Here is another example of how North Korea is really a “Soprano State” and why every country should be hesitant to have a DPRK embassy in their country:
Bangladesh authorities have seized a luxury Rolls-Royce Ghost car illegally brought into the country for a former North Korean diplomat expelled for smuggling.
Customs intelligence chief Moinul Khan said Han Son Ik intended to bring in the car without paying duty due to his diplomatic status and sell it on to a local buyer. Officials said the luxury car would have been liable for import duties of more than 800 percent had it been brought in legally.
Han was first secretary of the North Korean embassy in Dhaka until he was expelled in August after being accused of smuggling more than a million cigarettes as well as electronics worth half a million dollars.
“We had intelligence that Han made a deal with a local buyer to bring the person a Rolls-Royce with Han’s diplomatic immunity, therefore he attempted to evade customs tax,” Khan told AFP. “Han has been marked as a frequent offender.” AFP was unable to contact the North Korean embassy for comment.
In March 2015 a North Korean diplomat was forced to apologise after he was caught at Dhaka airport trying to smuggle nearly 27 kilograms (60 pounds) of gold worth $1.7 million into the country. A North Korean restaurant in Dhaka was shut down the same year after officials found it was selling wine and drugs such as Viagra without permission. [The Indian Express]
One Free Korea makes a great recommendation in this Tweet:
It seems like this same question has to be answered every time North Korea threatens to fire a long range missile. According to the article the US military will not shoot down the missile unless it threatens an area protected by US missile defenses. North Korea has historically fired their long range missiles on test trajectories out into the ocean. These tests allow intelligence agencies to collect information on the Kim regime’s progress in developing their missiles:
South Korean Defense Ministry retrieved an object believed to be a part of North Korean rocket, which was launched on February 7, 2016.
US Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Tuesday that if launches do not pose a risk to the US or an ally, “it may be more to our advantage… to gather intelligence from the flight.”
The US and other observers “can learn a lot” from any missile test, said Tal Inbar, a North Korea expert at the Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies.
“We can analyze the trajectory and conclude some insight about the power of the engines and the amount of fuel, and estimate the potential range of the missile.”
If it is possible to retrieve the missile or rocket from the sea, as South Korea did in February last year, Inbar said there “is a wealth of intelligence in such debris.”
He added that it was generally unwise to shoot down any missile that does not pose a threat as not only would you lose the ability to examine the missile and its flight, “if you try and shoot it down and miss, that’s a huge PR embarrassment.” [CNN]
This photo, captured from North Korea’s Central TV Station on Jan. 8, 2017, shows a newscaster reading a warning from the North’s foreign ministry that Pyongyang may launch its long-range ballistic missile at anytime and anywhere its leaders choose. (Yonhap)
Considering how President-Elect Trump tweeted that he would stop a North Korean rocket launch, I would be totally surprised if the Kim regime does not launch something in the near term just to call his bluff. The challenge for the North Koreans will be ensuring that the missile doesn’t blow up after launch which is what their track record for long range missiles has been lately:
North Korea on Sunday said it may launch its long-range missile at any time and anywhere its leaders choose, possibly hinting at its mobile capabilities while also asserting its right to do so.
In an interview carried by the North’s official Korean Central Television, a spokesman from the North’s foreign ministry also claimed his country has already developed standardized nuclear warheads.
“The United States continues to denounce our just preparations to launch rockets as a provocation and talk about sanctions as if a thief wields a stick,” the unidentified spokesman said.
In his New Year speech, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said his country was in the final stage of preparing to test-fire an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). [Yonhap]
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un inspects a newly built bag factory in Pyongyang, his first public outing of the new year, in this photo released by the North’s ruling party organ Rodong Sinmun on Jan. 5, 2017. The plant is capable of producing over 242,000 school bags and 60,000 ordinary bags a year, according to the paper. (Yonhap)
This is what the North Korea experts are saying about President-Elect Trump’s emphasis on pressuring China to do something about the North Korean nuclear and missile programs:
“Trump will soon learn that he can’t just tweet away North Korea’s ICBM and nuclear programs,” said Robert Manning, a senior analyst at the Atlantic Council. “He is flat out wrong about North Korea not developing a nuclear weapon that can reach the U.S. The only question is when. But it is likely to acquire that capability during his first term.”
Since the election, Trump has repeatedly criticized China for not helping with the North, even raising questions why the U.S. should stick to the “one-China” policy of diplomatically recognizing only Beijing, not Taiwan, when China is uncooperative over the North.
That’s in line with Trump’s campaign remarks that the North is China’s problem to fix.
Experts, however, were skeptical about the idea of pressuring China to resolve the problem.
“He has unrealistic expectations about China’s ability and/or willingness to achieve outcomes in regard to North Korea. He has equally wrong and outdated assumptions about U.S. leverage with China and will learn that through making really dumb mistakes in his first year,” Manning said.
“Trump has already shown his profound ignorance by threatening to discard the One-China policy that is the foundation of US-China relations, threatening to impose 45% tariffs on Chines goods — and then asking Beijing to solve his North Korea problem. That is complete incoherence — and he hasn’t even taken office yet,” he said.
The expert noted that there is little the U.S. can do about the problem in the near term that does not risk a war, “other than strengthening deterrence, imposing tough sanctions that remove North Korea from the international financial system.”
Scott Snyder, a senior expert on Korea at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Trump’s tweets show he thinks North Korea is a priority issue that is closely linked to China.
“For Trump, the issue is strongly connected to relations with China. However, at present there are few, if any, formal diplomatic channels by which Trump can communicate with the Chinese leadership, and the Chinese foreign ministry appears to have rejected diplomacy by tweet,” Snyder said.
“In addition, Trump appears to have rejected the idea that North Korea’s development of a preemptive strike capability will happen or that it provides Pyongyang with a basis for making demands such as an end annual US-ROK military exercises,” he said.
Joel Wit, a former State Department negotiator with North Korea and currently editor of the website 38 North specializing in North Korean affairs, expressed strong skepticism about Trump’s idea of resolving the problem by pressuring China.
“If he pursues the avenue of trying to get China to solve this problem for the U.S., then he is going to fail just like the Obama administration,” he said. [Yonhap]
Talk is growing in the United States of the possibility of using military strikes to take out North Korea’s nuclear and missile capabilities after the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, threatened he’s close to testing a long-range missile apparently capable of hitting the U.S.
Kim said in his New Year’s Day address that the communist nation has reached the final stage of preparations to test-launch an intercontinental ballistic missile. The remark was seen as a thinly veiled threat that Pyongyang is close to developing a nuclear-tipped missile capable of striking the continental U.S.
The threat appears to have stoked genuine fears of security among Americans, with reporters bombarding the Defense Department with questions of what the U.S. is going to do about the North’s missile, including whether it’s going to shoot it down or even launch a preemptive strike before it’s fired.
It also prompted President-elect Donald Trump to send a tweet: “North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won’t happen!”
On Wednesday, a private intelligence analysis firm, Stratfor, even laid out a list of potential targets in North Korea, including the Yongbyon nuclear complex, home to the North’s plutonium-producing reactor and reprocessing facility.
“When considering an attack on North Korea, there are two broad categories of strikes to deliberate. The first is a minimalist strike, specifically focused on dismantling the North’s nuclear weapons program. In this scenario, the United States would engage North Korean nuclear objectives only,” Stratfor said in an analysis piece carried by MarketWatch and, titled, “How the U.S. could derail North Korea’s nuclear program by force.”
“By not launching strikes on other North Korean targets, Washington leaves the door open, if only slightly, for de-escalation if Pyongyang can be convinced that the strike is not part of a regime change operation. What benefits Pentagon planners in this scenario is that a limited strike requires less resources and preparation, enhancing the element of surprise,”
Potential targets in the minimalist strike include the Yongbyon complex, including the 5-megawatt nuclear reactor and the reprocessing plant, as well as the Pyongsan uranium mine that provides fuel for the reactor, and the Pyongsong nuclear research and development facility, known as the North’s “Silicon Valley,” Stratfor said.
“These facilities form the heart of North Korean nuclear production infrastructure. If they were destroyed or disabled, the North Korean nuclear production network would be crippled, set back years at least,” it said. [Yonhap]
You can read more at the link, but what anyone thinking of advocating for a limited strike on North Korea needs to answer is what is the response then when the Kim regime retaliates and launches a limited artillery strike on Seoul? Can you imagine what the reaction will be from the Korean public will be especially if a left-wing President is elected this year?
