North Korea: 2012-2016

[Bill Moore]

While it is impossible to predict what will happen in North Korea I think it is safe to say that China has no interest in seeing North Korea implode in the immediate future, since they are hosting the Olympics in 2008 (major show case demonstration for what many predict will the nation with the world's largest economy by 2020), and S. Korea is more concerned about their economic development than their starving brothers and sisters in the North (a conflict of any type with the North would most likely be severely disruptive). I would place my money that the status quo will continue "if" North Korea's neighbors' have the ability to help Kim Jung Il maintain it.

[T. Jefferson]

This should increase China's influence in both regional and world affairs.

[franksforum]

From the Parliamentary Library of Australia dated 23 January 2008:

Political Change in North Korea

Executive summary:

The prospect of political change in North Korea is a recurring question, buoyed by media speculation regarding the health of the current leader, Kim Jong-Il, the dearth of information about his succession and concern for the potential instability that could occur.

Australian interest stems from the possibility that political change in North Korea could potentially affect the economic viability of the region, which contains Australia’s three largest export markets of China, South Korea and Japan. Political change in North Korea could potentially require Australian assistance in humanitarian and/or military operations.

There are four scenarios for political change in North Korea. These are: hereditary or other familial succession, a smooth transferral of power to another centre of power, such as the military, forced political change through coup or revolution, and the disintegration of the state and its ultimate absorption by South Korea. Each scenario has specific warning signs that are yet to appear.

The key determinants of political change in North Korea are likely to be the military, external powers and the economy. Each of these determinants plays a central role in the political viability of the current North Korean leadership. There are several triggers of political change in North Korea, one of which is the deterioration in the health of current leader, Kim Jong-Il.

Given the potential economic and security impact, the issue of political change in North Korea is something that Australia and the region should be prepared to address.

Here is the PDF link:

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/r...-08/08rp19.pdf

[AdamG]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3822538.ece

Kim Jong-il builds ‘Thunderbirds’ runway for war in North Korea

An airbase inside a mountain is the latest sign that North Korea, whose links to Syria’s nuclear programme came to light last week, is cranking up its military machine.

North Korean military engineers are completing an underground runway beneath a mountain that can protect fighter aircraft from attack until they take off at high speed through the mouth of a tunnel.

The 6,000ft runway is a few minutes’ flying time from the tense front line where the Korean People’s Army faces soldiers from the United States and South Korea.


Art imitates life. Life imitates art.

[Ken White]

for years. I'm curious. Wonder how they know its 6,000 feet long if it's underground...

[Ron Humphrey]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3822538.ece

Kim Jong-il builds ‘Thunderbirds’ runway for war in North Korea

An airbase inside a mountain is the latest sign that North Korea, whose links to Syria’s nuclear programme came to light last week, is cranking up its military machine.

North Korean military engineers are completing an underground runway beneath a mountain that can protect fighter aircraft from attack until they take off at high speed through the mouth of a tunnel.

The 6,000ft runway is a few minutes’ flying time from the tense front line where the Korean People’s Army faces soldiers from the United States and South Korea.


Art imitates life. Life imitates art.

of them to provide such a nice landing spot once whoever were to get finished cleaning off the military bases of all the rotting hulks setting on them

[Entropy]

Inside the Hermit Kingdom:

North Koreans May Be Turning Against the Regime and Beijing



"Now when the authorities blame America for the lack of food, people ask in turn, 'Is it the responsibility of America and South Korea to feed us? … why won't China help us, since it's our closest ally?'



-- A North Korean interviewed by the Daily North Korea

[Kenyatta]

Actually from some of my South korean collegues, it seems that many North Koreans know their gov. has been lying to them for the longest time, they know what the outside world looks like.

This is due to the fact, the Chinese goods in the form of cheap cellphones, South Korean VCDs, etc. are being smuggled in huge quantities into North Korea. The North Korean border with China while heavilly regulated is rife with corruption.

While the North Koreans know that their gov. is a bitch, they can't do anything about the gov. The military is hardline and any dissent is brutally crushed. So the only solution is to run away to China or Korea in large numbers to escape their situation.

I think that all of North korea's neighbors would like to change the way North Korea is run. I think China is particular wants North Korea to go her way(economic reform while keeping a authoritarian gov.) but North Koreas leaders probably know that when Norht Korea opens up to the world that China did, there's a big chance they will lose their positions(and most likely their heads).

Though I also think that North Korea's regime will not last that long. I think the slow distentigration of its society which is happening right now will take its toll. the new generation of North Koreans growing up with bootleg South korean drama VCDs and bootleg Chinese Cellphones will probably be the ones to reform the country....see you in 20-30 years.

[TristanAbbey]

Folks may be interested in this summary of the NK succession reportage:

http://bellum.stanfordreview.org/?p=316

Would appreciate comments from the more informed, in particular about whether I'm right or wrong about the big story being the succession, not the missile test, saber-rattling, etc.

[Ron Humphrey]

Folks may be interested in this summary of the NK succession reportage:

http://bellum.stanfordreview.org/?p=316

Would appreciate comments from the more informed, in particular about whether I'm right or wrong about the big story being the succession, not the missile test, saber-rattling, etc.

But if the kids competent at all there are probably quite a few in the hierarchy that might not mind the change at all.

Good indicator of this would be to look at why O originally "fell from grace" in the first place

[Ken White]

With four trips to Korea South -- and few incursions into the North (long ago) -- between 1950 and 1975, I know enough about North Korea to be mildly annoying; I do not even approach the danger level. However, I've watched them fairly closely for about 58 years now and I'm firmly convinced you're correct.

The succession is / will be a big event and I suspect the jockeying is bitter and ferocious. As for the rest of the noise, they have played the west like a second hand Ukelele since 1951. They are masters of the bluff and have manipulated every US administration since Eisenhower to get this or that break.

They constantly approach but generally do not cross the line Though they sporadically (mostly through miscalculation) step on the line just to see if we're paying attention. They are concerned with three Nations; China and Russia for obvious reasons -- and us; even Japan and South Korea are 'also rans' with them. They can be irrational and unduly bellicose but they are not crazy. That said, the worst thing we could do is ignore them -- that would drive them into a perhaps irrational frenzy...

[Entropy]

LINK

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea claimed it carried out a powerful underground nuclear test Monday - much larger than one conducted in 2006 - in a major provocation in the escalating international standoff over its rogue nuclear and missile programs.

Pyongyang announced the test, and Russia's Defense Ministry confirmed an atomic explosion at 9:54 a.m. (0054 GMT) in northeastern North Korea, estimating the blast's yield at 10 to 20 kilotons - comparable to the bombs that flattened Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The regime also test-fired three short-range, ground-to-air missiles later Monday from the same northeastern site where it launched a rocket last month, the Yonhap news agency reported, citing unnamed sources. The rocket liftoff, widely believed to be a cover for a test of its long-range missile technology, drew censure from the U.N. Security Council.

North Korea, incensed by the condemnation of the April 5 rocket launch, had warned last month that it would restart its rogue nuclear program, conduct an atomic test and carry out long-range missile tests.

As always, the best technical analysis is at armscontrolwonk.

[Jedburgh]

ICG, 13 Nov 06: North Korea's Nuclear Test: The Fallout

...There are no good options for resolving this crisis, but the least bad option remains a negotiated settlement. To achieve this, the U.S. and others will need to present a long-term view of economic change in North Korea while offering what amounts to a guarantee not to overthrow the Pyongyang regime. The undertaking will involve a considerable investment of diplomatic energy and financial resources and should be matched by a ramped-up effort to ensure that North Korea cannot proliferate nuclear weapons or missiles. But it provides the only prospect for peaceful and gradual change on the Korean peninsula.

Sanctions without sustained, direct diplomacy would only mean escalation. The Bush administration has operated under the flawed assumption that direct negotiations with its foe are a concession, when this may be the only way of moving forward. With Washington, Tokyo, Seoul and Pyongyang all locked into policies which are likely to change little until new leaders emerge, however, Beijing’s is the government to watch...

[120mm]

ICG, 13 Nov 06: North Korea's Nuclear Test: The Fallout

I thought direct negotiations were thought more to be a slight to our allies in the region.

Unilateralism, anyone?

[SWJED]

15 July Washington Post - N. Korea Shutters Nuclear Facility by Edward Cody.

After four years of off-and-on negotiations, North Korea said it began closing down its main nuclear reactor Saturday, shortly after receiving a first boatload of fuel oil aid.

The closure, if confirmed by U.N. inspectors, would mark the first concrete step in a carefully orchestrated denuclearization schedule that was agreed on in February, with the ultimate goal of dismantling North Korea's nuclear weapons program in exchange for fuel and other economic aid, and increased diplomatic recognition.

More broadly, it constituted the first on-the-ground accomplishment of six-nation negotiations that have been grinding away with little progress since 2003 under Chinese sponsorship. The talks -- including North and South Korea, Russia, Japan, the United States and China -- are likely to resume next week in Beijing to emphasize the parties' resolve to carry out the rest of the February agreement and eventually create a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula...

[Jedburgh]

Presentation from a CNS Event, 12 Mar 08:

Paranoid Potbellied Stalinist Gets Nuclear Weapons: How the U.S. Print Media Covers North Korea

A Backward Country Led by a Paranoid Pygmy

• “The Weird and Scary Saga of how an Isolated, Bankrupt Nation Went Nuclear,” (Newsweek cover story title, 10/23/06)

• “North Korea is a hermit state ruled by a potbellied, fivefoot-three paranoid Stalinist who likes to watch Daffy Duck cartoons.” (Bill Keller in NY Times, 1/11/03)

• “…led by world-class paranoids and fantasists capable of believing their own propaganda… Such a regime may be beyond reasoning or, even worse, deterring in a conventional sense.” (Jim Hoagland in Washington Post, 10/12/06)

The presenter published an article with the same title in the Mar 08 Nonproliferation Review.

Mainstream American print media coverage of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has been deeply flawed, a reality that skews policy debates and confuses public perceptions. Even simple factual descriptions of the parties’ obligations under the 1994 Agreed Framework have often been inconsistent and partial, informing readers about North Korea’s obligations more than U.S. obligations, and rarely acknowledging U.S. failures. The media repeated allegations about an illicit North Korean uranium enrichment program based largely on anonymous sources, who made what seem now to have been misleading statements. Journalists rely for comment on administration officials or members of Washington think tanks, while making little effort to gather opinions from academics, those on the left (as opposed to centrist liberals), or experts in Southeast Asia. Journalists also frequently present Kim Jong Il in ways that erase the Korean perspective on U.S.-Korean relations. Accurate, nuanced coverage of events on the Korean Peninsula is vital in producing an informed public and a policy-making process that is judicious, supple, and intelligent. This article concludes with various ways in which the media could better report on North Korea.....

[Jedburgh]

....As always, the best technical analysis is at armscontrolwonk.

The MIIS Center for Nonproliferation Studies' North Korea page is also a useful resource.

[H. Nelson]

I think the recent procurement of centrifuges by NK posses the largest proliferation in the world right now. With everyone focused on Russia, the START treaty, and how to secure 'loose' nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, we may allow uranium to slip out of NK and into hostile regional state actors (or worse, terrorists). Yet we cannot ignore the threat of direct nuclear attack by NK.

When countries do not hold their population as valuable, and the leadership has proven that they have an erratic decision calculus, our form of deterrence fails. Since our national nuclear defense strategy depends on nuclear retaliation against anyone who initiates a nuclear attack, and we can’t guarantee North Korea won’t become a first strike nation, we cannot allow North Korea to possess nuclear weapons. If we did, the US may find itself in a situation where it is forced to use nuclear weapons against an inferior country or absorb a nuclear attack without retaliating. Both outcomes would significantly impact our national security objectives. We must declare to the international community that a nuclear North Korea is unacceptable, and commence diplomatic actions immediately FOLLOWING a low impact strike to destroy the centrifuges.

http://onparadox.blogspot.com/

[Ken White]

How's things on the bridge?

I'm sure that your bellicosity is matched by your ardor and at the time of that "low impact strike" (I'm still pondering the dichotomy in that phrase...) you'll present yourself for accession into the Armed forces in some capacity to go help save South Korea. However, your post raises a couple of questions.

Question 1. Our assistance to South Korea 1950-53 (plus the ongoing continuation), our assistance to South Viet Nam, our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were all low impact efforts. How did they work out for us?

Question 2. Assume we announce our non acceptance of a nuclear North Korea. In the event no one else joins us and supports that position, how do we enforce our 'non acceptance?'

[Entropy]

When countries do not hold their population as valuable, and the leadership has proven that they have an erratic decision calculus, our form of deterrence fails.

So stationing troops in South Korea for the last 50+ years and stationing nukes on South Korean soil for most of that time was all for nothing?

we cannot allow North Korea to possess nuclear weapons.

Since NK already possesses nuclear weapons how exactly are we accomplish that?