Anti-war rallySouth Korean peace activists hold a news conference in front of the U.S. Embassy in Seoul on Jan. 9, 2020, to denounce a recent U.S. attack on Iran and call on Seoul not to send troops to the Strait of Hormuz. (Yonhap)
It is looking like the Moon administration is going to drag its feet on this issue in attempt to stay out of any conflict between the U.S. and Iran:
Ambassador Harry Harris
The United States has ramped up its pressure on Korea to send a naval contingency force to the Middle East to be part of the U.S.-led coalition in the Strait of Hormuz.
Seoul remains well aware of the importance of strengthening its alliance with Washington, but the government appears unable to make a quick decision on this as military tension between the U.S. and Iran escalates further. This follows Iran’s retaliatory attack on U.S. bases in Iraq, Wednesday, in the wake of a U.S. airstrike last week that targeted and killed an Iranian general. Participation in any maritime mission in such a climate, could endanger Seoul’s ties with Tehran and threaten the safety of Korean residents in Iran.
The latest push for participation from Seoul’s biggest ally came from U.S. Ambassador to Korea Harry Harris.
“I would hope that Korea will send forces out there,” Harris said in an interview with local broadcaster KBS, Tuesday, noting that Seoul gets so much of its oil from the Middle East.
You can read more at the link, but South Korea actually has good relations with Iran that they likely do not want to impact by sending a naval contingent to the Strait of Hormuz.
There is a lot of analysis going on right now in regards to what the Iranian missile strike will lead to:
Iran responded to the United States’ killing of its top military official, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, by firing over a dozen ballistic missiles at two U.S. military facilities in Iraq Tuesday night.
The move is likely to stoke fear of a war between the U.S. and Iran, but retired Col. Stephen Ganyard, a former fighter pilot and ABC News military analyst, said that what happens next will really depend on the damage incurred by the missiles, which were fired at the Erbil Air Base in northern Iraq and the Ain Al-Asad Air Base in western Iraq.
“It depends on what they hit. If they hit nothing, then the situation may de-escalate. If they hit something substantial and if they hurt Americans, then they can expect this will lead to a significant U.S. retaliation,” said Ganyard.
It is being reported that the missile strike did not hurt any Americans which leads me to conclude that the attack was carefully planned to try and not hurt anyone. If the Iranians gave a lot of indications and warnings of an impending attack this would give the people at each location time to shelter in hardened structures. Additionally if the strikes hit on the perimeter of the bases that would reduce the risk of casualties as well.
I believe the Iranians calculated that if they killed any Americans President Trump would have to respond forcefully. Now with little damage to show for the missile attack it gives the U.S. President reason to not respond forcibly while allowing the Iranians to save face. Ironically this missile attack is likely a deescalation attempt by the Iranians.
However, what I am most interested in is what will the North Koreans learn from this missile attack? I have always believed that if a pre-emptive strike was taken against North Korea’s nuclear or missile related facilities the Kim regime would respond with ballistic missile strikes against U.S. military bases in South Korea. If President Trump does not respond strongly to the Iranian missile attack, this could signal to the Kim regime that such a strategy could be feasible as long as Americans are not killed.
That would be a difficult feat to pull off considering how densely populated South Korea is around U.S. military bases compared to the two bases in Iraq. However, if a U.S. airstrike killed North Korean soldiers or civilians they could justify the killing of U.S. military servicemembers in such a retaliatory strike.
Unlike the two bases in Iraq, U.S. military bases in South Korea do have missile defense battery’s to protect them. This will help mitigate any attack, but no missile defense is 100% effective if North Korea is committed to massing fires on one location.
As far ROK nationals killed or injured I think the Kim regime cares less about because they don’t feel the Blue House would push for forceful retaliation and they could just blame the death of the ROK nationals on the U.S. for conducting the pre-emptive strike. The Korean left would assuredly promote this rationale and likely be protesting the U.S. after any such attack.
So whatever response comes from the Trump administration after the Iranian missile attack, North Korea will assuredly be closely watching to inform any future response plans they may have.
Considering that South Korea receives most of their energy from the Middle East it seems like it would be in their interests to ensure the Strait of Hormuz remains open:
Strait of Hormuz
South Korea is closely monitoring the situation in waters off Iran, including the U.S.’ possible request for its troops dispatch to the region, the defense ministry said Monday.
The United States has been asking its allies to join a military coalition to ensure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran.
“So far, we have not received any official requests from the U.S. side over the possible dispatch of our troops,” Col. Roh Jae-cheon, the deputy ministry spokesman, told a regular briefing.
“South Korea is keeping a close tab on the situation in the Strait of Hormuz while opening various possibilities in consideration of potential impacts the matter could have on our side,” he added.
Another official said that the ministry “is reviewing diverse options and measures with regards to the issue.”
Some observers have said that U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton could make such a request during his two-day visit here that begins Tuesday.
You can read more at the link, but so far Iran has not messed with energy shipments to South Korea. South Korea has actually had good relations with Iran to include the prior President conducting a state visit.
President Moon might calculate that dispatching a naval presence to the Strait of the Hormuz could anger Iran. Another factor to consider is the ROK may not want to cooperate with the Japanese Navy if it participates in such a maritime mission as well. It will be interesting to see what President Moon decides if asked by the U.S. to participate in the mission.
The attacks on these ships just happens to occur while Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is visiting:
Two oil tankers were damaged in a suspected attack off the Gulf of Oman early Thursday, prompting the rescue of dozens of crew members.
The U.S. Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet told Reuters it was assisting two tankers in the Gulf of Oman after receiving two distress calls. Details of the incident were unclear, but one of the operators made an unconfirmed report that a torpedo had hit its ship, Reuters reported.
“We are aware of the reported attack on tankers in the Gulf of Oman. U.S. Naval Forces in the region received two separate distress calls at 6:12 a.m. local time and a second one at 7:00 a.m.,” Joshua Frey of the Fifth Fleet said. The Fleet did not blame anyone for the attack.
One of the vessels involved was identified as the MT Front Altair, a Marshall Islands-flagged but Norwegian-owned crude oil tanker carrying naphtha, a petrochemical product, to Japan.
A South Korean Hyundai ship based in Dubai actually rescued the crew of the Front Altair.
The obvious play here is that the Iranians attacked these ships because they did not like whatever message they received from Prime Minister Abe on behalf of President Trump. The Iranians have long threatened to shut down the Straits of Hormuz and cause world oil prices to surge and this is a reminder of that fact.
It is amazing to me that something so insecure was used to communicate with spies in Iran and China. The US military gets non-stop information security training about using commercial websites and social media and here is American intelligence agencies operating an entire spy network on one:
Dozens of American spies were killed in Iran and China after a flawed communications service that allowed foreign foes to see what the agents were up to using Google, official sources have claimed.
Between 2009 and 2013 the US Central Intelligence Agency suffered a “catastrophic” secret communications failure in a website used by officers and their field agents around the world to speak to each other, according to a report in Yahoo News, which heard from 11 former intelligence and government officials about the previously unreported disaster.
“We’re still dealing with the fallout,” said one former national security official. “Dozens of people around the world were killed because of this.”
The internet-based communications platform was first used in the Middle East to communicate with soldiers in war zones and had not been intended for widespread use but due to its ease of use and efficacy, it was adopted by agents despite its lack of sophistication, the sources claimed.
Cracks only began to show when Iran, angered that the government under Barack Obama had discovered a secret Iranian nuclear weapon factory, went out with a fine tooth comb to find moles.
It discovered the existence of one of the websites used by US agents using Google. US officials believe that Iranian spies were able to use Google as a search tool to find secret CIA websites, unbeknown to those using them.
By 2011, Iran had infiltrated the CIA spy network and in May it announced that they had broken up a 30-strong ring of American spies.
Some informants were executed and others imprisoned as a result, the sources claimed.
This was corroborated by a report on ABC news at the time, which referred to a compromised communications system after a tip off from the CIA.
Meanwhile in China 30 agents working for the US were executed by the government after compromising the spy network using a similar means. Beijing had managed to break into a second temporary communications system, splintered from the initial platform and were able to see every single agent the CIA had placed in the country, the sources told Yahoo. [The Telegraph]
You can read more at the link, but you would think this would be bigger news with hearings and people being held accountable. I will let my readers draw their own conclusions on why this is not bigger news.
This report makes me wonder if there is a arms for petroleum agreement going on between North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China?:
North Korea has reportedly sold arms and military equipment to Middle East countries in violation of the United Nations sanctions.
The Wall Street Journal issued the report on Saturday citing a secret report by experts monitoring UN sanctions against the regime.
The UN experts said in the report that they found new evidence of the North’s arms smuggling and illegal financial transactions.
The panel said that the evidence showed North Korea sold tanks, ballistic missiles and rocket-propelled grenades to Yemen’s Houthi insurgents and other entities via a Syrian arms smuggler.
The UN report said that North Korean arms experts had visited a munitions factory in Syria multiple times. It added that the North’s imports of petroleum products surged on the routes involving Russian and Chinese vessels. [KBS World Radio]
Here is another example of free agency coming to international sports:
Ricardo Ratliffe (L) of South Korea goes up against Hamed Haddadi of Iran during the men’s basketball semifinal match between South Korea and Iran at the 18th Asian Games in Jakarta on Aug. 30, 2018. (Yonhap)
South Korea’s U.S. born basketball player, Ricardo Ratliffe, on Thursday rued a lack of team effort in his side’s disappointing loss against Iran at the 18th Asian Games.
South Korea lost its title defense bid after losing to Iran 80-68 in the men’s basketball semifinal match at the 18th Asian Games at Gelora Bung Karno (GBK) Istora arena in Jakarta.
Ratliffe, whose Korean name is Ra Gun-ah, was the only South Korean player who stood up against Iranians. He had a game-high 37 points and 12 rebounds, but his superb performance wasn’t enough to see South Korea through to the final.
“We just played terrible,” Ratliffe said of his team’s performance. “We didn’t play well together. That’s all.” [Yonhap]
That's because from what we can see so far, it looks like a really shitty deal — far worse than the Iran JCPOA, far worse than Agreed Frameworks I & II, almost sure to consolidate Kim Jong-un's domestic control, nuclear status & hegemony over South Korea. https://t.co/4qVpZlCYw7
President Trump is as expected getting bashed for pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal with claims that it will impact his ability to negotiate with Kim Jong-un:
President Donald Trump announces Iran nuclear deal withdrawal. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal is a major setback to US negotiating credibility and will complicate efforts to reach an agreement with Pyongyang over its own more advanced weapons programme, analysts say.
Trump is set to hold a much-anticipated and unprecedented summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in the coming weeks to negotiate over Pyongyang’s arsenal, after it last year carried out by far its most powerful nuclear test to date and launched missiles capable of reaching the U.S. mainland.
But the US president Tuesday pulled Washington out of the 2015 accord with Teheran, pouring scorn on the “disastrous” agreement and describing it an “embarrassment” to the United States ― although European signatories and the IAEA say Iran has complied with its obligations.
Antony Blinken, who was deputy secretary of state under Barack Obama, said the White House move “makes getting to yes with North Korea that much more challenging”.
“Why would Kim … believe any commitments President Trump makes when he arbitrarily tears up an agreement with which the other party is complying?” he asked on Twitter. [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but it can be argued that if the Obama administration thought the Iran nuclear deal was so great why did they not try and lobby the Senate to consent to the treaty as the Constitution requires? Consent from the Senate would have made it much harder for the President to withdraw from the treaty. This is what I will be looking for if President Trump is able to strike a deal with the North Koreans; will he try to get consent from the Senate?
As far as impacts to negotiating with Kim Jong-un, I think it is arguable that Trump is sending a message that North Korea will need to agree to denuclearize or there will not be a deal.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/59678205/956113070.jpg.0.jpg?resize=396%2C264&ssl=1)
