North Korea: 2012-2016

[William F. Owen]

Well my understanding is that if UN forces or anyone else boards North Korean vessels or blockades NK, then that is a breach of the 1953 ceasefire.

See article 15. Might want JMM to jump in on this.

..but don't worry. According to the great and the good, "Big Wars" are unlikely. We only have to worry about insurgents and Hybrids.

And don't assume that THEY THINK military action is not in their interest. History is covered in examples of folks who did things that turned out not to be in their interest... and they did them anyway! I think it might not be a good idea to under estimate just how serious things are right now.

[Ron Humphrey]

And don't assume that THEY THINK military action is not in their interest. History is covered in examples of folks who did things that turned out not to be in their interest... and they did them anyway! I think it might not be a good idea to under estimate just how serious things are right now.

wish I could disagree with you on this one. Especially if what Bill said is true.

[Coldstreamer]

I know the conventional (ie media driven) thinking is that N Korea is 'so powerful as to render war unthinkable', but surely their kit and manpower, abundant though it may be, is of the same vintage or older than Saddam's Million man army we gently turned into fertiliser in 1991? Surely their SAM array is similary susceptible...or have they got up to date S-300 type stuff?

My point being - and God knows we don't need another war - that they probably can be contained pretty comprehensively, and that a stiffening of western resolve (rather than rewarding bad behaviuor) doesn't necessarily spell the apocalypse? I always wondered (other than the bitter fact that they are exporters of WMD and instability) whether NK was in the same bracket as Cuba - just ignore and wait to implode.

Idle thinking here.

[William F. Owen]

Coldstreamer, mate. If you think Hezbollah had a lot of rockets, then North Korea has that to the power of 100. They could do very, very serious damage to the Seoul without leaving thier start line. Try to fight your way into North Korea, may be a bit of a challenge.

[Ken White]

Brandon:I'm no expert either but I have watched them for years. While four tours there, peace and war may cloud my judgment a bit, I suspect it is more 'We want' ...

Not to mention that we don't know if they popped a nuke; we only know it appears they may have. A few dump truck loads of TNT can give a marginal simulation. We'll see what comes out in the long term.

Plus, there are worse things than Nukes in any event.

Bill: No one in the west understands their reasoning. Some in the west have been watching them for years and while patterns do not provide predictions or assurances, they do provide probabilities. Plus, as I said, they're dotty, they are not nuts; in fact, they're really pretty shrewd...

Wilf:

"..but don't worry. According to the great and the good, "Big Wars" are unlikely. We only have to worry about insurgents and Hybrids. "

Absolutely. They've got it all figured out...

They could do very, very serious damage to the Seoul without leaving thier start line. Try to fight your way into North Korea, may be a bit of a challenge.

No question on the first part; on the second -- depends on which door you use but they're, even in their current debilitated state, no pushover that's certain.

Early days...

[Coldstreamer]

I've got all that...tons and tons of coventional, stacked and ready...

But my point is, are they genuinely likely to launch a first strike if NK mainland has not been targeted. Wilf - do we really think that thy'd react that strongly to dodgy ships being searched at sea - particularly if kit was found aboard them that was even more politically embarrassing for them. I'm not sure I see it happening. A hell of a lot of the usual piss and wind...but then again that's what we've had from appeasing them, to a degree. But the problem with appeasement is their tech and proliferation is still getting out. So we still lose.
Fundamentally, I suspect regime survival is all, and they won't invite a Western retaliation. Hence 1st strike unlikely.

But as Ken says...early days. Another thing to pray for.

[William F. Owen]

Wilf - do we really think that thy'd react that strongly to dodgy ships being searched at sea - particularly if kit was found aboard them that was even more politically embarrassing for them. I'm not sure I see it happening.

I wouldn't assume to predict what a North Korean Leader might do, or what might embarrass him. MacArthur said the Chinese would never intervene in Korea and the CIA said Iraq would never invade Kuwait. The Israelis were absolutely certain Egypt would not attack in 1973.

[Hacksaw]

I would defer to Ken's supreior experience (that was delicately put don't you think) wrt psyche and tendencies...

I would defer to Ron's experiences wrt cultural understanding...

I do, however, have some feel for capabilities, terrain, etc regarding the prospects for combat on the frozen chosen...

My greatest apprehension while serving thinking about combat operations in Korea was not the indirect fires (although impressive and certainly capable of wrecking death and destruction) - we have an idea how to systematicly take that down... ROK Arty and our ability to execute counter-fire fight isn't a joke either...

The hordes of NK light infantry and special operaters is also worrisome and would certainly creat a degree of havoc before they were hunted down... or stopped at the local grocery store to fill their bellies...

No what really worried me was that they might figure out how to provoke the South into attacking the North... the tyranny of terrain, UGF/Harts, and non-existent road infrastructure is some scarry business... especially if they haven't already shot their load on an attack...

Agree with Ken... this is almost certainly sabre rattling for the sake of leverage to preclude the implosion someone else mentioned...

In a very perverse way, I miss the hours worked and rigor of live above the no smile line...

Live well and row

[Ken White]

No what really worried me was that they might figure out how to provoke the South into attacking the North... the tyranny of terrain, UGF/Harts, and non-existent road infrastructure is some scarry business... especially if they haven't already shot their load on an attack...

However, on a serious note; yes indeed, to that comment...

Few Americans ever realized that we stayed on that DMZ for 50 plus years not to deter the North from attacking the South -- but rather the reverse.

[jmm99]

No doubt, NK has breached Art. 62's clear language (for rational or irrational reasons):

62. The Articles and Paragraphs of this Armistice Agreement shall remain in effect until expressly superseded either by mutually acceptable amendments and additions or by provision in an appropriate agreement for a peaceful settlement at a political level between both sides.

and some propose (based on news reports of "what should be done") to breach Art. 15 & 16's clear language (for the rational reason of preventing export of nuclear weapons):

15. This Armistice Agreement shall apply to all opposing naval forces, which naval forces shall respect the water contiguous to the Demilitarized Zone and to the land area of Korea under the military control of the opposing side, and shall not engage in blockade of any kind of Korea.

16. This Armistice Agreement shall apply to all opposing air forces, which air forces shall respect the air space over the Demilitarized Zone and over the area of Korea under the military control of the opposing side, and over the waters contiguous to both.

Ultimately, discussion of the Armistice will be trumped by each country's decision, based on its enlightened self-interests, of its need to invoke its rights under UN Article 51:

Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain inter- national peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

whether those rights be an "offensive defense", or solely defense of territory as is the current Russian response.

[Icepack6]

. . . .with all this new posturing, all I can envision is Kim-Jong-Il stomping his feet, and holding his breath until his cheeks turn blue. . . . .a la Team America.

Despite all of the needs in the North, the one consistent thing manifested over the years is dear leader wants legitimacy, measured ONLY by bilateral engagement with the US, not a committee of nations or the UN. For all the right reasons, we have rarely engaged KN without the UN, ROK, Russia, Japan and/or China coming along. Stuck in 1953 thinking, NK leadership is big on correlation of forces and wants to play with the big dogs. . . . and force one-on-one engagement with the US, thereby, establishing the legitimacy of the Kim dynasty.