regime which has never wavered in seven decades – it still seeks to dominate the peninsula under the rule of the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State.
At the trilateral Deputy Ministerial meetings 16-17 November in Washington, Deputy Secretary of State Sherman said she is satisfied with the consultations on an end of war “statement.” South Korean officials continue to say that the two sides are in the final stages of negotiations and near an agreement.
The ROK and U.S. diplomats are working on a way forward that will support the policies of both countries. The U.S. does not oppose an end of war declaration per se. As the Moon administration emphasizes it is only symbolic and not legally binding so the question is how it will affect the alliance and security on the Korean peninsula?
The U.S. position is likely that if there is an end of war declaration it must be meaningful and it must contribute to the security of the ROK. The only way it can do so is if there are negotiations to reduce the conventional threat on the DMZ as well as with the ballistic missile and nuclear threats. We must never forget that North Korea has the 4th largest military in the world has 70% of its 1.2 million man army deployed between the DMZ and Pyongyang postured for offensive operations. Its purpose is to attack the South. The South Korean forces are postured for the defense. While North Korea accuses the alliance of having a hostile policy, it is the North that actually demonstrates its hostile policy and has done so for the past seven decades. Few in the political ranks or in the media focus on North Korea’s hostile policies.
In regard to the Deputy Secretary’s remarks, we should not read too much into the use of the word statement versus declaration. She stated she is pleased with the diplomatic coordination being done by both sides. The diplomats might reach an agreement that might be summarized this way: The ROK and U.S. support peace and believe that it would be useful to declare an end to the war. However, to do so requires negotiations on both sides that must include concrete assurances and actual concrete measures to ensure the security of the ROK. It is likely there will be a statement that in principle the alliance supports an end of war declaration but will not make a unilateral declaration before completing negotiations with the North. Most importantly, there will be no declaration without substantive action by the North to reduce its threat and end its hostile policy. As long as the north continues to demonstrate its hostile policy the war cannot be declared over.
Again, the U.S. likely is not going to reject the proposal outright. To do so would open the US to criticism that it does not want peace. The U.S. is sincere in the desire for peace, but it has a stronger desire to ensure that attacks are deterred and the security of the ROK is maintained. The U.S. is also concerned with the political warfare strategy of North Korea, China, and Russia. They have already laid the groundwork to blame the U.S. for not reaching an end of war declaration. The regime has stated that it will not support an end of war declaration unless sanctions are lifted. China and Russia have urged the UN Security Council to lift sanctions. A fundamental precept of the Biden administration policy is the full implementation of all relevant UN Security Council resolutions. This means that it does not support sanctions relief until the north complies with the requirements of the resolutions. However, when there is no end of war declaration North Korea, China, and Russia will use their propaganda and agitation departments to blame the U.S. as the obstacle to peace. They will exploit this to focus on another important objective: to drive a wedge in the ROK/U.S. alliance. Fortunately, ROK and U.S. diplomats understand this, and this likely is why there has not been a premature announcement and why the diplomats are working on a way forward that is acceptable to both nations.
The other issue with an end of war declaration is that it will be exploited by political opponents in South Korea and the U.S. who believe U.S. forces should be removed from the Korean peninsula. Kim Jong-un defines the ROK/U.S. Alliance “hostile policy” as the existence of the ROK/U.S. alliance, the presence of U.S. forces in Korea, and extended deterrence and the nuclear umbrella over the ROK and Japan. An end of war declaration will breathe oxygen into the arguments of these groups and they could push for the removal of U.S. troops. Paradoxically, they will be providing direct support to Kim Jong-un’s objectives for removal of US troops so he can continue his strategy of subversion, coercion/extortion, blackmail diplomacy and ultimately the use of force to dominate the Korean peninsula under his rule.
In the end, I believe U.S. and ROK diplomats will propose negotiations with the north to work toward an end of war declaration. President Biden and President Moon will give Kim Jong-un an opportunity to negotiate and behave like a responsible member of the international community. This is really the key to any progress: will Kim ever become a responsible member of the international community? Unless he does there can be no progress. And we must not forget that paper and words do not trump steel.
David Maxwell, a 1945 Contributing Editor, is a retired US Army Special Forces Colonel who has spent more than 20 years in Asia and specializes in North Korea and East Asia Security Affairs and irregular, unconventional, and political warfare. He is the editor of Small Wars Journal and a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
19fortyfive.com · by David Maxwell · November 22, 2021
2. North Korea calls US human rights envoy a 'political housemaid' in protest of criticisms
Human rights and information are existential threats to the Kim family regime. The regime's response to to Ambassador Julie Turner is why we must take a human rights upfront approach.
North Korea calls US human rights envoy a 'political housemaid' in protest of criticisms
The Washington Post · by Kim Tong-Hyung | AP · August 2, 2023
SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea hurled misogynistic insults Wednesday at a newly confirmed United States special envoy to monitor the country’s human rights issues and warned of unspecified security consequences if Washington continues to criticize its human rights conditions.
The statement published by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency described Julie Turner as a “wicked woman” who was picked by the Biden administration as a “political housemaid” to launch groundless attacks on the country’s human rights record.
The U.S. Senate confirmed Turner’s appointment July 27. She previously served as the director of East Asia and the Pacific at the State Department.
The statement said the Biden administration’s public criticism of North Korea’s human rights situation highlighted its hostility toward Pyongyang in the face of an intensifying nuclear standoff between the countries. KCNA described Turner’s past criticisms of North Korea’s human rights record as absurd, and said the U.S. “revels in meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign state and slandering it.”
“Turner should know that she was chosen as a political housemaid and scapegoat for the ‘human rights’ plots to pressure the DPRK, a poor policy set forth by the Biden administration driven into a scrape in the DPRK-U.S. nuclear confrontation,” the agency said, using the initials of the North’s formal name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The agency said the continued U.S. criticism on North Korean human rights issues could “backfire on it, spawning severe security issues.”
In defiance of Washington last week, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un hosted senior delegates from Russia and China at a Pyongyang military parade that showcased his intercontinental ballistic missiles designed to target the U.S. mainland. Analysts say Kim is trying to boost the visibility of his partnerships with Moscow and Beijing as he looks to break away from diplomatic isolation and insert himself into a united front against the United States.
Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are at their highest point in years. The pace of North Korean missile tests and the United States’ combined military exercises with South Korea have intensified in a tit-for-tat cycle.
North Korea is sensitive to any criticism of its top leadership and government, and often issues harsh remarks toward U.S. and South Korean officials in times of animosity. The country’s language tends to be cruder when the targets are women: It called former South Korean President Park Geun-hye a prostitute, and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a “funny lady” who sometimes “looks like a primary schoolgirl and sometimes a pensioner going shopping.”
The Washington Post · by Kim Tong-Hyung | AP · August 2, 2023
3. Press Statement by Spokesman for Korea Association for Human Rights Studies
Insulting and terrible language.
But this rhetoric telegraphs the fear of a human rights upfront policy by the ROK and US. The regime will counterattack with accusations but it cannot withstand human rights scrutiny and it cannot withstand an information campaign that includes human rights.
Excerpt:
Julie Turner, a woman of ambiguous origin and nationality, has gained notoriety for plotting anti-DPRK "human rights" schemes while spitting out coarse invectives against the DPRK in the past.
Her absurd remarks are nothing but grumbles of either a person ignorant of even the concept of human rights or a human rights abuser embodying the inveterate bad habit of the U.S. which revels in meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign state and slandering it.
Now that such a person has dealt with "human rights issues" at the U.S. Department of State for 16 years, how many countries and nations have suffered mud-slinging from her.
Press Statement by Spokesman for Korea Association for Human Rights Studies
https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1690969207-501259654/rallies-and-demos-launched-in-region-of-south-korean-puppets/
Date: 02/08/2023 | Source: KCNA.kp (En) | Read original version at source
Pyongyang, August 2 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the Korea Association for Human Rights Studies Tuesday issued the following press statement:
It was reported that the U.S. Congress recently approved Julie Turner, named by Biden as an "envoy for the human rights issue in north Korea" of the Department of State.
Julie Turner, a woman of ambiguous origin and nationality, has gained notoriety for plotting anti-DPRK "human rights" schemes while spitting out coarse invectives against the DPRK in the past.
Her absurd remarks are nothing but grumbles of either a person ignorant of even the concept of human rights or a human rights abuser embodying the inveterate bad habit of the U.S. which revels in meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign state and slandering it.
Now that such a person has dealt with "human rights issues" at the U.S. Department of State for 16 years, how many countries and nations have suffered mud-slinging from her.
The fact that such a wicked woman was appointed as an "envoy for the human rights issue" of the U.S. Department of State clearly shows how hostile the U.S. administration is toward the DPRK.
Turner, who had served as a junior official of the Department of State for more than ten years, is said to be looking forward to working as an "envoy for the human rights issue in north Korea" as early as possible. It seems that she regards the post of "envoy for the human rights issue" as a high government post.
Turner should know that she was chosen as a political housemaid and scapegoat for the "human rights" plots to pressure the DPRK, a poor policy set forth by the Biden administration driven into a scrape in the DPRK-U.S. nuclear confrontation.
Former U.S. administrations resorted to confrontation rackets against the DPRK, fingering the "human rights card", but, eventually, they could not but suffer greater defeat and disgrace. And it is the miserable end of "envoys for the human rights issue in north Korea" of the U.S. Department of State that would retire in dishonor without any achievements during their term.
Turner will horribly realize that her job of playing the main role in the U.S. administration's foolhardy "human rights" racket is one hundred times worse than a lifetime junior official of the Department of State.
Lamentation and regret over destruction always come too late.
The U.S. is now getting frantic in its "human rights" smear campaign while maximizing its military hostile acts against the DPRK. This reality once again teaches the DPRK to force, with more powerful and merciless counteraction than ever, the U.S. to pay a high price enough to be unforgettable.
A retaliatory action of justice is bound to follow a sinister move.
The U.S. should ponder all its words and deeds, mindful that the "human rights issue in north Korea" can backfire on it spawning severe security issues. -0-
www.kcna.kp (Juche112.8.2.)
4. Rallies and Demos Launched in Region of South Korean Puppets
This is important. The regime is describing the work of the United Front Department and the Cultural Engagement Bureau. They are the leading elements of the regime's political warfare strategy:
- The United Front Department (UFD) overtly attempts to establish pro-North Korean groups in the ROK, such as the Korean Asia-Pacific Committee and the Ethnic Reconciliation Council. The UFD is also the primary department involved in managing inter-Korean dialogue and North Korea's policy toward the ROK.
- The 225th Bureau now Cultural Engagement Bureau, is responsible for training agents to infiltrate the ROK and establish underground political parties focused on fomenting unrest and revolution.
The political warfare strategy consists of two lines of effort: subversion of the ROK government and society and driving a wedge in the ROK/US alliance to drive US forces off the peninsula.
Excerpt:
Media daily air the news of struggles of people from all walks of life, reporting that the struggle for ouster of traitor Yun has continued despite heat wave and the people's passion for the struggle for the withdrawal of the U.S. military bases and the resignation of the Yoon "regime" is getting stronger day by day. -0-
Rallies and Demos Launched in Region of South Korean Puppets
https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1690969207-501259654/rallies-and-demos-launched-in-region-of-south-korean-puppets/
Date: 02/08/2023 | Source: KCNA.kp (En) | Read original version at source
Pyongyang, August 2 (KCNA) -- The public struggle is gaining momentum in the region of south Korean puppets to drive out the U.S., keen on forcing the colonial slavery and inflicting nuclear disaster, and traitor Yoon Suk Yeol, who is offering everything to outsiders, zealously following the U.S.
The "Peace Action", formed with more than 700 civic organizations, on July 27 held a press conference in Phaju of Kyonggi Province, at which it said that the situation on the Korean peninsula has deteriorated due to the U.S. and the Yoon Suk Yeol "regime's" moves to ignite a nuclear war, adding that inadmissible is another war on this land.
Thousands of citizens in the area of Phyongthaek, Kyonggi Province, staged a sit-in strike after encircling the U.S. military base there, shouting "Dissolution of the fake UN Command!" and "The withdrawal of the U.S. forces is our dream!"
Citizens and religionists in the Taejon area called a press conference, at which they stressed that the people of this land are suffering from the division system and that all peace-loving forces should unite to push out the outsiders, Yoon Suk Yeol and other war maniacs fanning the danger of a nuclear war.
A peace organization comprising more than 150 organizations held a rally in Seoul on July 28 to declare an action against the U.S., war and traitor Yoon Suk Yeol.
The organization said in a statement that the people in this land opposing war and aspiring after genuine peace can never pardon the U.S. and the Yoon Suk Yeol bellicose forces bringing the danger of a nuclear war to the Korean peninsula.
The 50th large-scale candlelight rally and demonstration for the resignation of Yoon Suk Yeol were powerfully staged in Seoul on July 29.
Speakers at the rally held in the wake of prior meetings said that traitor Yoon Suk Yeol deserves worse punishment than Park Geun Hye, there will be no future for them as long as the traitor stays in power and it is urgent to bring down Yoon without fail.
At the end of the rally, its participants staged a demonstration, holding large placards and posters reading "Yoon Suk Yeol, pro-Japanese lackey, step down", etc.
The workers' circle is steadily ramping up the struggle to oust the traitor.
The Confederation of Trade Unions (CTU) held a press conference at the meeting room of the organization on July 24 to announce a plan for practical action.
The chairperson of the CTU said that the recent general strike enabled the forces and front for the resignation of the traitor to be expanded. The chairperson declared that the second and third all-people rallies will be held to further fuel the struggle for the resignation of the Yoon Suk Yeol "regime".
All regional organizations under the CTU have intensified the struggle for the withdrawal of the U.S. forces and ouster of Yoon Suk Yeol in Seoul, Pusan, Ulsan, Taegu, Songju, Yong Dong, Kangrung, Phochon and other areas through such various forms as press conferences, rallies and demonstrations.
While vigorously launching regional or joint actions, those organizations disclosed the sinister intention of the U.S. to ignite a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula at any cost and expressed the will to force traitor Yun, who is making frantic efforts by taking advantage of this, to step down,.
In particular, fiercer actions have been waged in the areas where the U.S. military bases are seated.
Young people, poor and citizens joined the labor circles and religionists rose up in the struggle.
Media daily air the news of struggles of people from all walks of life, reporting that the struggle for ouster of traitor Yun has continued despite heat wave and the people's passion for the struggle for the withdrawal of the U.S. military bases and the resignation of the Yoon "regime" is getting stronger day by day. -0-
www.kcna.kp (Juche112.8.2.)
5. Biden sees Korea-US-Japan ties as special: envoy
So what will be the deliverable from the Camp David ROK-Japan -US summit? There are demands from some kind of substantive deliverable. Could we be on the path to a trilateral alliance?
Here is my recommendation: Announce the "Camp David Consensus." What is the consensus? It is an agreement among the three countries that the way forward will be the pursuit of a one free Korea. It is time to flip the conventional wisdom of denuclearization first and unification someday to the pursuit now of a free and unified Korea because unification is the only way to end the nuclear threat and the human rights abuses in the north.
Although denuclearization of the north remains a worthy goal, it must be viewed as aspirational as long as the Kim family regime remains in power. The conventional wisdom has always been that denuclearization must come first and then unification will follow and that there should be no discussion of human rights out of fear that it would prevent Kim Jong Un from making a denuclearization agreement. Today even a blind man can read the tea leaves and know that Kim Jong Un will not denuclearize despite the fact that his policies have been an abject failure. His political warfare and blackmail diplomacy strategies completely failed in 2022 because Presidents Yoon and Biden, like their predecessors, refused to make the political and economic concessions he demanded just to come to the negotiating table: namely to remove sanctions. It is time for the U.S and the ROK/U.S. alliance to execute a political warfare strategy that flips the conventional wisdom and seeks unification first and then denuclearization. Everyone must come to the understanding that the only way to end the nuclear program and the human rights abuses is through unification of the Korean peninsula. The ROK and U.S. must continue to maintain the highest state of military readiness to deter war and then adopt a human rights upfront approach, a comprehensive and sophisticated information and influence activities campaign, and focus all efforts on the pursuit of a free and unified Korea- ultimately a United Republic of Korea (UROK).
Biden sees Korea-US-Japan ties as special: envoy
Talks underway to regularly hold 3-way summit, Yoon’s office says
koreaherald.com · by Choi Si-young · August 1, 2023
The summit US President Joe Biden is hosting on Aug. 18 for South Korea and Japan at Camp David in Maryland, the first of its kind, is evidence that Biden considers the alliance special, South Korea’s ambassador to the US said Monday.
The trilateral meeting, meant to curb China’s influence and North Korea’s aggression while boosting economic ties, is the first Camp David summit Biden will hold since taking office in January 2021.
“We took the initiative in making this work,” Ambassador Cho Hyun-dong told reporters. Speculation is high over whether the summit could take place regularly, a decision that the three leaders would have to make on their own, according to officials familiar with the matter.
A senior official at President Yoon Suk Yeol’s office said, “Details are still being discussed.”
“The momentum for a completely new kind of three-way cooperation is borne out of an improvement in ties between South Korea and Japan,” Cho noted. The US-led coalition, working on dismantling North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, is stepping up efforts for disarmament as Pyongyang doubles down on missile tests.
The envoy was referring to a Seoul-Tokyo thaw in May, when the two leaders decided to put behind historical disputes involving Japan’s colonial occupation, and resume regular visits to each other’s countries after a 12-year hiatus.
Since last year, South Korea has been seeking closer ties with Japan, a neighbor that shares such “common interests” with Seoul in fighting off nuclear threats from North Korea, according to the Yoon administration, which took over in May of that year. Pyongyang since then has shown no signs of returning to nuclear talks.
Cho, who served as the first vice foreign minister before the ambassadorship, said the first meeting of a new Seoul-Washington group last month on managing US nuclear assets to deter the North’s aggression “drastically reinforced” the current deterrence plans, which chiefly rely on the US nuclear umbrella.
The Nuclear Consultative Group, which solidifies the US commitment to provide deterrence with nuclear weapons against North Korea, is one of the “very key outcomes” of the April summit between Yoon and Biden, according to Cho, who described the NCG as concrete progress in the allies’ pursuit of a nuclear-free North Korea.
“The overwhelming defense readiness of the allies will only be tighter as the North’s nuclear threats get bigger,” Cho said, adding that Seoul and Washington are closely monitoring developments in North Korea.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un last week met with the Russian defense minister in Pyongyang, as part of events held to mark what the North calls its victory against the US-led United Nations forces in the 1950-53 war. It was the first time for Kim to hold high-level talks since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in early 2020. China also sent a delegation.
“There are growing concerns over potential military cooperation between Russia and North Korea,” Cho said, stressing any weapons exchanges with North Korea would be a violation of the UN Security Council Resolutions that ban them. Pyongyang is also banned from using ballistic missile technology, which is also used in launching satellites.
Last week, US National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said that the US and its allies currently see little room for diplomacy on North Korea’s disarmament, noting the US-led coalition is seeking to advance military capabilities.
By Choi Si-young (siyoungchoi@heraldcorp.com)
koreaherald.com · by Choi Si-young · August 1, 2023
6. Upcoming Summit With Japan, Korea Is Latest Signal of U.S. Scramble To Deter China, as New Analysis Warns America’s Military ‘Superiority Is Gone’
The 240 page report referenced in the article can be downloaded here: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA2500/RRA2555-1/RAND_RRA2555-1.pdf
Upcoming Summit With Japan, Korea Is Latest Signal of U.S. Scramble To Deter China, as New Analysis Warns America’s Military ‘Superiority Is Gone’
Historic sensitivities could prevent South Korea and Japan from cooperating on defense, as American and its allies grapple with the loss of their ‘virtual monopoly on the technologies and capabilities that made them so dominant,’ Rand says.
DONALD KIRK
Tuesday, August 1, 2023
12:45:26 pm
nysun.com
From Northeast Asia to Australia, the lines of confrontation are deepening in the Indo-Pacific as Communist China expands its power and Washington and its allies scramble to build up their defenses — a challenge underscored by a new Rand Corporation analysis that warns America’s military “superiority is gone.”
“It has become increasingly clear that the U.S. defense strategy and posture are insolvent,” the Rand report says. “The United States and its allies no longer have a virtual monopoly on the technologies and capabilities that made them so dominant against adversarial forces.”
America’s waning military strength looms over the summit President Biden is hosting at Camp David on August 18 with the leaders of South Korea and Japan.
Together, South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk-yeol, and Japan’s prime minister, Fumio Kishida, have reason to be alarmed by the specter of China and Russia, with a long history of interest in exercising control over the Korean peninsula, cooperating closely in their mutual bid for regional power.
Mr. Biden will doubtless play upon these fears at Camp David, even as the protection offered by America’s defense umbrella, the Rand report suggests, isn’t as potent as it was in earlier years.
Even so, the Rand report says, America and its allies “do not require superiority to defeat aggression by their most powerful foes,” provided Washington collaborates “with key allies and partners” to “restore credible postures of deterrence.”
These recommendations could serve as a kind of subtext for the upcoming summit, as the three leaders will “discuss expanding trilateral cooperation across the Indo-Pacific and beyond,” the White House said, including the threat posed by North Korea.
At Camp David, the White House said, “the leaders will celebrate a new chapter in their trilateral relationship” and “reaffirm their strong bonds of friendship,” including “ironclad alliances” between America and Japan, and “the United States and the Republic of Korea.”
The problem with any talk of a trilateral arrangement, though, is that the Koreans and Japanese are at bitter odds over familiar, critical issues.
These range from the wording of histories of Japanese colonialism over Korea to payment for millions of Koreans made to work as slave labor for Japanese factories in World War II to compensation for “comfort women,” or their heirs, who were forced to serve Japanese soldiers.
For those reasons it’s beyond imagination that Tokyo and Seoul will join in a trilateral alliance with Washington, but Mr. Biden sees the trilateral summit as drawing them together so tightly as to cooperate in a war with North Korea and possibly even China.
The Americans would love to see the two engaging routinely in trilateral military exercises. Japanese and Korean warships have already cooperated to a limited degree in joint naval exercises, but how about combining air and naval games with ground forces in an assault similar to the American Marines’ annual exercises on South Korea’s east coast?
Millions of Koreans with memories of Japan as a harsh colonial master might object, but the point is to see if the two can work closely together as de facto allies not bound by a formal alliance.
Equally important, South Korea and Japan are transfixed by the menace of China, whose president, Xi Jinping, sees Taiwan is just as important as North Korea while extending Chinese influence from the South Pacific to Southeast Asia to the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, and even Europe and Africa.
Persuading South Korea and Japan to share common ground on Chinese expansionism, though, may not be easy considering their differing priorities and attitudes.
Mr. Yoon must always be mindful that China is by far the South’s biggest trading partner. If Mr. Xi were to finally try to make good on his vows eventually to recover the Republic of China on Taiwan as a lost Chinese province, Mr. Yoon would not want to be drawn into the conflict. Nor would he be happy about American forces using South Korea as a springboard for Taiwan’s defense.
Japan’s attitude toward the defense of Taiwan would likely be quite different. Japanese rule over Taiwan, between Japan’s victory over China in the Sino-Japanese in 1895 and Japan’s surrender in World War II 50 years later, may have been harsh, but the Taiwanese resented Qing dynasty rule and were not so deeply opposed to Japanese intervention.
Yet another factor may buttress the desire for Korean-Japanese cooperation: the revival of Russia as a regional power — and Chinese friend and possible ally.
Both the Russian defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, and a ranking member of the politburo of the Chinese Communist Party, Li Hongzhong, were guests last week at Pyongyang for the 70th anniversary of the armistice that ended the fighting in the Korean War.
Heightening concerns, China and Russia last month conducted joint air and naval exercises in the waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan.
The summit at Camp David, the White House said, “will advance a shared trilateral vision for addressing global and regional security challenges.”
That covers a wide range of interests — and a degree of cooperation that Mr. Biden hopes will persuade Messrs. Yoon and Kishida to forget the past in the interests of standing firm against their enemies.
nysun.com
7. Unification minister to meet civic group chiefs over abductees, detainees in N. Korea
Unification minister to meet civic group chiefs over abductees, detainees in N. Korea | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Soo-yeon · August 2, 2023
SEOUL, Aug. 2 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's new unification minister will meet with chiefs of civic groups dedicated to resolving the issue of abductees and detainees in North Korea this week as his first official schedule since the inauguration, his office said Wednesday.
Minister Kim Yung-ho will have a meeting Thursday with representatives of such advocacy groups and a family member of a South Korean pastor detained in the North, according to Seoul's unification ministry.
The planned meeting underscores Kim's commitment to addressing the long-pending issue of South Koreans who have been detained in the North after abduction, including those kidnapped during and after the 1950-53 Korean War.
The ministry plans to set up a task force in charge of the detainee issue, and slim it down by relocating about 15 percent of its workforce as part of its major organizational reshuffle.
Kim took office as South Korea's new point man on unification Friday, with a pledge to pursue a principle-based inter-Korean policy amid frozen ties with North Korea caused by Pyongyang's provocations. He is a conservative professor known to be a vocal advocate of human rights.
Since 2013, six South Koreans, including three pastors, have been detained in North Korea on charges of committing what the North called anti-North Korea crimes.
New unification minister honors war dead
New Unification Minister Kim Yung-ho, South Korea's top point man on North Korea, speaks to reporters after paying tribute to South Korean patriotic martyrs and war dead at the National Cemetery in Seoul on July 31, 2023. (Yonhap)
sooyeon@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Soo-yeon · August 2, 2023
8. Groups urge discussion on issue of abductees, detainees in N. Korea at Camp David summit
Groups urge discussion on issue of abductees, detainees in N. Korea at Camp David summit | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Soo-yeon · August 2, 2023
SEOUL, Aug. 2 (Yonhap) -- Civic groups on North Korea's human rights said Wednesday they have sent an open letter to President Yoon Suk Yeol calling for discussing the issue of abductees and detainees in the North during his upcoming summit with the leaders of the United States and Japan at Camp David.
The letter called for the leaders to discuss the issues of South Korean prisoners of the 1950-53 Korean War, abductees, including Japanese nationals, and detainees in North Korea as part of the summit agenda and include them in a joint summit statement.
U.S. President Joe Biden will host Yoon and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at Camp David, a presidential retreat on the outskirts of Washington, on Aug. 18.
The advocacy groups urged Yoon to lead diplomatic efforts to resolve those issues, secure their immediate return and promote accountability, including the repatriation of the remains of deceased people in the North, the letter read.
Since 2013, six South Koreans, including three pastors, have been detained in North Korea on charges of committing what the North called anti-North Korea crimes.
Of them, three South Korean pastors -- Kim Jung-wook, Kim Kuk-gi and Choe Chun-gil -- were sentenced to hard labor for life on charges of spying for South Korea's intelligence agency.
This photo, taken June 28, 2023, shows photos of South Koreans abducted and detained by North Korea during the 1950-53 Korean War. (Yonhap)
sooyeon@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Soo-yeon · August 2, 2023
9. S. Korea closely monitoring impact of U.S. credit downgrade: finance ministry
(LEAD) S. Korea closely monitoring impact of U.S. credit downgrade: finance ministry | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Kang Yoon-seung · August 2, 2023
(ATTN: UPDATES with closing share price at bottom)
SEOUL, Aug. 2 (Yonhap) -- South Korea is closely monitoring the aftermath of the U.S. credit rating downgrade, the finance ministry said Wednesday, noting the event is set to have only a limited impact on the market.
On Tuesday (U.S. time), Fitch Ratings downgraded the credit rating of the United States to AA+ from AAA, citing "repeated debt limit standoffs and last-minute resolutions."
It marked the first downgrade of the world's top economy since 2011 when S&P Global Ratings lowered the rating by a notch to AA+.
"So far, the market is expecting the impact (of Fitch's downgrade) will not be as significant as the adjustment of the U.S. credit rating by S&P in 2011," First Vice Finance Minister Bang Ki-sun said during a meeting.
"But as the market volatility at home and abroad may expand with increasing demand for safer assets, we plan to maintain close coordination among related bodies, and take measures to stabilize the market if necessary," he added.
The benchmark Korea Composite Stock Price Index, meanwhile, fell 50.6 points, or 1.9 percent, to close at 2,616.47 on Wednesday.
colin@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Kang Yoon-seung · August 2, 2023
10. Possible weapons trade between Russia, N. Korea shows difficulties facing Moscow: Pentagon
The members of the axis of authoritarians have to support each other.
Possible weapons trade between Russia, N. Korea shows difficulties facing Moscow: Pentagon
koreaherald.com · by Yonhap · August 2, 2023
The potential weapons trade between North Korea and Russia demonstrates the dire situation Russia finds itself in amid its ongoing war against Ukraine, a Pentagon spokesperson said Tuesday.
Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder made the remark after a news report suggested that North Korea may be sending weapons to Russia.
"Russia maintains a relationship with North Korea," the Department of Defense spokesperson told a daily press briefing when asked about possible weapons trade between the two countries.
The Financial Times earlier reported that Ukrainian troops were using North Korea rockets seized from a ship, indicating possible weapons trade between Pyongyang and Moscow.
"Certainly, we have seen in the past Russia looking to try to obtain munitions from countries like North Korea," Ryder added. "I don't have any updates to provide beyond what we said previously on this topic. But again, it highlights the dire straits that Russia finds itself in when it comes to resupplying and refreshing its munitions capabilities."
The US earlier accused North Korea of providing ammunition to a Russian paramilitary group, Wagner, for use in Ukraine, while stressing that multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions prohibit any arms trade with North Korea.
The Pentagon press secretary said he had no new updates to provide when asked about Pvt. Travis King, an active US service member stationed in South Korea who crossed the inter-Korean border into North Korea last month.
Still, he said he can "confirm that the DPRK has responded to United Nations Command," referring to North Korea by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
When asked to elaborate on North Korea's response, the Pentagon spokesperson said he was referring to the country's initial "acknowledgement" of receiving UNC's inquiry about Private King.
"What I will tell you is, as you heard us say previously, United Nations Command did communicate or provide some communication via well established communication channels," he told the press briefing.
"But I don't have any substantial progress to read out," he added.
On the upcoming trilateral summit between US President Joe Biden, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the Pentagon spokesperson said the US will continue to work closely with its two "staunchest allies" for peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region.
"The relationship between the United States, Japan and the Republic of Korea is very, very strong," he said, referring to South Korea by its official name.
"We are going to continue to work closely with those two countries to do everything we can do to help facilitate communication as it pertains to our mutual efforts to ensure regional peace and stability," added Ryder.
The trilateral summit is set to be held at Camp David on Aug. 18, the White House said earlier. (Yonhap)
koreaherald.com · by Yonhap · August 2, 2023
11. Thorough probe needed into suspicions of deliberate delay of THAAD normalization: presidential office
Thorough probe needed into suspicions of deliberate delay of THAAD normalization: presidential office | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Han-joo · August 2, 2023
SEOUL, Aug. 2 (Yonhap) -- A thorough investigation is necessary if there are suspicions that the previous Moon Jae-in administration deliberately dragged its feet in normalizing the U.S. THAAD missile defense system in South Korea, a senior presidential official said Wednesday.
Allegations have arisen that the Moon administration deliberately delayed the publishing of an environmental assessment report of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery base, which was installed in Seongju, 214 kilometers southeast of Seoul, in 2017.
Since its installation, the unit has been kept in a temporary status pending the assessment.
"The normalization of the Seongju base is an essential measure for the Korea-U.S. combined defense posture," the official said. "If there are suspicions this measure was deliberately delayed, I think we have to provide related facts to the people through a thorough investigation."
Normalization of the THAAD base picked up speed after President Yoon Suk Yeol came into office.
Earlier this year, the environment ministry concluded that the base poses no health hazards, saying the maximum amount of electromagnetic waves emanating from the THAAD base was just 0.2 percent of the legal safety protection standard.
This file image, taken Sept. 15, 2022, shows a U.S. Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense missile defense unit in Seongju, 214 kilometers southeast of Seoul. (Yonhap)
khj@yna.co.kr
(END)
en.yna.co.kr · by Kim Han-joo · August 2, 2023
12. N. Korea slams France for staging joint air drills with S. Korea
South Korea as a global pivotal state has a lot more international support than north Korea will ever have.
N. Korea slams France for staging joint air drills with S. Korea | Yonhap News Agency
en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · August 2, 2023
SEOUL, Aug. 2 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Wednesday lambasted France for holding a combined air exercise with South Korea for the first time last week, decrying it as an "undisguised military provocation" threatening the North's security.
A researcher at Pyongyang's Korea-Europe Association made the criticism in a statement released by the North's Korean Central News Agency after the two countries kicked off the two-day drills last Tuesday at an air base in the South's southeastern city of Gimhae.
"This is an irresponsible act of fanning up the acute tensions in the Korean Peninsula and an undisguised military provocation of threatening the security and interests of the DPRK, in support of the U.S. hostile policy towards it," Ryu Kyong-chol said in the English-language statement.
DPRK stands for the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Ryu took aim at France, claiming that its dispatch of fighter aircraft to the Korean Peninsula cannot be viewed other than an act regarding North Korea as an enemy.
"France had better stop wasting its energies in the Asia-Pacific region," the researcher said. "If it continues to run amuck without discretion in the Korean Peninsula, the biggest hotspot, as now, it will find itself in an undesirable situation."
The French team came here last week as part of the "Pegase" mission designed to deploy air assets to East and South Asia in what it calls a demonstration of the country's commitment to security in the Asia-Pacific region.
The first-ever bilateral training program between the two countries' air forces included air refueling drills, as well as a joint flight aimed at commemorating the sacrifices of U.N. troops killed during the 1950-53 Korean War.
F-15K fighter jets of South Korea and Rafale fighter jets of France fly over an air base in the southeastern city of Gimhae on July 25, 2023, in this file photo released by the South Korean Air Force. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)
yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr
(END)
Related Articles
en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · August 2, 2023
13. Defense Dept. confirms North Korea responded to outreach about Travis King
Defense Dept. confirms North Korea responded to outreach about Travis King
CBS News · by Eleanor Watson
North Korea has responded to outreach about Private Travis King, who crossed into the DPRK in July, according to the Pentagon, marking what appears to be the U.S.' first public acknowledgment of Pyongyang's response to King's situation.
The U.S. communicated through established channels after King crossed from South Korea into North Korea but had been waiting for a response from the North for weeks.
"There was the initial passing of the information, and this was essentially an acknowledgement from the DPRK government that yes, we have received your request for information," Pentagon press secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder told reporters on Tuesday.
The Pentagon used established channels with North Korea at the United Nations Command to make the requests about King.
"I can confirm that the DPRK has responded to United Nations Command, but I don't have any substantial progress to read out," Ryder said. He did not say when North Korea sent the response.
King crossed into North Korea in July after breaking from a group tour of the demilitarized zone. He had been scheduled to go back to the U.S. for separation from the Army after serving time in a South Korean detention facility for assaulting two South Koreans and kicking a patrol car.
He was escorted to the commercial airport outside Seoul but said goodbye to his escort at customs. Once he went through customs, King skipped the flight and found his way to a tour instead.
Army counter-intelligence is conducting a joint investigation with U.S. Forces Korea about King's actions, the Pentagon said in July.
CBS News reporter covering the Pentagon.
Twitter
CBS News · by Eleanor Watson
14. Japan’s Counterstrike: Learn from South Korea
Conclusion:
As Japan increases its defense prowess, it has taken a major step: developing counterstrike capabilities. However, Japan should focus not only on purchasing and developing weapons, but also on its strategic doctrine and command and control to achieve deterrence goals. South Korea has already begun operationalizing its strategic systems, and Japan should learn from its neighbor. Firstly, Japan must work on its counterstrike concept to clarify the timeline of operations and targets that Japan should attack in each time phase. This should be in coordination with South Korea’s Kill Chain and massive retaliation options to control escalation against North Korea. The nuclear consultative body that the United States seeks to establish would be a great venue for this joint targeting planning. Furthermore, Japan should create command-and-control systems specialized in counterstrike and missile defense. It would be preferrable to have a standing strategic command, similar to that forthcoming in South Korea, but if this is difficult then an ad hoc strategic task force, developed from the joint task force for ballistic missile defense, would suffice. Having a single commander overseeing Japan’s three services’ counterstrike capabilities would facilitate helpful consultative processes on targeting with South Korea.
Japan’s Counterstrike: Learn from South Korea - War on the Rocks
warontherocks.com · by Shinichi Hirao · August 2, 2023
Japan and South Korea have had a historically difficult relationship. Yet, the two countries have recently increased cooperation and share an interest in working together on North Korea. One example is that Japan, South Korea, and the United States agreed in June 2023 to deepen cooperation on information sharing to deal with growing North Korea’s missile threats. This is a good first step. Then, looking at Japan’s defense policy, Japan announced that it would develop counterstrike capabilities to reinforce its deterrent last December. This is another good step to improve bilateral ties with the South Korean government. Nevertheless, these are not enough to deter North Korea, as it rapidly strengthens its strategic deterrent. The United States, Japan, and South Korea should strengthen trilateral defense cooperation. It is time for Japan’s defense practitioners to learn from South Korea about its investment in counterstrike systems, designed to hold North Korean missiles and command-and-control facilities at risk.
Japan has had heated debates regarding the development of counterstrike capabilities. This discussion dates back to the 1950s, when then-Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama expressed that Japan could strike enemy military facilities under certain restrictions. Yet Japan had chosen not to develop counterstrike capabilities until this time. In its latest defense white paper, the Japanese government states that “the government has traditionally interpreted a point in time when an armed attack on Japan occurs as when the opponent launches an armed attack and has interpreted that we do not have to wait for suffering actual damage by an armed attack. Japan’s use of military force after the opponent launches an armed attack is different from the so-called preemptive strike by which the enemy country is attacked before its armed attack occurs.” Those in Japan with concerns over counterstrike capabilities often see the problems in whether Japan (with support from the United States) is able to detect the signs of the enemy launching an armed attack against Japan. This is a very important point, but it is not the focus of this article — rather, this piece explores more about operational challenges when an opponent actually launches an armed attack and fires missiles against Japan.
Become a Member
There are two main areas where Japan should learn from South Korea in terms of counterstrike. First, Japan should make its counterstrike doctrine concrete and aligned with that of South Korea to jointly address North Korea’s threats. In doing so, Japan needs to clarify the ultimate ends and respective means of its counterstrike capabilities, referring to and coordinating with South Korea’s Three Axis system. Second, Japan should establish joint command-and-control systems specialized in counterstrike capabilities. Toward this goal, Japan should consider creating a strategic command under the direct control of the standing joint command that will be established in 2024, or could grant authority to control counterstrike systems to its ad hoc joint task force responsible for ballistic missile defense.
South Korea’s Strategic Deterrence
Japan relies on U.S. extended deterrence and its own missile defense systems for strategic deterrence. Yet, as Japanese strategists write in the National Security Strategy, missile defense is not enough to deal with the current security environment. Countries have been building up large, sophisticated missile forces in the Indo-Pacific region. Japan is planning to invest in a slew of counterstrike capabilities, which are expected to attack enemy missile launchers and military facilities to reduce the number of missiles flying to the Japanese homeland. Japanese counterstrike capabilities and missile defense systems are intertwined and essential parts of strategic deterrence.
Faced with more serious North Korean military pressure, South Korea has gone further than Japan in terms of deterrence doctrine. South Korea started looking for missile capabilities much earlier than its neighbor — back in 1978, it successfully launched a Baekgom (백곰: polar bear) missile. Today, South Korea has developed the Three Axis system, which consists of Kill-Chain, Korea Air and Missile Defense, and Korea Massive and Punishment Retaliation. As Clint Work explained in these pages, these missile systems and sensors are designed to react to North Korea before, during, and after a missile attack. First, Kill Chain is a preemptive strike when South Korea detects signs of imminent attack, targeting North Korean artillery and missile silos. Second, Korea Air and Missile Defense is a multi-layered missile defense concept to intercept flying ballistic missiles. This includes the Patriot, Navy Aegis systems, and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile defense systems. Lastly, Korea Massive and Punishment Retaliation is a plan to attack Pyongyang and remove the North Korean political and military leadership. This response is much stronger than Kill Chain and is aimed at deterring North Korea’s employment of nuclear weapons by the threat of conventional but punitive retaliation. South Korea would use its ballistic and cruise missiles as a main means to strike, including Hyunmoo (현무) missile systems. To oversee these systems, South Korea will establish Korea Strategic Command in 2024 to effectively operationalize the Three Axis system. This command would control strategic weapons and missile defense.
This Three Axis system is central to South Korea’s deterrent against North Korea and was developed, in part, due to South Korean concerns that the U.S. response to a regional crisis may be delayed, or come after a North Korean attack. The discussion between South Korea and the United States about wartime operational control transfer attests to these concerns — South Korea will not regain operational control until it operationalizes the Three Axis system. Control was originally transferred to the U.N. Command during the Korean War and then to the South Korea-United States Combined Forces Command. In the past, the United States needed operational control of the South Korean forces to deter North Korea from invading the South again and to keep Seoul from launching its own attack to reunify the peninsula. Today, by contrast, as North Korea’s missile forces are growing, the United States is welcoming South Korea’s defense buildup. The United States also removed the missile restriction agreement with South Korea in 2021, which has reinforced the Three Axis system.
Challenges of Japan’s Counterstrike Capabilities in Dealing with North Korea
Japan declared it would look to possess stand-off weapons as a counterstrike means. This includes purchasing Tomahawk missiles and making its Type-12 surface-to-ship missiles longer-range and available from air, sea, and ground platforms. Japanese leaders are also considering making improvements to intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities to enhance targeting capabilities for these missiles. These are undoubtedly steps in the right direction. However, Japan still faces two challenges.
First, Japan must clarify its counterstrike doctrine. Both Japan and South Korea have invested well in missile defense. However, as mentioned earlier, while South Korea’s strike system has two axes (before and after missile attack), Japan’s doctrine for counterstrikes on adversary targets is less clear. The National Security Strategy indicates that these forces would be used in a lawful way based on domestic and international law and follow Japan’s three standards of using force. This means that any strikes will strive to use the minimum amount of force necessary and Japan’s strike would come after an enemy’s launching of an armed attack (as mentioned earlier, this does not mean Japan has to wait until missiles cause damage to the Japanese soil). Yet, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida did not clarify under what situations Japan could launch preemptive counterstrike. Again, this is “preemptive counterstrike” —preemptive because this occurs before an adversary fires missiles against Japan, but this is still counterstrike in the sense that Japanese reaction happens after the enemy launches an armed attack.
This omission could be an attempt at “strategic ambiguity,” designed to deter North Korea by intentionally blurring Japan’s redline. Nevertheless, defense practitioners should be capable of launching preemptive counterstrike in case intelligence shows signs of imminent attack from North Korea and responsible civilian policymakers have made that decision. Defense planners should start by splitting the capabilities into preemptive and retaliatory counterstrike, and then should explore what weapons should be used to attack what targets. South Korea already clarifies what targets and means would be used when its military conducts the Kill Chain and massive punishment options. Once Japan materializes its counterstrike doctrine in this way, Japan and South Korea will both benefit from holding consultative processes on targeting, or how to make the most of two countries’ assets in a timely and proportionate manner.
This will enable Japan and South Korea to jointly control escalation and deter North Korea from crossing the nuclear threshold. In other words, if Japan and South Korea do not coordinate their counterstrike doctrines and one of them conducts a counter-value strike before North Korea launches its missiles, North Korea has a good reason to escalate to the nuclear dimension and could strike both countries. Of course, this conversation will be useful to the United States too, as long as the United States would command Korean forces in the event of a conflict. There are multiple existing mechanisms for Japan or South Korea to have this dialogue on a bilateral basis with the United States, but the emerging trilateral nuclear consultation group will be the best place to have this targeting discussion, even though Japan and South Korea’s strike means remain conventional.
The second challenge is command and control. South Korea will soon establish the Korea Strategic Command, but Japan currently has no plan to make an equivalent command. The military’s future counterstrike capabilities will be dispersed in the Ground, Maritime, and Air Self Defense Force. Japan should establish joint headquarters to command and control these strategic strike systems in a timely and appropriate manner. This is particularly necessary if Japanese missiles forces are asked to destroy North Korea’s missile launchers prior to an attack. One way to establish a strategic command is to place it under the direct control of the standing joint command that the Self Defense Force will create in 2024 to facilitate joint operations overall. If it is difficult to have a permanent strategic command politically, Japan could develop its ad hoc ballistic missile defense task force into a counterstrike and missile defense task force. The task force is organized to counter ballistic missiles, having a commander of the Air Defense Command from the Air Self Defense Force as its head. This task force includes missile defense units from three services, connecting them with the detection and information-sharing system, called the Japan Aerospace Defense Ground Environment. It would be politically and financially more feasible to integrate counterstrike capabilities, such as the Type-12 surface-to-ship missiles and Tomahawk missiles, in this ad hoc task force than it would be to establish a new strategic command. Though ad hoc, this would make the commander of the Air Defense Command responsible for counterstrike operations and enable him/her to have a conversation with the commander of Korea Strategic Command.
Conclusion
As Japan increases its defense prowess, it has taken a major step: developing counterstrike capabilities. However, Japan should focus not only on purchasing and developing weapons, but also on its strategic doctrine and command and control to achieve deterrence goals. South Korea has already begun operationalizing its strategic systems, and Japan should learn from its neighbor. Firstly, Japan must work on its counterstrike concept to clarify the timeline of operations and targets that Japan should attack in each time phase. This should be in coordination with South Korea’s Kill Chain and massive retaliation options to control escalation against North Korea. The nuclear consultative body that the United States seeks to establish would be a great venue for this joint targeting planning. Furthermore, Japan should create command-and-control systems specialized in counterstrike and missile defense. It would be preferrable to have a standing strategic command, similar to that forthcoming in South Korea, but if this is difficult then an ad hoc strategic task force, developed from the joint task force for ballistic missile defense, would suffice. Having a single commander overseeing Japan’s three services’ counterstrike capabilities would facilitate helpful consultative processes on targeting with South Korea.
Become a Member
Shinichi Hirao is an officer of the Japan Ground Self Defense Force. He has been in service for eight years and his research interests include nuclear and conventional deterrence, including Japan’s counterstrike capabilities. He received his B.A. in Law from the University of Tokyo and the Master of Public Policy from the University of Virginia.
The views and opinions expressed here are the author’s own, and do not reflect those of any organization with which the author is or was affiliated.
Image: Wikipedia
Commentary
warontherocks.com · by Shinichi Hirao · August 2, 2023
15. Seventy years ago, the Korean War didn’t quite end
As I noted in a previous message, I think these activists have "romanticized" the Pyongyang problem and consider that it is the Palestine of Northeast Asia. It allows them to balem the "imperialist" US and the west which always seems to be a major talking point.
Excerpts:
He notes that a key organizer of the demonstrations is Christine Ahn, who has said her goal is “to liberate Korea” from “the yoke of U.S. imperialism” and that America is “the world’s aggressor and empire.” She has described Hawaii as “occupied territory.”
At least no one in Congress is buying this nonsense, right? Not quite. Rep. Brad Sherman’s Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act has drawn 45 co-sponsors. Ms. Ahn and associates are lobbying for more.
Seventy years ago, the Korean War didn’t quite end
washingtontimes.com · by Clifford D. May
By - - Tuesday, August 1, 2023
OPINION:
May I remind you what a hellhole North Korea is?
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea — that’s its official and fraudulent name — is a dynastic totalitarian dictatorship in which, according to Freedom House, “arbitrary arrests and detention are common, and punishments for political offenses are severe. The state maintains a system of camps for political prisoners where torture, forced labor, starvation, and other atrocities take place.”
North Koreans are “classified according to their family’s level of loyalty and proximity to the leadership under a semi-hereditary caste-like system known as songbun. Those who are classified as ‘wavering’ or ‘hostile’ instead of ‘loyal’ face official discrimination in employment, live in poorer housing, and receive limited educational opportunities, though rules can be manipulated through bribery.”
In contrast to the Republic of Korea — the official and truthful name of South Korea, which has evolved into a free and prosperous nation — the North is unable to produce enough food for its 26 million people. Emigration is illegal, and those attempting to escape, the regime threatens, “will be shot without warning.”
Last week, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un — his father, Kim Jong Il, was “Dear Leader,” and his paternal grandfather, Kim Il Sung, “Great Leader” — welcomed senior officials from China and Russia to celebrate Victory Day, the 70th anniversary of the armistice that halted three years of armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula.
A military parade featured goose-stepping soldiers, tanks, drones, and Hwasong-18 intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Since no peace treaty was ever signed, the Korean War never really ended, which makes it America’s longest war. To this day, roughly 30,000 U.S. troops remain in the South to deter the North.
Over the decades that followed the armistice, American diplomats negotiated a series of deals intended to prevent North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons. Time after time, the regime pocketed American concessions and cash while breaking its promises.
Mr. Kim is now estimated to possess more than 50 nuclear warheads. (Remember that when considering the on-again, off-again talks with Tehran.)
Over the past two years, he has conducted dozens of illegal missile tests. U.S. efforts to impose sanctions on North Korea at the U.N. Security Council have been blocked by Russia and China. They insist that Mr. Kim is merely responding to the threats posed by the U.S., Japan and South Korea.
That echoes their claim that the Korean War began when American “imperialist aggressors” invaded the North. In truth, Kim Il Sung attacked the South in June 1950 with permission and approval from Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.
Chinese dictator Mao Zedong subsequently sent “volunteers” backed by Soviet air power to support the North in the “War to Resist America and Aid Korea,” aka the “Grand Fatherland Liberation War.”
An estimated 4 million Koreans died. Nearly 40,000 American troops were killed.
At least Americans now understand this history and no longer harbor illusions about North Korea, right? Not quite.
Last week, self-described peace advocates — including Code Pink and the Quincy Institute — gathered in Washington for a three-day event called “Korea Peace Action: National Mobilization to End the Korean War.”
They are demanding that the U.S. sign a formal peace agreement with the North. Would that include guarantees of nonaggression by Mr. Kim, a timeline for him to give up his nuclear weapons, and progress on human rights? Not quite.
“The effort is a deception,” Ji Seong-ho, a member of South Korea’s National Assembly, writes in The Wall Street Journal. Korea Peace Action is “parroting the regime’s ‘hostile policy’ refrain — that tensions on the Korean Peninsula result from U.S.-South Korean military exercises, the presence of U.S. troops in Korea, and U.S. economic sanctions.”
“This issue is personal for me,” Mr. Ji adds. Born in the North, where he and his family “were close to death from starvation,” he survived by scavenging “bits of coal from freight trains, which I would sell to buy food on the black market.
“When I passed out from hunger on the railroad tracks, a train ran over me and almost totally severed my left leg and arm, which both had to be amputated without anesthesia or antibiotics.”
Eventually, on crutches, he managed to escape through China and Southeast Asia before reaching South Korea in 2020.
He notes that a key organizer of the demonstrations is Christine Ahn, who has said her goal is “to liberate Korea” from “the yoke of U.S. imperialism” and that America is “the world’s aggressor and empire.” She has described Hawaii as “occupied territory.”
At least no one in Congress is buying this nonsense, right? Not quite. Rep. Brad Sherman’s Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act has drawn 45 co-sponsors. Ms. Ahn and associates are lobbying for more.
Undecided members would be well advised to read an article published last week in Foreign Affairs by Rep. Mike Gallagher, chairman of the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, and Aaron MacLean, a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
They warn that now, as in 1950, the U.S. “has failed to make sufficient military investments,” thereby “tempting a tyrant in Beijing who harbors imperial ambitions to try his luck.”
The CCP remains adept at “twisting the truth to advance its ambitions” and propagating false narratives. (Remember what the CCP has said regarding the COVID-19 pandemic that emerged from Wuhan.)
Messrs. Gallagher and MacLean conclude: “In its last war with China, Washington failed to deter its adversaries, failed to prepare its military, and prolonged the fighting. …The next time, the stakes will be even higher — and Washington must do better.”
We have plenty of time to make the necessary policy changes, right? Not quite.
• Clifford D. May is founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a columnist for The Washington Times.
Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Click to Read More and View Comments
Click to Hide
washingtontimes.com · by Clifford D. May
De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647
email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com
| 
