Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"There is no such thing as neutral education. Education either functions as an instrument to bring about conformity or freedom."

- Paulo Freire

“When a person can’t find a deep sense of meaning they distract themselves with pleasure.”

- Viktor Frankl

“The argument for liberty is an argument against the use of coercion to prevent others from doing better.”

- F.A. Hayek

1. DPRK (North Korea): Open Briefing on the Human Rights Situation : What's In Blue : Security Council Report

2. S. Korea, Japan, US summit to move trilateral cooperation to 'new level': Kirby

3. S. Korea delivers relief supplies to Hawaii over wildfire damage

4. N. Korea claims U.S. Pvt. Travis King wants refuge in North or third country

5. Yoon to depart for U.S. to attend summit with Biden, Kishida

6. Police raid arms procurement agency over suspected corruption in Aegis destroyer project

7. Funeral ceremony held for Yoon's late father

8. Volunteer fighter gets suspended prison term for illegal entry into Ukraine

9. US slaps sanctions on entities over alleged arms deals between NK, Russia

10. The United States and its allies must be ready to deter a two-front war and nuclear attacks in East Asia

11. Ex-North Korean diplomat to be named as aide to unification minister

12. Camp David Summit to Unite U.S., South Korea, Japan

13. Eye on China, Biden Pulls Japan and South Korea Closer

14. North Korea prepares for military actions in protest of U.S. three-nation summit -S.Korea

15. North Korean military officers on hook for dog meat stew rations

16. US, South Korea and Japan look to ‘institutionalize’ ties

17. North Korea may test ICBM as US, Japan, South Korea leaders meet

18. Missiles aren't the only threat from North Korea. Its conventional arms are just as deadly

19. US officials hype Japan-ROK-US Camp David visit: 'Defining trilateral relationship'

1. DPRK (North Korea): Open Briefing on the Human Rights Situation : What's In Blue : Security Council Report

A perfect set-up for the JAROKUS Summit at Camp David on Friday.

I asked Special Rapporteur Elizabeth Salmon at an event this week how we should address those who argue that human rights stand in the way of diplomatic negotiations and the potential denuclearization of north Korea. She of course said we must never shy away from addressing north Korean human rights and we must do so in every venue. As I have written many times, human rights in north Korea are not only a moral imperative they are a nationals security issues as Kim Jong Un not only denies human rights in order to remain in power but he is also responsible for the sacrifice and suffering of the Korean people in the north as he prioritizes his nuclear and missile programs over the welfare of the people.

Excerpts:

The meeting was requested by Albania, Japan, and the US to discuss the links between human rights abuses and violations in the DPRK and international peace and security. The expected briefers are UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the DPRK Elizabeth Salmón, and a civil society representative.

...

Following tomorrow’s meeting, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (US) will deliver a joint statement on the human rights situation in the DPRK on behalf of more than 50 member states, including Council members Albania, Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, Switzerland, the UK, and incoming members Slovenia and the ROK.

DPRK (North Korea): Open Briefing on the Human Rights Situation : What's In Blue : Security Council Report

securitycouncilreport.org

DPRK (North Korea): Open Briefing on the Human Rights Situation

Tomorrow morning (17 August), the Security Council is expected to convene for an open briefing on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) under the agenda item “The situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. The meeting was requested by Albania, Japan, and the US to discuss the links between human rights abuses and violations in the DPRK and international peace and security. The expected briefers are UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the DPRK Elizabeth Salmón, and a civil society representative. The Republic of Korea (ROK) is expected to participate in the meeting under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. The meeting will mark the first occasion that the Council has held an open briefing on the human rights situation in the DPRK since December 2017.

Background

The Council first discussed the human rights situation in the DPRK on 22 December 2014 following a request (S/2014/872) from permanent Council members France, the UK, and the US and elected members Australia, Chile, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the ROK, and Rwanda that cited the final report of the Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the DPRK (COI). The COI’s report, which was issued on 7 February 2014, concluded that systematic, widespread, and gross human rights violations had been committed by the DPRK and found that many of these violations constituted crimes against humanity. Among other matters, the report recommended that the Council refer the situation in the DPRK to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and impose targeted sanctions against those most responsible for committing crimes against humanity.

The December 2014 meeting request, which also asked for “The situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” to be formally placed on the Council’s agenda “without prejudice to the item on non-proliferation in the DPRK”, was unsuccessfully opposed by China and Russia. (For more information, see our 19 December 2014 What’s in Blue story.) Since then, the Council’s consideration of this issue has remained contentious due to differing views among Council members as to whether human rights violations in the DPRK constitute a threat to international peace and security. China has regularly argued that the Council is not the appropriate UN forum for discussing human rights issues, that such issues should not be politicised, and that discussion of human rights in the DPRK jeopardises efforts to ease tensions and denuclearise the Korean Peninsula. Russia has adopted a similar position, together with some elected members.

Other Council members, however, have taken the view that the human rights situation in the DPRK is directly linked to international peace and security and merits attention from the Council. These members tend to argue that human rights violations perpetrated by the DPRK enable it to pursue its ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programmes and often point to specific examples, such as the use of revenue generated by overseas workers from the DPRK to fund these programmes, as evidence to support their arguments.

From 2014 to 2017, the Council held an annual open meeting on the human rights situation in the DPRK featuring briefings from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and senior UN Secretariat officials. Each of these meetings required a procedural vote in order to go ahead due to objections from China. These objections were supported by Russia and some elected members. Since 2017, it appears that the proponents of an open briefing have not been able to garner sufficient support to hold a meeting. In 2018, for example, the US was reluctant to pursue an open briefing, apparently due to concerns that it could have had a negative effect on diplomatic negotiations it was pursuing with the DPRK. (For more information, see our 11 December 2019 What’s in Blue story.)

Procedural Vote Tomorrow

It appears that China will object to holding an open briefing tomorrow and that there will be a procedural vote on the adoption of the agenda at the meeting’s outset. Pursuant to rule 9 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, the first item of the provisional agenda for each Council meeting is the adoption of the agenda. In accordance with established practice, the agenda is normally agreed ahead of the meeting and adopted without a vote. If the agenda cannot be agreed before the meeting and a Council member raises an objection to the provisional agenda, the Council president will call for a procedural vote on the adoption of the agenda. Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, procedural decisions of the Council require nine affirmative votes and cannot be vetoed by a permanent member.

Ahead of the previous open Council briefings on the human rights situation in the DPRK, at least nine Council members signed a letter to the Council president requesting the meeting. In December 2017, for example, France, Italy, Japan, Senegal, Sweden, Ukraine, the UK, the US, and Uruguay signed a letter (S/2016/1034) asking for a meeting on the human rights situation in the DPRK with briefings from senior officials from the UN Secretariat and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Such a letter is not a requirement, and it appears that no letter has been sent to the US, the Council president for August.

On 9 December 2022, however, following a meeting on the human rights situation in the DPRK that was held under “any other business”, eight current Council members (Albania, Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, Switzerland, the UK, and the US), together with more than 20 other member states, signed a joint statement that urged all Council members to support an open briefing on human rights in the DPRK in 2023. These Council members, along with the EU and more than 50 other member states, also signed a 28 February letter requesting that the agenda item “The situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” remain on the list of items of which the Council is seized (S/2023/157).

The seven Council members who did not sign these documents are Brazil, China, Gabon, Ghana, Mozambique, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). At the time of writing, it appears that at least one of these members will vote in favour of holding the open briefing and that the meeting will therefore take place.

Tomorrow’s Meeting

The US has circulated a concept note ahead of tomorrow’s open briefing, which says that the meeting aims to explore how the Council and the broader international community can uphold international peace and security by promoting awareness of and accountability for the DPRK’s human rights violations and abuses. The concept note also argues that these violations are inextricably linked with the DPRK’s weapon of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes and suggests that the repressive political climate in the DPRK enables the government to use an inordinately large share of its resources on weapons development without comment from its population.

In their statements tomorrow, some Council members, including the P3 (France, the UK, and the US) and other like-minded states are likely to express grave concern over the human rights situation in the DPRK and outline the links between human rights violations perpetrated by the government and international peace and security. Some of these members may also urge the DPRK to engage with the UN’s human rights mechanisms and call for accountability for perpetrators of violations. In this regard, some members may refer to OHCHR’s 18 January report on promoting accountability in the DPRK, which argued that fresh, creative strategies are needed and described several possible avenues for addressing this issue, such as pursuing prosecutions using the principle of universal jurisdiction in the ROK.

Members may discuss the situation of women and girls in the DPRK. In a 9 March report on the rights of women and girls in the country, Salmón concluded that “widespread gender stereotypes are the root cause of discrimination against women” and noted that women are held in “inhumane conditions and deprived of food” and subjected to “torture and ill treatment, forced labour and gender-based violence, including sexual violence by state officials”. Some members might also raise the issue of enforced disappearances, including by referring to OHCHR’s 28 March report on this issue, which noted that the “anguish, sorrow, and reprisals that families … have had to endure are heart breaking” and called for renewed efforts for truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence.

China and Russia, on the other hand, are likely to reiterate their position that the human rights situation in the DPRK should not be considered by the Council. Both members might also argue that the use of sanctions has done little to ease tensions on the Korean Peninsula and accuse the US of not doing enough to incentivise the DPRK to return to dialogue.

Following tomorrow’s meeting, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (US) will deliver a joint statement on the human rights situation in the DPRK on behalf of more than 50 member states, including Council members Albania, Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, Switzerland, the UK, and incoming members Slovenia and the ROK.

securitycouncilreport.org

2. S. Korea, Japan, US summit to move trilateral cooperation to 'new level': Kirby

Seems like we are setting a high bar for the JAROKUS summit.

Excerpts:

"I think we all understand the significance when a meeting is held there (Camp David). It's meant to signal, but with deep symbolism, the importance that we attach to this momentous moment," he told the seminar.

Campbell said the summit will produce a "very ambitious set of initiatives that seek to lock in trilateral engagement both now and in the future."

The initiatives, according to Kirby, will commit the three countries to "long-term" efforts in improving their trilateral cooperation, according to Kirby.

(LEAD) S. Korea, Japan, US summit to move trilateral cooperation to 'new level': Kirby | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Duk-Kun Byun · August 17, 2023

(ATTN: UPDATES with remarks from NSC coordinator for Indo-Pacific Kurt Campbell, minor edits in paras 8-11, 16-17 ; ADDS photo; CHANGES slug)

By Byun Duk-kun

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 (Yonhap) -- The upcoming trilateral summit between the leaders of South Korea, Japan and the United States will take their countries' three-way cooperation to a new level, a White House official said Wednesday.

John Kirby, National Security Council (NSC) coordinator for strategic communications, said the leaders will also focus on ways to institutionalize such cooperation among their countries.

"This trilateral summit is all about taking affirmative steps towards improving our cooperation with each other in a three-way sort of situation," the NSC spokesperson told a press briefing at the Washington Foreign Press Center.

John Kirby, National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications, is seen answering questions during a press briefing at the Foreign Press Center in Washington on Aug. 16, 2023 in this captured image. (Yonhap)

U.S. President Joe Biden is set to host South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida for a trilateral summit at Camp David on Friday.

Kirby added there will be new initiatives announced Friday that will move "our relationships with each other and amongst each other to a whole new level."

Kirby and many other U.S. officials have noted the upcoming trilateral summit will be historic, partly because it will be the first "standalone" trilateral summit ever to be held between the leaders of the three countries.

Yoon and Kishida will also be the first foreign leaders to visit Camp David under the Biden administration and since 2015.

Kurt Campbell, NSC coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, highlighted the significance of the venue for the upcoming summit in a seminar hosted by the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit organization based in Washington.

"I think we all understand the significance when a meeting is held there (Camp David). It's meant to signal, but with deep symbolism, the importance that we attach to this momentous moment," he told the seminar.

Campbell said the summit will produce a "very ambitious set of initiatives that seek to lock in trilateral engagement both now and in the future."

The initiatives, according to Kirby, will commit the three countries to "long-term" efforts in improving their trilateral cooperation, according to Kirby.

Kurt Campbell, NSC coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, is seen speaking at a seminar hosted by the Brookings Institution in Washington on Aug. 16, 2023 in this captured image. (Yonhap)

"I think one of the things you are going to see in the initiatives that are announced is that they are very forward looking, and commit ourselves to long-term initiatives improving trilateral cooperation," he told the press briefing, adding the three leaders will be looking at "not just the near future but the far future" when they seek ways to continue or institutionalize their countries' trilateral cooperation.

"I can assure you that following the summit on Friday, there will continue to be meetings and discussions and opportunities to engage trilaterally across all our three administrations going forward," said Kirby.

He also insisted that the initiatives to be announced Friday will be "built for distance."

"We understand that improving trilateral cooperation is, to use the sports analogy, it's a marathon, not a sprint," he said. "And what these three leaders are going to get together on Friday and do is make sure that we are ready for the marathon."

Campbell agreed, saying, "We have the confidence that we will be able to sustain, build on what we believe will be a defining trilateral relationship for the 21st century."

The upcoming summit will naturally focus on security issues as it comes amid North Korea's evolving nuclear and missile threats.

However, it will also cover a broad spectrum of other issues, according to Kirby.

"I want to stress that this summit is more than just about security environment. There's an awful a lot of ways in which we can improve our relationships across a broad spectrum of issues, not just military," he told the press briefing.

bdk@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Duk-Kun Byun · August 17, 2023

3. S. Korea delivers relief supplies to Hawaii over wildfire damage

S. Korea delivers relief supplies to Hawaii over wildfire damage | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Yi Wonju · August 17, 2023

SEOUL, Aug. 17 (Yonhap) -- South Korea has provided Hawaii with food and other emergency supplies to help cope with a series of devastating wildfires that recently ravaged the island of Maui, Seoul's foreign ministry said Thursday.

Lee Seo-young, South Korean consul general in Honolulu, expressed hopes for Hawaii's speedy recovery as he delivered water, food, blankets, electric generators and other aid items to Lieutenant Governor Sylvia Luke on Wednesday (Hawaii time), it added.

The relief items are part of the US$2 million worth of humanitarian aid Seoul had pledged to provide to Hawaii earlier this week.

Of the total, $500,000 worth of assistance will be extended in the form of relief supplies and another $1.5 million in cash to the Hawaii Community Foundation, the state's largest non-profit organization.

The latest wildfires have killed at least 106, making it the deadliest U.S. fire in over a century.

South Korean consul general in Honolulu Lee Seo-young (C) poses for a photo with Hawaii's Lieutenant Governor Sylvia Luke (R) at a ceremony on Aug. 16, 2023, to deliver relief supplies to Hawaii to help the U.S. state cope with the recent outbreak of wildfires, in this photo provided by Seoul's foreign ministry the following day. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)

julesyi@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Yi Wonju · August 17, 2023

4. N. Korea claims U.S. Pvt. Travis King wants refuge in North or third country

A north Korean expert pointed out to me that the most significant part of this statement is the reference to a third country. He assesses that the regime wants Pvt King to leave north Korea and going to a third country may be the simplest way to do that so that it does not have to deal directly with the US.

(3rd LD) N. Korea claims U.S. Pvt. Travis King wants refuge in North or third country | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · August 16, 2023

(ATTN: RECASTS first 10 paras, headline; ADDS analyst's comment)

By Chae Yun-hwan

SEOUL, Aug. 16 (Yonhap) -- North Korea said Wednesday an American soldier who ran across the inter-Korean border into the North last month admitted that he "illegally intruded" due to "inhuman maltreatment and racial discrimination within the U.S. Army," claiming that he has expressed a willingness to seek refuge there or in a third country.

It marked the North's first public confirmation of the status of Pvt. Travis King, who made an unauthorized crossing of the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) into the North during a tour to the Joint Security Area (JSA) in the Demilitarized Zone separating the two Koreas on July 18.

"Travis King confessed that he had decided to come over to the DPRK as he harbored ill feeling against inhuman maltreatment and racial discrimination within the U.S. Army," the North's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said in an English-language report. DPRK stands for the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Citing an interim result of the North's investigation into King's border crossing, the KCNA said the U.S. soldier "also expressed his willingness to seek refugee in the DPRK or a third country, saying that he was disillusioned at the unequal American society."

The KCNA said the country's soldiers took custody of King after he "deliberately intruded" into the North's side of the JSA and that an investigation by a "relevant organ" is ongoing.

King's alleged remarks reported in the North's state media are impossible to verify.

This file photo, provided by the Associated Press on July 24, 2023, shows American soldier Travis King during a news program being aired at Seoul Station in central Seoul. (Yonhap)

Shortly after the North's first confirmation of King's detention, the U.S. Department of Defense said the alleged comments by King cannot be verified and that it is focused on bringing him back home.

"We cannot verify these alleged comments," a Pentagon spokesperson told Yonhap News Agency. "The department's priority is to bring Pvt. King home, and we are working through all available channels to achieve that outcome."

Observers have said North Korea could seek to use King for its propaganda efforts or as a bargaining chip to demand concessions from Washington as dialogue between the two sides has remained at a standstill since 2019.

"(North Korea) has unveiled a part of its investigation findings without reaching a conclusion," Yang Moo-jin, president of the University of North Korean Studies in central Seoul, said. "It appears that (the North) is emphasizing that it holds the key to resolving the issue, and calling on the U.S. to make a wise choice."

U.S. officials have previously said King "willfully" crossed the MDL "without authorization" and that the North has not made any substantive response to its inquiries over his status.

The U.S.-led U.N. Command, which oversees activities in the DMZ, earlier said it is working with its North Korean counterparts to resolve the incident but has declined to provide details.

King has faced legal trouble after being stationed in South Korea. He was detained in a South Korean prison workshop from May 24 to July 10 after failing to pay a fine for damaging a police patrol car last year.

On Oct. 8, South Korean police apprehended King for suspected violence at a nightclub in western Seoul. He reportedly did not cooperate with police officers demanding his personal information and kicked the door of their vehicle.

King had been set to return to the United States on July 17, where he could have faced additional disciplinary action, but he did not board his flight at Incheon International Airport, west of Seoul, and took part in the JSA tour the next day.

The incident came as tensions have run high due to North Korea's continued weapons tests, including a Hwasong-18 intercontinental ballistic missile launch last month.

Direct diplomatic talks between the U.S. and the North have been stalled since their working-level nuclear talks in Sweden in October 2019 in the wake of the bilateral no-deal summit in Hanoi in February of that year.

The North's acknowledgement of the incident also came as South Korea and the U.S. plan to kick off a major military exercise next week.

The annual Ulchi Freedom Shield (UFS) exercise based on an all-out war scenario is set to take place from Monday through Aug. 31, featuring various contingency drills, such as the computer simulation-based command post exercise, concurrent field training and the Ulchi civil defense drills.

Pyongyang has long accused the allies' drills of being rehearsals for an invasion against it.

yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Chae Yun-hwan · August 16, 2023

5. Yoon to depart for U.S. to attend summit with Biden, Kishida

Yoon to depart for U.S. to attend summit with Biden, Kishida | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Haye-ah · August 17, 2023

By Lee Haye-ah

SEOUL, Aug. 17 (Yonhap) -- President Yoon Suk Yeol is set to depart for the United States on Thursday to attend a trilateral summit with U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on ways to enhance security cooperation in the face of North Korea's nuclear threat.

The summit will be held at the Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland on Friday, marking the first time the three countries' leaders will meet for a stand-alone trilateral summit that's not on the sidelines of a multilateral event.

The summit was proposed by Biden when the three leaders met on the margins of a Group of Seven summit in Japan in May as the U.S. pushes to lock in recently improved Seoul-Tokyo ties in a trilateral framework countering China and Russia's growing assertiveness.

As such, cooperation on economic security issues, such as building resilient supply chains for semiconductors and batteries, is also expected to feature high on the agenda.

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol (R) speaks with U.S. President Joe Biden (L) and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida ahead of their three-way talks in Hiroshima, Japan, in this file photo taken May 21, 2023. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

"Through the upcoming South Korea-U.S.-Japan summit, Camp David will be recorded as the site of 21st century diplomatic history that opened a new chapter in trilateral cooperation," Principal Deputy National Security Adviser Kim Tae-hyo told reporters Sunday. "Trilateral consultations among South Korea, the U.S. and Japan will gain a clear independent identity as an Indo-Pacific cooperation body."

Kim said the summit will help the countries create and institutionalize a "key framework" for trilateral cooperation in the future, while also allowing the leaders to discuss a common vision and basic principles for trilateral cooperation and build comprehensive and multilayered cooperation mechanisms across diverse sectors at every level.

The three leaders are reportedly planning to announce the "Camp David Principles," outlining specific measures to enhance trilateral cooperation, including the establishment of a three-way hotline and the obligation to consult with one another in the event of a military crisis.

Principal Deputy National Security Adviser Kim Tae-hyo briefs reporters on an upcoming trilateral summit involving South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at the presidential office building in Seoul on Aug. 13, 2023. (Yonhap)

In a speech commemorating Korea's independence from Japan's 1910-45 colonial rule Tuesday, Yoon touted the upcoming summit as one that will "set a new milestone in trilateral cooperation, contributing to peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula and in the Indo-Pacific region."

Meanwhile, in an interview with Bloomberg published Wednesday, he said he expects to see an agreement on ways to enhance the three countries' capabilities to respond to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats, including through the possible increase of trilateral defense exercises.

He also said the three countries will work to operationalize their sharing of missile warning data on North Korea in real time within this year.

The three leaders' schedule on Friday will include a luncheon together and a joint press conference. Talks are also under way to arrange a Yoon-Biden summit and a Yoon-Kishida summit during the day.

Yoon will depart the U.S. on Friday evening to return home.

First lady Kim Keon Hee will not accompany him on the trip to the U.S., which will come only hours after the funeral of Yoon's father.

hague@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Haye-ah · August 17, 2023

6. Police raid arms procurement agency over suspected corruption in Aegis destroyer project

Rule of law.

Police raid arms procurement agency over suspected corruption in Aegis destroyer project | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Cheong-mo · August 17, 2023

SEOUL, Aug. 17 (Yonhap) -- Police on Thursday raided the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), as part of their investigation into allegations of possible corruption in the process of selecting Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. as the preferred bidder for an indigenous Aegis-equipped destroyer development project in 2020.

The Korean National Police Agency sent investigators to the DAPA headquarters at the Gwacheon Government Complex, just south of Seoul, in the morning to search the DAPA department in charge of the Korea Destroyer Next Generation (KDDX) project to build the next-generation 6,000 ton-class destroyer.

They reportedly seized the KDDX-related bidding documents based on suspicions that a high-ranking DAPA official changed the bidding-related regulation in favor of Hyundai Heavy.

At that time, Hyundai Heavy beat rival bidder Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co. by a margin of just 0.056 points. Police suspect that the DAPA official deleted a regulation that specifies penalty points for bidders involved in security breach incidents. Hyundai Heavy was once involved in a KDDX secret leak case involving a former Navy officer.

The DAPA had denied the suspicion saying the concerned bidding regulation was not deleted.

A model of an indigenous Aegis-equipped destroyer to be built by Hyundai Heavy Industries is seen on display. (Yonhap)

ycm@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Cheong-mo · August 17, 2023

7. Funeral ceremony held for Yoon's late father

A tough week for the President. Our condolences.

Funeral ceremony held for Yoon's late father | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Haye-ah · August 17, 2023

By Lee Haye-ah

SEOUL, Aug. 17 (Yonhap) -- A funeral ceremony was held for President Yoon Suk Yeol's late father on Thursday, with only close family members, the deceased's former students and senior officials in attendance.

Yoon Ki-jung, an honorary professor at Seoul's Yonsei University, died Tuesday at the age of 92.

He was known as an expert on studying economic inequality using statistical methods and dedicated his career to teaching applied statistics from 1973 to 1997.

The funeral was held at Seoul's Severance Hospital for 30 minutes from 8:30 a.m., with the attendance of around 20 family members, including Yoon and first lady Kim Keon Hee, the deceased's former students, economists, senior presidential officials and leaders of the ruling People Power Party, according to the presidential office.

The funeral procession circled Yonsei University's College of Commerce and Economics where the late Yoon used to work before heading for the burial site.

Yoon is scheduled to depart for the United States later in the day to attend a trilateral summit with U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.

President Yoon Suk Yeol (2nd from L) and first lady Kim Keon Hee (3rd from L) walk behind a portrait of Yoon's late father, Yoon Ki-jung, during his funeral at Severance Hospital in Seoul on Aug. 17, 2023, in this photo provided by the presidential office. (PHOTO NOT FOR SALE) (Yonhap)

hague@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Lee Haye-ah · August 17, 2023

8. Volunteer fighter gets suspended prison term for illegal entry into Ukraine

Volunteer fighter gets suspended prison term for illegal entry into Ukraine | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Cheong-mo · August 17, 2023

SEOUL, Aug. 17 (Yonhap) -- A South Korean volunteer fighter indicted for entering Ukraine in 2022 to fight against Russia's invasion in violation of the passport law was given a suspended prison sentence by a court Thursday.

The Seoul Central District Court sentenced Rhee Keun, a Navy SEAL-turned-YouTuber, to a prison term of one and a half years, suspended for three years, on charges of passport law violation and a hit-and-run involving the injury of a motorcyclist.

Rhee Keun (R) arrives at the Seoul Central District Court in southern Seoul on Aug. 17, 2023, to attend his sentencing hearing. (Yonhap)

The 39-year-old Rhee was also ordered to conduct 80 hours of social service and attend 40 hours of safe driving classes.

Rhee returned home from Ukraine in May last year with knee injuries after his three-month service as a volunteer fighter against invading Russian forces. He was also charged with injuring a motorcyclist in an accident while driving in Seoul in July last year and fleeing the scene without offering rescue measures.

The court found him guilty of the charges of violating the passport law, saying staying in Ukraine and participating in the country's volunteer army could put an excessive burden on his homeland regardless of his intentions.

ycm@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Cheong-mo · August 17, 2023

9. US slaps sanctions on entities over alleged arms deals between NK, Russia

US slaps sanctions on entities over alleged arms deals between NK, Russia

The Korea Times · August 17, 2023

In this photo provided by the North Korean government, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, center right, and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, center left, visit an arms exhibition in Pyongyang, North Korea, Wednesday, July 26. AP-Yonhap

The United States on Wednesday imposed sanctions on three entities it accused of being tied to arms deals between North Korea and Russia as Washington cracked down on those seeking to support Russia's war in Ukraine.

The U.S. Treasury Department in a statement said that Russia has increasingly been forced to turn to North Korea and other allies to sustain its war in Ukraine as it expends munitions and loses heavy equipment on the battlefield.

The action is the latest by Washington, which has imposed rafts of sanctions targeting Moscow and Russian President Vladimir Putin since the start of the war, which has killed tens of thousands of people and turned cities to rubble.

"The United States continues to root out illicit financial networks that seek to channel support from North Korea to Russia's war machine," Treasury's Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, Brian Nelson, said in the statement.

"Alongside our allies and partners, we remain committed to exposing and disrupting the arms trade underpinning Putin's brutal war in Ukraine."

Russia's embassy in Washington and North Korea's mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The entities targeted in Wednesday's action are Limited Liability Company Verus, Defense Engineering Limited Liability Partnership and Versor S.R.O.

The Treasury said Slovakian national Ashot Mkrtychev, already under U.S. sanctions, is the president of Versor, founder and owner of Verus and director of Defense Engineering.

Washington accused Mkrtychev of negotiating with North Korean and Russian officials to organize potential plans to transfer over two dozens kinds of weapons and munitions to Russia in exchange for goods to North Korea.

Wednesday's action freezes any US assets of those designated and generally bars Americans from dealing with them. Those that engage in certain transactions with the sanctioned entities can also be hit with punitive measures. (Reuters)

The Korea Times · August 17, 2023

10. The United States and its allies must be ready to deter a two-front war and nuclear attacks in East Asia

Read the entire report here: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/the-united-states-and-its-allies-must-be-ready-to-deter-a-two-front-war-and-nuclear-attacks-in-east-asia/?utm

Excerpts:

The risk that a war in East Asia would go nuclear is rising, as the PRC and North Korea have increasing incentive and capabilities for limited nuclear attacks.

The United States and its allies are not situated to fight a two-front limited nuclear war in East Asia; the PRC may be soon.

If conflict breaks out, however, the United States has options to manage escalation.

Biases in US and allied institutions are impeding their understanding of how an East Asian conflict could escalate, and their preparations to manage such escalation.

Report

August 16, 2023

The United States and its allies must be ready to deter a two-front war and nuclear attacks in East Asia

By Markus Garlauskas

Introduction

“If hostilities were to renew on the [Korean Peninsula] it is not a matter of ‘if’ the Chinese Communist Party will intervene, it is when … This has been a very difficult topic for us to address as an alliance.”— Retired Gen. Robert Abrams, former commander of US Forces Korea (USFK)1

“I’ve wargamed conflicts with China and with North Korea dozens of times. If we look at a map and consider the forces involved, it is almost impossible for either to occur without some form of simultaneity.”—US defense official, name withheld

“If the political survival of Xi Jinping or Kim Jong Un is at stake in [a] military conflict they are losing, escalating to a limited nuclear strike would be rational … hesitating to use nuclear weapons would be the irrational act.”—US intelligence official, name withheld

The challenges to deterrence in East Asia have begun to change fundamentally in recent years, putting them on track to present grave risks to US national security interests over the coming decade. This report summarizes the results of a study focused on two of these emerging and interrelated challenges to deterrence in East Asia. The first is the potential for a conflict with either the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or North Korea to escalate horizontally and become a simultaneous conflict with both. The other is the possibility that either or both adversaries would choose to escalate vertically to a limited nuclear attack—rather than concede defeat—in a major conflict.

US thinking about war in East Asia often neglects the possibility that the United States would have to fight the PRC and North Korea simultaneously rather than separately. Furthermore, conventional wisdom in the United States underestimates the risk that either the PRC or North Korea would resort to a limited nuclear strike in the event of a conflict in the region. However, the recent behavior of the United States’ adversaries in East Asia suggests that this thinking may be off the mark; the PRC military has reorganized itself to prepare to fight a two-front war, while both the PRC and North Korea continue to develop the sophistication and size of their tactical nuclear arsenals.

To better understand the threats posed by these two major risks five to ten years from now (in the 2027-2032 timeframe), we conducted a series of workshops and interviews with key government personnel and experts, and analyzed our findings in this report, originally written for the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (but not necessarily representing its views). These findings should serve as a wake-up call: The United States and its allies can no longer think about conflicts with the PRC and North Korea in isolation from each other, and they must take urgent action to prepare for the possibility of facing limited nuclear attacks in an East Asia conflict scenario.

Definitions

The study’s methodology required development and refinement of working definitions for several key terms central to the study’s goals: simultaneous conflicts, limited nuclear use, and integrated deterrence.

Simultaneous conflicts with the PRC and North Korea, for the purposes of this study, are military conflicts that take place in overlapping timeframes. The conflicts could begin at different times and occur at different levels of intensity, and might or might not geographically overlap. This definition also includes the possibility of simultaneous conflicts wherein some PRC and North Korean military forces would be engaged in combat with each other, even as other PRC and North Korean military forces fought US and/or US-allied forces.

Limited nuclear attack (LNA), for the purposes of this study, is the employment of nuclear weapons for lethal, destructive, and/or electromagnetic effects on US and/or allied personnel and assets, while remaining sufficiently limited in scope and scale to be only a small fraction of the adversary’s capabilities. Mere tests, demonstrations, or threats were not considered to qualify as LNA, but as part of a broader category of limited nuclear use. Though nuclear weapons defined by treaty as “nonstrategic,” or considered “low yield” or employed by a “tactical” delivery system, might be particularly suited to LNA, such attacks could employ other weapons and delivery systems.

Integrated deterrence was not publicly defined by the US government until late in the study; however, the study utilized a working definition similar to that used in the 2022 US National Security Strategy. The various aspects to be “integrated” included: integration across military and nonmilitary domains; integration across geographic areas; integration across levels of conflict; integration across US government and military organizations; and integration with allies and partners.2

Key findings

If a conflict with one adversary in East Asia doesn’t end quickly, expect it to widen. If a conflict is initiated by either the PRC or North Korea, the potential for expansion to simultaneous conflicts with both would pose a high risk to US and allied defense objectives, particularly because this would impose severe operational and strategic challenges. During this study, we found many plausible pathways from which a conflict with one could expand into conflicts with both, even without Beijing and Pyongyang coordinating with one another. Though it is ill-advised to confidently predict the flow of a conflict up to a decade from now, such pathways are sufficiently numerous and plausible that—if a conflict with either the PRC or North Korea does not conclude quickly—we should anticipate that simultaneous conflicts with both could result.

Deep distrust currently exists between the PRC and North Korea, and we found that neither is likely to feel compelled by any obligation to fight alongside the other—but this would not prevent the emergence of simultaneous conflicts with both. Advance coordination between the two is one of the less likely ways such simultaneous conflicts could emerge. We identified a series of far more plausible pathways, depicted in Figures 1 and 2.
Simultaneous conflicts impose challenges so severe that the risk should still be considered high, even if the probability of these two conflicts occurring simultaneously is uncertain. The logistical challenges alone are daunting, given the requirements of such major conflicts, including stocks of precision standoff munitions and missile-defense interceptors. Operationally, simultaneous conflicts would force overstretched US command-and-control (C2) systems to make hard choices about how to allocate limited numbers of their most valuable assets. Meanwhile, alliance management and escalation management would become exponentially more complex.
If North Korean aggression triggers a successful counteroffensive by the US and South Korea, this will likely prompt the PRC to intervene to protect its interests as North Korea collapses. Such intervention would likely spark a confrontation in the context of US-PRC rivalry and distrust, which could escalate to military conflict. Further, Beijing would likely be willing to risk a conflict to prevent Seoul and Washington from dictating the terms of Korean unification via an unchecked counteroffensive.
Any major US-PRC conflict—for example, if the PRC attacks Taiwan—is likely to escalate horizontally and engulf Korea, unless the US-PRC conflict is a limited war with a quick, decisive outcome. In such a conflict, Beijing is likely to strike US regional bases, possibly including US Forces Korea (USFK) bases well within mutual striking distance of the PRC mainland. Even if the South Korean military and USFK are initially fenced off from hostilities, either side could view them as a US tool to break a stalemate or be drawn in as the PRC attacks US bases in Japan by overflying Korea. Additionally, Beijing could encourage Pyongyang to escalate in order to tie down US and ROK forces. Whether or not Beijing does, a US-PRC conflict would disturb North Korea’s escalation calculus. US reinforcements flowing to the region, along with US commitments and losses, could prompt opportunistic or preemptive aggression from North Korea—particularly because the conflict’s outcome would have immense implications for Pyongyang.
A second conflict need not even escalate very far for such challenges to come into play. As a major conflict with the PRC or North Korea begins, the potential for escalation to draw in the other immediately affects the political and military options available to the United States and its allies, even if war is averted. Seoul’s efforts to avoid being dragged into a US-PRC war, for example, could constrain US forces in South Korea. Meanwhile, US and South Korean efforts to avoid a war with the PRC could hamstring US-South Korean operations in the Yellow Sea, or in mountainous areas near the PRC-North Korean border.

The risk that a war in East Asia would go nuclear is rising, as the PRC and North Korea have increasing incentive and capabilities for limited nuclear attacks. The risk of a limited nuclear attack by the PRC or North Korea in the event of conflict is likely to grow through the 2027–2032 time frame, and simultaneous conflicts would exacerbate this risk. Building on the results of another study we conducted but have not made public, “Preventing Strategic Deterrence Failure on the Korean Peninsula,” this study found that North Korea has been rapidly advancing its capability and intent to initiate a limited nuclear attack in the event of conflict.3 Though the study did not find evidence as compelling to show that the PRC is currently moving aggressively in this direction, it found evidence that the PRC’s capability to employ nuclear weapons for operational and tactical purposes is increasing.

North Korean weapons capabilities and policy have moved rapidly toward enabling limited nuclear attacks. Pyongyang’s September 8, 2022, nuclear policy declaration set the stage and justification for limited nuclear attacks, stating that nuclear first use is an option to retake the initiative in a conflict, for example.4 Meanwhile, since January 2021, North Korea has been sounding a drumbeat on its tactical nuclear capabilities, including tests of claimed tactical nuclear-capable missiles and displays of a new tactical nuclear warhead.5 6
Though Beijing may not be matching Pyongyang’s focus on tactical nuclear options, PRC capabilities suited to limited nuclear attack—such as the DF-26 ballistic missile, dubbed the “carrier killer” or “Guam killer”—are already significant and on track to increase.7 Though North Korea seems more likely than the PRC to initiate a limited nuclear attack, a North Korean nuclear attack would also raise the risk of a US-PRC nuclear confrontation, particularly if Beijing perceives the US response as threatening. In addition, if a US-PRC conflict starting elsewhere “horizontally” escalates to Korea, and yet PRC victory remains elusive, a “vertical” escalation to limited nuclear attack may be the next logical step from Beijing’s perspective.8
A PRC military intervention in a Korean conflict would also add dangerous new variables to North Korea’s nuclear calculus. An intervention without the North Korean regime’s prompting or permission would be a clear threat to its survival, likely making a limited nuclear attack appear to be the “least bad” option. Conversely, a PRC intervention permitted by North Korea, designed to help protect the regime from the consequences of its escalation, might lead Pyongyang to expect US restraint in response to a limited nuclear attack because of Washington’s fear of triggering a US-PRC nuclear war.

The United States and its allies are not situated to fight a two-front limited nuclear war in East Asia; the PRC may be soon. US and allied capabilities, command-and-control arrangements, and posture (including forces, bases, and agreements with allies) are unsuited to prevent simultaneous conflict with the PRC and North Korea and/or a limited nuclear attack or provide robust military response options if they occur.

Based on the workshop discussions, the logistical, command and control, basing, and alliance policy considerations of the United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific all appear designed around and suited for one fight or the other. They aren’t designed for simultaneous conflicts with the PRC and North Korea. Further, this design signals, perhaps unintentionally, that the United States and its key East Asian allies are not yet seriously considering, much less preparing for, simultaneous conflicts. The US-South Korean alliance, in particular, often appears to be avoiding even discussion of this politically sensitive, yet critical, topic.
The United States and its allies have appeared reluctant in recent years to actively and openly prepare a response to limited tactical nuclear attack in East Asia, much less to prepare to fight a “limited” nuclear conflict. Statements such “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” and “there is no scenario in which the Kim regime could employ nuclear weapons and survive” may be unintentionally signaling that the United States is deliberately unprepared for such possibilities, and is instead counting on the implicit threat of all-out nuclear conflict resulting from a single nuclear strike as a deterrent.9 Decisions and statements about posture and capabilities also signal a disinterest in preparing limited-nuclear-response options, with US officials publicly dismissing the idea of redeploying tactical nuclear weapons to the region.10
If current trends continue, the PRC is likely to be far better prepared than the United States to fight on multiple fronts in East Asia and to conduct limited nuclear strikes. The apparent lack of preparedness of the United States and its allies to fight simultaneous conflicts with the PRC and North Korea and for a limited nuclear conflict increases the chances that Beijing or Pyongyang—if already in conflict with the United States—would see advantage in moving first to expand to a dual conflict or escalate to a limited nuclear attack. The PRC’s establishment of a separate Northern Theater Command for Korea contingencies and the Eastern Theater Command for Taiwan contingencies, along with the fielding of accurate dual-capable missiles (nuclear and conventional) shows Beijing’s progress in this direction.

If conflict breaks out, however, the United States has options to manage escalation. The study found that, even if the United States fails to deter aggression by either the PRC or North Korea, there will still be key opportunities for integrated deterrence approaches to help reduce the risk of escalation to conflicts with both, or to a limited nuclear attack. The study identified a range of leverage points in Beijing and Pyongyang’s decision-making that could help to limit such “horizontal” and “vertical” escalation.

Beijing’s view: Beijing probably wants to limit conflict and avoid a regional or nuclear war if it is employing force to achieve goals regarding Taiwan or maritime disputes, or if it is intervening to protect its interests in a Korea conflict. Workshop participants noted likely concerns in Beijing about the potential for uncontrolled escalation in such scenarios, and one expert particularly highlighted that Beijing’s “nightmare scenario” could be fighting the United States, Japan, and South Korea simultaneously. Given the difficulty that Beijing has had in influencing or constraining Pyongyang under more stable circumstances, PRC leaders are likely to believe that expanding a US-PRC war to the Korean peninsula would introduce new, uncontrolled, and unpredictable elements and complicate conflict termination. Similarly, Beijing likely recognizes that a military intervention during a North Korean conflict with South Korea and the United States holds many risks and uncertainties, including unpredictable effects on Pyongyang’s escalation calculus.
Pyongyang’s view: Though North Korea is likely to see both opportunities and threats in the event of a US-PRC conflict, it almost certainly would be initially hesitant to embark on a level of aggression risking regime-ending consequences. Pyongyang would likely be skeptical of Beijing’s willingness to prioritize defending North Korea, even as “co-belligerents” fighting the United States and its allies simultaneously. North Korea would also likely be uncertain as to whether the United States or the PRC would be able to win a decisive victory, regardless of North Korean involvement. Though it may not be possible to deter some posturing or limited aggression by North Korea in such scenarios, there would be an opportunity to raise Pyongyang’s level of caution through integrated deterrence approaches.
Personnel below the regime leaders’ level in both states could be susceptible to influence to delay or discourage escalation in such scenarios. Their personal interests may sharply diverge from those of their leaders in such extreme circumstances, as the risks of conflict escalation take precedence over fear of punishment for passivity or disobedience. The US and its allies could exploit the tendency of high-level officials in autocratic systems toward delay and confirmation, rather than prompt action.

Biases in US and allied institutions are impeding their understanding of how an East Asian conflict could escalate, and their preparations to manage such escalation. Deep-seated organizational and cognitive biases have obstructed the ability of the United States and its allies to anticipate, deter, and prepare for these two possibilities: simultaneous conflicts with the PRC and North Korea, or limited nuclear attack by either adversary. During the study, members of the research team and many of the expert participants found that such biases have often led to unfounded optimistic assertions, particularly the idea that Beijing or Pyongyang would remain a passive observer while the other fights a conflict that would have profound consequences for the security of both. (For more on the biases at work in the way the United States and its allies think about East Asian security, see Jonathan Corrado’s essay, “Biases blind us to the risk of Chinese military intervention in Korea.”)

A bias toward overcentralized perception of adversary decision-making has obstructed US consideration of simultaneous conflicts with the PRC and North Korea. Many US personnel who have not closely studied the Pyongyang-Beijing relationship make unsupported assumptions about either the level of coordination between Beijing and Pyongyang or North Korea’s level of responsiveness to PRC direction—driving another assumption, that simultaneous conflicts would only happen by Beijing’s conscious choice. Others assume that the low trust between Beijing and Pyongyang made simultaneous conflicts impossible.
Mirror imaging and wishful thinking were also common US and allied biases reported by study participants. In particular, some participants reported the widespread belief that the United States and the PRC have a common overriding interest in avoiding a two-front war or nuclear escalation, without considering whether this would hold true if the PRC were losing a war with the United States. Similarly, a frequent response to the idea of a limited North Korean nuclear attack is that North Korea “wouldn’t dare” to use nuclear weapons because its leaders “know it would be the end of their regime,” without considering scenarios in which the regime is already facing imminent destruction.
What’s known as the “law of the instrument bias” was often identified during the study, as each of the three most relevant US four-star joint commands for these issues has a distinct and separate role. Deterring nuclear attack is the domain of US Strategic Command; deterring PRC aggression is the domain of US Indo-Pacific Command; and North Korean aggression is the domain of Combined Forces Command/US Forces Korea. This makes it difficult, but important, to enable integration across these commands in order to best address security challenges in East Asia. Integration will increase the range of resources available to each command and will thus help commands to view problems from new angles, rather than with a disproportionate focus on their own command’s regional or strategic domain.

Continued: Read the entire report here: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/the-united-states-and-its-allies-must-be-ready-to-deter-a-two-front-war-and-nuclear-attacks-in-east-asia/?utm

11. Ex-North Korean diplomat to be named as aide to unification minister

[EXCLUSIVE] Ex-North Korean diplomat to be named as aide to unification minister

The Korea Times · August 17, 2023

Ko Young-hwan, who worked as a North Korean diplomat before defecting to South Korea in 1991, attends a seminar on the 2023 Report on North Korean Human Rights in Seoul, July 11. Ko will be named as a special aide to Unification Minister Kim Yung-ho, according to government officials familiar with the matter. Newsis By Jung Min-ho

A North Korean diplomat-turned-defector will be appointed as a special aide to Unification Minister Kim Yung-ho, The Korea Times has learned.

According to two government officials familiar with the matter, Ko Young-hwan, who had worked as a North Korean diplomat in Africa for more than 10 years before defecting to South Korea in 1991, will help the minister formulate North Korea policies.

The decision is expected to be announced in two weeks as part of other reforms involving the unification ministry. Last month, President Yoon Suk Yeol called for change, saying the ministry should no longer operate like "a support department for North Korea." Soon afterward, Vice Minister Moon Seung-hyun said the ministry was preparing for a sweeping reshuffle.

Speaking to The Korea Times and several other outlets on Wednesday, Kim said the ministry has so far been passive in dealing with Pyongyang due to concerns that any policy it comes up with might irritate the North Korean regime ― and, therefore, hurt inter-Korean relations as well as the prospect of unification.

This will soon change, according to the new minister. If the North violates human rights with new measures such as a ban on, say, K-pop, the ministry should be able to say that it is wrong and unacceptable, Kim said.

Ko's ample experience in North Korea's diplomatic circles and elite groups is expected to help the minister understand how his rights-focused policy would affect the regime as well as the international discourse on North Korea.

He started his career in 1979 and worked in central and east Africa, including the North Korean Embassy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly known as Zaire), while interpreting French for late North Korean leader Kim Jong-il a few times in his meetings with French-speaking African leaders.

With the planned appointment, Ko joins a list of other North Korean defectors filling positions at the government or its agencies under the Yoon administration.

In June, Lee Han-byeol, 40, a rights advocate who escaped North Korea in 1999, became the first defector to join the National Human Rights Commission of Korea as one of its seven non-standing commissioners.

The same month, the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs announced that Kim Geum-hyok, 31, a member of a Pyongyang elite family who defected to South Korea in 2012, would become a policy assistant to Minister Park Min-shik.

This trend is expected to continue under the current administration.

In his speech during Wednesday's press conference on North Korean escapees detained in China, the unification minister said he would welcome all North Koreans who wish to come to the South, where they would be treated fairly and equally just like their South Korean compatriots.

The Korea Times · August 17, 2023

12. Camp David Summit to Unite U.S., South Korea, Japan

JAROKUS

This is a historic opportunity.

We should recall the 7th item on the White House Indo Pacific Strategy. Rarely do we see such substantive implementation of strategies that are usually more aspirational.

EXPAND U.S.-JAPAN-ROK COOPERATION

Nearly every major Indo-Pacific challenge requires close cooperation among the United States’ allies and partners, particularly Japan and the ROK. We will continue to cooperate closely through trilateral channels on the DPRK. Beyond security, we will also work together on regional development and infrastructure, critical technology and supply-chain issues, and women’s leadership and empowerment. Increasingly, we will seek to coordinate our regional strategies in a trilateral context.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/U.S.-Indo-Pacific-Strategy.pdf

Camp David Summit to Unite U.S., South Korea, Japan

Concerns over North Korea’s missiles and China’s military expansion are pushing Seoul and Tokyo closer together

By Vivian Salama

Aug. 16, 2023 6:19 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/camp-david-summit-to-unite-u-s-south-korea-japan-c9cad067?mod=hp_lead_pos10

President Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol at the Group of Seven leaders summit in Hiroshima, Japan, earlier this year. PHOTO: BLOOMBERG NEWS/PRESS POOL

WASHINGTON—A new trilateral alliance linking the U.S., South Korea and Japan will enhance cooperation among the nations in key areas, including ballistic-missile defenses, to counter rising threats from North Korea and China.

The leaders of the U.S. Japan and South Korea are meeting Friday at Camp David, where they are expected to announce details of the agreement, which will also cover intelligence sharing, supply chains and cybersecurity.

President Biden hopes that America’s two strongest allies in the region—which have a history of mutual antagonism—will embrace the benefits of a unified trilateral bloc. The meeting, with South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, will be the first summit to take place at the presidential retreat since Biden took office.

Japan and South Korea together host more than 80,000 American troops. Biden, his national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, have lobbied Tokyo and Seoul on the importance of establishing a bloc, which Beijing has likened to an Asian NATO.

Asked Wednesday about Beijing’s criticism that the U.S. is setting up a mini-NATO against China, Kurt Campbell, Biden’s top Indo-Pacific adviser, said Washington is responding to a demand signal from countries in the Asia-Pacific region looking to counterbalance Chinese pressure.

Eye on China, Biden Pulls Japan and South Korea Closer

By Ben Dooley and Choe Sang-Hun

Reporting from Tokyo and Seoul

Aug. 17, 2023, 4:37 a.m. ET

The New York Times · by Choe Sang-Hun · August 17, 2023

The president will host the leaders of the two Asian democracies at Camp David, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine spurs them to rapidly mend relations.

President Biden, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan and President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea during the Group of 7 summit in Hiroshima in May.Credit...Kenny Holston/The New York Times

Aug. 17, 2023, 4:37 a.m. ET

With threats growing in Asia, the leaders of the United States, Japan and South Korea will meet at Camp David on Friday, taking a major step toward a three-way military and economic partnership that would have been nearly inconceivable before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

As the United States has tried to counter challenges from both China and North Korea, one key obstacle has been the tense and sometimes downright hostile relationship between Japan and South Korea, its two most important friends in the region.

Now, Tokyo and Seoul are trying to quickly move past seemingly irresolvable disputes over the bitter history between them, as Russian aggression against Ukraine highlights their own vulnerabilities in a region dominated by China.

President Biden hopes to cement the nascent improvement in relations when he hosts Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan and President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea at the Maryland presidential retreat. It will be the first time that leaders of the three nations have ever met outside the context of a larger summit, as well as the first time that Mr. Biden has invited world leaders to Camp David.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said this week that the meeting would give the three heads of state a chance to talk about concrete steps toward maintaining regional peace and stability.

That’s diplomatic speak for “the need for a response to the challenges coming from China,” said Tetsuo Kotani, a senior fellow at the Japan Institute of International Affairs.

But Russia will lurk in the meeting’s background, Mr. Kotani said. Moscow’s attempt to seize Ukraine by force has sharpened the focus on Beijing’s threats to do the same to Taiwan. It has also raised concerns about the growing alignment among China, Russia and North Korea, all nuclear powers.

A joint military drill between the United States and South Korea in March. Officials are expected to announce expanded military drills and increased information sharing among Washington, Seoul and Tokyo.Credit...Lee Jin-Man/Associated Press

The emergence of what the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, has called a “neo-Cold War” around the Korean Peninsula was on display last month. Russia’s defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, and Li Hongzhong, a member of the Political Bureau of the Chinese Communist Party, stood with Mr. Kim in Pyongyang during a military parade featuring the nuclear-capable missiles that North Korea has developed in defiance of the United States and the U.N. Security Council.

Trilateral missile drills last month among the United States, Japan and South Korea in the sea between the two Asian nations were followed by military exercises between China and Russia in nearby waters.

The gathering sense of threat has destroyed complacency in Seoul and Tokyo that had been a hurdle to forming a tighter three-way partnership with the United States, which has acknowledged for years that it cannot counter China alone. And it has pushed both Asian capitals to play a more active role in Europe, where they have provided aid to Ukraine and pursued closer ties with NATO.

“The situation in our part of the world is getting much, much worse than many had expected,” said Kunihiko Miyake, the research director at the Canon Institute of Global Studies.

The meeting at Camp David will be an opportunity to consolidate and institutionalize the progress that Washington, Seoul and Tokyo have made in the past year in tightening their ranks, officials from the nations said.

The United States has spent decades fruitlessly trying to get Japan and South Korea to work together on security issues. And there is an awareness in all three countries that the progress that has been made is fragile.

Mr. Yoon’s efforts to improve ties with Japan have galvanized popular anger ahead of a legislative election in April. Mr. Kishida, too, has a weak political position at home, where mismanagement of domestic issues has hurt his popularity, and where more conservative politicians are wary of anti-Japanese sentiment in Seoul. Both Asian nations worry that U.S. pledges of cooperation could be undone if Donald J. Trump is elected president next year.

With that in mind, one of the meeting’s key goals is to embed mechanisms of cooperation “in the DNA” of the three governments and to “create a new normal” that will be difficult to reverse, Rahm Emanuel, the U.S. ambassador to Japan, said in a recent interview.

An image released last month by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency showed the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, with Russia’s defense minister, Sergei Shoigu.

Kim Tae-hyo, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Yoon, said that the South Korean administration expected the summit to “establish a key structure of trilateral cooperation and institutionalize it.”

The most visible manifestation is likely to be a pledge to hold an annual meeting among the countries’ three leaders. More practically, officials are expected to announce expanded cooperation not only in joint military drills and military information-sharing, but also in artificial intelligence, supply chains and cyber and economic security.

The three heads of state will also discuss concrete steps for deterring North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats, Mr. Kim said.

Since taking office last year, Mr. Yoon has emphasized improving ties with Japan and aligning South Korea more closely with Washington and Tokyo in confronting China, Russia and North Korea.

Under Mr. Yoon, South Korea has restored and expanded joint military drills with the United States and joined exercises with the United States and Japan to track and intercept missiles from North Korea.

In a speech on Tuesday marking the anniversary of Korea’s liberation from Japan at the end of World War II, Mr. Yoon avoided discussing his country’s historical grievances with Tokyo, emphasizing instead the benefits of partnership.

The Camp David summit, he said, “will set a new milestone in trilateral cooperation contributing to peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula and in the Indo-Pacific region.”

Perhaps most important, Mr. Yoon has taken steps to resolve a festering controversy over Japan’s wartime use of Korean forced labor. That opened the door for an exchange of visits between Mr. Yoon and Mr. Kishida and the rollback of Japanese sanctions on the Korean semiconductor industry.

As a gesture of good faith, Mr. Kishida has also held off on releasing treated radioactive water from the destroyed Fukushima nuclear power plant until after the summit. The subject is a lightning rod in South Korea.

A news broadcast in Seoul last month showing a North Korean missile test. Mr. Biden, Mr. Yoon and Mr. Kishida plan to discuss ways to deter North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats.

Not all South Koreans have been happy with Mr. Yoon’s pivot. His domestic critics rail at what they describe as Japan’s failure to properly atone for its brutal colonial rule. They fear that Mr. Yoon’s efforts to deepen military cooperation among the United States, Japan and South Korea will only raise tensions — and the chances of war — on the Korean Peninsula.

As for China, it may seek its own meeting with Tokyo and Seoul in response to the Camp David summit, said Wu Xinbo, dean of international studies at Fudan University in Shanghai.

But, he added, if there are “substantive actions that are unfavorable to China,” Beijing may take a “relatively tough response.”

Wang Yi, China’s top diplomat, warned Japan and South Korea last month against aligning themselves too closely with the United States. “No matter how yellow you dye your hair, or how sharp you make your nose, you’ll never turn into a European or American, you’ll never turn into a Westerner,” Mr. Wang said.

Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, cautioned the three countries against forming “cliques,” adding that Beijing “opposes the practice of intensifying confrontation and harming the strategic security of other countries.”

The possibility of economic retaliation by Beijing is a serious concern for both South Korea and Japan, who count China as their largest trading partner.

Both nations “are uneasy with the idea of a new Cold War, an economic war with China,” said Daniel Sneider, a lecturer in international policy at Stanford University.

“But they still have to navigate trying to find some balance between engagement and competition and confrontation,” he said.

Ben Dooley reported from Tokyo, and Choe Sang-Hun from Seoul. Claire Fu contributed reporting from Seoul.

Ben Dooley reports on Japan’s business and economy, with a special interest in social issues and the intersections between business and politics. More about Ben Dooley

Choe Sang-Hun is the Seoul bureau chief for The Times, focusing on news in North and South Korea. More about Choe Sang-Hun

The New York Times · by Choe Sang-Hun · August 17, 2023

14. North Korea prepares for military actions in protest of U.S. three-nation summit -S.Korea

One important point. Kim Jong Un is not stupid. He knows that attacking the alliance when it is strong is not a path to success. Sure he very might conduct a missile test as a provocation -or even a nuclear test - but he is unlikely to conduct a major kinetic attack against the South. And of course he might only use rhetoric and take no action at all.

North Korea prepares for military actions in protest of U.S. three-nation summit -S.Korea

Reuters · by Ju-min Park

SEOUL, Aug 17 (Reuters) - North Korea may launch an intercontinental ballistic missile or take other military action to protest a summit of the United States, South Korea and Japan, a South Korean lawmaker said on Thursday, citing the country's intelligence agency.

U.S. President Joe Biden will meet at Camp David on Friday with South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, hoping to tighten ties between Seoul and Tokyo amid nuclear threats from North Korea at a time when China's regional influence is growing.

North Korea has criticised the deepening military co-operation of the three countries as part of a dangerous prelude to the creation of an "Asian version of NATO".

The reclusive state could also attempt another spy satellite launch at the end of August or early September after its first such effort failed in May, Yoo Sang-bum, a member of the South Korean parliament, told reporters.

Speaking after a meeting with the chief of the National Intelligence Service, Yoo said there was a chance the North would launch the satellite to celebrate its founding anniversary on Sept. 9.

Its leader, Kim Jong Un, has set a priority of conducting a launch in the second half of this year, Yoo added.

North Korea and Russia agreed on broad defence co-operation when the Russian defence minister met Kim last month and watched a military parade with him in the capital, Pyongyang, Yoo quoted South Korean intelligence as saying.

"The National Intelligence Service is anticipating that Russia and North Korea will speed up their defence cooperation and is closely tracing movements" to spot any possible Russian transfer of nuclear missile technology to the North, he added.

Russian officials appear to have visited North Korea this month to discuss details of military co-operation and South Korea spotted signs of military supplies being shipped out of Pyongyang on a Russian plane on Aug. 8, he said.

Washington has criticised North Korea for providing weapons to Russia for its war in Ukraine, which Russia calls a "special operation".

On Wednesday, the United States imposed sanctions on three entities it accused of being tied to arms deals between the two countries.

Pyongyang and Moscow have denied arms transactions.

South Korea's foreign ministry welcomed the latest U.S. measures, saying it would also review imposing further sanctions on the North aimed at curbing its illicit weapons development and arms trade.

"Any U.N. member state should immediately halt military co-operation with North Korea, including illicit arms transactions, that threatens the peace and stability of the international community," the ministry spokesperson told a briefing.

Reporting by Ju-min Park and Soo-hyang Choi; Additional reporting by Hyonhee Shin; Editing by Edmund Klamann and Gerry Doyle

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Acquire Licensing Rights, opens new tab

Reuters · by Ju-min Park

15. North Korean military officers on hook for dog meat stew rations

I do hope our three leaders will discuss the potential for north Korean instability and the potential for contingencies. I remain concerned about the regime's inability to provide resources to all military units and what will happen if and when some military units are "deprioritized" and have to further fend for themselves.

The loss of military coherency can lead to regime collapse. Or a decision by Kim to go to war as his only option to survive (in his calculus).

North Korean military officers on hook for dog meat stew rations

But officers are given no budget, forcing them to sell personal items on the market to raise money.

By Lee Myung Chul for RFA Korean

2023.08.16

rfa.org

North Korea’s military has ordered officials to procure dog meat to improve the health of their soldiers during the hottest days of the summer, leaving them to foot the bill for the canines, according to sources inside the country with knowledge of the situation.

The reclusive, nuclear-armed state boasts the world’s second-largest military, with nearly 30% of the North Korean population actively serving in reserve or in a paramilitary capacity.

And while the Kim Jong Un regime typically directs a sizable portion of the nation’s harvests to the military, soldiers are often malnourished and forced to supplement their rations on their own.

Earlier this month, North Korea’s General Political Bureau issued a directive to provide “healthy food” to Korean People’s Army soldiers on the hottest days of the summer “at all costs,” a source with ties to the military in North Hamgyong province told RFA Korean.

“Dangogi-jang [dog meat stew] was guaranteed as a healthy food to be provided,” said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity citing fear of reprisal.

Three officials from each department of a military unit were instructed to divide up the rations and provide them to the unit’s 60-120 soldiers “on a daily basis,” but were never provided with a budget.

“Some of the officials don’t raise dogs at home, so they have to buy [dog meat] at the market,” the source said. “For now, rations are not supplied to military officials [for the dog meat stew] and the burden has shifted [to them] under various pretexts. This is making life difficult for the officials.”

According to the source, the price of a dog weighing 12 kilograms (26 pounds) is 200,000 won (US$24) at the market.

But with salaries of 2,500-7,000 won (US$0.30-0.84) per month, the officials have “nowhere near enough” to buy them.

No money

“Military officials and their families are not comfortable following the order to provide healthy food for the soldiers,” the source said.

“To prepare everything by themselves without any support is a big burden. They have to sell something at the market, buy a dog with the money they receive, process the dog at home, and feed the soldiers on the assigned day.”

A second source with military connections in North Pyongan province noted that for “several months,” not even regular rations have been consistently provided to military officials for their soldiers.

“It is a major burden for officials, who are already struggling to make a living, to prepare healthy food for their soldiers,” he said. “Many officials are dissatisfied with the authorities for assigning these kinds of tasks while ignoring the living conditions of the officials and their families.”

Last month, North Korean residents complained to RFA about being overworked in preparation for the 70th anniversary of the signing of the armistice that ended hostilities in the 1950-53 Korean War, held on July 27.

In addition to dropping everything to beautify their towns, practice for dancing and sports competitions, and attend educational lectures, all citizens were required to donate 3,000 won (U.S.$0.27) to support the People’s Army, which is enough to feed an entire family for a day.

Translated by Claire Shinyoung Oh Lee. Edited by Joshua Lipes and Malcolm Foster.

rfa.org

16. US, South Korea and Japan look to ‘institutionalize’ ties

This is some interesting analysis. Is fear of a second Trump presidency more motivating than the threats from China dn north Korea?

Excerpts:

“Both capitals will be looking very carefully at our election and the possibility we may have a transition in leadership at the top,” said Sheila Smith, a Japan expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, at a preview of the summit hosted by the think tank on Tuesday.

The United States, Smith said, had long been “proactive in trying to encourage better bilateral relations between Seoul and Tokyo,” but “the Trump administration really didn’t focus much on that” and left Tokyo-Seoul ties to struggle as it pursued an “America First” policy.

That led to a reckoning, said Scott Synder, an expert on Korea at the Council on Foreign Relations, which has now culminated in Camp David and the plans for a more concrete tripartite alliance.

“One of the motivations in both South Korea and Japan for pursuing institutionalization,” Snyder said, “would be precisely to hedge against political uncertainty in the United States.”

US, South Korea and Japan look to ‘institutionalize’ ties

Concerns about Trump-like ambivalence, not so much China, have led to Friday’s summit, experts say.

By Alex Willemyns for RFA

2023.08.16

Washington

rfa.org

U.S. President Joe Biden hosts his Japanese and South Korean counterparts on Friday in a major step toward “institutionalizing” ties between the countries toward a more tangible trilateral alliance.

Beijing has slammed the summit at Camp David, Maryland, as part of a ploy by the United States to establish a “mini-NATO” in Asia.

This time, though, it’s not China that’s the impetus for the three leaders to push their alliances into something more concrete. It’s not even North Korea and its increased nuclear-weapons testing.

It’s fears, experts say, that former President Donald Trump – or another candidate with similar foreign-policy views – could return to the White House and rebuff an active U.S. role in North Asia.

“Both capitals will be looking very carefully at our election and the possibility we may have a transition in leadership at the top,” said Sheila Smith, a Japan expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, at a preview of the summit hosted by the think tank on Tuesday.

The United States, Smith said, had long been “proactive in trying to encourage better bilateral relations between Seoul and Tokyo,” but “the Trump administration really didn’t focus much on that” and left Tokyo-Seoul ties to struggle as it pursued an “America First” policy.

That led to a reckoning, said Scott Synder, an expert on Korea at the Council on Foreign Relations, which has now culminated in Camp David and the plans for a more concrete tripartite alliance.

“One of the motivations in both South Korea and Japan for pursuing institutionalization,” Snyder said, “would be precisely to hedge against political uncertainty in the United States.”

Institutionalization

It’s not yet clear what “institutionalization” of tripartite ties means.

Reuters reported on Monday that Friday’s summit was unlikely to produce a formal security arrangement between the three countries, but could produce a “three-way hot line,” as well as an in-principle deal to forge closer security ties and a pledge for annual meetings.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken shed little light on what an “institutional” approach would mean on Tuesday.

“What you can expect to see coming out of this summit is collaboration on a trilateral basis that is further institutionalized in a variety of ways, to include regular meetings at a variety of levels – senior levels – in our governments,” Blinken told reporters.

At the Brookings Institution on Wednesday, Rahm Emanuel, the U.S. ambassador to Tokyo, said the summit’s aim is to broadly “embed” changes so they are “not just dependent on these three leaders.”

“The goal here is,” he said, “that this becomes the new normal, and that you weave it into the DNA of all the institutions – whether it's intelligence, security, political, diplomatic, economic – and that no one country, or no one future leader, rolls that rock back down the hill.”

Fragile alliance

It’s not only the prospect of Trump’s return that has put closer tripartite ties in the face of Beijing and Pyongyang at longer-term risk.

South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida – who held their nations’ first bilateral summit in over a decade in March – face their own domestic issues.

Yoon, for instance, won power last year pledging closer military ties with the United States and Japan – South Korea’s historical enemy – but has quickly fallen in popularity, and has not had an approval rating above 26% in over a year, according to Morning Consult tracking.

“It’s fair to say that in South Korea, President Yoon’s efforts are still not widely popular,” said Christopher Johnstone, a former director for East Asia on Biden’s National Security Council and now the Japan chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“In Japan,” he said, “there’s this constant refrain of skepticism that the improvement will be durable and that there’s the risk that a future [South Korean] president could flip the table over again.”

That means there now exists what could be a small sliver of opportunity for Biden, Yoon and Kishida to cement some planks of long-term security cooperation, even if it’s only a beginning.

“The focus of this meeting,” Johnstone said, “is to look for ways to institutionalize the progress that’s been made, and to make it harder for future leaders in any of these countries to walk away from it.”

Asian ‘mini-NATO’

Despite the vagueness of the plans announced so far, Beijing, which has long opposed what it says are U.S. plans to create a NATO-style military alliance in Asia, has voiced its opposition to the summit.

“China opposes relevant countries assembling exclusionary groupings, and practices that intensify antagonism and undermine the strategic security of other countries,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said at a press briefing on Tuesday.

The Global Times, a mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, also criticized the summit as a push toward something bigger.

“On the surface, the U.S., Japan, and South Korea are under the banner of ‘countering North Korea's growing nuclear threat,’” the editorial said, “but in fact, it has always been U.S.' desire to build a ‘mini-NATO-style’ trilateral military alliance in Northeast Asia.”

U.S. State Department deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel on Tuesday denied any such plans exist and said the summit should not be seen “as any kind of step” toward a NATO-style bloc.

But that does not mean it won’t be historical, said Kurt Campbell, Biden’s Indo-Pacific coordinator, at the Brookings Institution, noting it was Biden’s first time hosting foreign leaders at Camp David.

“We are seeking not just to lock-in Japan and South Korea for the future, but the United States as well,” he said. “We're going to try to embed this in our politics in such a way that it will be hard [to change things back] for any leader in either of the three countries.”

Edited by Malcolm Foster.

rfa.org

17. North Korea may test ICBM as US, Japan, South Korea leaders meet

Or it may just spew rhetoric or even do nothing.

North Korea may test ICBM as US, Japan, South Korea leaders meet

By CUE The Straits Times2 min

August 17, 2023

View Original

Solid-fuel missiles have the propellants baked into rockets, allowing them to stay hidden from spy satellites. PHOTO: REUTERS

SEOUL – North Korea may time the test launch of a missile that can deliver a nuclear warhead to the American mainland to coincide with a Friday summit of the leaders of Japan, South Korea and the US, South Korea’s spy service was cited as saying by a lawmaker.

Mr Kim Jong Un’s regime is also looking to hold military drills that could include tests of missiles designed to deliver nuclear strikes on Japan and South Korea, National Intelligence Service officials told South Korean members of Parliament on Thursday, ruling party lawmaker Yoo Sang-bum told reporters.

US President Joe Biden will host Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol at the Camp David presidential retreat in rural Maryland, where the three are expected to discuss ways to enhance their security cooperation and military training to respond to the nuclear and missile threats from Mr Kim’s regime.

Pyongyang has a habit of timing its provocations to coincide with major political meetings, and the summit among the leaders of North Korea’s three top enemies may entice Mr Kim to put on a show of force. Pyongyang test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) just before Mr Yoon met Mr Kishida in Japan in March.

Mr Yoon said in a written interview with Bloomberg the world would never accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons power and opened the door to a possible breakthrough in cooperation on deterrence at the summit.

Mr Yoo said movements of vehicles needed to help launch an ICBM were detected in areas including Pyongyang. There are continuous signs of preparations for a launch, including the movement of propellants, he said.

These signs could indicate that North Korea is preparing to launch one of its liquid-fuel ICBMs. Mr Kim and his preteen daughter were on hand in March to see the launch of the Hwasong-17, the state’s largest ICBM that is designed to carry a multiple nuclear warhead payload.

Since then, it has twice tested its solid-fuel Hwasong-18 ICBM. Solid-fuel missiles have the propellants baked into rockets, allowing them to stay hidden from spy satellites, rolled out and fired in a manner of minutes, giving the US less time to prepare for interception.

Liquid-fuel ICBMs take time to fill with propellant, which makes them vulnerable to attack before being launched.

North Korea may also try to launch a space rocket to deploy a spy satellite in late August or early September, around the time it celebrates its foundation day on Sept 9, Mr Yoo said. Mr Kim’s regime tried on May 31 to put a spy satellite into orbit, but the rocket failed a few minutes into flight before crashing in international waters in the Yellow Sea.

North Korea is barred by United Nations Security Council resolutions from conducting ballistic missile tests, but Pyongyang has long claimed it is entitled to a civilian space programme for satellite launches. The US and its partners have warned that technology derived from North Korea’s space programme could be used to advance its ballistic missiles. BLOOMBERG

18. Missiles aren't the only threat from North Korea. Its conventional arms are just as deadly

I am surprised to see discussion of the conventional threats or north Korea Korea strategy. Note the emphasis on alliance "decoupling" or driving the US off the peninsula. This leads to those who argue we should not trade Seattle for Seoul. Those who argue we should remove troops so we are not faced with that trade are simply supporting Kim Jong Un's political warfare strategy.

Excerpts:

As for North Korea's missile program, it is designed to be more survivable in order to withstand a preemptive strike from the U.S, as well as to have the capability to strike the U.S., in order to create a so-called "decoupling dynamic" between Washington and Seoul.

The ultimate objective of North Korea, Cha said, is to divide the U.S.-South Korea alliance by creating a homeland security threat, and long range artillery alone is not going to achieve that.

Cha concluded: "North Korea's goal, I think, is not simply to prevent an attack from the U.S. and South Korea. It is really to get the United States off the Korean Peninsula, and then have a have a nuclear advantage over South Korea. That is ultimately their goal."

To reinforce Dr. Cha's points:

Kim Family Regime Overall Strategy

•Vital Interest: Survival of the Kim Family Regime

•Strategic Aim: Unification of the Peninsula

oUnder the domination of the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State (to ensure survival of the regime)

oSubversion, coercion, extortion, use of force

•Key Condition: Split the ROK/US Alliance

oUS forces off the Peninsula

o“Divide and Conquer” – Divide the Alliance and conquer the ROK

•Desire: Recognition as nuclear power – negotiate a SALT/START – like process

Key Questions:

1.Has the regime abandoned its strategy of the use of subversion, coercion, and force to unify Korea under northern domination to ensure regime survival?

2.Has the regime abandoned its objective to split the ROK/US Alliance to support its strategy?

3.Who does Kim fear most: the US or the Korean people?

4.What do we want to achieve in Korea?

5.What is the acceptable durable political arrangement on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia that will serve and protect US and Alliance interests?

Missiles aren't the only threat from North Korea. Its conventional arms are just as deadly

KEY POINTS

While North Korea’s ballistic missile launches are the ones that grab headlines, the threat of conventional artillery strikes should not be ignored, says Rand.
North Korea maintains around 6,000 artillery systems within range of South Korean population centers, including the capital of Seoul which has a population of 10 million.

CNBC · by Lim Hui Jie · August 17, 2023

A fire assault drill by North Korean rocket artillery units at an undisclosed location in North Korea in March 2023 in this photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). Around 6,000 of these units are located in range of South Korean population centers.

KCNA | Reuters

North Korea's missile launches in the past month have ratcheted up tensions on the Korean Peninsula —but that's not the only threat the reclusive state poses.

While North Korea's ballistic missile launches are the ones that grab headlines, the threat of conventional artillery strikes should not be ignored, warned Naoko Aoki, associate political scientist with the Rand Corporation.

North Korea boasts the world's fourth largest armed forces, according to the Council of Foreign Relations. In late 2022, CFR estimated North Korea had 1.3 million active military personnel, in addition to a 600,000 strong reserve force.

Most military analysts acknowledge that North Korea's armed forces are no match for the combined U.S. and South Korean forces, but they say that the country can still wreak immense damage on South Korea via conventional arms.

Artillery threat

North Korea has regularly threatened to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire" with its arsenal of weapons, and unlike most of its other threats, this one may not be pure hyperbole.

Asked if such a threat was credible, Victor Cha, senior vice president and Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, replied: "They could do that if they wanted to."

watch now

VIDEO9:5909:59

Russia has become a pariah state. What's next?

International Digital Originals

But he warned that Pyongyang will face a strong response if it ever carried out that threat. "There would be a response [from the U.S. and South Korea] very clearly if they did that. But they could do it if they wanted to."

A 2020 assessment from policy think tank Rand Corp found that North Korea maintains around 6,000 artillery systems within range of South Korean population centers, including the capital of Seoul which has a population of 10 million.

Rand estimated that if the thousands of artillery systems were deployed and used against civilian targets, they could potentially kill more than 10,000 people in an hour.

"Even brief, narrowly tailored attacks could destroy key industrial facilities and seriously harm the South Korean economy," the analysts pointed out.

Separately, a 2018 Rand report illustrates that one of the world's largest semiconductor fabrication plants — Samsung Electronics' Pyeongtaek plant — is within range of North Korea's long-range rocket systems, despite being about 100 kilometers from the border.

A 2018 Rand assessment on how far various North Korean artillery systems can reach into South Korea. The longest ranged systems can reach as far as 200 kilometers from the border.

Rand Corporation

Display manufacturer LG Display's largest OLED manufacturing plant is located in Paju, just nine kilometers from the border and can be reached by the North's mid-ranged artillery.

"This threat gives North Korea the power to coerce the South Korean government, or to retaliate against South Korean military or political actions, even without resorting to its chemical or nuclear arsenals," the 2020 report pointed out.

Is it credible?

Rand's 2020 assessment said it would be difficult for South Korean and U.S. forces to incur significant damage on North Korea's artillery units, as these will be sheltered from counterfire in underground facilities.

Daniel Pinkston, who lectures on international relations at Troy University in Seoul, said the constant artillery threat may be overlooked by most people, but not by military planners and senior national security officials in Seoul and Washington.

"The missile launches have been high profile because they have been part of testing many new systems that give North Korea greater military capabilities and options," he told CNBC.

watch now

VIDEO2:3702:37

North Korea shows no interest in talks about its nuclear program: Think tank

Squawk Box Asia

However, Pinkston disagrees with Rand's report that such a threat can drive South Korea's government to "do X" — or more specifically, force Seoul into a course of action.

Should North Korea follow through on the threat to attack the South, "the gloves are off" and a response can be expected from South Korean and U.S. forces, he said, highlighting that North Korea will not do well in conventional warfare against the allied forces.

Pinkston pointed out that North Korea is not the only one that can launch an attack at short notice. "Many people don't seem to realize that a counterattack from the South can be launched on very short notice as well," he added.

North Korea's goal, I think, is not simply to prevent an attack from the U.S. and South Korea. It is really to get the United States off the Korean Peninsula.

Victor Cha

Korea Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies

If the North were to fire on civilian targets, allied forces from the U.S. and South Korea will be able to retaliate quickly by destroying North Korea's systems.

"If I were the KPA, I'd want to use my munitions for military targets to suppress the counterattack, which would be very intense," Pinkston added, referring to North Korea's armed forces, the Korea People's Army.

Holistic perspective

Why would North Korea need to develop missiles if it holds such a potent threat over South Korea — even if short-lived?

That's because North Korea's missile program or its artillery forces cannot be seen in isolation, but need to be considered as part of a bigger threat, explained Cha from CSIS.

The North Korean threat needs to be viewed in its entirety, and the full extent of the danger consists of: The conventional artillery threat over South Korea, its missile and nuclear program, as well as its cyber attack arm, he added.

However, Cha pointed out that there have also been studies that have shown the damage inflicted by North Korean artillery is "not that effective."

watch now

VIDEO2:5602:56

North Korea and Russia think nuclear weapons can be a 'great equalizer': Author

Squawk Box Asia

"They may be able to do some damage initially, [but] that damage may be overestimated and that soon after their artillery positions become known, counter battery fire from U.S. and South Korean forces could neutralize that artillery pretty quickly."

As for North Korea's missile program, it is designed to be more survivable in order to withstand a preemptive strike from the U.S, as well as to have the capability to strike the U.S., in order to create a so-called "decoupling dynamic" between Washington and Seoul.

The ultimate objective of North Korea, Cha said, is to divide the U.S.-South Korea alliance by creating a homeland security threat, and long range artillery alone is not going to achieve that.

Cha concluded: "North Korea's goal, I think, is not simply to prevent an attack from the U.S. and South Korea. It is really to get the United States off the Korean Peninsula, and then have a have a nuclear advantage over South Korea. That is ultimately their goal."

CNBC · by Lim Hui Jie · August 17, 2023

19. US officials hype Japan-ROK-US Camp David visit: 'Defining trilateral relationship'

JAROKUS.

US officials hype Japan-ROK-US Camp David visit: 'Defining trilateral relationship' - Breaking Defense

breakingdefense.com · by Justin Katz · August 16, 2023

Yoon Suk Yeol, South Korea’s president, left, and Fumio Kishida, Japan’s prime minister, shake hands ahead of a summit meeting at the prime minister’s official residence on March 16, 2023 in Tokyo, Japan. (Photo by Kiyoshi Ota – Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — As the leaders of Japan and South Korea prepare to join President Joe Biden at Camp David later this week, several high-level American government officials are setting high expectations for the summit, dubbing the three countries’ future as “a defining trilateral relationship for the 21st century.”

“What we have seen over the course of the last couple months is a breath-taking kind of diplomacy that has been led by courageous leaders in both Japan and South Korea,” said Kurt Campbell, coordinator for the Indo-Pacific on the National Security Council. “What [South Korean] President Yoon [Suk Yeol] and [Japanese] Prime Minister [Fumio] Kishida have done has defied expectations. They have sometimes, against the advice of their own councilors and staff, taken steps that elevate the Japan-South Korean relationship into a new plane.”

The meeting is significant, given the bitter history and tense diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea that dates back to World War II. That Biden is hosting them at Camp David — Campbell noted Biden has hosted few foreign dignitaries at the presidential retreat — seems to be part of the White House’s signal that the president views this relationship as vital to American interests.

“I think we all understand the significance when a meeting is held there. It’s meant to signal with deep symbolism the importance that we attach to this momentous moment,” Campbell said during a Brookings Institute event on Wednesday.

Campbell and Mira Rapp-Hooper, senior advisor for East Asia and Oceania on the NSC, said the White House plans to announce new engagements between the three countries on issues concerning security, technology and education.

“We will announce a number of things [including a] trilateral annual summit between the three leaders which we intend to abide by, a national security and secretary of state effort that will help prepare the way for that,” Campbell said. “We’re going to invest in technology to have a three-way hotline for the leaders and others inside their governments to communicate.”

It is also expected that cooperation in space will be on the table, although how much of that cooperation will be focused in the national security realm is unclear.

Hooper nodded to a previous joint statement issued in November, when the two foreign heads of state were in Cambodia and made a commitment to share early missile warning data.

“And one of the things we’ll be able to report out on Friday is that we’re well on our way to being able to do that, as well as make progress in a number of other information sharing areas that allow us to pull data and information to better understand the picture that we are facing,” she said.

Rahm Emanuel, the US ambassador to Japan, summed up the coming meeting as a “fundamental advancement of America’s interests.”

breakingdefense.com · by Justin Katz · August 16, 2023

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

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, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

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."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website