Tag: Iran

If the Iranian regime tries to again seize a ROK vessel doesn’t this just validate everything President Yoon said? If Iran doesn’t want to be the enemy of other Middle East nations maybe they should stop sponsoring terrorism and advancing their nuclear and missile programs:

Korea’s lingering diplomatic conflict with Iran, inflamed by President Yoon Suk Yeol’s recent remarks branding the Middle Eastern country as the archenemy of the United Arab Emirates, has been mentioned as a potential threat to the Korean shipping industry, since the Korea Shipowners’ Association (KSA) issued a warning last Wednesday to vessels sailing in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz to “remain vigilant.”

Just a few days after Yoon sparked the diplomatic controversy during his visit to the UAE, the KSA sent a letter to its members to warn them of growing concerns about the safety of ships sailing off the coast of Iran.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

If Iran is not a threat to the UAE as Iran claims, then why are U.S. and ROK troops stationed there?:

President Yoon Suk Yeol’s description of Iran as the “enemy” of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has provoked protest from Tehran as it calls Yoon’s remark undiplomatic and asks for Seoul’s explanation.

The government is stepping up to prevent the issue from creating diplomatic problems with Iran. 

Yoon made the remarks during his visit to the Akh Unit, which trains the UAE’s special operations forces, Sunday (local time), as part of his efforts to encourage its soldiers. 

“You are here because the UAE is our brother nation,” Yoon told the troops. “And (defending) our brother nation’s security is as important as that of South Korea’s. The UAE’s enemy ― the most threatening nation ― is Iran and our enemy is North Korea… We are in a very similar position to the UAE.” 

He was on a four-day state visit to the Middle Eastern country when he made the comment.

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Nasser Kanaani said the ministry is looking into and following up on the comments of the Korean president on relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the UAE, which are neighboring countries with established diplomatic relations.

The spokesman also said Yoon’s remarks show he is totally unaware of the historical and friendly relations between Iran and the Persian Gulf littoral states, including the UAE, as well as positive developments quickly taking place in this regard.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

If there wasn’t enough problems for Samsung dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, now Iran is making threats against the smartphone maker:

An Iranian official on Tuesday warned Samsung Electronics that it is planning to restrict the use of the tech giant’s mobile phones in the country, accusing the company of bowing to pressure from the United States.

The official’s statement is a response to Samsung’s decision to limit app purchases for Iranian users of its Galaxy Store, for which it cited issues with converting Iranian currency. The policy is set to take effect beginning in late February.

But Iranian news outlets have reported the move as a response to U.S. sanctions against the country and have suggested the restriction will widen to free apps as well next month. Samsung is the dominant smartphone producer in Iran, with more than 50 percent market share.  

Mohammad Jafar Na’nakar, a government official who heads the legal department at Iran’s Ministry of Information and Communications Technology, delivered the warning to Samsung during an interview Tuesday with Press TV, an Iranian state-run news outlet.

“The list of measures against Samsung is ready,” Na’nakar said.

Joong Ang Ilbo

You can read more at the link.

Even though this is about as minimal military support the Blue House could have provided to the U.S. for the Strait of Hormuz mission, the Korean left is still predictably upset about it:

The progressive Justice Party made clear its firm opposition to the government’s decision.

“The deployment of the Cheonghae unit to the Strait of Hormuz can lead to hostile relations with Iran, so I cannot agree with it. In addition, the decision means the unit’s mission has changed, so the National Assembly has to decide whether to approve the plan,” Justice Party Chairwoman Sim Sang-jeung said.

Party for Democracy and Peace Spokeswoman Rep. Park Joo-hyun also said, “The dispatch means Korea will join a war between the United States and Iran without any justification and it will eventually end up with hostile ties with traditional ally, Iran.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link, but when did Iran become an ally of South Korea? Iran has an important economic relationship due to its oil, but is hardly an ally that would defend South Korea. In fact Iran has had an important military relationship with North Korea for many years; the very country that tried to destroy the ROK during the Korean War and continues to be committed to the overthrow of South Korean democracy.

Then again to some members of the Korean left anyone assisting North Korea is considered an ally.

This is a great way for the Moon administration to make it appear they are contributing to the international coalition defending the Strait of Hormuz when in reality they just added a liaison officer:

South Korea’s decision to send troops to the tense Strait of Hormuz for “independent” naval operations drove home its desire to cement alliance cooperation with the United States and avoid straining ties with its trade partner, Iran, analysts said Tuesday.

Capping monthslong deliberations that pitted security cooperation with Washington against economic relations with Tehran, Seoul announced it would temporarily expand areas of operations for its anti-piracy Cheonghae unit to cover the passageway off Iran.

The naval unit, now stationed in the Gulf of Aden, will operate independently of the International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC), a U.S.-led military coalition to safeguard freedom of navigation in the waterway, though it would cooperate with the coalition if need be. Two South Korean liaison officers will be dispatched to the IMSC.

Yonhap

You can read more at the link, but basically the ROK ship on anti-piracy duty in the Gulf of Aden can be asked by the US coalition for help through a ROK liaison officer that is deployed to assist them.

Here is the Moon administration’s policy on sending forces to protect navigation in the Straits of Hormuz:

Presidential Chief of Staff Noh Young-min said Thursday that the government could seek its own way to protect the lives and properties of Koreans in the Strait of Hormuz rather than participating in a U.S.-led naval coalition policing the region.

His remarks came amid Washington’s increasing pressure on Seoul to participate in the International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC), a coalition of countries including the United States, Saudi Arabia, the U.K. and Bahrain sending naval units to the area to safeguard navigation. Korea has been put in a dilemma over whether to join the maritime mission amid recently heightened tensions in the Middle East in the wake of the U.S. killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani and Iran’s retaliatory attack on U.S. bases in Iraq.

“We have not yet decided on whether to participate as a member of IMSC,” Noh said during an interview with CBS radio, Thursday. “But the government is reviewing possible ways to protect the lives and properties of our people and companies in the Middle East amid the recent political turmoil there … Such a review is progressing considerably.”

Korea Times

You can read more at the link, but Korea’s policy appears to be we will keep thinking about this so we don’t have to make a tough decision. In the meantime we will let the U.S. military do the dirty work of keeping the Strait of Hormuz open.

It makes me wonder if this stance from Korea will factor into the ongoing cost sharing negotiations?

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:

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.

Korea Times

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.

ABC News

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.