This satellite image, provided by U.S. research monitoring website 38 North on Jan. 11, 2018, shows the nuclear test site in the Punggyeri region in North Korea on Dec. 28, 2017. The website claimed North Korea has carried out significant tunneling on the west side of its main nuclear test site, saying these activities underscore Pyongyang’s continued efforts to maintain the site’s potential for future nuclear testing. (Yonhap)
North Korea’s propaganda outlet called for the total suspension of joint military drills between South Korea and the United States on Friday, in response to the allies’ decision to delay them until after the PyeongChang Winter Olympics.
The North’s website Uriminzokkiri said that dialogue and a “war rehearsal” cannot go together, calling the exercises the source of catastrophe for the Korean Peninsula.
“They should totally stop the military drills, not just delay them,” it said in a commentary. [Korea Herald]
You can read more at the link, but this all goes back to North Korea’s strategy of separating the ROK from the US. Ending the ROK-US military drills using nuclear coercion is one of the ways they are trying to do this.
After the completion of the Olympics, if the delayed Key Resolve exercise is not cancelled, the Kim regime can then use it as an excuse to start another provocation cycle. That is why I fully expect there will be another launch in the spring timeframe. What else that won’t be surprising is that all the usual suspects in the western media will be out blaming President Trump for the return of the provocation cycle.
Here is another reminder that in South Korea you do not have the same right to self defense as most people would expect back in the United States or other countries:
Korea has a “stand-your-ground law” that allows people to use force to protect themselves or others against threats.
But many believe the law is nothing but a name because of its lack of flexibility for defenders.
Under the law, people are allowed to use force to “prevent unjust infringement of one’s or another person’s legal interest,” as long as there are reasonable grounds for that act and the degree of force does not go beyond reasonable bounds. But the law, as precedents and police guidelines show, deems using weapons and inflicting injuries on the attacker that would take more than three weeks to recover from unreasonable ― a standard many find almost impossible to meet in reality.
If both sides sustain injuries, police almost always press assault charges on both, regardless of how the fight started and how serious each person is hurt, urging them to settle and drop allegations.
“Police do not want to give an impression that they are taking sides with anyone,” Kwak Dae-kyung, professor at the police administration department of Dongguk University, told The Korea Times. “This is why police are cautious about making a conclusion that one of them did so for self-protection.”
Also, there are too many petty altercations for police to handle. “It just takes too much time and effort to find out exactly what happened with physical evidence for every single case,” he said. “Thus, police try to conclude the case quickly for everyone involved by convincing them to settle.”
Some people refuse to settle and bring the case to court. But the court rarely recognizes self-defense claims.
“The court interprets the law very narrowly, which is the key of the issue,” lawyer Kim Yong-min said. “As long as the court’s current interpretation stands, there are few things police and prosecutors can do to change it.”
According to the law, which states that the defense act should not exceed reasonable limits, the person should not use greater force than that inflicted on him or her, which Kim thinks is the most nonsensical part of the law. (……..)
But change may be coming here. Over the past few months, dozens of petitions were posted on the Cheong Wa Dae website to urge the government and the National Assembly to revise the self-defense law. [Korea Herald]
You can read much more at the link, but there are numerous examples over the years of victims of criminal activities being convicted by a Korean court for defending themselves. The self defense law is even worse for foreigners when the Korean assailant can just lie and the police will likely blame the foreigner for the altercation.
Here are a few examples involving USFK servicemembers:
It looks like the final decision on the “Pinks and Greens” will be coming soon:
Sergeant Major of the Army Dan Dailey stands with soldier models wearing the proposed Pink & Green daily service uniform at the Army-Navy game in Philadelphia, Pa., December 9, 2017.The U.S. Army will soon make a final decision on whether to switch back to its classic World War II-era dress uniform.
The U.S. Army will make a final decision in a matter of months on whether to switch back to its classic World War II-era “pink and green” dress uniform as part of an effort to more closely link troops to the service’s history, the Army said.
The uniform would replace the current Army Service Uniform — introduced in 2008 — which would be used as a more formal dress uniform.
The proposed change has the support of the Sergeant Major of the Army Dan Dailey, who donned a prototype at the Army-Navy game in December.
“That (World War II) was a point in history where soldiers were highly respected and there was a sense of nationalism in the country. When you looked at them you said that is an American soldier,” Dailey recently said. (……)
A switch, however, appears inevitable. The Army has showcased the uniform at prominent events, such as the Association of the U.S. Army convention in October and the Army-Navy football game. [Stars & Stripes]
You can read more at the link, but just like replacing the Army Combat Uniform (ACU) with the current Operational Camouflage Pattern (OCP) was the right answer despite the ACU’s short life cycle, I think replacing the ASU with the “Pinks and Greens” is the right answer as well.
Visitors cross a suspension bridge over Mount Sogeum in the city of Wonju, northeast of Seoul, on Jan. 11, 2018, in this photo released by the Wonju municipality. The 200-meter-long Mount Sogeum Suspension Bridge opened on that day and is the longest bridge in South Korea’s mountains, leading to a 100-meter-high rock mountaintop. (Yonhap)
There has likely been some back channel communications with the Kim regime, but I would be very surprised if President Trump was in direct contact with Kim Jong-un like he appears to be suggesting:
President Donald Trump suggested in an interview Thursday that he has developed a positive relationship with the North Korean leader, but declined to say whether they have spoken.
No sitting U.S. president is known to have spoken with a North Korean leader. The two nations have remained in a state of war and without diplomatic relations since the Korean War ended in 1953 without a peace treaty.
“I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un,” Trump told The Wall Street Journal. “I have relationships with people. I think you people are surprised.”
Asked if he had spoken with Kim, Trump was evasive: “I’m not saying I have or haven’t. I just don’t want to comment.” [Associated Press]
An academic from Russia, Alexander Vorontsovtraveled to North Korea and what he has come back with looks like yet another information operation to drive a wedge between the United States and South Korea:
In my conversations in Pyongyang, senior North Korean Foreign Ministry officials did not conceal their surprise that Seoul failed to see the huge gap in threat perceptions between American and South Korean societies. The North Koreans see growing signs, reflecting President Donald Trump’s “America First” principle, that the United States is prepared to accept the terrible loss of lives that would result from a large-scale military conflict with North Korea. In contrast, South Korean public opinion continues to believe that president Trump would never start a war in Korea—and that the tension, crisis-like atmosphere, and belligerent rhetoric are all posturing.
North Korean diplomats expressed surprise that a substantial part of the South Korean elite have missed many indications, reflected in polling data,[1] that a majority of Americans now believe that the US cannot allow North Korea to acquire a missile capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the US mainland and that Pyongyang would order such a strike as soon as it had this capability. North Korean diplomats stressed that this is a misperception. As one opined, “it would be suicidal to attack the USA first and especially with nuclear weapons. We understand that it would be the last day of our country.” These officials were truly baffled that a majority of the South Korean population does not seem to have grasped the reality that the Trump administration, despite the risks, is inching ever closer to a preventive strike on North Korea. Pyongyang, they maintained, is under no such illusions.
North Korean experts reiterated that they are striving to reach some kind “nuclear parity” with the US, but not in order to use it in an unprovoked first strike against the American mainland. [The National Interest]
None of these attacks led to a retaliatory strike because of their conventional capabilities were an effective deterrent. So clearly there is more to why they want to develop nuclear weapons so aggressively. The theory that makes the most sense is that the true intention of their nuclear program is to separate the US from South Korea and then seek a confederation on North Korean terms.
This sounds like one of these only in Korea stories:
KB Kookmin Bank has come under fire for holding a grueling 100 kilometer march for its recruits and reportedly giving out oral contraceptive pills to its new female employees — a large portion of which are under 30 — during the training period.
According to the news report from a local daily, the commercial bank gave the pills to the employees to control their menstrual cycles before they go on a 100-kilometer overnight march. The bank has traditionally carried out the marching event every year to boost the morale of the rookies, the report said.
The bank explained that it provided the pill for the health of female employees who are on their period, as they could feel relatively more exhausted than their male co-workers during the harsh schedule. The employees were not forced to take the pill, the bank added.
The act, however, caused a public backlash after it was revealed on Monday. [Korea Herald]
You can read more at the link, but the bank did not mandate the use of the pills, it was optional if the female employees needed it. As far as marching 100 kilometers if the new employees knew this was something they would have to complete for initial training and were being paid I don’t see what the big deal is?
