Quotes of the Day:
“How did our country go so quickly from unique global power to a country that is widely perceived as no longer willing to bear the costs or accept the responsibility of global leadership—or even capable of governing itself effectively?”
— Exercise of Power: American Failures, Successes, and a New Path Forward in the Post-Cold War World by Robert Michael Gates
https://a.co/fiNmAYk
"In all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful."
- Leo Tolstoy
"We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
- Winston Churchill
1. Opinion | South Korea makes a welcome turn toward the U.S. — just when it is really needed
2. How South Korea's election of Yoon Suk Yeol may affect relationship with US
3. Pyongyang’s Manufactured Missile Crisis – Analysis
4. South Korea's new conservative president will likely setback peace and gender equality | Opinion
5. Japanese and South Korean leaders agree to boost ties with US to tackle North Korea
6. Joe Biden's Nightmare: A War in Ukraine and North Korea Testing ICBMs
7. NK outlet slams S. Korea for denouncing satellite project as ICBM development
8. Yoon's spokesperson urges N. Korea to return to dialogue
9. US Warns North Korea’s Reconnaissance Satellite Tests Are Cover for ICBM Development
10. U.N. recruiting new special rapporteur for N. Korea human rights
11. Yoon names Ahn head of transition committee
12. Revisiting Yoon’s 8-month political career before presidential leap
13. N. Korea may fire big missile to put spy satellite in space
14. US-South Korea Free Trade Agreement Key to Further Elevating Alliance
15. The Continuing Threat of North Korea's Chemical Weapons
16. After S.Korea Election Loss, Moon's Ruling Party Scrambles to Regroup
17. South Korea’s president-elect promises military buildup
1. Opinion | South Korea makes a welcome turn toward the U.S. — just when it is really needed
Opinion | South Korea makes a welcome turn toward the U.S. — just when it is really needed
The first quarter of 2022 has been a time of testing on the Korean Peninsula. In North Korea, the communist regime has been conducting a spate of missile technology trials. Two particularly ominous tests on Feb. 26 and March 4 appear to have involved components that could later be used in an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States. Given that this could foreshadow an end to Pyongyang’s self-imposed ban on long-range missile testing, the Biden administration was right to call North Korea’s behavior a “serious escalation” and to announce that the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command would step up surveillance and missile defense force readiness.
Meanwhile, south of the 38th parallel, the Republic of Korea was conducting a different kind of test — of its democratic political system, in the form of a very close presidential election. On the whole, South Korea’s 35-year-old democracy passed with flying colors. Though voters were deeply polarized along left-right lines, and the major candidates ran almost exclusively negative campaigns, the voting was free and fair. The victor, conservative Yoon Suk-yeol, got only 263,000 more votes than progressive rival Lee Jae-myung, but the latter quickly and graciously conceded his defeat. The stage is set for something that has never even come close to happening in the North — a peaceful transfer of power. And the closeness of the race, coupled with continued opposition control of Congress, may restrain Mr. Yoon’s ability to enact his more questionable campaign promises, such as a pledge to abolish the country’s Ministry of Gender Equality and Family.
Perhaps most important for the United States, Mr. Yoon promises to end the efforts of his predecessor, Moon Jae-in, to steer South Korea’s foreign policy on a more conciliatory path with respect to China and its client, North Korea, while distancing Seoul from the United States. The Moon government consciously played down North Korea’s human rights violations and balked at installing additional U.S. theater missile defense systems. The purpose was to preserve commercial relations with China while gradually inducing North Korea to modify its behavior. Seoul wound up with little to show for these overtures, as the North’s missile tests and China’s backing for Pyongyang, despite its nuclear weapons programs, demonstrate.
Mr. Yoon proposes instead to make South Korea into a “global pivotal state,” with an active international role commensurate to its economic strength and liberal-democratic values. As part of that, he advocated “a deeper alliance with Washington,” which should be “the central axis of Seoul’s foreign policy.” As well, Mr. Yoon wants South Korea to mend fences with Japan, a perennial sore spot left over from the latter’s occupation of Korea before and during World War II. If it goes according to plan, Mr. Yoon’s policy could bolster democratic unity across the Indo-Pacific and help prevent China from using North Korea as a means to weaken and distract what should be a united front of countries deterring it from aggression against Taiwan.
Occurring coincidentally in the final days of the Korean campaign, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reminded the whole world — including, perhaps, a critical mass of Korean voters — that U.S.-led security alliances are far from obsolete. The U.S.-Korea bond is a case in point; the Biden administration should work with Mr. Yoon to reinvigorate it.
2. How South Korea's election of Yoon Suk Yeol may affect relationship with US
Excerpt:
Yoon will likely "side more with the United States and take a harder line toward China," Kathy Moon of the Brookings Institution told the Voice of America, saying that includes military cooperation with the United States "that would really ruffle China's feathers."
How South Korea's election of Yoon Suk Yeol may affect relationship with US
Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Elected in one of the narrowest presidential races in South Korea’s history, Yoon Suk Yeol, the country’s former top prosecutor, is a political newcomer with the conservative People Power Party who has sometimes been compared to former President Trump.
Yoon is expected to take a harder line against North Korea and seek a closer relationship with the United States.
The White House congratulated Yoon on Wednesday following his victory.
"The alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea, our economies and our people is ironclad," a U.S. spokesperson said, according to Reuters. "President Biden looks forward to continue working with the new President-elect to further expand our close cooperation."
President Biden said he had spoken with Yoon and he looks "forward to working with him to continue to strengthen the U.S.-ROK Alliance and take on shared global challenges."
Yoon is succeeding President Moon Jae-in, who cannot run for another term. Yoon beat liberal Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung to take the presidency.
The election was a "testament to the dynamism and resiliency of Korea’s democracy," said Chris Del Corso, chargé d’affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Seoul.
President Biden and South Korean President Moon Jae-in end a news conference in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., May 21, 2021. (Getty Images)
He added that the two countries were preparing to mark the 140th anniversary of bilateral relations.
"The bond between our two countries is stronger than ever," he said.
Observers of foreign affairs weighed in on the possible future of U.S. relations with South Korea.
"Yoon intends to deploy additional units of the U.S. THAAD anti-missile system and strengthen joint South Korea-U.S. military exercises in proportion to North Korea's missile threats," Cheong Seong-Chang of the Sejong Institute, a think tank in South Korea, told ABC News,
South Korea elected Yoon Suk Yeol as its next president this week. (Associated Press)
Yoon will likely "side more with the United States and take a harder line toward China," Kathy Moon of the Brookings Institution told the Voice of America, saying that includes military cooperation with the United States "that would really ruffle China's feathers."
3. Pyongyang’s Manufactured Missile Crisis – Analysis
There is no better manufacturer of criese than Kim Jong-un.
Excellent conclusion:
This ‘manufactured’ missile crisis can be likened to a petulant child throwing a tantrum and, to Asian security analysts, the coercion–negotiation cycles of the Kim dynasty should be all too familiar. Despite the North’s provocations, Washington, Seoul, Tokyo and like-minded allies should not acquiesce to any one-sided negotiations.
Instead, efforts should go towards using economic and diplomatic levers to encourage strict international enforcement of all sanctions against North Korea, strengthening global cyber defences to stymie North Korean cyber and crypto currency fraud, and using all avenues to intercept Pyongyang’s maritime smuggling.
Pyongyang’s Manufactured Missile Crisis – Analysis
By Liang Tuang Nah*
From November 2021 through till January 2022, Pyongyang has violated UN resolutions and caused significant alarm in the international media by testing a plethora of missiles. But the international community needn’t be intimidated by North Korea’s missile testing, as they have little strategic impact. Standing firm against Pyongyang is still the best course of action.
The missiles ranged from cruise missiles to railway borne missiles, hypersonic glide vehicles, submarine launched ballistic missiles, new surface to air missiles, an intermediate range ballistic missile and run of the mill short-range missiles. Still, the international policy of comprehensive pressure should remain. Although North Korean Supreme leader Kim Jong-un wants economic sanctions to be lifted, missile showboating as a process to achieve this must never be legitimised.
Going off the missile reliability requirements of military powers like the United States, Russia and China, 12–36 tests are needed to assure war time reliability. Aside from short or medium range missiles that have been extensively tested since the Kim Il-sung era, the regime’s rocket scientists would be hard pressed to assure themselves that their latest weapons can function as touted. A handful of tests do not constitute proof of a definitive operational threat to South Korea, the United States and Japan.
What Pyongyang more likely possesses is a potentially enhanced deterrent, a luxury dependent on risk averse defence planners from foreign countries who promote caution in diplomacy and operational war planning. If Washington could only achieve an 83.4 per cent effectiveness rate for their Tomahawk cruise missiles during the 1991 Gulf War, the functionality of North Korean missiles is ostensibly far lower. Whether or not Kim’s new missiles can induce enough strategic uncertainty in Washington and Seoul is anyone’s guess, but reliability statistics are not on Pyongyang’s side.
Even if Kim’s latest military ‘equalisers’ are effective, the regime cannot defy economic reality to produce sufficient numbers of sophisticated missiles by diktat alone. With an economy approximate to Botswana’s in size, Pyongyang maintains its current military spending by diverting up to 23.3 per cent of its GDP towards defence. The DPRK would be hard pressed to gather the financial wherewithal for a technologically upgraded and quantitatively beefed-up missile arsenal. The drastically tightened UN sanctions from 2016–17 have certainly put the brakes on the introduction of new missile models.
Despite labour and other costs being significantly lower in North Korea, cutting-edge missiles are intrinsically expensive due to costly components. The North’s decrepit economy is unable to produce enough of these weapons to affect the inter-Korean strategic power balance. At the very least, North Korea requires an expanded time horizon to achieve its technological ambitions, giving regional governments breathing room to plan an appropriate response.
Logically speaking, the Kim regime knows that North Korea cannot dominate or absorb South Korea. The use of nuclear arms or ballistic missiles against any South Korean or US targets would provoke a war that would likely lead to the termination of the Kim dynasty. Since loss of power is the last thing that Kim wants, antagonising the US–South Korea alliance into serious military retaliation is off the books.
Observations near the DMZ and in North Korea support this assertion. There is no evidence of internal strife or an attempted coup within the North Korean elite. Kim Jong-un’s success in quelling such resistance would need to be reinforced by displays of overt dominance, emphasising his exclusive leadership qualifications. Indeed, high profile military adventurism against the US–South Korea alliance would serve as a concrete demonstration to his domestic audience of his mettle and legitimacy as supreme leader.
Another sign of an impending offensive would be indirect indications of troop mobilisation. If the Korean People’s Army (KPA) wishes to place its forces on a war footing without triggering an immediate response, it would halt all civil duties carried out by KPA units, since a large chunk of the KPA is utilised for economic work. Intelligence analysts should look for North Korean air force planes being moved into hardened or underground shelters and navy vessels leaving their ports in droves. These moves reduce the target signature of the KPA’s air and sea assets, preserving their strike capacity. None of these actions have been observed.
Kim’s latest missiles are at best demonstration prototypes, economic limitations prevent the upgrade and expansion of Pyongyang’s missile arsenal, and significant military action from the North is improbable. So Kim’s prolific missile firing is coercive communication designed to remind the Biden administration of North Korea’s alleged capabilities — compelling Washington to negotiate on terms favourable to Pyongyang.
But Biden is preoccupied with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and managing contentious China–US ties is a secondary priority. That makes Pyongyang’s shenanigans a tertiary issue, if even that. With Kim doubtless aware of Biden’s priorities, the international community will likely see more escalatory actions from North Korea in the weeks ahead.
This ‘manufactured’ missile crisis can be likened to a petulant child throwing a tantrum and, to Asian security analysts, the coercion–negotiation cycles of the Kim dynasty should be all too familiar. Despite the North’s provocations, Washington, Seoul, Tokyo and like-minded allies should not acquiesce to any one-sided negotiations.
Instead, efforts should go towards using economic and diplomatic levers to encourage strict international enforcement of all sanctions against North Korea, strengthening global cyber defences to stymie North Korean cyber and crypto currency fraud, and using all avenues to intercept Pyongyang’s maritime smuggling.
*About the author: Liang Tuang Nah is a research fellow in the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
4. South Korea's new conservative president will likely setback peace and gender equality | Opinion
Just to note: The author, in all her dealings with north Korea, has never pressed the regime on the brutal treatment of Korean women in the north.
South Korea's new conservative president will likely setback peace and gender equality | Opinion
Amid rising housing prices and concerns about the economy, South Korean voters recently narrowly elected conservative Yoon Suk-yeol as their next president. He defeated Lee Jae-myung, of President Moon Jae-in's Democratic Party. Yoon's win promises to reverse progress made on two key fronts: peace with North Korea and women's rights.
In a repudiation of outgoing president Moon's rapprochement with North Korea, Yoon opposes an end-of-war declaration with North Korea and takes a harder stance against China—a position that will surely raise tensions in the region. President-elect Yoon has called an end-of-war declaration "premature" that lacked national consensus. According to a recent poll conducted by the National Unification Advisory Council, 67 percent of South Korean adults believe an end-of-war declaration is "necessary."
Yoon is a proponent of CVID—the complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear program—a policy that has failed for decades. In other words, he believes North Korea must hand over all of their nuclear weapons before offering any security assurances such as a peace agreement. He aims to achieve this via "peace through power"—normalizing U.S.-South Korea joint military exercises and by developing pre-emptive strike capability against North Korea. Yoon opposes suspending joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises because he believes it will cause a rift in the alliance between Washington and Seoul. Yet these exercises—which are based on an operation plan that reportedly includes preemptive strikes and "decapitation" of North Korean leadership—have shown to actually raise tensions with North Korea and incite provocative rhetoric and actions.
During most of Moon's presidency, South Korea (the tenth largest economy in the world) has navigated the great power competition between Washington and Beijing through "strategic ambiguity" by maintaining its security alliance with the United States and its partnership with its largest trading partner, China. But Yoon promises a harder line against China, including further deploying the U.S.' Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) system as a counter to China's growing military power. China has reacted negatively to the expansion of THAAD, saying it goes beyond protecting South Korea to infringing on China's security. For that reason, South Korean villagers are protesting the THAAD system because it puts them squarely in the crossfire of a potential conflict between the U.S. and China.
As evidenced by prior conservative administrations, Yoon's presidency may also have a chilling effect on South Korea's peace movement. Former President Park Geun-hye harbored a blacklist of nearly 10,000 artists, activists and cultural icons, including Oscar-winning Parasite director Bong Joon-ho, who were critical of her administration. I was also banned by the Park administration from entering South Korea, my homeland, as retribution for a women's DMZ peace walk I helped organize. President Moon quickly overturned this.
Before Park, the former conservative President Lee Myung-bak established a team within the Korean Central Intelligence Agency to monitor public opinion online and post comments alleging that the opposition candidates were pro-North Korean. In line with such actions, Yoon's wife, Kim Keon-hee, said she would imprison journalists who have been critical of her husband.
Yoon's promise to abolish the Ministry of Family and Gender Equality will also be a major setback for women's rights. If he follows through on his promise, it will reverse important progress on gender discrimination and women's rights. The ministry, which only receives 0.2 percent of the national budget, provides social welfare for children and families. Of this paltry sum, only 3 percent goes to advancing gender equality in a country where women only earn roughly 67.7 percent of men's monthly wages, the highest wage gap among developed countries.
South Korea's President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol speaks during a news conference. KIM HONG-JI/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Women are noticeably absent in politics and corporate boardrooms. The misogyny is so deep in South Korea that in 2016, only 1.9 percent of women who experienced sexual violence asked the police for help, according to the ministry. Things started to change in 2016 after a woman was murdered in Seoul's Gangnam district, prompting South Korean women to begin sharing their experiences with violence and misogyny. While President Moon extended the statute of limitations and punishment time for sexual harassment crimes, not enough has been done to close the gender wage gap and protect women.
Unfortunately, Yoon is part of the rising backlash against feminism in South Korea, where 79 percent of men in their twenties feel "seriously discriminated against" due to their gender, according to the Hankook Ilbo. Yoon is among a growing number of conservative leaders railing against gender equality. "It is not a coincidence that women's equality is being rolled back at the same time that authoritarianism is on the rise," Erica Chenoweth and Zoe Marks wrote in Foreign Affairs. That's because democracy and women's rights go together, or as the Korean Association of Women's United logo says, "Feminism Improves Democracy."
"Aspiring autocrats and patriarchal authoritarians have good reason to fear women's political participation," cautioned Chenoweth and Marks. Women's participation in mass movements "are both more likely to succeed and more likely to lead to more egalitarian democracy."
Women's greater political participation would also have positive implications for peace in Korea. Research shows that when women are involved in peace processes, an agreement is more likely to be reached and to last. A study from Georgetown University showed that between 1991 and 2017, women's groups were involved in 71 percent of informal peace processes, and their participation helped to legitimize the formal peace process among the public.
To counter the threats to peace and gender equality under a Yoon presidency, South Korea will need the active participation of women. Feminists are powerful agents for peace and democracy. Yoon, and South Korea's democratic allies in the West, cannot afford to dismiss them.
Christine Ahn is the founder and executive director of Women Cross DMZ, a global movement of women mobilizing to end the Korean War.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
5. Japanese and South Korean leaders agree to boost ties with US to tackle North Korea
Off to a seemingly good start. But these two leaders are going to have to do the hard work to improve relations.
Japanese and South Korean leaders agree to boost ties with US to tackle North Korea
(CNN)Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean president-elect Yoon Suk-yeol said they had agreed on Friday to ramp up three-way ties with the United States in responding to North Korea's evolving military threat.
Kishida told reporters after a phone call with Yoon the two agreed to stay in close contact over North Korea and shared the view it would be good to meet as soon as possible.
North Korea recently used what is believed to be a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system in two secretive launches, likely paving the way for a resumption of long-range tests, US and South Korean officials said on Friday.
Kishida said pretty much all diplomatic options are open in dealing with North Korea, possibly including sanctions, and that Japan will stay in close contact with the US and South Korea on any response.
A spokeswoman for Yoon, who won Wednesday's presidential election, said he expressed hopes for greater trilateral cooperation involving the US in dealing with North Korea.
Read More
Relations between the two neighbors have been strained over issues stemming from Japan's 1910-45 colonization over the Korean peninsula, including victims of Japan's forced labor and mobilization of wartime brothels.
Good bilateral ties are essential and need to be advanced given the state of world affairs, Kishida said.
Yoon told Kishida it would be important to resolve bilateral pending issues in a "reasonable, mutually beneficial manner," adding both sides have many areas of cooperation including regional security and the economy.
Yoon also shared condolences to the victims and the families of the 2011 earthquake that struck off the northeastern Japan, marking its 11th anniversary, she added.
6. Joe Biden's Nightmare: A War in Ukraine and North Korea Testing ICBMs
But we have to stop the discussion of trading Los Angeles for Seoul and weaken extended deterrence.
Excerpts:
If this proves to be the DPRK’s course, its neighbors and the US will have to prepare for North Korea as a significant and permanent nuclear power. The regional dynamic will become much more complex, even for a nominal ally such as China, which would find itself with less influence over Pyongyang.
Pressure for increased military outlays would greatly increase on both Japan and South Korea, in which more hawkish governments already are planning to spend more. Moreover, the viability of America’s policy of extended deterrence would become an issue. Once the North has the capability to target the US mainland, defending the ROK and Japan could mean the loss of American cities. Would future presidents be prepared to sacrifice Washington for Tokyo or Seoul? If the US closed its nuclear umbrellas, its allies would have to consider their nuclear options.
The Biden administration undoubtedly would prefer to avoid any more foreign policy crises. However, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un appears to have a different view. With the DPRK almost certain to continue testing ICBMs and possibly preparing a nuclear test, Pyongyang might soon force itself back onto Washington’s unwilling agenda.
Joe Biden's Nightmare: A War in Ukraine and North Korea Testing ICBMs
North Korea has gone on a missile testing spree, nearly a dozen so far this year. However, the last two—launches on February 26 and March 4—are now thought to be of intercontinental ballistic missiles, even though not shot at full range. The Defense Department opined that the purpose “was likely to evaluate this new system before conducting a test at full range in the future.”
The Biden administration offered a routine denunciation. Said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby: “the United States strongly condemns these launches, which are a brazen violation of multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions, needlessly raise tensions, and risk destabilizing the security situation in the region.” The administration reportedly planned to impose new sanctions on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea —another Washington ritual with not the slightest likelihood of changing Pyongyang’s behavior.
Indeed, the Biden administration was reduced to almost begging. The Pentagon declared that “the United States is revealing this information publicly and sharing it with other allies and partners because we believe that the international community must speak in a united voice to oppose the further development and proliferation of such weapons by the DPRK.” As if anyone believed that Kim Jong-un would be moved by “the international community” condemning his military program “in a united voice.”
The missile twice tested apparently was unveiled in the North’s October 2020 military parade. The only good news is that this missile is not thought to be capable of hitting the US. The bad news is that there is no reason to believe that Pyongyang will stop with it.
Kim imposed a unilateral moratorium on a long-range missile and nuclear testing after the 2017 “fire and fury” contretemps with the Trump administration. However, in January the North Korean Politburo declared that the “hostile policy and military threat by the U.S. have reached a danger line that cannot be overlooked anymore” and decided to reconsider “the trust-building measures that we took on our own initiative on a preferential ground and to promptly examine the issue of restarting all temporally-suspended activities.” Which suggested that ICBM and even nuclear tests were going to resume.
In the past, the DPRK would accompany a missile launch like the latest with great fanfare amid threats of doom and destruction for South Korea and the US. But not this time, which, ironically, creates greater concern. North Korea then used missile tests to press Washington to engage. In theory that could be Kim’s strategy today. After all, the Biden administration is quite busy: its domestic agenda is in shambles, political future is dismal, and international agenda is overflowing, topped by the ongoing Russian attack on Ukraine. The Korean peninsula barely warrants a mention, let alone treatment as a priority in Washington.
However, the administration already has reached out to Pyongyang, only to see its overtures contemptuously ignored or rejected. The DPRK largely cut off contact with Washington after the failure of the 2019 Hanoi summit. Kim maintained that stance toward President Joe Biden. When pressed the North repeated its standard declaration that the US had to drop its “hostile” policy. No doubt the regime sees every new criticism and sanction as further evidence of hostility.
Obviously, Kim could intend to reengage in the near future. Only he and presumably those around him know his intentions. However, in contrast to the past, nothing in the North’s behavior suggests a desire to connect.
More likely is the opposite possibility, an attempt to avoid the administration’s attention. Faced with the continuing US demand for complete denuclearization and failure to win sanctions relief from his supposed pal, Donald Trump, Kim may have decided to mount a full-scale arms build-up before again approaching Washington, only this time from a position of great strength. For instance, in December he told members of the Workers’ Party of Korea: “The military environment of the Korean peninsula and the trend of the international situation getting instable day after day demand that bolstering the state defense capability be further powerfully propelled without a moment’s delay.”
Acting now would be a smart move. Relations between Russia and the US are at a nadir, likely to only worsen. Relations between China and the US are bad, while those between China and the DPRK are much improved from the recent past. Thus, the North likely is safe from additional international sanctions and enhanced enforcement of existing penalties.
Equally important, as noted earlier, the Biden administration is badly distracted. It cannot easily handle another crisis. Issuing boilerplate statements in response to North Korean activity is the easiest course. Finally, South Koreans have narrowly elected a more hawkish president, but the new government won’t take over until May and will face an opposition-controlled National Assembly. In any case, the Republic of Korea has long allowed the US to dominate security issues on the Korean peninsula.
Image of North Korean Road-Mobile ICBM. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Pyongyang previously unveiled its ambitious military program. At the eighth congress of the Worker’s Party of Korea, held in January 2021, Kim declared: “Our external political activities going forward should be focused on suppressing and subduing the U.S., the basic obstacle, the biggest enemy against our revolutionary development.” How so? The regime would “further strengthen our nuclear deterrence.”
He offered a laundry list of planned advances and improvements, including hypersonic warheads, ICBMs, improved warheads, multiple warheads, reconnaissance satellites, solid fuel missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, tactical nukes, and unmanned aerial vehicles. He earlier used a military parade to showcase new arms and highlight the regime’s ambitions. Naturally, Kim presented these measures as defensive: “The reality shows that we need to strengthen the national defense capabilities without a moment of hesitation to deter the United States’ nuclear threats and to bring peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula.”
Fulfilling this long list likely is beyond Pyongyang’s fiscal capabilities, especially after two years of isolating itself to combat COVID-19, essentially imposing self-sanctions. Nevertheless, the DPRK has done much with limited resources in the past. And a joint report by the Asan Institute and Rand Corporation warned that “by 2027, North Korea could have 200 nuclear weapons and several dozen intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and hundreds of theater missiles for delivering the nuclear weapons.”
Such an arsenal would make the North a mid-range nuclear power, alongside China, France, Great Britain, India, Israel, and Pakistan. The idea of a nuclear-free DPRK would be but a chimera. And Kim’s negotiating position would be greatly strengthened: Pyongyang could offer to give up scores of nukes and cap its program, while remaining a nuclear power, in return for the end of economic sanctions and perhaps America’s military presence on the peninsula.
North Korea’s New Hypersonic Missile. Image Credit: KCNA/North Korean State Media.
North Korea Ballistic Missile Test. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Reinforcing this interpretation of Kim’s strategy is his retreat from economic reform. If he hoped to make a deal that would open the North to the international economy, he should maintain if not expand existing market-expanding measures. His backward shift suggests that he expects continued economic isolation and hardship, requiring greater state oversight.
The regime also has attacked foreign, particularly South Korean, culture. Kim once dallied with Disney figures and hosted a K-pop concert. Today teens who sing K-pop are being arrested. Since international economic exchange inevitably increases foreign contacts of all sorts, again the North looks to be planning for long-term isolation, launching an offensive against what it sees as dangerous outside influences.
If this proves to be the DPRK’s course, its neighbors and the US will have to prepare for North Korea as a significant and permanent nuclear power. The regional dynamic will become much more complex, even for a nominal ally such as China, which would find itself with less influence over Pyongyang.
Pressure for increased military outlays would greatly increase on both Japan and South Korea, in which more hawkish governments already are planning to spend more. Moreover, the viability of America’s policy of extended deterrence would become an issue. Once the North has the capability to target the US mainland, defending the ROK and Japan could mean the loss of American cities. Would future presidents be prepared to sacrifice Washington for Tokyo or Seoul? If the US closed its nuclear umbrellas, its allies would have to consider their nuclear options.
The Biden administration undoubtedly would prefer to avoid any more foreign policy crises. However, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un appears to have a different view. With the DPRK almost certain to continue testing ICBMs and possibly preparing a nuclear test, Pyongyang might soon force itself back onto Washington’s unwilling agenda.
A 1945 Contributing Editor, Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties. He worked as special assistant to President Ronald Reagan and editor of the political magazine Inquiry. He writes regularly for leading publications such as Fortune magazine, National Interest, the Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Times. Bandow speaks frequently at academic conferences, on college campuses, and to business groups. Bandow has been a regular commentator on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. He holds a JD from Stanford University.
7. NK outlet slams S. Korea for denouncing satellite project as ICBM development
Of course they will denounce the South for this and everything else.
NK outlet slams S. Korea for denouncing satellite project as ICBM development | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, March 13 (Yonhap) -- A North Korean propaganda machine slammed South Korea on Sunday for denouncing what Pyongyang claims were recent satellite launch tests as efforts to develop a new intercontinental ballistic missile, arguing it is a double standard to take issue with space projects that all countries are entitled to undertake.
South Korea and the United States have recently announced their assessment that Pyongyang's purported satellite tests on Feb. 27 and March 5 were part of efforts to develop a new ICBM system ahead of a possible full-range rocket launch.
The North has claimed the launches were for "reconnaissance satellite" development.
"Many countries launch military satellites," Uriminjokkiri, one of the North's propaganda websites, said in a commentary. "It is a shameless and brigandish act to maliciously defame only our reconnaissance satellite launch preparations and talk even about sanctions."
It also said the South's denunciation is nothing more than "paranoiac convulsion."
The outlet also claimed that the reconnaissance satellite project is part of the country's five-year defense science and weapons system development plan.
"It is wrong for South Korean authorities, who are bent on developing various missiles and space launch vehicles targeting us, to put a double standard on our legitimate space development plans and exercise of our self-defense right," it said.
(END)
8. Yoon's spokesperson urges N. Korea to return to dialogue
Yoon's spokesperson urges N. Korea to return to dialogue | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, March 13 (Yonhap) -- North Korea should return to the dialogue table for complete denuclearization, a spokesperson for President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol said Sunday, as Pyongyang accelerates efforts to develop a new intercontinental ballistic missile.
Kim Eun-hye, the spokesperson, made the remark during a press briefing, but she declined to discuss details, including what was discussed when national security adviser Suh Hoon briefed Yoon on pending issues a day earlier
"We hope North Korea will come out for dialogue for complete denuclearization," Kim said when asked for comment on North Korea's moves to develop a new ICBM.
South Korea and the United States have recently announced their assessment that Pyongyang's purported satellite tests on Feb. 27 and March 5 were part of efforts to develop a new ICBM system ahead of a possible full-range missile launch.
The North has claimed the launches were for "reconnaissance satellite" development.
(END)
9. US Warns North Korea’s Reconnaissance Satellite Tests Are Cover for ICBM Development
Yep.
US Warns North Korea’s Reconnaissance Satellite Tests Are Cover for ICBM Development
The U.S. and South Korean military defined North Korea’s reconnaissance satellite tests conducted on February 27 and March 5 as a test for its new ICBM system.
Advertisement
North Korea normally unveils the performances of its missiles a day after the tests, but it has not disclosed details of the two reconnaissance satellite tests, leading Washington and Seoul to closely look into the performance of the missiles and the possible rationale for the tests.
In a statement published by John Kirby, the press secretary of the Defense Department, the United States accused North Korea of testing its new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system through the reconnaissance satellite tests.
“Based on analysis of these launches, the United States Government has concluded that these launches involved a new Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) system that the DPRK is developing, which was originally unveiled during the Korean Workers Party parade on October 10, 2020,” Kirby said in the statement. (DPRK is an abbreviation of North Korea’s formal name: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)
The system unveiled during the military parade on October 2020, which was referred to in the statement, is a giant version of North Korea’s Hwasong-15 ICBM – known as Hwasong-17. As the North appears poised to test more larger missiles in the coming months, Washington is closely watching the possibility of the North deciding to test its ICBMs again.
North Korea tested its Hwasong-15 ICBM in November 2017. Since then, it has not conducted any ICBM or nuclear tests under leader Kim Jong Un’s self-imposed moratorium– which was made as a friendly gesture to encourage nuclear diplomacy with then-U.S. President Donald Trump. However, since the failed Hanoi Summit in 2019, North Korean official have repeatedly stated that the moratorium is no longer in effect, although Pyongyang has not yet explicitly broken it by testing ICBMs or nuclear devices. Washington now believes that the North could cross the red line anytime in the coming years.
In the first reconnaissance satellite test conducted on February 27, the North’s missile flew about 300 km at a maximum altitude of about 620 km. The missile that was test-fired on March 5 showed similar performance: 270 km range with 560 km apogee.
As United Nations Security Council resolutions ban North Korea from testing and developing any ballistic missiles, Washington and Seoul have condemned the North’s successive ballistic missile tests since January. However, Washington views the North’s so-called reconnaissance satellite tests as more serious, because satellite and ICBM launches require similar technology.
Advertisement
“The purpose of these tests, which did not demonstrate ICBM range, was likely to evaluate this new system before conducting a test at full range in the future, potentially disguised as a space launch,” Kirby’s statement reads.
The South Korean Defense Ministry also made similar remarks over the North’s reconnaissance tests, saying North Korea’s two most recent missile tests involved the regime’s new ICBM, the Hwasong-17.
While experts were predicting the North’s next moves in the lead up to the 110th birth anniversary of Kim Il Sung, the founder of the North and grandfather of the current leader Kim Jong Un, on April 15, North Korean state media reported on Friday that Kim Jong Un “gave field guidance to the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground.”
“He understood and estimated the present state of the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground and put forward tasks to rebuild it on a modern and expansion basis and build a number of new elements in the launching ground so as to launch the military reconnaissance satellite and other multi-purpose satellites by diverse carrier rockets in the future,” the state media reported.
Kim emphasized the importance of the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground as it is the place where the North launched two artificial earth satellites, Kwangmyongsong-3 and Kwangmyongsong-4, in 2012 and 2016 respectively. The North actually launched three artificial earth satellites, two in 2012, but the first one failed to reach orbit according to the North’s assessment at the time.
Kim also inspected the country’s National Aerospace Development Administration this week and said that his country will launch a lot of military reconnaissance satellites in coming years to provide real-time information on the military actions of the U.S. and its allies, according to the North’s state media.
Developing the country’s reconnaissance satellite capabilities is part of Kim’s five-year military modernization plan. North Korea is believed to still lack sufficient technology to secure high-quality, high-resolution images from space, considering its reports on the second satellite missile on March 5 did not include any images. South Korea’s Ministry of Defense had critiqued the low resolution of the images released following the February 27 launch.
As Kim has publicly kicked off his country’s race for more satellite launches, Washington and Seoul are going to coordinate more closely to cope with the possible scenario of the North launching ICBMs capable of reaching the U.S. mainland in the coming months.
10. U.N. recruiting new special rapporteur for N. Korea human rights
I doubt the UN would accept him but I would recommend the Executive Director of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, Greg Scarlatoiu, unless President Biden would nominate him as the US Ambassador for North Korean Human Rights. I would prefer him to be the Ambassador.
U.N. recruiting new special rapporteur for N. Korea human rights | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, March 13 (Yonhap) -- The human rights body of the United Nations is recruiting a new special rapporteur for North Korea's human rights and plans to name the successor in June, its website said Sunday.
The successful candidate will be announced at the 50th session of the U.N. Human Rights Council slated to kick off on June 13, according to the website.
The new candidate, if selected, will replace Tomas Ojea Quintana, who has served in the position since 2016, and formally assume the post from August.
The special rapporteur position was first created in 2004 to investigate and report to the U.N. Human Rights Council and General Assembly on the human rights situation in the reclusive regime in light of international human rights law.
The rapporteur can serve up to six years based on renewal on an annual basis.
Quintana, an Argentine lawyer and human rights expert, succeeded Marzuki Darusman of Indonesia as the special rapporteur for North Korea in 2016.
elly@yna.co.kr
(END)
11. Yoon names Ahn head of transition committee
I suppose Ahn will have a large say in the cabinet choices.
(2nd LD) Yoon names Ahn head of transition committee | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: ADDS more info in paras 4, 6-11; CHANGES photo)
By Joo Kyung-don
SEOUL, March 13 (Yonhap) -- President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol named his candidacy merger partner Ahn Cheol-soo chairman of the transition committee Sunday, making the first step to take over the administration and set the agenda for the next five years.
Yoon also tapped his campaign chief, Rep. Kwon Young-se of the People Power Party (PPP), as vice chairperson of the committee, and appointed former Jeju Gov. Won Hee-ryong, who served as policy chief of the campaign, as the committee's planning chief.
Ahn, who heads the minor People's Party, dropped out of the presidential race at the last minute to support Yoon under a candidacy merger deal. The two said at the time that they will work together in forming the transition committee and the government.
"We share the same values and philosophy about running state affairs," Yoon said of Ahn's appointment at a press conference at the PPP headquarters in Seoul. "Ahn has a will to lead the committee and I also believe he is the right person."
Yoon said the transition committee will be comprised of seven standing subcommittees.
The committee will also include an advisory group for national unity and two special panels dedicated to the COVID-19 crisis and balanced regional growth.
Ahn will also double as chairman of the COVID-19 special committee that will handle issues that include the compensation of small business owners.
Under the law, the transition committee can have one chairperson, one vice chairperson and 24 committee members.
Yoon, set to take office May 10, plans to name other committee members later this week.
kdon@yna.co.kr
(END)
12. Revisiting Yoon’s 8-month political career before presidential leap
Useful background. Note the challenge of both Yoon's and Lee's wives
Revisiting Yoon’s 8-month political career before presidential leap
What made Yoon’s victory closest presidential run ever?
Published : Mar 10, 2022 - 18:51 Updated : Mar 11, 2022 - 16:35
President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol speaks during a press conference at the National Assembly in Seoul on Thursday. (Yonhap)
President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol’s improbable run to the highest seat of South Korean leadership was littered with controversy, scandal and bad decision-making, both on his own part and that of his main rival from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, Lee Jae-myung, and the tumultuous journey is reflected in the fluctuating polls from Gallup Korea along the way.
Yoon, who was until a year ago the country’s chief prosecutor appointed by the incumbent Moon Jae-in administration, declared his bid for the presidency on June 29. The following month, he garnered 25 percent of support in a Gallup survey, slightly ahead of then-Gyeonggi Province governor and would-be archrival Lee.
November marked the first time he acquired a sizable lead over Lee in terms of support -- 42 percent to 31 percent.
Then, in the final weeks of the campaign, the race came down to a dead heat between Yoon and Lee.
Spouse risks jolted January
After Yoon took the lead in the aforementioned November poll, he maintained a lead or held onto a tie for the next couple of months. In early January, however, Lee came out on top, leading Yoon 36 percent to 26 percent. This was when a scandal related to future first lady Kim Kun-hee rose to the surface, and also after Yoon made the controversial comment that “poor, uneducated people do not know, and cannot feel the necessity of freedom.”
Suspicions surrounding Kim included one that she fabricated her credentials and plagiarized her doctoral dissertation at Kookmin University. The plagiarism accusation is currently under investigation by the school and the fabricated credentials turned out to be true, as Kim herself issued a public apology on the matter.
Kim Kun-hee, wife of the main opposition People Power Party’s presidential candidate Yoon Seok-youl, apologizes on Dec. 26 for falsely reporting her work experience. (Yonhap)
But just when Lee’s lead seemed all but certain, a scandal surrounding his own wife Kim Hye-kyung surfaced on Jan. 28, when a media report revealed Kim had relied on public servants for her personal errands and used credit cards meant for public officials. The scandal grew with the revelation that Lee and his family had used an official state car for personal benefit, and Kim had hired a personal driver for that car who was compensated out of the government budget.
Like Yoon’s wife, she also issued a public apology without elaborating on exactly which portion of the accusations were true.
In what had rapidly become a race to pick the lesser of two evils, ratings for Ahn Cheol-soo of the minor People’s Party grew to a campaign-high of 15 percent in a Jan. 6 poll.
Although Ahn would eventually drop out of the race, he would play a crucial part in the course of the presidential election.
Last-minute surprise from Ahn
With family issues dragging down both candidates, the ratings for the two gradually ground to a neck-and-neck race around Feb. 24 -- Lee at 38 percent vs. Yoon at 37 percent -- and in a March 2 poll -- Yoon at 39 percent vs. Lee at 38 percent -- the last released before the election.
But Yoon had one last surge left in the tank after the survey blackout: the realization of a prolonged deal to merge campaigns with his conservative rival Ahn.
Ahn became a major player after polls started showing slumping support for Yoon. Ahn had maintained that he would finish the race, with boosted morale from his own ratings that had risen into the double digits.
But a Feb. 17 poll -- the last time Yoon held a comfortable lead over Lee with 41 percent to 34 percent -- showed that his support kept shrinking, down two percentage points from the week before to 11 percent.
Ahn on Feb. 13 first reached out to Yoon to unify their campaigns, but the negotiations fell through with both parties blaming the other.
Ballots were printed and the two conservatives both took part in the TV broadcast of the last presidential debate on March 2. But things took a dramatic turn the very next day when the two met to agree on a merger, just a day before early voting began.
Yoon Suk-yeol (left) and Ahn Cheol-soo (Yonhap)
It is unclear exactly how big of a factor Ahn was in Yoon’s campaign, but People Power Party camp officials were optimistic as the nation went to polls, predicting an easy victory with as high a margin as 10 percentage points.
Close call
The optimistic expectations of Yoon’s camp were shattered when the exit polls jointly conducted by major broadcasting stations KBS, MBC and SBS projected an extremely close race of Yoon at 48.4 percent and Lee at 47.8 percent, invoking an eerie silence and scattered murmurs among camp officials. An independent exit poll conducted by JTBC even showed Lee leading 48.4 percent to Yoon’s 47.7 percent.
In the early hours of vote counting, Lee maintained a lead by nearly as much as 10 percentage points. But deeper into the night, the lead began to narrow.
It was just past midnight when Yoon finally overtook Lee. He went on to win 48.6 percent of the votes, against Lee’s 47.8 percent, grabbing the victory by the smallest margin in South Korean presidential election history. In the end, the final result was nearly identical to what the KBS, MBC and SBS exit polls had predicted.
Each of the candidates did well, as expected, in regions that traditionally supported their parties.
Both Gyeongsang provinces, Busan, Ulsan and Daegu once again proved to be loyal supporters of the conservative bloc, while Gwangju and the Jeolla provinces threw themselves beyond the liberal candidate. The Chungcheong provinces and Gangwon Province, considered moderately conservative, also went to Yoon.
Lee did edge out Yoon slightly in the swing regions of Greater Seoul -- Seoul, Incheon and Gyeonggi Province -- roughly 8.3 million to 8.1 million, but the population gap between the Gyeongsang and Jeolla provinces played in Yoon’s favor.
An interesting turnout was the result of Seoul, which Yoon took 50.6 percent to 45.7 percent. Yoon took leads of 67, 65.1 and 56.8 percent in the affluent Gangnam-gu, Seocho-gu and Songpa-gu, respectively. These are also the regions with the most expensive apartments in the city, with apartments in the 14 districts south of the Han River selling in January this year for an average of 1.5 billion won ($1.22 million), while 11 Seoul districts north of the river sold for an average of 998 million won, according to KB Real Estate.
This was a reminder of the public’s complaints against incumbent leader Moon Jae-in’s real estate policy. A KBS survey of 4,195 voters on the day of the election showed that 71.6 percent of voters considered real estate issues when choosing who to vote for.
Yoon dominated the vote for those over 60, 67.1 percent to Lee’s 30.8 percent, while it was the other way around among those in their 40s with Lee’s 60.5 percent to Yoon’s 35.4 percent. For those in their 30s and 50s, Lee took 48.1 percent and 52.4 percent leads to Yoon’s 46.3 percent and 43.9 percent, respectively.
While support for the two candidates was evenly distributed among genders in the aforementioned age groups, 20-somethings were drastically divided with 58.7 percent of young men voting for Yoon and 58 percent of their female counterparts voting for Lee.
It was a direct result of Yoon’s strategy of targeting 20-something male voters, many of whom have felt left out by the Moon administration’s policies that have been labeled as “feminism.” Yoon even pledged to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, which Yoon described as producing “unfair policies that favor women.”
Yoon’s anti-feminist path was shown clearer than ever when he adamantly claimed to have been misquoted in a written interview with the Washington Post, in which he was quoted as saying, “I consider myself a feminist.” Yoon retracted the statement, with his camp blaming an “administrative error.”
His blatant anti-feminist ways resulted in young women throwing their weight behind Lee, although their anger ultimately fell short of overthrowing a man who claimed to not be a feminist on the same date as International Women’s Day.
13. N. Korea may fire big missile to put spy satellite in space
Excerpts:
North Korea conducted two successful satellite launches from the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground in the northwest in 2012 and 2016. It said they were observation satellites under its peaceful space development program, but outside experts said they were designed to spy on rivals, though there is no evidence that the satellites ever transmitted images.
Experts say North Korea could launch a spy satellite ahead of a major political anniversary in April — the 110th birthday of state founder Kim Il Sung, the late grandfather of Kim Jong Un.
Jung, the analyst, said he thinks the launch will likely come in early May, just before a new South Korean president takes office later that month.
Kirby said the U.S. military ordered “enhanced readiness” among its ballistic missile defense forces in the region and intensified surveillance activities off the Korean Peninsula’s west coast.
The launch, if carried out, would be North Korea’s most serious provocative act since its three ICBM tests in 2017.
N. Korea may fire big missile to put spy satellite in space
1 of 5
In this undated photo provided by the North Korean government on Friday, March 11, 2022, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visits the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground in Tongchang-ri, North Korea. Independent journalists were not given access to cover the event depicted in this image distributed by the North Korean government. The content of this image is as provided and cannot be independently verified. Korean language watermark on image as provided by source reads: "KCNA" which is the abbreviation for Korean Central News Agency.
- Uncredited - hogp, KCNA via KNS
In this undated photo provided by the North Korean government on Friday, March 11, 2022, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, left, visits the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground in Tongchang-ri, North Korea. Independent journalists were not given access to cover the event depicted in this image distributed by the North Korean government. The content of this image is as provided and cannot be independently verified. Korean language watermark on image as provided by source reads: "KCNA" which is the abbreviation for Korean Central News Agency.
- Uncredited - hogp, KCNA via KNS
A visitor watches a TV screen showing a news program reporting about North Korea's missile with file footage at a train station in Seoul, South Korea, Friday, March 11, 2022. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ordered his officials to expand a satellite launch facility to fire a variety of rockets, state media reported Friday, as the U.S. and South Korean militaries concluded the North is testing a new intercontinental ballistic missile system.
A man watches a TV screen showing a news program reporting about North Korea's missile with file footage of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, at a train station in Seoul, South Korea, Friday, March 11, 2022. Kim ordered his officials to expand a satellite launch facility to fire a variety of rockets, state media reported Friday, as the U.S. and South Korean militaries concluded the North is testing a new intercontinental ballistic missile system.
A man watches a TV screen showing a news program reporting about North Korea's missile, at a train station in Seoul, South Korea, Friday, March 11, 2022. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ordered his officials to expand a satellite launch facility to fire a variety of rockets, state media reported Friday, as the U.S. and South Korean militaries concluded the North is testing a new intercontinental ballistic missile system.
By HYUNG-JIN KIM - Associated Press
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea has tested parts of its biggest intercontinental ballistic missile in two recent launches, the U.S. and South Korean militaries said, a suggestion it is likely to fire that weapon soon to put a spy satellite into orbit in what would be its most significant provocation in years.
Separately, South Korea’s Defense Ministry said it detected signs that North Korea was possibly restoring some of the tunnels at its nuclear testing ground that were detonated in May 2018, weeks ahead of leader Kim Jong Un’s first summit with then- President Donald Trump. The ministry didn't say whether it believes the North was restoring the site to resume tests of nuclear explosives.
After analyzing the launches, the U.S. and South Korean militaries concluded they involved an ICBM system under development that North Korea first unveiled during a military parade in October 2020.
“The purpose of these tests, which did not demonstrate ICBM range, was likely to evaluate this new system before conducting a test at full range in the future, potentially disguised as a space launch,” Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said in a statement Thursday.
South Korea released a similar assessment and said North Korea must immediately stop any act that raises tensions and regional security concerns.
The ICBM in focus is the Hwasong-17, North Korea’s biggest missile, which could potentially fly up to 15,000 kilometers (9,320 miles), far enough to strike anywhere in the U.S. and beyond. The 25-meter (82-foot) missile, which was shown again at a defense exhibition in North Korea's capital, Pyongyang, last year, has yet to be test-launched.
North Korea has already demonstrated the potential to reach the U.S. mainland with flight tests of other ICBMs, the Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-15, in 2017. Some analysts say developing a larger missile could mean the country is trying to arm its long-range weapons with multiple warheads to overcome missile defense systems.
In 2018, North Korea unilaterally suspended long-range and nuclear tests before it entered now-dormant denuclearization talks with the United States. The talks collapsed in 2019 due to disputes over U.S.-led sanctions on the North. Top North Korean officials recently hinted at lifting the 2018 weapons test moratorium.
Seoul's statement about North Korea’s nuclear testing ground came after recent commercial satellite images showed a possible resumption of construction activity at the site in the northeastern town of Punggye-ri. It was used for the North’s sixth and last nuclear test in 2017.
After declaring the site's closure, Kim invited foreign journalists to observe the destruction of tunnels in May 2018. But North Korea didn’t invite outside experts to certify what had been destroyed. Analysts who studied the satellite images say it's unclear how long it would take for the North to restore the site for nuclear detonations.
North Korea’s two missile launches were the latest in a string of tests in recent months, an apparent attempt to modernize its arsenal and pressure the Biden administration as nuclear disarmament talks remain stalled.
Observers expect North Korea to launch the Hwasong-17 missile for two main military purposes — testing key weapons parts and putting its first functioning spy satellite in space. They say North Korea may claim that it is firing a rocket, not a missile, for a satellite launch, but the U.N. and others have viewed past satellite launches as disguised tests of its long-range missile technology.
Kwon Yong Soo, a former professor at Korea National Defense University in South Korea, said the estimated thrust of the Hwasong-17 suggests it is powerful enough to place multiple reconnaissance satellites into orbit in a single launch. He said North Korea would also want to test the missile’s engine parts.
Kwon said the liquid-fueled Hwasong-17 may be too big and lack mobility given North Korea’s poor road conditions. He said the launch could be a show of force, but that a spy satellite could sharply increase the North's capability to monitor the movements of U.S. aircraft carriers and other strategic assets.
“If you want to use long-range strikes on moving targets like aircraft carriers, you need to receive data on their movement from satellites,” Kwon said. “If North Korea puts a spy satellite (in space), that will be an epoch-making development.”
Jung Chang Wook, head of the Korea Defense Study Forum think tank in Seoul, said North Korea would want to test technologies that ensure multiple warheads of a missile could survive the extreme heat and pressure of reentry from space.
Jung and Kwon both believe North Korea has acquired the reentry vehicle technology for a single warhead missile, an assessment that some analysts dispute.
A spy satellite and a missile with multiple warheads were among an array of sophisticated weapons that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has vowed to develop to counter what he calls American hostility such as economic sanctions.
“If North Korea succeeds in its test of a reentry vehicle for multiple warheads, that will tremendously boost its leverage in its negotiations with the United States,” Jung said. “It could be a game changer.”
On Friday, North Korean state media said Kim visited the country’s satellite launch facility and ordered officials to modernize and expand it to fire a variety of rockets. Earlier this week, he said that North Korea needs reconnaissance satellites to monitor “the aggression troops of the U.S. imperialism and its vassal forces.”
North Korea conducted two successful satellite launches from the Sohae Satellite Launching Ground in the northwest in 2012 and 2016. It said they were observation satellites under its peaceful space development program, but outside experts said they were designed to spy on rivals, though there is no evidence that the satellites ever transmitted images.
Experts say North Korea could launch a spy satellite ahead of a major political anniversary in April — the 110th birthday of state founder Kim Il Sung, the late grandfather of Kim Jong Un.
Jung, the analyst, said he thinks the launch will likely come in early May, just before a new South Korean president takes office later that month.
Kirby said the U.S. military ordered “enhanced readiness” among its ballistic missile defense forces in the region and intensified surveillance activities off the Korean Peninsula’s west coast.
The launch, if carried out, would be North Korea’s most serious provocative act since its three ICBM tests in 2017.
Associated Press writer Kim Tong-hyung contributed to this report.
Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Be the first to know
Get local news delivered to your inbox!
14. US-South Korea Free Trade Agreement Key to Further Elevating Alliance
US-South Korea Free Trade Agreement Key to Further Elevating Alliance
The free trade and investment agreement between the U.S. and South Korea will hit the 10-year mark on March 15. With bilateral trade having expanded nearly 70% over the past decade, the agreement between the two long-time allies deserves renewed support and greater strategic utilization for years to come.
The U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement is extensive in scope and has eliminated tariff and non-tariff barriers between the two countries in most cases, providing institutionalized mechanisms for resolving disputes. The U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement is America’s second-largest trade pact by trade flows, after the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
The economic utility of the resilient U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement has been measurably growing. Since the agreement’s implementation in 2012, bilateral trade flows have increased, with U.S. services exports rising from $6.5 billion in 2012 to over $20 billion.
The agreement has been very beneficial for American farmers, with U.S. agricultural exports to Korea having reached approximately $9.4 billion in 2021.
According to the recently published 2022 Trade Policy Agenda and 2021 Annual Report by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the agreement has been “an economic boon to U.S. agricultural exporters,” with America’s agricultural exports to Korea in 2021 reaching to approximately $9.4 billion.”
Foreign direct investment has increased markedly as well, with the stock of South Korean investment in the United States nearly tripling to more than $50 billion and U.S. foreign direct investment to South Korea increasing by almost 50% to over $40 billion. The United States is the top destination for South Korean firms’ overseas investment, with the U.S. accounting for the largest share of foreign direct investment made to South Korea.
It’s also notable that the U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement has weathered trade tensions between Washington and Seoul and been polished up through modifications since the pact entered into force in 2012. Indeed, that process has made South Korea America’s proven business partner more than ever.
As the 2022 Trade Policy Agenda and 2021 Annual Report points out:
Korea is a valued trading partner and a close ally. The United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) continues to be both a reflection of that close relationship and the foundation upon which we can build to make it even more cooperative. Going forward, we are committed to working with Korea to address our shared concerns, such as supply chain challenges, sustainable trade, emerging technologies, the digital economy, and trade facilitation.
Further enhancing bilateral trade and investment facilitation in the framework of the agreement—particularly to deal with trade uncertainties intensified by the current global geopolitical situation—is critical for the future economic health of the two long-time allies.
From a broader foreign policy perspective, the U.S.-South Korean alliance has been the pillar of peace and prosperity in Asia for generations, particularly given the fact that South Korea’s relationship with the U.S. is based on shared values, people-to-people ties, and business cooperation led by global companies in both countries.
As the years have passed, these shared values and interactions have bound the two nations closer and closer. This is not to say that relations have never been strained. For example, Washington and Seoul have often differed on the best way to deal diplomatically with North Korea. Yet, despite numerous ups and downs—or perhaps thanks to them—South Korea has become a model ally for the U.S.
Indeed, the U.S. and South Korea have much to gain from an ever-evolving partnership by working closer together on key strategic fronts to move the alliance forward. Washington’s latest Indo-Pacific Strategy document defines the “strategic ends” of America’s engagement in the region to be the advancement of “a free and open Indo Pacific that is more connected, prosperous, secure, and resilient.”
In realizing that envisioned objective, South Korea can serve as one of the most reliable lynchpins in dealing with many common challenges. Throughout many trying and challenging times over the past several decades, the notable free market democracy has demonstrated its willingness and resilient capacity to work with the U.S. toward shared goals.
Dynamic trade and investment activities through the agreement have deepened and broadened the economic relationship over the past 10 years. Yet looking into the future, the primary focus should be what more we can accomplish as we look ahead to a brighter future that our two countries will shape.
To that end, South Korea’s latest noteworthy presidential election, which marked a welcome right turn of electing a conservative candidate, offers another unique prospect for further elevating ties between Seoul and Washington.
Seizing that opportunity would be a fulfilling way to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-South Korea trade agreement.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected] and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
15. The Continuing Threat of North Korea's Chemical Weapons
The Continuing Threat of North Korea's Chemical Weapons - Korea Economic Institute of America
The Peninsula
The Continuing Threat of North Korea's Chemical Weapons
Published March 7, 2022
Last month was the fifth anniversary of North Korea’s assassination of Kim Jong-nam using VX, a deadly nerve agent. On 13 February 2017, the half brother of Chairman Kim Jong-un was attacked by North Korean proxies in the Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Malaysia. Experts say that the deployment of a horrific weapon outside of North Korea underlines the continuing threat posed by Pyongyang’s chemical weapons.
The assassination of Kim Jong-nam demonstrates how Pyongyang is willing to use chemical weapons towards protecting the Kim family. Kim Jong-nam had been living in exile in Macau for several years, but his comments to foreign journalists critical of the regime made him a target for elimination by his half-brother. Using chemical weapons to silence critics of the regime is what sets North Korea apart, according to Dr. Jieun Baek, a fellow at the Belfer Center at Harvard University. “Many nations have chemical weapons as part of their military arsenal,” she said. “What makes [North Korea] unique is their flagrant misuse of it in non-wartime.”
But Pyongyang using chemical weapons during a war is something that experts say is a very real possibility. “Their operational plan is based on breaking through the defensive belts of the ROK military north and east of Seoul,” says Col. David Maxwell, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “They’ll use chemical weapons with all their other munitions to be able to do that.” One military objective would be to use chemical weapons to shape the movement of enemy personnel. “They know that we’re not likely to use an area that’s contaminated,” said Col. Maxwell. “They can use that to deny us areas that they want us to stay out of [and] they may exploit that.”
A second North Korean objective would be to destroy enemy military infrastructure. This would include bases in South Korea that support the alliance’s capabilities in the air. “What [the North Koreans] want to do is use chemical weapons to prevent our ability to refuel and rearm aircraft, to maintain them in what we call ‘sortie generation,'” said Col. Maxwell. “They want to use chemical weapons to stop our operations, or at least degrade them, because they don’t have very good air defense capabilities.”
South Korean ports would also be targets for a North Korean chemical weapons attack. “We believe their campaign plan calls for a rapid occupation before South Korea can mobilize all its forces, and before the U.S. can reinforce the Peninsula,” says Col. Maxwell. He explained that attacking ports in Pohang, Pusan, and Pyeongtaek would be necessary to ensure the Americans and South Koreans could not quickly mobilize troops to push back a North Korean advance, just as during the Korean War. “Once the chemical weapons have attacked the port, unless the military comes in and decontaminates them, I would think it would stop port activities,” said Col. Maxwell.
As seen in Kuala Lumpur, North Korean chemical weapons also have a terror component as well. One analysis previously published by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists projected up to 25% of the population of Seoul would be killed if the North launched a “sea of sarin” attack using 240 pounds of the gas. Taking shelter from gaseous chemical weapons or washing off liquid contaminants are doable actions that would save lives in the event of a North Korean attack. “But it will have an effect on the population and it will terrorize them,” said Col. Maxwell. “It goes to the brutality and the nature of the Kim family regime.”
While most popular attention is focused on North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missiles, American and South Korean officials have indicated the chemical weapons program is also a threat. In Congressional testimony last year, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security Jennifer Walsh identified Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, and Pyongyang as significant threats because of their weapons of mass destruction. “North Korea’s continued pursuit of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons jeopardizes international stability and weakens the global nonproliferation regime,” she said. According to the 2018 Defense White Paper by the ROK Ministry of National Defense, the North has an estimated stockpile of 2,500 to 5,000 tons of chemical weapons, manufactured under a program that began in the 1980s. In a 2017 report by 38 North, there are 18 locations associated with the manufacture of blood, tear, blister, asphyxiant, nerve, and emetic agents.
Considering these serious implications of North Korea’s chemical weapons, it is a bit ironic that it will lead the United Nations Conference on Disarmament. The Korea JoongAng Daily reported previously that the body announced North Korea would assume the Conference’s leadership from May 30 until June 24 this year. Although the position is ceremonial, rotating among the 65 members of the Conference, experts say the venue has the potential to address North Korea’s chemical weapons.
Among the arms control treaties the body has helped developed is the Chemical Weapons Convention, which entered into force in April 1997 and counts the U.S. and South Korea among its signatories. “Why not try to maximize our own interests by using this forum, with North Korea as the chair, to address North Korea’s chemical weapons?” asked Dr. Sung-yoon Lee, from Tufts University. Experts like Dr. Siegfried Hecker have previously suggested that these kinds of negotiations could be “confidence-building” measures that could lead to movement on the North’s nuclear weapons.
Given North Korea’s diplomatic track record, it is hard to be optimistic about such negotiations. “I think Pyongyang’s negotiating behavior throughout history, and most recently the summitry with the Trump and Moon administrations, indicate the margin for Pyongyang’s flexibility is quite narrow,” said Soo Kim, a policy analyst at the RAND Corporation and professor at American University. “It may simply be another opportunity for the regime to toy with the policy ambitions and vulnerabilities for his own narcissistic satisfaction.”
And even if North Korea were to join the Chemical Weapons Convention, North Korea has not always fulfilled its obligations. Dr. Lee points out that it was “brazen” in developing nuclear weapons despite its membership in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. “But getting more legally bound to these international norms is not a bad idea,” he said. North Korea has tried to address challenges faced by disabled people after signing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It is not impossible for the U.S. and other like-minded states to “use this farcical opportunity to ensnare North Korea into at least signing onto the chemical weapons ban treaty,” said Dr. Lee.
Going forward, experts say that chemical weapons remain just one aspect of the threat posed by North Korea. Professor Kim warns against ranking Pyongyang’s myriad capabilities in terms of advancing its goals. “The forest is clearly important in understanding North Korea,” she said, “but the composition of the forest – the types of trees and their unique characteristics – are just as important in learning how to deal with the DPRK.” Given the wide range of Pyongyang’s toolkit, policymakers in Seoul and Washington should “not underestimate North Korea’s creativity in using both conventional and non-conventional weapons in pursuit of their ultimate goal, which is to keep power in the Kim family,” adds Dr. Baek.
Terrence Matsuo is a Contributing Author at the Korea Economic Institute of America. The views expressed here are the author’s alone.
16. After S.Korea Election Loss, Moon's Ruling Party Scrambles to Regroup
After S.Korea Election Loss, Moon's Ruling Party Scrambles to Regroup
By U.S. News Staff U.S. News & World Report3 min
FILE PHOTO: South Korean President Moon Jae-in speaks during a ceremony of the 103rd anniversary of the March 1st Independence Movement Day in Seoul, South Korea, March 1, 2022. Jeon Heon-Kyun/Pool via REUTERS/File PhotoReuters
By Hyonhee Shin
SEOUL (Reuters) - The party of outgoing South Korea President Moon Jae-in scrambled to regroup on Friday as its leadership resigned in en masse after its devastating election defeat, but still holds enough seats to potentially thwart the new president's agenda.
Conservative opposition candidate Yoon Suk-yeol, a former prosecutor-general and political novice, won South Korea's closest election in decades on Wednesday, tapping voter disillusionment over spiralling housing prices, deepening inequality and scandals involving Moon's aides.
The governing Democratic Party's entire leadership team resigned on Thursday, taking responsibility for the result, leaving the party's 172 lawmakers and other officials to gather on Friday to analyse the failure and chart the way forward.
There were signs of discord among the Democrats.
Some called for soul searching and the need to shake off perceptions of arrogance, while others said the top priority should be placed on the June election of heads of local governments nationwide, not the leadership change.
Despite the defeat, the Democrats will retain their solid majority in the 300-seat, single chamber parliament until the next election in 2024, meaning their support is essential for Yoon to pass new legislation, approve budgets and appoint cabinet ministers.
"The government will change, but the power balance in parliament will not," said Shin Yul, a political science professor at Myongji University.
"How Yoon would handle the lopsided structure would be key, and in order to draw the opposition's cooperation, he would need strong public support behind any policy drive."
AGENDA IN CHECK
Yoon promised after his victory to heal polarised politics, embrace foes and work with the Democrats.
But the bruising campaign marred by scandals, smears and gaffes exposed some bitter feelings harboured by both sides, highlighting the challenges Yoon faces when he is sworn in May.
Before his resignation, the Democrat chairman said last week Yoon would be a "vegetative president" who would struggle to run the government with the ruling party occupying just 105 seats.
Yoon told a rally on Tuesday there was talk among some Democrats that if he was elected they would disrupt his government and rally dissenters in his party.
The Democrats are exploring how to keep Yoon's conservative agenda in check, including his pledge to buy an additional THAAD U.S. missile system, which Yoon's campaign estimated would cost up to 1.5 trillion won. ($1.2 billion)
Yoon has said the system was necessary to bolster capital area defences against North Korea's evolving missile threats.
But the Democrats have voiced stiff resistance, saying it risks economic retaliation from China which argues the equipment's powerful radar could penetrate into its territory.
Shin said an early test could be the local government election in June, and confirmation hearings when Yoon nominates cabinet ministers after taking office.
Moon had been criticised for appointing the highest number of nominees without bipartisan approval in the country's democratic history.
"The ruling party had faced backlash after using its majority to press ahead with its agenda without consensus," Shin said. "They would know they still play a role in fostering bipartisan politics, with their power in parliament."
($1 = 1,233.3300 won)
(Reporting by Hyonhee Shin; Additional reporting by Yeni Seo; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)
Copyright 2022 Thomson Reuters.
17. South Korea’s president-elect promises military buildup
South Korea’s president-elect promises military buildup
Defense News · by Hyung-jin Kim and Kim Tong-hyung, AP · March 10, 2022
SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s president-elect, Yoon Suk Yeol, said Thursday he would solidify an alliance with the United States, build up a powerful military and sternly cope with North Korean provocations, hours after he won the country’s hard-fought election to become its next leader.
Yoon, whose single five-year term is to begin in May, said during his campaigning he would make a boosted alliance with the United States the center of his foreign policy. He’s accused outgoing liberal President Moon Jae-in of tilting toward Pyongyang and Beijing and away from Washington.
He’s also stressed the need to recognize the strategic importance of repairing ties with Tokyo despite recent bilateral historical disputes.
Some experts say a Yoon government will likely be able to reinforce ties with Washington and improve relations with Tokyo but can’t really avoid frictions with Pyongyang and Beijing.
“I’ll rebuild the South Korea-U.S. alliance. I’ll [make] it a strategic comprehensive alliance while sharing key values like a liberal democracy, a market economy and human rights,” Yoon told a televised news conference.
“I’ll establish a strong military capacity to deter any provocation completely,” Yoon said. “I’ll firmly deal with illicit, unreasonable behavior by North Korea in a principled manner, though I’ll always leave [the] door for South-North talks open.”
After his election win, he spoke with U.S. President Joe Biden on the phone. According to a White House statement, Biden congratulated Yoon on the election and emphasized the U.S. commitment to the defense of South Korea. The statement said the two also committed to maintain close coordination on addressing the threats posed by North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.
On Japan, Yoon said that Seoul and Tokyo should focus on building future-oriented ties. “The focus in South Korea-Japan relations should be finding future paths that would benefit the people of both countries,” he said.
The two countries are both key U.S. allies and closely linked to each other economically and culturally, but their relations sank to post-war lows during Moon’s presidency over disputes related to Japan’s 1910-1945 colonization of the Korean Peninsula.
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Thursday expressed a desire to communicate with Yoon to bring back good ties. But he still said Tokyo will stick to its position that all compensation issues have been settled by a 1965 bilateral treaty.
V/R
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Phone: 202-573-8647
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
