Another year with an upcoming Key Resolve exercise means once again more threats from North Korea:
North Korea issued a threat Wednesday that the upcoming annual joint military drills between South Korea and the United States will result in a catastrophic outcome as the U.S. defense secretary is set to travel to Seoul this week to discuss ways to reinforce the alliance against the North.
“The problem is the South Korean government, in defiance of the atmosphere, is already making a fuss about taking the path to push ahead with Key Resolve and Foal Eagle joint military exercises in March and bring in again U.S. nuclear strategic assets,” the North’s Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland said in its statement carried by the country’s state-run Korean Central News Agency.
“It’s needless to say what catastrophic outcome could result when such nuclear war rehearsals take place in front of us at a time our strategic status has changed,” the statement said, suggesting the country’s possession of own nuclear weapons. [Yonhap]
You can read more at the link, but the North Koreans have been quiet recently so I would not be surprised if they do a missile test or some other provocation during the Key Resolve timeframe.
Here is the latest opinion on what the US should do about North Korea:
Washington should consider preemptively striking North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), said U.S. Senator Bob Corker, a Republican from Tennessee and chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, during the committee’s first hearing this year on North Korea on Tuesday.
The comment comes amid rising tension in South Korea and the United States after North Korean leader Kim Jong-un declared during his New Year’s address on Jan. 1 that his country was in its “final stage” of test-firing an ICBM, which would be the first of such tests if Kim actually follows through.
Seoul has yet to acknowledge detecting any signs that the North was preparing a test-fire, although several military sources here claim to have discovered two new missiles along North Korea’s eastern coast that could be an ICBM under work. [Joong Ang Ilbo]
This photo, taken on Jan. 18, 2017, and released by the Choson Sinbo newspaper on Jan. 31, 2017, shows the snow-capped Chollima Statue in Pyongyang, which depicts a soaring pegasus with a pair of citizens riding the majestic beast. The name of the statue means “thousand-mile horse.” (Yonhap)
Whatever abuse of power he was involved in must not have been that bad considering he wasn’t executed:
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has sacked the chief of the country’s spy agency on suspected abuse of power after the ruling party conducted surveillance on the ministry, sources said Friday.
Kim Won-hong, 72, was dismissed from the head of the Ministry of State Security after the party’s audit late last year found his agency had abused its authority, according to the sources familiar with North Korean affairs.
His military rank may have been demoted to lieutenant general from full general, they said.
North Korea’s security ministry has powerful authority as it screens so-called reactionary elements in society, supervises political prisoners’ camps and arrests those who attempt to flee the country.
Known as one of heavyweights in North Korea, Kim became the head of the spy agency in April 2012 after Kim Jong-un took office in late 2011.
He is also known to have spearheaded the move to execute Jang Song-thaek in December 2013, the once-powerful uncle of the North’s young leader.
A local report said that Kim might have been dismissed for abusing his position and on corruption charges, adding there is a slim chance for him to be reinstated. [Yonhap]
The Chinese and the Russians both know the THAAD system is no threat to them, they are just using this as a way to create a wedge in the US-ROK alliance. With a left wing candidate likely winning the upcoming ROK presidency if the impeachment of President Park is upheld it will be interesting to see what happens with the planned deployment of THAAD:
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis answers questions from reporters during a flight to South Korea. Photo courtesy of the Defense Department.
U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said that none other than North Korea needs to worry about the planned deployment of the U.S. THAAD missile defense system in South Korea.
Mattis, who arrived in Seoul on his first overseas trip since taking office, made the remark to reporters traveling together with him on the plane, stressing THAAD is a defensive system, according to a transcript provided by the Pentagon.
“There’s only one reason that we even have this under discussion right now, and that is North Korea’s activities,” Mattis said. “THAAD is for defense of our allies’ people, of our troops who are committed to their defense.”
“Were it not for the provocative behavior of North Korea we would have no need for THAAD out here. There’s no other nation that needs to be concerned about THAAD other than North Korea,” he said. [Yonhap]
There have been many North Korea experts arguing that President Trump should pursue a deal with North Korea to freeze their nuclear and ICBM programs. One US expert has now called any freeze deal with North Korea a “mirage”:
David Straub
Most proponents are more careful than Mr. Clapper and refer to a “freeze” rather than a “cap.” A cap suggests U.S. acceptance of North Korea as a nuclear weapons state for the indefinite future. Doing that would destroy U.S. credibility not only with its allies in Seoul and Tokyo but throughout the world as well. It would also undermine the global nuclear nonproliferation regime and signal to Iran that it could violate its own nuclear agreement with impunity.
Most cap proponents understand this and so talk publicly instead about a freeze, arguing that it would just be a steppingstone on the way to elimination. This is disingenuous because they themselves don’t believe Pyongyang will ever give up the nuclear weapons it already has or even fully stop its nuclear development activities under a freeze.
In truth, a freeze now would just be a cap in disguise. The entire international community would also regard it as such, unlike in earlier years when the North’s nuclear capabilities were not as advanced and their elimination was still considered possible.
A negotiated freeze is like a mirage, an illusion that recedes as quickly as one tries to approach it. That applies both to what we would need Pyongyang to do and what Pyongyang would demand of us in return for a freeze. [The Hill]
You can read more at the link, but the way I look at it is that any freeze deal should not include a peace treaty and only scaling down of US-ROK military exercises plus some lifting of sanctions. A peace treaty should only be offered in return for the complete dismantlement of their nuclear and ICBM programs which we know they will never do.
The freeze deal should then have strong language in it that any non-compliance by North Korea opens them to a bombing strike to ensure compliance. Including bombing strike wording then gives the US world opinion on its side if it needs to use force and makes it in the Chinese regime’s interest to ensure their benefactors in Pyongyang comply with the deal.
I and others have been saying this for years that the Kim regime would never denuclearize and its seems it is becoming a more popular viewpoint:
The United States should give up on any last-remaining hope that engagement with North Korea could lead to its denuclearization, a U.S. expert told a Senate hearing Tuesday, calling for all-round pressure on Pyongyang to rethink its nuclear pursuit.
Nicholas Eberstadt, a senior analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, made the remark during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, as some experts have stepped up calls for reopening negotiations with Pyongyang to curb its dangerously accelerating nuclear and missile programs.
“At this juncture, as so often in the past, serious people around the world are calling to ‘bring North Korea back to the table’ to try to settle the DPRK nuclear issue. However, seeing the DPRK for what it is, rather than what we would like it to be, should oblige us to recognize two highly unpleasant truths,” Eberstadt said.
“First, the real existing North Korean leadership will never willingly give up their nuclear option. Never. Acquiescing in denuclearization would be tantamount to abandoning the sacred mission of Korean unification: which is to say, disavowing the DPRK’s raison d’etre,” he said.
Therefore, submitting to foreign demands to give up its nuclear weapons could well mean more than humiliation and disgrace for North Korean leadership, and would mean delegitimization and destabilization for the regime as well, the expert said.
“Second, international entreaties —- summitry, conferencing, bargaining, and all the rest —- can never succeed in convincing the DPRK to relinquish its nuclear program. Sovereign governments simply do not trade away their vital national interests,” he said. [Yonhap]
