Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners


Quotes of the Day:


“Half the world is composed of people how have something to say and can’t, and the other half who have nothing to say and keep on saying it.” 
- Robert Frost


“To a disciple who was forever complaining about others, the Master said, ‘If it is peace you want, seek to change yourself, not other people. It is easier to protect your feet with slippers than to carpet the whole of the earth.’” 
- Anthony de Mello 



Characteristics of the American Way of War (12 of 13)


12. Logistically Excellent. American history is a testament to the need to conquer distance. Americans at war have been exceptionally able logisticians. With a continental-size interior and an effectively insular geostrategic location, such ability has been mandatory if the country was to wage war at all, let alone wage it effectively. Recalling the point that virtues can become vices, it can be argued that America not infrequently has waged war more logistically than strategically, which is not to deny that in practice the two almost merge, so interdependent are they.85 The efficient support of the sharp end of American war-making can have, and has had, the downside of encouraging a tooth-to-tail ratio almost absurdly weighted in favor of the latter. A significant reason why firepower has been, and remains, the long suit in the American way of war, is that there repeatedly has been an acute shortage of soldiers in the infantry. A large logistical footprint, and none come larger than the American, requires a great deal of guarding, helps isolate American troops from local people and their culture, and tends to grow as it were organically in what has been pejoratively called the "logistical snowball."86 Given that logistics is the science of supply and movement, America's logistical excellence, with its upside and its downside, of necessity has rested upon mastery of "the commons." Borrowing from Alfred Thayer Mahan, who wrote of the sea as a "wide common," Barry Posen has explained how and why the United States is master not only of the wide common of the high seas of Mahan's time, but also of the new commons of the air, space, and cyberspace.87 Should this mastery cease to be assured, the country would have difficulty waging war against all except Mexicans and Canadians.


Those who might doubt the historical reality of a distinctive American way of war are hereby invited to compare with other countries the amount of materiel and the quantity and quality of support deemed essential to keep American soldiers tolerably content in the field. Many critics of General Westmoreland's strategy in Vietnam failed to notice that he was always painfully short of fighting soldiers. The U.S. military presence under his command may have totaled some 550,000, but no more than 80,000 of those soldiers were "fighting men."88 There is a crossover point where logistical sufficiency, in any kind of war, regular or irregular, can slip into an excess that is counterproductive. In regular warfare, the traditional American way provides the infrastructure and depth of materiel that permit sustained combat. By way of the sharpest of contrasts, for example, Hitler's Luftwaffe was always in more or less desperate straits because of a lack of spare parts. In World War II, both Germany and Japan fielded flashy "shop window" forces that lacked staying power. The American way is the reverse of that. But in the conduct of irregular warfare, which almost invariably is waged on foreign soil, America's traditional way with abundant goods and services for the troops does have a rather obvious downside. The American logistical footprint is heavy, and it grows organically. The American way of war entails large bases that require protection. Those bases, dumps, and other facilities help isolate Americans from the local people and their culture, and, indeed, they create a distinct economy which signals the political fact that America has taken over. Naturally, it is difficult to envisage serious measures to lighten the logistical footprint, given concerns about reenlistment, political pressures from soldiers' relatives, and soldier-citizens' notions of their rights. To succeed in COIN in particular, as it has been discussed in this monograph, the Army needs to adapt in the direction of lighter, more agile forces, a process that is already underway. Furthermore, in gauging the extent of its material necessities in the field, it should give far greater weight to the irregular perspective than has been the case heretofore.
- Colin Gray, 2006




1. U.S. accuses China of trying to hide North Korea atrocities

2. Kim Jong-un ultimately accountable for NK's human rights violations: US envoy

3. Defense ministry sets out to normalize military intelligence-sharing deal with Japan

4. Political divide intensifies in Korea over Yoon-Kishida summit

5. NK claims almost 800,000 people have signed up for military to fight against US

6. U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee members to visit Seoul next month: sources

7. Yoon's Bid to Improve Japan Ties Faces Backlash from South Korean Left

8. The US must trade muscles for diplomacy to end the North Korean nuclear crisis

9. Fatal Attraction: Unexpected Outcome Of The Inter-Korean Collusion – OpEd

10. N. Korean laborers in China are still making clothing for S. Korean and US brands





1. U.S. accuses China of trying to hide North Korea atrocities


I am sure Ambassador Greenfield Thomas supports a human rights upfront approach.


Thomas-Greenfield said North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs were "inextricably linked to the regime's human rights abuses."



U.S. accuses China of trying to hide North Korea atrocities

Reuters · by Michelle Nichols

UNITED NATIONS, March 17 (Reuters) - The United States accused China on Friday of attempting to hide North Korea's atrocities from the world by blocking the webcast of an informal meeting of United Nations Security Council members on accusations of human rights abuses by Pyongyang.

"Some council members are all too willing to shield the regime from accountability," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the meeting in a veiled reference to China and Russia.

China and Russia argue that the 15-member Security Council, which is charged with maintaining international peace and security, should not discuss human rights issues. They say such meetings should be confined to other U.N. bodies like the U.N. Human Rights Council or the U.N. General Assembly.

Chinese diplomat Xing Jisheng said the meeting, co-hosted by the United States and Albania, was "not constructive in any way."

"Instead of easing tension it may rather intensify the conflict and therefore is an irresponsible move. Using U.N. WebTV for live broadcast is a waste of U.N. resources," he said.

All 15 council members have to agree to allow such informal discussions to be webcast by the United Nations, and diplomats said it was rare for a broadcast to be blocked. Despite China's move, the meeting on Friday was still public and media attended.

Thomas-Greenfield said North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs were "inextricably linked to the regime's human rights abuses."

"The pursuit of weapons of mass destruction always trumps human rights and humanitarian needs of its people," she said. "(North Korean leader) Kim Jong Un has chosen ammunition instead of nutrition, missiles over humankind."

North Korea did not take part in the meeting. Its mission to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.

Pyongyang rejects accusations of human rights abuses and blames sanctions for a dire humanitarian situation in North Korea. The country has been under U.N. sanctions over its ballistic missile and nuclear programs since 2006.

"The feigned hypocritical concern of the West about human rights in North Korea isn't fooling anybody," Russian diplomat Stepan Kuzmenkov told the meeting. "Everybody knows full well that the U.S. uses human rights to settle scores with governments not to their liking."

The U.N. Security Council is likely to hold a formal meeting on Monday, diplomats said, over North Korea's launch on Thursday of an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by Richard Chang

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Reuters · by Michelle Nichols


2. Kim Jong-un ultimately accountable for NK's human rights violations: US envoy



Good comments from the Ambassador.


Kim Jong-un ultimately accountable for NK's human rights violations: US envoy

The Korea Times · March 18, 2023

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield speaks to reporters during a news conference, March 1, 2021, at the United Nations headquarters. AP-Yonhap 


North Korean leader Kim Jong-un should be held accountable for North Korea's gross human rights violations as the leader of the country, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations has said after an informal session on the matter in the Security Council.


"Kim Jong-un is the leader of North Korea. So as the leader, the buck stops at the top," Linda Thomas-Greenfield stressed during an exclusive interview with Yonhap News Agency, Friday (local time), at the U.N. headquarters after co-hosting the panel's Arria-formula meeting on the human rights situation in the reclusive nation.


She said the U.S. was "very pleased" to hear a report from Elizabeth Salmon, the U.N. special rapporteur for North Korea's human rights, on the situation "on the ground."


"We think that there are conditions and reports that she has provided that would justify holding people accountable, and we look forward to working in that direction," the envoy said.


At the meeting, Salmon urged the international community to step up efforts to address the problem through the International Criminal Court (ICC) or other means.


On specific measures to prosecute the human rights violators, Thomas-Greenfield said, "There are tools and mechanisms within the international system for doing that," apparently referring to the ICC.


"I won't preview what might or could be done in terms of the different tools that we have available, but they are available for our use," she added.


The ambassador voiced hope for more proactive discussions on the North Korean human rights issue, especially in the case that South Korea becomes a nonpermanent member of the council.


"It is our hope that we will continue to engage actively and proactively on issues related to the DPRK," she said. "But I think the presence of South Korea, should they get a non-elected position, will help us make that case."

DPRK stands for the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.


Asked about Seoul's planned bid for nonpermanent membership of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC), the ambassador was guarded, only saying, "If South Korea gets elected, we can expect that the DPRK will be constantly on our agenda."

Skepticism has grown recently about the UNSC's role in checking the North's brinkmanship.


It held 10 rounds of meetings last year for discussions in response to the Kim regime's ballistic missile launches, but failed to produce a formal document amid opposition from China and Russia, two of the veto-wielding permanent members of the council.


Earlier this week, the North's foreign ministry slammed the UNSC meeting as a scheme to "bring down" the country's regime and warned that it will take the "toughest counteraction" against the "most vicious hostile plots of the U.S." (Yonhap)

The Korea Times · March 18, 2023


3. Defense ministry sets out to normalize military intelligence-sharing deal with Japan



Defense ministry sets out to normalize military intelligence-sharing deal with Japan | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 정주원 · March 17, 2023

SEOUL, March 17 (Yonhap) -- The defense ministry initiated the process to normalize a military intelligence-sharing deal with Japan on Friday, following a summit agreement between the leaders of both countries the previous day.

The defense ministry said it sent a letter to the foreign ministry requesting measures to normalize the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA).

The foreign ministry is soon expected to send an official letter to its Japanese counterpart in response, officials said.

On Thursday, President Yoon Suk Yeol said he agreed to "completely normalize" the military pact during his summit with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo as part of efforts to better respond to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats.


Signed in 2016, GSOMIA was seen as a rare symbol of security cooperation between Seoul and Tokyo.

In 2019, the former administration of President Moon Jae-in decided to terminate it in protest of Tokyo's export restrictions against Seoul amid disputes over Japan's mobilization of Koreans into forced labor during World War II.

The decision was later put on hold but caused vulnerability to the agreement's ground of legal justification.

jwc@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 정주원 · March 17, 2023



4. Political divide intensifies in Korea over Yoon-Kishida summit


Will the political opposition hinder the momentum from the summit?


What alternatives does the political opportunity offer to improve national security and national prosperity?  It should be obvious that the political opposition is taking a partsoan approach to this issue. They really need to be called out for their partisanship and for not putting the defense of the ROK first.


Hopefully President's Yoon's efforts can be a wake-up call for the Korean people that will help them focus on national security and prosperity while managing the historical issues. In other words we should hope that the Korean people in the South will now prioritize security and prosperity.



Political divide intensifies in Korea over Yoon-Kishida summit

The Korea Times · by 2023-03-17 16:31 | Foreign Affairs · March 18, 2023

Lee Jae-myung, center in the front row, leader of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea, and other participants chant slogans during a rally in Seoul on March 18, denouncing President Yoon Suk Yeol's March 16 summit with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. Yonhap 


Political strife escalated Saturday over the recent Korea-Japan summit, as the liberal opposition took to the streets blasting President Yoon Suk Yeol for cozying up to Tokyo and looking past historical disputes on wartime forced labor.


Yoon held a summit with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo on Thursday to mend ties strained by historical disputes stemming from Japan's colonization of the Korean Peninsula from 1910-45.


Earlier this month, South Korea announced its plan to compensate the victims of wartime forced labor through a foundation with donations from domestic companies and not the accused Japanese firms, a move opposed by the victims, opposition parties and activists.


During his trip to Japan, Yoon said Korea has no plans to seek reimbursement from Japan after compensating the victims.


On Saturday, the presidential office hailed the summit as a success, saying it has "provided a turning point in improving the bilateral relations that had reached their worst point ever."


The first bilateral summit between the two neighbors in 12 years has "expanded the scope of cooperation to economic security, such as stabilizing supply chains, and promoting key cutting-edge technology, while working to restore the existing cooperative channels" with Tokyo, Yoon's office said in a press release.


However, Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) harshly criticized Yoon for turning his back on public opinion and "eventually choosing to become a servant of Japan."


"President Yoon went (to Japan) with boxes of gifts and came back not even empty-handed but with a bunch of bills to pay," he said at a rally in Seoul protesting against the recent summit.


About 3,000 people, including members of opposition political parties and progressive civic groups, participated in the demonstration in front of Seoul City Hall.


Lee slammed Yoon's "humiliating attitude" toward Japan and stressed that the victims' right to claim compensation is a basic human right that cannot be infringed upon.


The opposition DPK also denounced Yoon for quoting Okakura Kakuzo, a Japanese scholar also known as Okakura Tenshin who supported Tokyo's colonial rule of Korea, during his speech at Keio University in Tokyo.


During a written press briefing, DPK spokesperson An Ho-young said the scholar had claimed Korea was originally Japanese territory.


"President Yoon's humiliating diplomacy with Japan is now beyond pro-Japanese diplomacy, and we are left with no choice but to call it submissive diplomacy," he said.


The ruling People Power Party (PPP) defended the summit results as having resumed "shuttle diplomacy" and "opening a new era of future-oriented cooperation."


"Korea and Japan have been reborn as partner countries that share universal values and cooperate in security, and an economic and global agenda," PPP spokesperson Jang Dong-hyeok said.


Jang also accused the DPK of spreading fake news about the summit and stirring up anti-Japan sentiment, saying the party is "relying on anti-Japan sentiment for incitement." (Yonhap)


President Yoon Suk Yeol, left, shakes hands with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at the end of their joint news conference after their summit in Tokyo on March 16. Yonhap

The Korea Times · by 2023-03-17 16:31 | Foreign Affairs · March 18, 2023



5. NK claims almost 800,000 people have signed up for military to fight against US


Sign up? Is that how they describe conscription or mandatory service?


What kind of message is the regime trying to send? Is this an attempt to show the superiority of the north Korean system when compared to the recruiting problems facing the US military?


NK claims almost 800,000 people have signed up for military to fight against US

The Korea Times · March 18, 2023

North Korea launches a Hwasong-17 intercontinental ballistic missile from the Sunan area in Pyongyang, Marc 16, in this photo carried by its official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) the following day. Yonhap 


North Korea claims that about 800,000 of its citizens have volunteered to join or reenlist in the nation's military to fight against the United States, the country's state newspaper reported Saturday.


The Rodong Sinmun stated that about 800,000 students and workers nationwide, on Friday alone, expressed a desire to enlist or reenlist to counter the U.S.


The claim came after North Korea launched a Hwasong-17 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), Thursday, in response to ongoing U.S-South Korea military exercises.


Pyongyang fired the ICBM into the sea between the Korean peninsula and Japan, hours before South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol flew to Tokyo for a summit that discussed ways to counter the nuclear-armed North.


The North's ballistic missiles are banned under United Nations Security Council resolutions and the launch drew condemnation from governments in Seoul, Washington and Tokyo.


South Korean and American forces began 11 days of joint drills, dubbed "Freedom Shield 23," Monday, being held on a scale not seen since 2017 to counter North Korea's growing threats.


The North's leader Kim Jong-un accused the United States and South Korea of increasing tensions with the military exercises. (Reuters)

The Korea Times · March 18, 2023


6. U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee members to visit Seoul next month: sources



U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee members to visit Seoul next month: sources | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · March 18, 2023

WASHINGTON, March 18 (Yonhap) -- A delegation from the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, led by Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), is set to visit South Korea early next month, diplomatic sources said Friday.

During their visit scheduled for April 5-6, the nine lawmakers plan to meet with President Yoon Suk Yeol, National Assembly Speaker Kim Jin-pyo and Foreign Minister Park Jin to discuss ways to develop the South Korea-U.S. alliance and strengthen the joint response to North Korea's escalating threats, according to the sources.

The visit comes ahead of Yoon's state visit to Washington for talks with U.S. President Joe Biden, slated for later that month.

The Seoul government is trying to arrange Yoon's address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress during the trip, marking the 70th anniversary of the military alliance between the two countries.

The bipartisan delegation, including Reps. French Hill (R-AR), Young Kim (R-CA) and Ami Bera (D-CA), is also likely to travel to Taiwan and Japan, amid mounting tensions between Washington and Beijing over trade, Taiwan and other issues, the sources said.


South Korean Foreign Minister Park Jin (2nd from R) and South Korean Ambassador to the U.S. Cho Tae-yong (R) pose for a photo with Rep. Michael McCaul (2nd from L), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Young Kim during their meeting in Washington on Feb. 2, 2023, in this file photo provided by the ministry. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)


(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · March 18, 2023


7. Yoon's Bid to Improve Japan Ties Faces Backlash from South Korean Left


This is the key question: WIll the current ROK-Japan cooperation outlast Yoon and Kishida or will the political opposition in Korea derail it?


Excerpts:


Improved Japan-South Korea relations could be hugely beneficial for the United States, which has long sought greater trilateral cooperation on regional threats.


Some U.S. analysts believe the Japan-South Korea rapprochement may outlast Yoon and Kishida, given China’s increased military assertiveness and North Korea’s near-constant missile tests and other threats.


At least for now, many South Korean opposition politicians seem to disagree.


Ko Min-jung, a senior Democratic Party lawmaker, told VOA on Friday it is possible for South Korea to both deal with its security challenges and avoid what she called “surrender diplomacy.”


“There is good reason to question the benefit of South Korea giving up everything, unconditionally, to Japan,” she said.


Yoon's Bid to Improve Japan Ties Faces Backlash from South Korean Left

March 17, 2023 7:35 AM

voanews.com

South Korea’s left-leaning opposition forces blasted the country's president, Yoon Seok Yeol, on Friday as he returned from a summit aimed at opening a new era in South Korean-Japanese relations.

Yoon on Thursday became the first South Korean president in 12 years to hold a bilateral summit with his Japanese counterpart when he met Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo.

The two agreed to restore regular visits to each other’s countries, took steps to ease trade tensions, and vowed to strengthen security cooperation to deal with shared threats such as China and North Korea.

The summit results were not enough to satisfy the South Korean left, which fiercely opposes Yoon’s efforts to look past historical disputes that have long strained relations with Japan.

“Yesterday’s Korea-Japan summit was the most embarrassing and disastrous in South Korea’s diplomatic history,” said Lee Jae-myung, the head of the main opposition Democratic Party.

Speaking at a party meeting, Lee said it looked “as if we were paying tribute to Japan, begging for reconciliation and surrendering.”

The backlash, though largely expected, highlights the challenge Yoon faces in moving ahead with efforts to improve Japan ties.

Forced labor proposal

Last week, Yoon unveiled a plan to resolve one of the thorniest disputes between the two countries – Japan’s use of forced labor during its brutal 1910-1945 occupation of the Korean Peninsula.

Under Yoon's plan, Seoul dropped a demand that Japanese companies compensate South Korean forced labor victims; instead, South Korean businesses will offer compensation through a government-backed foundation.


South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol joins Masakazu Tokura, chairman of Keidanen, the Japan Business Federation, and Kim Byong-joon, acting chairman of the Federation of Korean Industries, as they attend a Japan-Korea Business Roundtable meeting in Tokyo, Japan, March 17, 2023.

About 60% of South Koreans oppose the plan, according to multiple opinion polls.

A collection of left-leaning politicians and activist groups have called for demonstrations against Yoon’s forced labor proposal, recalling large anti-Japan protests in Seoul in 2019, during the peak of the forced labor dispute.

Yoon’s calculus

It is not clear how much any backlash will hurt Yoon, whose approval rating is already relatively low – just 33%, according to a poll released Friday by Gallup Korea.

Yoon still has more than four years left in his five-year presidential term. Like all South Korean presidents, he is constitutionally barred from running for a second term.

He may be betting that political pressure related to the forced labor issue will lessen by the time his party must field a candidate for the 2027 presidential elections, according to Mason Richey, associate professor of international politics at Seoul's Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.

“That’s the gamble Yoon is making – I think he’s pretty much willing to take the heat for the moment,” Richey said.

Shaky ground

The question is whether the Democratic Party will eventually stop using the issue to attack Yoon – and whether the country’s next liberal president will undo the forced labor proposal.


South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol delivers a speech to students at Keio University in Tokyo, Japan March 17, 2023, in this photo released by Kyodo.

Recent history suggests Yoon’s efforts are on shaky ground.

In 2015, South Korea’s last conservative president, Park Geun-hye, reached an agreement under which Japan would compensate South Korean women who were forced into sexual slavery. President Moon Jae-in, a liberal, later repudiated the deal.

If Yoon is unable to convince his political opponents of the merits of the proposal, then it will meet a similar fate, predicted Robert Kelly, a political science professor at South Korea’s Pusan National University.

“This is a pretty big rock that Yoon’s got to roll up the hill,” Kelly said. “And Kishida’s got to give him some help or it’s not going to work.”


South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, left, and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, right, shake hands following a joint news conference at the prime minister's official residence in Tokyo, Japan, March 16, 2023.

Historical matters

So far, there are few signs Japan will agree to the kinds of concessions demanded by South Korean progressives, such as a fresh apology over wartime atrocities or direct compensation for forced labor victims.

At Thursday’s summit, Kishida did not offer a new apology. Instead, he reaffirmed that the Japanese government “inherits on the whole the historical perceptions of past governments,” including a 1998 declaration that included an apology.

Speaking alongside Kishida, Yoon said he has no plans to seek reimbursement from Japan.

Japan insists the forced labor and all other compensation issues were resolved by a 1965 treaty that established relations between Japan and South Korea. Under the treaty, South Korea received $300 million in economic aid and $500 million in loans from Japan.

However, South Korean forced laborers began demanding compensation starting in the 1990s and subsequent South Korean court rulings have sided with the victims.

Shared challenges

For many South Korean conservatives, there are bigger issues at stake – such as dealing with the rapidly expanding North Korean nuclear missile threat and securing global supply chains.

“This is why Yoon proposed a solution to the issue of forced labor despite huge political risks," read an editorial in the conservative Chosun Ilbo newspaper. "This summit offers a chance to make things right again."

Choi Eun-mi, a researcher at the Seoul-based Asan Institute, said Yoon’s proposal was not meant to be a comprehensive solution to the forced labor issue, but represents an important first step.

“There is no way to satisfy everyone,” Choi said. “I wish we could, but it’s not that easy.”

U.S. President Joe Biden last week praised Yoon’s proposal, saying it marks "a groundbreaking new chapter of cooperation and partnership between two of the United States’ closest allies."


FILE - U.S. President Joe Biden, left, speaks as South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol listens during a news conference at the People's House inside the Ministry of National Defense, May 21, 2022, in Seoul, South Korea.

Improved Japan-South Korea relations could be hugely beneficial for the United States, which has long sought greater trilateral cooperation on regional threats.

Some U.S. analysts believe the Japan-South Korea rapprochement may outlast Yoon and Kishida, given China’s increased military assertiveness and North Korea’s near-constant missile tests and other threats.

At least for now, many South Korean opposition politicians seem to disagree.

Ko Min-jung, a senior Democratic Party lawmaker, told VOA on Friday it is possible for South Korea to both deal with its security challenges and avoid what she called “surrender diplomacy.”

“There is good reason to question the benefit of South Korea giving up everything, unconditionally, to Japan,” she said.


8. The US must trade muscles for diplomacy to end the North Korean nuclear crisis


In short, Ms Moore's recommendation is appeasement.  


When we deal with north Korea we must have a deep understanding of the nature, objectives, and strategy of the Kim family regime.


I would like to know why Women Cross DMZ has no concern for human rights in north Korea, especially women's rights?


What we really needed is a human rights upfront approach, a sophisticated information and influence activities campaign, and the pursuit of a free and unified Korea which is the only course of action that will achieve denuclearization and an end to the crimes against humanity being committed against the Korean people living in the north.


Conclusion:


Amid heightened tensions with other nuclear-armed powers, including Russia and China, the United States must do everything it can to diffuse the situation with North Korea through peaceful and diplomatic means. The potential for escalatory responses heightens the risk of a catastrophic war that would put millions of lives at risk of death, suffering, and displacement. Decades of pressure-based tactics have failed to make progress on North Korea’s denuclearization and only worsened global security. It’s time to try something different.

The US must trade muscles for diplomacy to end the North Korean nuclear crisis

thebulletin.org · by François Diaz-Maurin · March 16, 2023

By Colleen Moore | March 16, 2023

Colleen Moore

Colleen Moore is the director for advocacy at Women Cross DMZ, a non-profit organization of women mobilizing for peace on the Korean Peninsula. Moore... Read More


US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un shake hands at the Hanoi Summit in Vietnam on February 27, 2019. The summit ended without a deal after the United States demanded again North Korea’s unilateral denuclearization. (Credit: White House)

Tensions are dramatically escalating on the Korean Peninsula, after a series of missile tests from Pyongyang in 2022. The United States and South Korea have responded to these threats with military maneuvers of their own, raising the stakes even further. But this is a recipe for disaster: To avoid an all-out war on the Korean Peninsula, the United States must stop the muscle-flexing, commit to diplomacy instead, and adopt a peace-first strategy.

North Korea’s progress in weapons development should come as no surprise; in 2021, Kim Jong-un announced that North Korea would expand its nuclear weapon capabilities in order to deter what they perceive as hostility and aggression from the United States. This perception by Pyongyang is a direct result of the Biden administration’s continuation of decades of failed policies—consisting of isolation, sanctions, and military threats—all these dotted with occasional flurries of diplomacy. To have even a chance of halting the expansion of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and preventing a conflict that crosses the nuclear threshold, the United States must address the root cause of tensions: the unresolved Korean War.

An enduring conflict. While an armistice signed in 1953 halted fighting between the United States and North Korea, the Korean War never legally ended; neither country signed a formal peace agreement. This 70-year state of war has ingrained mutual distrust between North Korea and the United States—which, since North Korea developed nuclear weapons, has cemented even further.

After the United States expanded its nuclear presence in Korea, introducing tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea in 1958, North Korea pursued technology capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium. Tensions boiled over in the 1990s, with North Korea announcing its intention to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in response to United States-South Korea joint military exercises as well as the United States’ push for inspections of suspected military facilities in North Korea. The Agreed Framework of 1994, in which North Korea agreed to freeze its plutonium-production complex in exchange for light-water reactors from the United States, simmered tensions. However, the deal collapsed in 2002 when the Bush administration confronted North Korea over fears of a clandestine uranium enrichment program. North Korea then restarted plutonium production and withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty—leading to its first nuclear test on October 9, 2006.

Since then, time and time again, the United States has insisted on North Korea’s unilateral and complete denuclearization without first reducing tensions and building trust. Continuing to press North Korea to dismantle arguably its most effective deterrent without resolving its underlying contentious relationship with the United States is certain to fail: North Korea will continue to see such demand for unilateral denuclearization as a non-starter in negotiations.

RELATED:

Rhetoric in Ukraine has reinforced the fallacy of limited nuclear exchange

For example, during the first round of the six-party talks in August 2003 (involving belligerents of the Korean War—the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and China—as well as Japan and Russia), the United States rejected North Korea’s calls for normalizing relations and a non-aggression pact. Instead, the United States demanded that North Korea completely dismantle its nuclear arsenal before providing diplomatic or other incentives. To this demand, North Korea’s Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan responded, “The United States wants North Korea to drop its pants and be naked and humiliated before the United States is prepared to improve relations. We are technically at war with the United States. You want us to surrender unconditionally.”

During the fifth and sixth rounds of the talks, the United States and North Korea agreed that Pyongyang would “provide a complete and correct declaration of all its nuclear programs” by end of 2007. But once the deadline arrived and the United States inquired about North Korea’s actual number of nuclear weapons, Kim Gye-gwan said, “We’re still technically at war with you. It would be inappropriate for us to discuss weapons with an enemy state.”

Demanding again North Korea’s unilateral denuclearization was also responsible for ending without a deal the 2019 talks in Hanoi between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump. North Korea had offered to dismantle all its nuclear production facilities in Yongbyon in exchange for partial sanctions relief. But, maintaining its all-or-nothing stance, the United States countered by demanding that North Korea fully dismantle its nuclear weapons program.

Former US officials who had made progress on freezing North Korea’s nuclear weapons program from 1994 to 2002 agree that security guarantees are necessary for North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons. Former US Secretary of Defense William Perry argued that since North Korea views its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent against a possible US invasion, South Korea and the United States should address North Korea’s security concerns and normalize relations first before seeking its denuclearization. Former Los Alamos National Laboratory director Siegfried Hecker, who visited the Yongbyon nuclear site four times, also said that he believes North Korea “will not give up its weapons and weapons program until its security can be assured.”

Unsustainable status quo. Despite these calls, the Biden administration—like the three US presidential administrations before—remains entangled in the failed policy of up-front denuclearization, like when the US State Department’s Press Secretary Ned Price recently rolled back Under Secretary for Arms Control Bonnie Jenkins’ comments on pursuing an arms control and risk reduction approach to North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. While the administration’s North Korea policy review released in 2021 claims to strike a balance between President Donald Trump’s “grand bargain” diplomacy and President Barack Obama’s “strategic patience” approach, in practice, both approaches maintain the status quo of maximum pressure—through sanctions and military exercises—without putting anything on the negotiating table.

RELATED:

Some countries plan to decentralize control of nuclear weapons in a crisis. Here's why that's dangerous.

The status quo in US-North Korean relations will only worsen the security of the Korean Peninsula.

Diplomacy is the only option. To truly improve the security of the Korean Peninsula, the Biden administration should trade its bold approach for a strategy of diplomacy toward North Korea. An effective diplomacy must be fourfold. First, the United States should emphasize it is willing to resume diplomacy, focusing on immediate de-escalation of tensions and restoration of communication channels. Second, it should prioritize formally ending the Korean War with a peace agreement with North Korea. Third, the Biden administration should rebuild trust by offering to lift sanctions, especially those that impact the North Korean population. Fourth, it should also take steps to reduce tensions such as scaling down or ceasing joint military exercises with South Korea, especially since joint military exercises do not deter North Korea but rather provoke a cycle of tit-for-tat provocative rhetoric and actions.

Diplomacy has been the most successful method of making progress toward denuclearization. In 1994, the Clinton administration successfully persuaded North Korea to freeze plutonium production at the Yongbyon complex in the Agreed Framework. The 2018-2019 summits between the United States and North Korea resulted in several tension-reducing measures, including the repatriation of US soldiers’ remains, reunions of Korean families separated by the war, landmine clearance in the demilitarized zone, North Korea’s self-imposed moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile testing, and suspension by the United States of joint military exercises with South Korea. However, while past talks aimed solely at North Korea’s denuclearization, future negotiations should instead first address the root cause of the security crisis to build toward longer-lasting agreements and mutual trust.

Amid heightened tensions with other nuclear-armed powers, including Russia and China, the United States must do everything it can to diffuse the situation with North Korea through peaceful and diplomatic means. The potential for escalatory responses heightens the risk of a catastrophic war that would put millions of lives at risk of death, suffering, and displacement. Decades of pressure-based tactics have failed to make progress on North Korea’s denuclearization and only worsened global security. It’s time to try something different.


Together, we make the world safer.

The Bulletin elevates expert voices above the noise. But as an independent, nonprofit media organization, our operations depend on the support of readers like you. Help us continue to deliver quality journalism that holds leaders accountable. Your support of our work at any level is important. In return, we promise our coverage will be understandable, influential, vigilant, solution-oriented, and fair-minded. Together we can make a difference.

Make your gift now


Share:




thebulletin.org · by François Diaz-Maurin · March 16, 2023



9. Fatal Attraction: Unexpected Outcome Of The Inter-Korean Collusion – OpEd


Ouch! "Communist politician was elected a president in S Korea."  


Some interesting assessment here:


What can a dictator do when he is afraid of his own guards? Routine shake-ups with carrots and whips, constant purges on every opportunity, and calculated provocations for outside enemies. That is exactly what Kim has done. In a recent memoir by Mike Pompeo, Kim was quoted as saying that the US forces staying in S Korea had benefitted his regime. That seems like Kim’s honest remark. It revealed how the regime had taken advantage of their presence for its own geopolitical strategies in the region and its propaganda at home. Strange as it may sound, the presence of the US forces has contributed to the regime’s stability under Kim’s control.

Political dilemmas

Pyongyang had their best opportunity for inter-Korean unification with Seoul when the South’s government was run by Moon and numerous supporters of the North. But Kim did not take it for one obvious reason. Kim fears that peaceful inter-Korean unification would threaten his throne, since the Communist factions in Seoul would want their “shares” in the governance and that would jeopardize the regime’s doctrine that recognizes only one “Führer” (i.e., their propagandic term “Mt Baekdu bloodline”).

​Ponder this conclusion:


The US can stir up the regime in so many different ways but has done little other than economic sanctions. It seems that Washington wants no regime change in N Korea, for regime change may cause unpredictable outcomes and risks in the region and beyond. Probably, Washington’s tactic is to do little and wait until intervention becomes necessary.


Many things are commonplace in N Korea now: hunger, crime, bribery, drugs, etc. While all these involve money at the core, easy money is always the culprit for corruption. The decades-old collusion with Seoul has only fueled Pyongyang’s culture of corruption. How many more should perish and defect before the regime collapses under its own weight?


Fatal Attraction: Unexpected Outcome Of The Inter-Korean Collusion – OpEd

eurasiareview.com · by Max S. Kim · March 17, 2023

Each time a Communist politician was elected a president in S Korea, many were concerned that the inter-Korean relations would go under N Korea’s control, which in turn would put S Korea’s national security and military preparedness on the line. As a result, Pyongyang-led inter-Korean unification, many feared, would be the future of the two Koreas.


The concerns again became a harsh reality during Moon’s presidency. The South’s Communists took back control of the nation and filled every branch of the government with their ranks. They committed treason. They let the South’s guard down, rigged the national policies to make the North’s operatives walk free, supplied huge monies to Pyongyang, incensed Japan with military and diplomatic confrontations, and sabotaged the US-S Korea alliance; and the list goes on.

The damage was insurmountable and many thought it was just a step away for Pyongyang and Seoul to declare a unified Korea and nothing could stop it since it would be a legitimate act by the two sovereign nations. But interestingly, Pyongyang did not seize the golden opportunity, and that revealed much about their inner mind and conundrum. What is the regime afraid of?

Thirty years of collusion with Seoul has brought more dilemmas to Pyongyang. The towering economy and lively pop culture of S Korea have become a powerful blackhole that can dissolve N Korea. The men and women in the streets of Pyongyang admire the wealth and freedom their neighbors in Seoul enjoy. Deep in their minds they now worship the golden calf and refuse the “faith.” Pyongyang began to see that a unified Korea with Seoul would only accelerate the regime’s collapse.

Economic dilemmas

The regime’s biggest problem is its dysfunctional economy. Failure in a market economy and lack of modern industrialization make N Korea’s economy unrepairable without external help. But accepting external assistance to rebuild its economy require the regime’s commitment and openness to the international community. N Korea cannot afford that without giving up their family-owned ruling structure that prohibits the population from interacting with the outside world. The stalled economy has caused all sorts of trouble for the regime. As the Korean saying goes, “the standing water comes to rot,” and that’s the foreseeable future of the regime.

Will China come to rescue as an ally and help N Korea rebuild its dying economy? Surely not. Pyongyang already got the answer when Hu Jintao advised Kim’s late father of “reformation and openness.” China has given N Korea very little beyond the survival level. Strategically, all that Beijing wants is keeping the Kim regime on life support.


Kim balked at Trump’s offer of massive economic help in exchange for denuclearization. The unprecedented public fanfare for Kim’s departure for Hanoi, aired by N Korea’s national media, ended up delivering frustration and emptiness to the nation, when Kim fooled himself in thinking that Trump would not know about N Korea’s hidden nuclear facilities. It is a lost opportunity for N Korea and Kim will not get another offer of this nature. The regime is left with what they now have, relying heavily on the loyalists at home and their elements and supporters abroad.

Fortunately, but also unfortunately, one of the world’s most prosperous economies—S Korea—borders with the starving Kim regime. The South’s stout economy not only proves the North’s miserable defeat, it forces the North to take every opportunity for easy money through collusion and extortion. How can moths avoid attraction to the flame? But the regime does not yet appear to fully comprehend the fatal consequence of flying too close to the sun. The writing was on the wall but they didn’t see it.

Ideological dilemmas

What the regime fears most is disobedience of its ruling-class members. But over the years Kim has failed to satisfy his loyalists because the bankrupt regime has little wealth to keep them loyal; instead, he has placed ever-growing burdens on their shoulders by demanding more money from them in order to make up for his limited resources.

In recent years, a number of high-rank officials and military brass were executed and imprisoned on charges of “monetary disloyalty,” which proves that disobedient and corrupt members have exponentially increased in number. In N Korea anyone who is found to have kept a considerable amount of money (US currency or gold) in their home faces an espionage charge automatically and the regime hands down a maximum penalty on them. The allegation that Kim’s uncle Jang Song Thaek was executed because he mismanaged the black money left by Kim’s late father is also significant in this regard.

Ideology has faded. It is money that people are loyal to and N Korea is not an exception either. When the amount of money they bring in for Kim is a barometer of their loyalty—hence their safety in the regime—that only makes them more obsessed with money because it is money and not the “rocket man” that can safeguard them. Most of Kim’s loyalists now worship money as their new savior and have forgotten the two bodies laid embalmed in the Pyongyang Mausoleum; the dead can no longer protect them or harm them.

Recent satellite photos showed the construction of new, bigger lock-up camps near the nuclear experiment sites in the regime’s mountainous northeastern province. The North’s populace has two classes—the privileged/ruling class and the undesired/labor class—and political prisoners are almost all former members of the privileged class. The fact that more lock-up camps are needed for political prisoners also proves that more members of the privileged class have fallen victim to the regime’s faltering economy. The regime is stuck in a mobster mindset and the level of cruelty they have shown to their own disloyal members is beyond imagination.

But despite the regime’s horrific revenge, more members of the privileged class appear willing to be disloyal to Kim. Each year more high-rank officials, generals, and diplomats have defected from N Korea or been incarcerated for their defection attempts; the numbers are unprecedented in the regime’s history. It is a clear indication that the privileged class has an irreparable deep ideological fracture; even Kim’s insiders and loyalists, who prefer the status quo, appear to feel discontent and insecure about their future. Has the fall of N Korea finally started?

Military dilemmas

The economic and ideological failures have raised existential questions for the regime. N Korea has long lost its military capabilities to wage another conventional war with S Korea since its bankrupt economy made much-needed military upgrades and modernization impossible. The alternative was tactics of asymmetric warfare with focus on “unconventional weapons” (that is, nuclear and biochemical warheads) and effective delivery systems.

The problem is, the regime cannot use their unconventional weapons in military offense. If they are ever used against S Korea or the US forces, N Korea would be equally devastated from their responses. When the outcome is an irreversible devastation with no win, how can N Korea wage a war? The situation is very different from that of the 1950’s when Seoul was unprepared for the North’s preemptive strike. Thus, in reality, the regime’s nuclear capabilities are for defense and their survival from external attacks rather than for offense and their annihilation at home.

The regime’s perennial military threats to S Korea and the US forces are war rhetoric designed mainly as its internal propaganda for the military and the ruling class. Since the regime has its national identity and foundation on the “military occupation and liberation” of the South, loss of military capabilities to wage another war has raised political conundrums for the regime. Kim fears the hard-liners in his military, who would challenge his authority and show disobedience en masse if they think the party’s failed leadership would throw their future off.

What can a dictator do when he is afraid of his own guards? Routine shake-ups with carrots and whips, constant purges on every opportunity, and calculated provocations for outside enemies. That is exactly what Kim has done. In a recent memoir by Mike Pompeo, Kim was quoted as saying that the US forces staying in S Korea had benefitted his regime. That seems like Kim’s honest remark. It revealed how the regime had taken advantage of their presence for its own geopolitical strategies in the region and its propaganda at home. Strange as it may sound, the presence of the US forces has contributed to the regime’s stability under Kim’s control.

Political dilemmas

Pyongyang had their best opportunity for inter-Korean unification with Seoul when the South’s government was run by Moon and numerous supporters of the North. But Kim did not take it for one obvious reason. Kim fears that peaceful inter-Korean unification would threaten his throne, since the Communist factions in Seoul would want their “shares” in the governance and that would jeopardize the regime’s doctrine that recognizes only one “Führer” (i.e., their propagandic term “Mt Baekdu bloodline”).

After seizing Saigon, why did N Vietnam purge first the Vietcong forces who had helped and fought alongside them? Power struggle always has the same fate. If Kim could wage and win a war against S Korea, he would easily handle the factions in the South in the same manner as N Vietnam did, but that is out of the question now.

Seasoned people in specialized and professional areas such as military strategists, intelligence and propaganda officers, and senior diplomats form Pyongyang’s brainpower. Their combined experience and knowledge help steer the regime’s future direction. But after Kim got power, surprisingly many of them have been axed as if their services were no longer needed; the names are too many to mention here. That is an irrevocable loss for the regime for sure.

Most of his father’s loyalists were rounded up with his uncle Jang’s purge; and the regime’s continued arrests of its disloyal members have caused an outburst of high-rank defectors from military posts, government offices, and secret service agencies. The failed outcome of Kim’s summits with Trump resulted in cleansing of the ranks of the regime’s Foreign Ministry branch.

A tsunami of executions and imprisonments are yet to come pending the outcome of the ongoing trial in the South of the former presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung and his secret connection to Pyongyang. The revelation so far is that the final amount of money that reached Kim was much smaller than the actual amount of money Lee handed over to N Korea during Moon’s presidency. No doubt there was a “delivery incident” inside the regime. As a fuming Kim keeps an eye on the trial, those responsible in the regime’s Propaganda and Anti-S Korean Operations branch will dearly pay the price for their disloyalty.

How can the regime deal with limited manpower when they have to lose so many experienced members of the loyalist group? That plainly speaks one truth. The regime needs no new brains and heroes as they have no other path to take than to preserve the status quo. Unable to handle a mountain of trouble the Kim family has handed down for generations, they have lost sight of the future. Their best strategy is to keep the same path and play by the book since that is the path most familiar to them, until they fall to their death.

Summary

The US can stir up the regime in so many different ways but has done little other than economic sanctions. It seems that Washington wants no regime change in N Korea, for regime change may cause unpredictable outcomes and risks in the region and beyond. Probably, Washington’s tactic is to do little and wait until intervention becomes necessary.

Many things are commonplace in N Korea now: hunger, crime, bribery, drugs, etc. While all these involve money at the core, easy money is always the culprit for corruption. The decades-old collusion with Seoul has only fueled Pyongyang’s culture of corruption. How many more should perish and defect before the regime collapses under its own weight?

eurasiareview.com · by Max S. Kim · March 17, 2023



10. N. Korean laborers in China are still making clothing for S. Korean and US brands





N. Korean laborers in China are still making clothing for S. Korean and US brands

“All the factories in Liaoning Province employing North Korean laborers would have to close if it weren’t for orders from the US or South Korea,” a reporting partner told Daily NK

By Seulkee Jang - 2023.03.15 11:00am

dailynk.com

A piece of clothing manufactured at a Chinese factory employing North Koreans. (Daily NK)

North Korean laborers dispatched to China are still making clothing for South Korean and US brands, Daily NK has learned.

Daily NK recently obtained photos of clothing produced by North Korean workers at a factory in China.

The photos captured dozens of windbreakers, casual dress jackets and pairs of pants made by North Korean workers, including items sporting famous US brands.

In fact, there is a lightly padded windbreaker with the “Airwalk” label, with the triangular Airwalk logo on the left breast.

Airwalk is a clothing label owned by the US holding company Collective Brands.

However, Airwalk sells its trademark rights to several countries, with owners of the trademark sometimes manufacturing the clothing themselves. As such, it is unclear whether the items produced by the North Korean laborers was ordered by the US headquarters or by a company in another country like South Korea.

When South Korean or US companies produce clothing in China, some production stages are entrusted to subcontractors, with factories that employ North Korean workers receiving many of these subcontract orders.

Daily NK reported in 2021 that clothing items delivered to South Korea like Hazzys, The North Face, FILA and Le Coq Sportif are produced by North Korean workers in Chinese factories.

As recently as 2021, most items produced by North Korean workers in China were famous brands from South Korea, the US and elsewhere, but subcontract orders declined somewhat in 2022 as many global companies pulled out of China, a reporting partner in China told Daily NK, speaking on condition of anonymity.

However, the reporting partner said orders continue to come in from small and mid-sized South Korean and US companies.

Clothing manufactured at a Chinese factory employing North Koreans. The jackets were reportedly produced for a South Korean company. (Daily NK)

In fact, the casual man’s dress jacket and pants in the photo above were ordered by a South Korean company.

When South Korean companies make subcontract orders, there are reportedly several rounds of checks because standards are high.

However, South Koreans have never themselves inspected a factory employing North Koreans. Instead, Chinese people who manage the subcontract orders take part in the inspections.

Most of the intermediaries who hand South Korean subcontract orders to factories employing North Korean laborers are ethnic Chinese business people, the reporting partner told Daily NK.

“All the factories in Liaoning Province employing North Korean laborers would have to close if it weren’t for orders from the US or South Korea,” he claimed.

“Orders from big companies have noticeably decreased, but factories can still run on orders from lesser-known small and medium-sized businesses.”

Translated by David Black. Edited by Robert Lauler.

Daily NK works with a network of reporting partners who live inside North Korea. Their identities remain anonymous due to security concerns. More information about Daily NK’s reporting partner network and information gathering activities can be found on our FAQ page here.

Please direct any comments or questions about this article to dailynkenglish@uni-media.net.

Read in Korean

dailynk.com






De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com



De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647


If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."
Company Name | Website
Facebook  Twitter  Pinterest  
basicImage