Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"Ignorant, restless desperadoes, without conscience or principles, have led a deluded multitude to follow their standard, under pretense of grievances which have no existence but in their own imaginations."

- Abigail Adams

"It is wonderful what strength of purpose and boldness and energy of will are roused by the assurance that we are doing our duty."

- Walter Scott

"In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists."

- Eric Hoffer

1. It’s time to take Kim Jong Un and his nuclear threats seriously

2. N. Korea fires 1 short-range ballistic missile, about 170 artillery shots: S. Korean military

3. Moscow–Pyongyang cooperation remains muted

4. S. Korea slaps its first unilateral sanctions on N. Korea in 5 years over nuke, missile threats

5. NSC lambasts North Korea’s overnight provocations

6. Nearly dozen N. Korean military aircraft identified flying near inter-Korean air boundary: JCS

7. N.Korea Diversifies Nuke Warhead Delivery System

8. Reasons for S. Korea’s loss of UN Human Rights Council membership

9. South Korea scrambles jets as Kim Jong Un sends warplanes near border

10. North Korea Conducts Overnight Ballistic Missile Launch

11. Why a light aircraft carrier is a good idea

12. The nuclear umbrella is really needed now

13. What is behind North Korea's rising belligerence?

14. South Korea prefers US ‘strategic assets’ to nuclear weapons, senior official says

15. It’s Time to Accept That North Korea Has Nuclear Weapons

16. North Korea still far away from tactical strike ability, experts say

17. Even a small nuclear test by North Korea would be a big US worry

1. It’s time to take Kim Jong Un and his nuclear threats seriously

If you do not read anything else about Korea today, read this from Professor Lee. He is one of the very best north Korean analysts we have. I usually emphasize the importance of getting the assumptions right about the nature, objectives, and strategy of the Kim family regime. Professor Lee offers one of the best descriptions I have read.

These excerpt is critical to understand north Korea:

North Korea’s strategy throughout has been one that combines calculated provocations, graduated escalation and a post-provocation peace ploy. But the end game for Kim, like his father and grandfather before him, remains the same: triumphing over South Korea and incorporating its people and territory under the North’s jurisdiction.

...

Reunification under the North’s terms is central to Kim’s plan. As such, international observers might be wise to focus more on the purpose of Kim’s provocations, rather than the cause.

Pondering “What caused Kim to test a nuke?” may lead some into the same trap as asking, “What caused Putin to invade Ukraine?”

Both questions assume the aggressor to be reactive rather than proactive and ignore his grandiose intentions.

Kim Jong Un has a grand strategy. As long as South Korea exists as a richer and more democratically legitimate Korean state that serves as a magnet for his own people, the specter of the German model of reunification – under which the richer Germany absorbed the poorer one – hovers ominously for Kim. And that, he cannot allow.

As such, world leaders must beware: When narcissistic tyrants make nuclear threats, they carry menacing meaning – even when uttered by unusually odd-looking despots.

It’s time to take Kim Jong Un and his nuclear threats seriously

theconversation.com · by Sung-Yoon Lee

As the West frets over the possibility of Vladimir Putin turning to nuclear weapons in Ukraine, there is a risk that similar threats posed by another pariah leader are not being treated as seriously – those of North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.

The isolationist East Asian nation has conducted seven nuclear-capable missile blasts over the course of 15 days, from Sept. 25 to Oct. 9, 2022. One flew over Japan, plunging into the Pacific after flying 2,800 miles – a distance that puts the U.S. military base in Guam within range.

Then, on Oct. 10 – the 77th anniversary of the founding of North Korea’s communist Workers Party – state media announced that Kim had personally conducted field guidance of his nation’s “tactical nuclear operation units,” which displayed the capacity to “hit and wipe out” enemy targets.

True, Russia’s enormous nuclear arsenal make its threats more credible than North Korea’s. Moscow has the means, and fear over defeat in Ukraine could provide the motive.

There is another reason that Kim’s nuclear threats may sound less ominous, if not entirely hollow. North Korea’s leader strikes many in the West almost as a laughable figure – a narcissistic, well-nourished dictator with, to many, a comical look. Yes, he harbors worrying nuclear bomb ambitions and presides over a desperate state facing widespread hunger. But his occasional threats to nuke his southern neighbor – South Korea – are greeted by many as little more than buffoonish bellicosity. Take, for example, then-President Donald Trump’s 2017 speech at the United Nations in which he belittled Kim as a “Rocket Man on a suicide mission.”

But as a scholar of Korean history who has watched as the North’s regime has threatened to destabilize the region, I believe Kim must be taken seriously. He is deadly serious about completing his grandfather’s and father’s mission of reunification of the Korean peninsula. It is the dynasty’s “supreme national task,” and there is little to suggest that Kim won’t resort to any length to make that happen.

Preemptive nuclear strikes

In 2022 alone, North Korea has fired over 30 missiles, including six intercontinental ballistic projectiles. These activities are in “open breach of United Nations sanctions,” as the U.N. Panel of Experts on North Korea reported in September.

Yet, there has not been a single new United Nations Security Council Resolution passed in response to these serial violations. And I doubt one will be forthcoming even in the wake of a major nuclear test, which is looming. Security Council members Russia and China, which supported previous U.N. sanctions following North Korean missiles and nuclear tests, are unlikely to do so again this time amid the growing geopolitical rift with the West. Both countries actively blocked such moves led by the U.S. earlier in the year.

Worse, recent remarks by Putin and Kim have brought back the once unthinkable notion of a nation preemptively nuking a neighboring state.

In September, North Korea promulgated a new “law on the state policy on the nuclear forces.” It sets out the conditions under which North Korea would use nuclear weapons. In broad and vague terms, the law cites “taking an upper hand in a war” and being “inevitably compelled and cannot help but use nuclear weapons” as reasons to resort to the ultimate weapon.

Reporting of North Korea’s missile launches. Kim Jae-Hwan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

In outlining a fairly open-ended approach to nuclear action, Kim has escalated the rhetoric and attempted to normalize the right to strike first. It lays the groundwork for using any “hostile” move by South Korea – which the regime defines broadly as anything between criticism of its human rights violations to combined defensive military exercises with the United States – as as a pretext for preemptive nuclear strikes.

Kim appears to be arguing that it is his right to use nuclear weapons whenever he deems it necessary. It is a truly frightening prospect.

A cycle of escalation

The recent nuclear-capable missile launches, coming just weeks after a new nuclear doctrine and coinciding with Putin’s escalation in Ukraine, looks to paint the U.S. into a corner and seize on the growing Cold War split. Kim is forging new norms in the politics of the region.

It may be hard to accept that North Korea – a small economic actor compared with the U.S., China, Russia, Japan and South Korea – has outmaneuvered its bigger interlocutors. But, over the past 30 years of nuclear diplomacy, it has been North Korea that has mostly called the shots – from proposing talks, agenda-setting and agenda-shifting to deciding when to walk away.

In the process, Pyongyang has wrested away billions of U.S. dollars’ worth of cash, food, fuel and other goods from other countries while building approximately 50 nuclear bombs, ICBMs and other strategic weapons.

From the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations alone, North Korea received over US$1.3 billion worth in aid in return for repeated false pledges of denuclearization.

North Korea’s strategy throughout has been one that combines calculated provocations, graduated escalation and a post-provocation peace ploy. But the end game for Kim, like his father and grandfather before him, remains the same: triumphing over South Korea and incorporating its people and territory under the North’s jurisdiction.

To enable this, North Korea will need to repeat its cycles of provocations and deescalation while continuing to grow its military arsenal to the extent that it becomes a clear and present nuclear threat to the U.S. mainland and an unbearable regional liability. At that point, so the strategy goes, it can push the U.S. to withdraw forces in South Korea, rendering the South vulnerable to submission to the North’s plans.

Kim’s grand strategy

Reunification under the North’s terms is central to Kim’s plan. As such, international observers might be wise to focus more on the purpose of Kim’s provocations, rather than the cause.

Pondering “What caused Kim to test a nuke?” may lead some into the same trap as asking, “What caused Putin to invade Ukraine?”

Both questions assume the aggressor to be reactive rather than proactive and ignore his grandiose intentions.

Kim Jong Un has a grand strategy. As long as South Korea exists as a richer and more democratically legitimate Korean state that serves as a magnet for his own people, the specter of the German model of reunification – under which the richer Germany absorbed the poorer one – hovers ominously for Kim. And that, he cannot allow.

As such, world leaders must beware: When narcissistic tyrants make nuclear threats, they carry menacing meaning – even when uttered by unusually odd-looking despots.

theconversation.com · by Sung-Yoon Lee

2. N. Korea fires 1 short-range ballistic missile, about 170 artillery shots: S. Korean military

Political warfare, blackmail diplomacy, and development of advanced warfighting capabilities.

My question for all of these actions of the past weeks: Have we seen any indications and warnings for preparation for war? I think not.

And we should remember that we are collecting data on all these firings. Every action Kim takes provides us with a better understanding of the regime and the nKPA.

(6th LD) N. Korea fires 1 short-range ballistic missile, about 170 artillery shots: S. Korean military | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 채윤환 · October 14, 2022

(ATTN: UPDATES with more details in paras 16-17)

By Song Sang-ho and Chae Yun-hwan

SEOUL, Oct. 14 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Friday fired a short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) into the East Sea and about 170 artillery shots into maritime "buffer zones" set under a 2018 inter-Korean military tension reduction accord, the South Korean military said.

The provocative move came after more than 10 North Korean warplanes staged menacing flights close to the inter-Korean border, prompting the South Korean Air Force to scramble its F-35A stealth fighters and other assets to the scene, according to the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

The JCS said it detected the SRBM launch from the Sunan area in Pyongyang at 1:49 a.m., and that the missile flew some 700 kilometers at an apogee of 50 km at a top speed of about Mach 6.

It also detected the North's firing of some 130 artillery shots into the Yellow Sea from Majang-dong, Hwanghae Province, between 1:20 a.m. and 1:25 a.m., and of some 40 artillery shots into the East Sea from Gueup-ri, Gangwon Province, between 2:57 a.m. and 3:07 a.m.

The artillery shots landed in eastern and western buffer zones north of the Northern Limit Line, the de facto inter-Korean sea border, which were delineated under the two Koreas' Comprehensive Military Agreement (CMA) signed on Sept. 19, 2018, to reduce tensions.

The North's Korean People's Army said later via the country's state media that it took "strong countermeasures" in response to what it claims to be a 10-hour-long South Korean artillery exercise.

Seoul officials said the artillery exercise in question was conducted by the U.S. Forces Korea at a firing range in Cheorwon, some 71 km northeast of Seoul, from 8 a.m. through 6 p.m. on Thursday, involving multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS).

The JCS issued a statement criticizing the artillery firing and the SRBM launch as a "clear" violation of the CMA and U.N. Security Council resolutions, respectively.

"Our military gravely warns North Korea regarding the fact that it has violated the Sept. 19 military agreement and escalated military tensions on the Korean Peninsula through continued provocations, and strongly urges it to immediately cease them," the JCS said.

It added, "Our military will keep maintaining a firm readiness posture based on capabilities to respond overwhelmingly to any North Korean provocations."

Regarding Friday's provocations, Seoul's defense ministry sent a message to Pyongyang through a western military communication line, its officials said.

"We sent the message to point out that artillery firings in western and eastern maritime buffer zones constitute a violation of the Sept. 19 military agreement, and to urge (the North) to abide by it and prevent a recurrence," the official said on condition of anonymity.

The South Korean military sees the North's latest artillery firings in the two separate buffer zones as the third and fourth instances of the regime violating the CMA. The North earlier violated the agreement in 2019 and 2020.

The latest breach of the CMA came amid growing talk of the need to consider scrapping the agreement in case the North presses ahead with what would be its seventh nuclear test.

JCS Chairman Gen. Kim Seung-kyum and Gen. Paul LaCamera, the commander of the South Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command, had virtual consultations and reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthen the allies' combined defense posture.

The U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said in a statement that it was aware of the North's latest missile launch, adding the U.S. commitments to the defense of South Korea and Japan remain "ironclad."

Earlier in the day, South Korea announced its first unilateral sanctions against Pyongyang in five years, blacklisting 15 North Korean individuals and 16 institutions in response to the North's evolving nuclear and missile threats.

On Wednesday, Pyongyang also fired two long-range strategic cruise missiles, involving units operating "tactical nukes," the KCNA has reported.

The North, in addition, announced Monday that leader Kim Jong-un had inspected military drills involving the units in charge of tactical nukes from Sept. 25 to Sunday, during which it staged a series of provocations, including the Oct. 4 launch of an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM).

The drills were organized under "inevitable" circumstances in reference to the deployment of the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier to the East Sea for naval drills with South Korea, according to the KCNA.

sshluck@yna.co.kr

yunhwanchae@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 채윤환 · October 14, 2022

3. Moscow–Pyongyang cooperation remains muted

Excerpts:

While North Korea has long been accustomed to international isolation, things are different for Russia. Russia is now largely isolated internationally and in need of support. If it continues to remain stuck in a prolonged war with Ukraine, the implications for Russia’s international diplomatic position and its domestic economy will not be positive. That is likely one of the reasons why Moscow reached out to Pyongyang after the outbreak of the war.

But North Korea is calculating and strategic. Pyongyang will not take unnecessary risks if the rewards are insufficient. North Korean officials may continue providing verbal support to Russia, but this doesn’t mean they are prepared to have their own people die in a war that means little to them. Although North Korea would engage with the proposal to send labour to the Donbas region, this would only be possible if Russia manages to win the war.

Until then, North Korea remains emboldened while Russia’s options look increasingly limited.

Moscow–Pyongyang cooperation remains muted | East Asia Forum

eastasiaforum.org · by Gabriela Bernal · October 12, 2022

Author: Gabriela Bernal, UNKS

Moscow and Pyongyang are taking active steps to strengthen their alliance. The situation may look like a win–win for both sides, but North Korea has more to gain from cooperation than Russia.

Russia has long been one of North Korea’s closest allies, with their relationship dating back to 1945 when Korea was divided into North and South. The close ties between the two nations were confirmed earlier this year through North Korea’s support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Russia soon reciprocated the gesture by vetoing additional sanctions proposed by the United States against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at the UN in May 2022. That marked a significant move by Moscow since Russia had never before vetoed UN sanctions against North Korea and had even implemented them in the past. Russia’s support for North Korea in 2022 is far more public and noteworthy than over the past few decades.

After North Korea recognised the ‘independence’ of the Russian-backed Ukrainian breakaway republics in July 2022, proposals to bring North Korean labour to the Donbas region began making headlines. That would provide the North Korean government with much-needed foreign currency, which has been difficult to acquire throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Although Russia supported sanctions in 2017 requiring UN member states to expel all North Korean workers from their territories, Moscow’s tone seems to have changed. But North Korean labour would only benefit Russia if it ends up winning the war in Ukraine.

Another surprise came in August 2022, when the New York Post reported that North Korea was offering Russia 100,000 ‘volunteer troops’ for their Ukraine offensive. Although the claim was difficult to verify, it raised concerns over how closely Russia and North Korea were cooperating behind the scenes. But North Korea is unlikely to send troops to fight in Ukraine, as this would come at a major political cost that is likely not worth the risk for Pyongyang.

In early September, the United States accused Russia of trying to buy ‘millions of rockets and artillery shells’ from North Korea to use in the war in Ukraine. Russia has already violated international sanctions by reportedly purchasing weapons from Iran. But military experts are sceptical about the quality of North Korean weapons and how much they would really help the Russians in Ukraine.

North Korea tried to put the rumour to rest in late September when an unnamed Ministry of Defence official said the country was not selling weapons to Russia. ‘We have never exported weapons or ammunition to Russia before and we [do] not plan to export them’, the official was quoted as saying. The official accused the United States and other ‘hostile forces’ of spreading rumours to ‘pursue its base political and military aims’.

Given that plans between Moscow and Pyongyang remain in the realm of imagination, there is no significant cause for concern for the time being. As it currently stands, North Korea has more to gain from cooperation than Russia. While Russia may still lose the war or remain bogged down in Ukraine for an unforeseeable period of time, North Korea stands to gain foreign currency from potential cooperation with Russia and, more importantly, gain Russian support at the UN.

With Russian and Chinese support at the UN, North Korea is likely to feel emboldened to take greater risks than ever before. Since further sanctions cannot be implemented without the agreement of these two permanent members of the UN Security Council, having Moscow and Beijing in its corner means a great deal to Pyongyang. Beijing has implied that it would not even support additional sanctions if North Korea conducted a seventh nuclear test.

While North Korea has long been accustomed to international isolation, things are different for Russia. Russia is now largely isolated internationally and in need of support. If it continues to remain stuck in a prolonged war with Ukraine, the implications for Russia’s international diplomatic position and its domestic economy will not be positive. That is likely one of the reasons why Moscow reached out to Pyongyang after the outbreak of the war.

But North Korea is calculating and strategic. Pyongyang will not take unnecessary risks if the rewards are insufficient. North Korean officials may continue providing verbal support to Russia, but this doesn’t mean they are prepared to have their own people die in a war that means little to them. Although North Korea would engage with the proposal to send labour to the Donbas region, this would only be possible if Russia manages to win the war.

Until then, North Korea remains emboldened while Russia’s options look increasingly limited.

Gabriela Bernal is a PhD candidate at the University of North Korean Studies, Seoul.

eastasiaforum.org · by Gabriela Bernal · October 12, 2022

4. S. Korea slaps its first unilateral sanctions on N. Korea in 5 years over nuke, missile threats

We will never see another "Sunshine Policy" any time soon. Between UN, US, and ROK sanctions, the regime cannot be bailed out as it was beginning in 1997.

Given the conditions inside north Korea and regime actions, we could see what we expected to happen following the Arduous March of the famine of 1994-1996.

Beware the indications and warnings.

(LEAD) S. Korea slaps its first unilateral sanctions on N. Korea in 5 years over nuke, missile threats | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · October 14, 2022

(ATTN: UPDATES throughout with details; RECASTS headline; ADDS byline)

By Yi Wonju

SEOUL, Oct. 14 (Yonhap) -- South Korea said Friday it has put 15 North Korean individuals and 16 institutions on its blacklist in its first unilateral sanctions against Pyongyang in nearly five years in response to its evolving nuclear and missile threats highlighted by unrelenting missile launches and the stated drills by tactical nuclear operation units.

The people on the new list include officials at shipping firms and organizations related to the North's missile program, as well as those involved in the procurement of supplies for weapons of mass destruction.

"We strongly condemn North Korea for staging a series of missile provocations with unprecedented frequency recently and suggesting the use of tactical nukes against us," the foreign ministry said.

The new sanctions come as the North has ratcheted up tensions on the peninsula with a barrage of provocative missile launches in recent weeks amid growing concerns it may soon conduct a nuclear test.

This marks the first time the South Korean government has slapped sanctions on the North since 2017, following Pyongyang's sixth nuclear test. It is the first set of sanctions against the North since the launch of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration in May.

The ministry said it would consider slapping additional sanctions on Pyongyang in case it stages further provocations.

"The latest unilateral sanctions hold importance in that (such a measure) was taken for the first time in five years and this is not the end," a ministry official told reporters on condition of anonymity. "We plan to impose additional unilateral sanctions against North Korea's provocations and to discuss ways to improve the effectiveness of sanctions in close coordination with the United States, Japan, Australia, the EU and other friendly countries."

The listed individuals include those from Korea Ryonbong General Corp., known as a defense conglomerate specializing in acquisition for North Korea's defense industries, and Second Academy of Natural Sciences, now known as Academy of the National Defense Science, which is responsible for the development of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons.

The institutions, mostly shipping companies, include the Ministry of Rocket Industry, Hapjanggang Trading Corp., Korea Rounsan Trading Corp. as well as the North's Maritime Administration and Ministry of Crude Oil Industry.

The latest sanctions by Seoul are widely viewed as largely symbolic, as all transactions between the two Koreas have been virtually banned for years. The individuals and entities are already on the blacklist announced by the U.S. government from December 2016 to May 2022, according to the ministry.

julesyi@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · October 14, 2022

5. NSC lambasts North Korea’s overnight provocations

One of the positive outcomes of north Korean actions could be driving improved trilateral cooperation.

We should keep in mind that we deter war or a resumption of hostilities. It is very hard to deter provocations. Preventing war is job one. Whenever we say that we are going to deter provocations and then north Korea conducts one we undermine our legitimacy. We have been successful in deterring a resumption of war for 69 years and we need to ensure that record is sustained.

I am going to put up a sign in my office that says "It has been ___ days since the last provocation." I wonder if we will ever get to a number in double digits any time soon.

Excerpt:

Kim Gunn, Seoul's special representative for Korean Peninsula peace and security affairs, also reaffirmed the commitment to deter North Korean threats in his talks with Washington’s special representative for North Korea Sung Kim, and Takehiro Funakoshi, director general for Asian and Oceanian affairs at Japan’s Foreign Ministry.

NSC lambasts North Korea’s overnight provocations

koreaherald.com · by Jo He-rim · October 14, 2022

President Yoon Suk-yeol speaks to reporters as he arrives at the presidential office in Seoul on Friday. (Yonhap)

South Korea’s National Security Council on Friday strongly condemned North Korea for carrying out a series of military provocations overnight, including an artillery drill in violation of an inter-Korean military agreement.

Early on Friday, Pyongyang fired some 170 artillery shots into maritime “buffer zones” in the east and west coast. It also launched a short-range ballistic missile toward the East Sea.

Prior to the launch of the ballistic missile and artillery shots, the North flew about 10 warplanes staging a menacing flight close to the inter-Korean border, prompting the South Korean Air Force to send its F-35A stealth fighters to the scene.

Over the barrage of provocations, the National Security Council held an emergency meeting to discuss response measures.

Top security officials, including National Security Advisor Kim Sung-han and ministers, noted how the recent ballistic missile tests by the North came with an unprecedented frequency and were fired from various places at different times. They agreed that the recent provocations clearly constituted a violation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions, the presidential office said.

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol on Friday said the North’s artillery firing is a violation of the Comprehensive Military Agreement signed between the two Koreas in 2018, which calls for both sides to halt of all hostile military activity.

"We're reviewing the cases one by one, but we are sure it is a violation of the Sept. 19 accord,” Yoon said.

To a media inquiry, the US State Department also confirmed that the series of provocations carried out by the North overnight on Friday is a clear violation of the UNSC resolution, threatening the security on the Korean Peninsula and the surrounding regions.

Seoul’s top nuclear envoy held separate phone calls with his US and Japanese counterparts to agree that the overnight provocations by Pyongyang is a violation of the UNSC resolution as well as the inter-Korean accord, according to the Foreign Ministry.

Kim Gunn, Seoul's special representative for Korean Peninsula peace and security affairs, also reaffirmed the commitment to deter North Korean threats in his talks with Washington’s special representative for North Korea Sung Kim, and Takehiro Funakoshi, director general for Asian and Oceanian affairs at Japan’s Foreign Ministry.

By Jo He-rim (herim@heraldcorp.com)

koreaherald.com · by Jo He-rim · October 14, 2022

6. Nearly dozen N. Korean military aircraft identified flying near inter-Korean air boundary: JCS

Not mentioned but we should remember that the Comprehensive Military Agreement established no fly zones near the DMZ. This is likely another violation of that agreement. The alliance has lived up to the agreement while the regime has not.

Nearly dozen N. Korean military aircraft identified flying near inter-Korean air boundary: JCS

koreaherald.com · by Yonhap · October 14, 2022

By Yonhap

Published : Oct 14, 2022 - 07:06 Updated : Oct 14, 2022 - 07:06

(123rf)

A group of some 10 North Korean military aircraft were flying south of a special reconnaissance line set by South Korea, Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said Friday.

Seoul scrambled military aircraft, including F-35A fighter jets, in response, according to the JCS.

The JCS said the North Korean aircraft were detected flying about 25 kilometers north of the Military Demarcation Line in the central region and about 12 kilometers north of the Northern Limit Line, a de facto inter-Korean border in the Yellow Sea, between 10:30 p.m. Thursday and 0:20 a.m. Friday. They were also spotted near the inter-Korean border in the eastern part of the peninsula, according to the JCS.

The North Korean aircraft were detected south of the Special Reconnaissance Line that triggers a response by Seoul, according to the JCS.

It marks the second time in a week North Korea flew military aircraft near the inter-Korean border.

Pyongyang had a group of 12 fighter jets and bombers fly north of the Special Reconnaissance Line last Thursday. (Yonhap)

7. N.Korea Diversifies Nuke Warhead Delivery System

Trying to create a targeting dilemma for the alliance. But we gain intelligence with each firing. We should make sure that Kim knows that he is giving us an advantage each time he conducts a launch.

N.Korea Diversifies Nuke Warhead Delivery System

english.chosun.com

October 14, 2022 11:51

North Korea's firing of two long-range cruise missiles early Wednesday morning shows how keen the regime is to diversify its delivery systems for nuclear warheads.

Cruise missiles are capable of carrying a 200 to 300 ㎏ payload, which is lighter than those of ballistic missiles. If a North Korean cruise missile can carry a nuclear warhead, it means that the North's technology to miniaturize nuclear warheads is making great strides.

"We assume that the North already obtained the technology to make 500-㎏ nuclear warheads around 2017," a military source here said. "It's therefore reasonable to speculate that it has developed the technology further by now."

The South Korean military has not made its estimate public. The Defense White Paper published last year simply says that the North's technology seems to have reached a "considerable level."

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un (center) poses with soldiers in an undisclosed location in Pyongyang on Wednesday, in this grab from [North] Korean Central Television the following day.

The consensus seems to be that a small 500-㎏ nuclear warhead can be mounted on short-range ballistic missiles that are capable of striking anywhere in South Korea. These include Iskander missiles that can avoid interception, as well as missiles from multiple rocket launchers. Intercontinental ballistic missiles carry warheads weighing 1 ton or more.

There is speculation that the regime will test a tactical nuclear bomb or small nuclear warhead with a low yield in an upcoming nuclear test. The ability to mount a small nuclear warhead on a missile means that the North has the ability to use tactical nuclear weapons at will.

Major facilities of the South Korean military, U.S. bases in Japan and even in Guam would come under threat from such attacks.

N.Korea Launches Flurry of Provocations Overnight

Kim Jong-un 'Watched Simulated Nuke Attacks on S.Korea'

China, Russia Block UNSC Statement Against N.Korea

S.Korean Missile Crashes on Golf Course

N.Korea Fires Missile over Japan

N.Korea Fires Missiles for 3rd Time in 5 Days

N.Korea Fires More Missiles into East Sea

N.Korea Fires Ballistic Missile Before S.Korea-U.S. Drills

U.S. Calls for Dialogue with N.Korea Fall on Deaf Ears

Yoon Vows to Thwart N.Korea's Nuclear Ambitions

N.Korea Fires 2 Cruise Missiles into West Sea

Yoon Offers Economic Aid If N.Korea Scraps Nukes

U.S. Warns of 'Swift, Forceful Response' to N.Korean Nuke Test

'Time of Appeasing N.Korea Is Over,' Says Yoon

U.S., Korea 'Will Use Nuclear Arms to Defend Themselves'

english.chosun.com

8. Reasons for S. Korea’s loss of UN Human Rights Council membership

Conclusion:

The election result will inevitably influence the government’s pursuit of “value diplomacy,” which highlights freedom and human rights. The world will be torn apart amid the new Cold War geopolitical environment. The resistance from third-world countries against human rights policies shaped by advanced nations will intensify. There is no time to blame. The government must rigorously examine where the responsibility for the loss of membership lies, which is truly a disappointing result given South Korea’s standing as the world’s No. 9 donor to the UN regular budget. This is necessary for South Korea to play its role as a key pillar nation in international society.

Reasons for S. Korea’s loss of UN Human Rights Council membership

donga.com

Posted October. 14, 2022 07:38,

Updated October. 14, 2022 07:38

Reasons for S. Korea’s loss of UN Human Rights Council membership. October. 14, 2022 07:38. .

South Korea lost the UN Human Rights Council membership election, failing to serve the second consecutive term. Four seats were distributed to the Asia-Pacific States, and South Korea gained 123 votes and stood fifth. For the first time, South Korea lost its UN Human Rights Council membership since 2006, when it was elected as the founding member of the Council. Indeed, it is shocking that South Korea fell behind countries such as Bangladesh and Vietnam, which can hardly be considered countries that uphold human rights standards.

The UN Human Rights Council is one of the three major councils in the United Nations. Its importance is growing with increased human rights violations worldwide, including China’s crackdown on ethnic minorities, discrimination against women in Iran and the Middle East, and human rights atrocities in Ukraine following Russia’s invasion. Losing membership at the UN Human Rights Council means that South Korea can no longer speak up for global human rights issues, even in relation to the Korean Peninsula, such as resolutions on human rights abuses in North Korea.

The loss of membership is partly attributable to South Korea’s passive attitude toward raising its voice against human rights abuses in North Korea. South Korea has not participated in the group of nations adopting resolutions on the human rights situation in North Korea four times in a row since 2019. On the domestic front, South Korea enacted the so-called anti-leaflet law. It pressed to pass press arbitration-related laws, which brought about severe resistance from international human rights groups.

Another cause of defeat is the government’s complacency towards the election. Although the competition for membership is fierce, the South Korean government did not have a decent strategy to win the seat. There are 14 international organization elections that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has decided to run for. The government, however, squandered its assets in the ILO Secretary General election, where South Korea gained only two votes and exhausted all its resources that could have been used for other key elections. Yet, it is reported that the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations had no idea it would lose the election, which raises doubt about its competency.

The election result will inevitably influence the government’s pursuit of “value diplomacy,” which highlights freedom and human rights. The world will be torn apart amid the new Cold War geopolitical environment. The resistance from third-world countries against human rights policies shaped by advanced nations will intensify. There is no time to blame. The government must rigorously examine where the responsibility for the loss of membership lies, which is truly a disappointing result given South Korea’s standing as the world’s No. 9 donor to the UN regular budget. This is necessary for South Korea to play its role as a key pillar nation in international society.

한국어

donga.com

9. South Korea scrambles jets as Kim Jong Un sends warplanes near border

South Korea scrambles jets as Kim Jong Un sends warplanes near border

The Washington Post · by Min Joo Kim · October 14, 2022

SEOUL — South Korea scrambled fighter jets overnight Thursday after North Korean warplanes flew close to the border dividing the two countries. The move, which was widely seen as provocative even by Pyongyang’s standards, came as the North launched another ballistic missile early Friday morning, the latest of several recent weapons tests by Kim Jong Un’s regime.

North Korean aircraft flew as close as seven miles north of a de facto maritime border between the two Koreas, according to the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). Pyongyang’s warplanes were also detected just over a dozen miles north of a land border.

The incidents took place between late Thursday and early Friday, and about 10 of Pyongyang’s warplanes were involved. North Korea also dispatched warplanes near the South last week, but the latest flights — which are considered highly unusual — veered even closer to Seoul’s airspace. The South Korean military said it “conducted an emergency sortie with its superior air force, including the F-35A” fighter jets, but no clashes were reported.

Seoul also said Pyongyang had fired artillery shells into maritime buffer areas established in 2018 as part of inter-Korean peace efforts.

“The [North] Korean People’s Army sends a stern warning to the South Korean military inciting military tension in the front-line area with reckless action,” a spokesman for the General Staff of North Korea’s army said, according to a statement carried by the state-run Central News Agency.

The official said the “countermeasures” were in response to earlier South Korean artillery fire that lasted some 10 hours. The South Korean Defense Ministry said it had conducted artillery drills at a site just south of the border with North Korea but that the exercises did not violate a 2018 military agreement.

“To mark his 10th year in office, Kim Jong Un needs to step up as a heroic leader — and he has nothing but nuclear arms to show off as achievement,” said Uk Yang, a military strategy expert at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul.

The recent military drills and tests held by the North, while threatening, also expose the limits of Pyongyang’s forces, he said. The warplanes were “antiquated” and suggest that the provocations are “signs of desperation,” he added.

North Korea says it views recent military drills by the United States, South Korea and Japan as a threat. The allies say the training exercises are defensive in nature. South Korea’s presidential office on Friday convened an emergency meeting of its National Security Council and pledged to work with allies to prepare for further provocations from the North.

Tensions continue to build while nuclear negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington remain stalled. North Korea has carried out more than 40 missile launches this year and this week, Kim supervised a cruise missile test and pledged to strengthen the regime’s nuclear arms program to ward off enemies. The North Korean leader said his nuclear forces were fully prepared for “actual war,” according to state media.

On Friday, South Korea also imposed unilateral sanctions against North Korea for the first time in roughly five years. The measures target 15 North Korean individuals and 16 organizations involved in nuclear and missile development, according to the South’s Foreign Ministry.

The short-range ballistic missile that North Korea launched Friday was fired at about 1:49 a.m. toward waters between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, according to the South Korean military. The missile flew some 435 miles and reached an altitude of about 31 miles, the JCS said.

The Washington Post · by Min Joo Kim · October 14, 2022

10. North Korea Conducts Overnight Ballistic Missile Launch

Key point:

It wasn’t immediately known if Mr. Kim had attended the Friday launch. But part of North Korea’s aim at firing missiles at unusual hours and from unconventional places is to demonstrate the country has the ability to evade U.S. and allied missile defenses in the region, weapons experts say.

North Korea Conducts Overnight Ballistic Missile Launch

Kim Jong Un’s regime fired short-range ballistic missile early Friday, defense officials in South Korea and Japan said

https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-korea-conducts-overnight-ballistic-missile-launch-11665696203?mod=Searchresults_pos4&page=1

By Timothy W. MartinFollow

and Dasl YoonFollow

Updated Oct. 14, 2022 1:10 am ET

SEOUL—North Korea conducted another middle-of-the-night weapons launch early Friday, Seoul and Tokyo officials said, prompting South Korea to fly jet fighters and impose unilateral sanctions, as tensions grow on the Korean Peninsula.

A short-range ballistic missile was fired from the Sunan area on the outskirts of Pyongyang at 1:49 a.m. local time, Seoul’s military said. The missile traveled roughly 400 miles after hitting a maximum altitude of 31 miles, before landing in the waters between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, Tokyo’s Defense Ministry said.

The weapons launch followed apparent North Korean military air exercises, Seoul’s military said. It said the exercises involved about 10 planes that flew just several miles away from the inter-Korean border, from late Thursday evening to just past midnight, firing about 170 artillery shots off North Korea’s east and west coasts. In response, South Korea scrambled its F-35A jet fighters and other assets.

After North Korea launched the short-range missile on Friday, its army said the country had needed to take unspecified “strong military countermeasures,” according to Pyongyang’s state media.

That was a reaction to 10 hours of artillery-fire drills conducted Thursday by South Korea’s army. South Korea’s presidential office later said the drills were part of regular military exercises.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

The 10-Point.

A personal, guided tour to the best scoops and stories every day in The Wall Street Journal.

Preview

South Korea’s National Security Council convened a meeting following the overnight provocations, calling the artillery shots a violation of a 2018 inter-Korean military pact that bans hostile acts in the border area. Japanese Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada said that North Korea has “persistently and unilaterally” escalated provocations, calling the spree of tests absolutely unacceptable.

The U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said the North’s latest missile launch doesn’t pose an immediate threat to U.S. personnel or territory, or its allies.

On Friday, South Korea issued its first unilateral sanctions against Pyongyang in nearly five years, blacklisting 15 North Koreans and 16 organizations involved in Pyongyang’s weapons development.

Last week, the U.S. imposed new sanctions of its own on North Korean entities and individuals who supported Pyongyang’s development of weapons, days after the launch of an intermediate-range missile over Japan. North Korea’s ballistic missile launches are barred by United Nations Security Council resolutions.

Any efforts at the U.N. Security Council to pursue further penalties against Pyongyang have been blocked by Russia and China, two of North Korea’s close allies who have advocated for a relaxing of sanctions.

The two Koreas have traded blame over who is ratcheting up tensions between the two countries. In an address to the U.N. last month, North Korea’s ambassador to the U.N. called the joint military exercises between Washington and Seoul a dangerous act that is driving the situation on the Korean Peninsula “to the brink of war.” South Korean officials have said North Korea’s continued provocations will only lead to a strengthened military cooperation with the U.S. and Japan.

North Korea over the years conducted many of its weapons tests in the hours after sunrise. But Pyongyang has made an exception in recent days: a Sunday launch of two ballistic missiles occurred between 1:48 a.m. and 1:58 a.m. local time, while a Wednesday test of a pair of long-range cruise missiles began at around 2 a.m., Seoul’s military has said.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has implored his military to advance the country’s nuclear program, while expressing disinterest in diplomacy with Washington and Seoul.

In recent weeks, the 38-year-old Mr. Kim has guided a spree of missile tests that simulated tactical nuclear strikes against the U.S. and South Korea—including a launch that Pyongyang claimed had been fired from an underwater silo. He also oversaw the Wednesday launch of cruise missiles, which stayed airborne for nearly three hours and flew in oval and figure-eight patterns, Pyongyang’s state media said.

What’s Next After North Korea’s Latest Barrage of Weapon Tests

Why a light aircraft carrier is a good idea

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2022/10/13/opinion/columns/light-aircraft-carrier-Korea-Japan/20221013194956483.html

Moon Geun-sik

The author, a Ret. navy captain, is a professor at Kyonggi University Graduate School of Politics.

In 1996, when Japan claimed sovereignty over the Dokdo islets, President Kim Young-sam pushed for a plan to build a light aircraft carrier. “I will fix Japan’s rudeness,” he said. But a year later, military leaders put the brakes on the scheme with the reasoning that “North Korea’s threats should be addressed first.” Since then, the Moon Jae-in administration resumed the project and allocated the budget. But the Yoon Suk-yeol administration is reconsidering the project yet again.

The Moon administration based its decision to build a light aircraft carrier on the need to respond to the North Korean threat as well as maritime security threats from China and Japan. But I think the project is being reconsidered because of a lack of justification for a light aircraft carrier. The role of such a carrier should be better explained, and the navy should inform the public of all possible situations that can occur at sea.

We vividly remember the intrusion of Japanese patrol boats in 2006 into the territorial waters of Dokdo, a Korean territory. The situation actually escalated into a state of emergency. At that time, Korea prepared for a push-out operation by mobilizing warships, but the plan failed because Korea’s naval strength was inferior to that of Japan in terms of the number and size of warships. As a result, active responses such as warning shots could not be made. Our navy had to overcome the crisis with mental strength and combat capabilities.

Just as the warships of the two countries were on the verge of a clash, emergency mediation by the United States barely ended the crisis. It is dizzying to imagine what would have happened without the help of the U.S. I missed the decisive vision of President Kim Young-sam, who ordered a light aircraft carrier 10 years before the incident, as if he predicted such an aggression. While there has not been a direct threat posed in Korean territorial waters, Japan still claims its sovereignty over Dokdo by augmenting naval forces, including aircraft carriers.

The bigger problem is China. China recently posed direct and indirect threats in Korea’s southwestern waters. According to data submitted by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under the Ministry of National Defense to the National Assembly, over 260 Chinese warships entered South Korean waters last year while the number of Chinese aircraft violations of the Korean Air Defense Identification Zone (Kadiz) increases rapidly each year.

The activities that China engages to turn the South China Sea into an inland sea are now in progress in our southwestern sea. China is arbitrarily building artificial islands on seven reefs in the Spratly Islands to make the South China Sea its inland sea. In March, three artificial islands became China’s military bases as missiles and fighter jets were deployed. After ignoring its agreements with Asean member countries, China is poised to turn the South China Sea into an inland sea and declare it as Chinese territorial waters and an air defense identification zone.

Once China completes the mission of transforming the South China Sea into an inland sea, it will likely turn to the East China Sea, which includes Korea’s West Sea (or the Yellow Sea) and Ieo Island. Some moves are already underway. China has installed nine fixed buoys in the middle waters of the West Sea and demonstrated mobilization of an aircraft carrier fleet near the 124-degrees East longitude. China frequently violates the Kadiz, explores the Ieo Island to the south of Jeju Island, marks it on the Chinese map, and expands maritime and air patrols over the rock islet.

Our navy must inform the public of the grim situation as it is, and prepare weapons for defense. Our Second and Third Fleets are guarding the southwestern seas, but the size of naval vessels are dwarfed by Chinese warships. China is trying to dominate Korean waters with a fleet of 60,000- to 70,000-ton carriers in the Yellow Sea, while Korea is responding with only 3,000- to 7,000-ton destroyers.

It is realistically impossible to have naval power on par with China, the world’s second largest economy. Yet, we need at least one light aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea to keep Chinese aircraft carriers from crossing the sea arbitrarily. Some say that it would be more cost-efficient to arm our forces with missiles rather than a light aircraft carrier to respond to Chinese aircraft carriers. But I want to ask them: Could Korea make a preemptive missile attack on a Chinese vessel that invaded Korean territorial waters without permission? If not, should we have reefs taken by China like the Philippines and bring the case to the International Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)?

Our navy should be reminded that Korea would have been helpless without the help from the U.S. when Japan invaded Dokdo’s territorial waters in 2006. The naval leaders must remember that China’s moves to turn Korea’s southwest sea into an inland sea could be a second Dokdo incident. The plan to build a light aircraft carrier should be promoted as it is the optimal response strategy for our navy.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.

12. The nuclear umbrella is really needed now

How do we provide strategic reassurance to our blood ally?

Excerpt:

What really matters for the conservative government is getting an assurance of U.S. extended deterrence, including its nuclear umbrella. The argument for South Korea building its own nuclear armaments is rooted in the suspicion that the U.S. might not unfurl its nuclear umbrella to protect its ally at a critical moment. To effectively dispel such concerns, the Yoon administration must consider every possible scenario and devise detailed action plans. Luckily, the government has started to reactivate the Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group between vice foreign and defense ministers of the two allies. But that is just the beginning.

Thursday

October 13, 2022

dictionary + A - A

The nuclear umbrella is really needed now

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2022/10/13/opinion/editorials/nuclear-umbrella-Korea-US/20221013195516388.html

After North Korea’s nuclear threats, South Korea’s security concerns are growing fast. The foundation for the South’s North Korea policy has been based on the possibility of Pyongyang denuclearizing. Now, calls are growing to fundamentally review South Korea’s security strategy by putting all available options on the table. Politicians and security experts are presenting diverse ideas such as the South having its own nuclear armaments, the redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons or a sharing of U.S. nukes, as with NATO.

Each argument has reasonable aspects because nukes can only be countered by nukes. Given the potential repercussions, however, the issue is not simple. If the leadership of the People Power Party (PPP) continues talking about withdrawal from the Non-proliferation Treaty and scrapping of the 1992 Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, followed by opposition from the Democratic Party (DP), the confusion will only help North Korea.

Moreover, South Korea alone cannot arm itself with nuclear weapons or redeploy tactical nukes. Such ideas would have immense ramifications, and the Yoon Suk-yeol administration must approach the issue carefully. Instead of blindly riding on the tide or joining political offensives or responding emotionally, government officials must think before they speak — or act.

What really matters for the conservative government is getting an assurance of U.S. extended deterrence, including its nuclear umbrella. The argument for South Korea building its own nuclear armaments is rooted in the suspicion that the U.S. might not unfurl its nuclear umbrella to protect its ally at a critical moment. To effectively dispel such concerns, the Yoon administration must consider every possible scenario and devise detailed action plans. Luckily, the government has started to reactivate the Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group between vice foreign and defense ministers of the two allies. But that is just the beginning.

As North Korea continues nuclear saber-rattle, elevating the extended deterrence to the highest level is unavoidable, including the deployment of U.S. nuclear assets to the peninsula. The Yoon administration must find effective ways to elevate trust.

The alarming security situation in the peninsula does not lend itself to mistakes. If the government makes a fumble, South Koreans could live under the North Korean nuclear threat permanently. A thorough review of our security strategy is demanded. It is not the time for national division over our response to the ever-growing nuclear threat from across the border.

13. What is behind North Korea's rising belligerence?

The author would have benefited from a conversation with Professor Sung Yoon Lee.

Most analysts from South Korea never go far enough in explaining regime objectives and strategy - they never get to peninsula domination and unification

Excerpts:

"There seems to be no clear purpose for the recent actions," said Go Myong-hyun, a senior fellow of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. "In the past, we used to say there is an equation that the North's provocations are aimed at greater leverage in talks. However, the recent moves are not the case."

In the past, the North's strategy and goal was gaining U.S. recognition as a nuclear state and lifting the sanctions that are hampering its trade. However, North Korea is now assumed to have produced many nuclear weapons and there is less attractiveness in gaining such recognition, Go said.

"Rather, the recent moves are assumed to be aimed at gaining international attention for its seventh nuclear test with missile launches and other provocations, and showing its force to the world," Go said. "Bragging about its nuclear forces seems to be the ultimate purpose of the recent moves."

What is behind North Korea's rising belligerence?

The Korea Times · by 2022-10-14 20:22 | North Korea · October 14, 2022

In this photo carried by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency on Oct. 10, North Korean soldiers stage an artillery firing exercise. YonhapPyongyang stages barrage of military provocations overnight

By Nam Hyun-woo

North Korea staged multiple military actions including a missile launch, air drill and artillery firing on a single night, Thursday to Friday, in what appears to be unprecedented belligerence in recent years. Experts said tensions on the Korean Peninsula are only increasing as the two Koreas resort to hardline approaches, and it is becoming more difficult to predict what the ultimate purpose of the North's recent provocations is.

According to Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), North Korea on early Friday launched a short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) into the East Sea and fired about 170 rounds of artillery shells into the East and West Seas and some of the rounds landed in maritime buffer zones set under a 2018 inter-Korean agreement on ceasing hostile military actions.

Also, the JCS said that more than 10 North Korean military aircraft staged menacing flights close to the Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the border area from 10:30 p.m., Thursday, to 0:20, Friday, which caused the South Korean Air Force to scramble its F-35A stealth fighters and other assets to the scene.

The North Korean aircraft staged the flights between the NLL and the Tactical Action Line, which was set by South Korea's military about 20 to 50 kilometers from the NLL, to earn time to react to the North's aerial provocations. It was the first case of North Korean aircraft flying south to the Tactical Acton Line since October 2012.

The JCS said the rounds did not drop in South Korean waters but landed in a maritime area north of the NLL in the buffer zone. Since the 2018 comprehensive military agreement prohibits artillery shelling in waters in the buffer zone, the JCS said, "The North has clearly violated the agreement."

Seoul's Ministry of National Defense sent a statement to Pyongyang to note that the artillery firing was a clear violation of the military agreement, but the North is yet to show any response.

Instead, North Korea's Korean People's Army said it conducted the shelling "as a strong military countermeasure" to South Korea, which had conducted artillery exercises for more than 10 hours.

The JCS said that U.S. Forces Korea had staged a drill involving multiple launch rocket systems at a firing range in Gangwon Province, but that it was "a planned exercise" which had launched rockets toward the south outside of the military buffer zone.

Also on Friday, the South Korean government announced independent sanctions, blacklisting 15 North Korean individuals and 16 institutions for their involvement in North Korea's nuclear and missile programs and efforts to evade other sanctions. It was the first case of such unilateral sanctions by Seoul in five years, when it imposed one in 2017 in response to an intercontinental ballistic missile launch by Pyongyang.

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol told reporters Friday morning, "This type of material provocation by the North is always followed by a political offensive and socio-psychological offensive aimed at reunifying the Korean Peninsula under communism," and that the top priority is "having a firm awareness of the enemy and a strong commitment to defending the Constitution by upholding our liberal democracy."President Yoon Suk-yeol gestures as he answers reporters' questions at his office in Yongsan District, Seoul, Friday. Yonhap

Unclear intentions

With greater tensions added to the two Koreas, which are already walking a tightrope following the North's string of missile tests since last month, experts said that the Korean Peninsula now seems to be mired in a vicious spiral, and that it is becoming more difficult to ascertain North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's ultimate goal with the continued tests.

"There seems to be no clear purpose for the recent actions," said Go Myong-hyun, a senior fellow of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. "In the past, we used to say there is an equation that the North's provocations are aimed at greater leverage in talks. However, the recent moves are not the case."

In the past, the North's strategy and goal was gaining U.S. recognition as a nuclear state and lifting the sanctions that are hampering its trade. However, North Korea is now assumed to have produced many nuclear weapons and there is less attractiveness in gaining such recognition, Go said.

"Rather, the recent moves are assumed to be aimed at gaining international attention for its seventh nuclear test with missile launches and other provocations, and showing its force to the world," Go said. "Bragging about its nuclear forces seems to be the ultimate purpose of the recent moves."

A TV screen shows a file image of North Korea's missile launch during a news program at Seoul Station in Seoul, South Korea, Friday. North Korea early Friday launched a short-range ballistic missile toward its eastern waters and flew warplanes near the border with South Korea, further raising animosities triggered by the North's recent barrage of weapons tests. AP-Yonhap

Hong Min, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification, said Friday's provocations should be seen as its reaction against South Korea's strengthened military posture and Seoul's debates over discarding the military agreement so as to contain Pyongyang's nuclear test.

"It was unusual that the North announced that it was reacting to a 10-hour long artillery drill," Hong said. "It seems like the shelling was aimed at testing whether Seoul really thinks about breaking the military agreement. If the North dared to ignore the agreement, it can simply arm its soldiers in the Demilitarized Zone."

Hong said that many South Korean politicians assume that "the North is staging the military actions with some great purpose in mind," but there are fair chances that Pyongyang is just responding to Seoul's stance of enhancing extended deterrence with the U.S.

"If we look into the situation from North Korea's shoes, South Korea's new Yoon government abruptly started to mention extended deterrence," Hong said. "Then, it brought a U.S. aircraft carrier for naval drills, so the North also started to react. And now, South Korea is talking about deploying U.S. nuclear weapons or developing its own warheads."

"I'm not trying to justify the North's military actions, but it is questionable whether the current spiral of provocation-punishment is helpful in controlling the situation of the Korean Peninsula. … The North has become confident about its weapon system. Unlike in the past, there will not be a breather if the two sides keep raising tensions," he said.

The Korea Times · by 2022-10-14 20:22 | North Korea · October 14, 2022

14. South Korea prefers US ‘strategic assets’ to nuclear weapons, senior official says

Excerpt:

It is “most desirable” to deter the North using “U.S. strategic assets currently available on the Korean Peninsula,” rather than deploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, Vice Minister of National Defense Shin Beom Chul told SBS Radio on Thursday.

South Korea prefers US ‘strategic assets’ to nuclear weapons, senior official says

Stars and Stripes · by David Choi · October 13, 2022

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un watches a missile launch in this image released by the state-run Korean Central News Agency on Oct. 10, 2022. (KCNA)

CAMP HUMPHREYS, South Korea — Positioning U.S. strategic assets in South Korea is preferable to deploying nuclear arms there to match the threat from North Korea, a senior defense official in Seoul said Thursday.

It is “most desirable” to deter the North using “U.S. strategic assets currently available on the Korean Peninsula,” rather than deploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, Vice Minister of National Defense Shin Beom Chul told SBS Radio on Thursday.

The United States has roughly 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea as well as a state-of-the-art Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, system capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.

The defense ministry has primarily focused on the timely deployment of “strategic assets” in South Korea, rather than a “nuclear sharing” agreement with the U.S., Shin said.

His comments follow a call by the leader of the ruling People Power Party to scrap a 1991 inter-Korean denuclearization agreement that prohibits the South from possessing or producing nuclear weapons.

The agreement should be abolished if North Korea conducts its seventh nuclear test, Chung Jin-suk wrote Wednesday on his personal Facebook page.

“The moment of decision has come,” Chung said. The agreement has been turned into “scraps of toilet paper,” he added.

U.S. and South Korean officials have said North Korea, which has fired more than 40 missiles in 25 rounds of tests so far this year, is also prepared to test its first nuclear device since 2017.

The communist regime last fired two cruise missiles on Wednesday, according to North Korean state-run media and the South’s Ministry of National Defense. The North alarmed world leaders by launching a ballistic missile over Japan on Oct. 3.

A potential nuclear weapons program in South Korea would be at odds with existing U.S. policy. U.S. administrations under Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump have consistently stressed that the White House goal in the region is to rid the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons entirely.

“We will seek sustained diplomacy with North Korea to make tangible progress toward the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, while strengthening extended deterrence in the face of North Korean weapons of mass destruction and missile threats,” said Biden’s National Security Strategy released on Wednesday.

Former senior U.S. military officials have warned against deploying nuclear weapons in South Korea.

During a panel discussion hosted by The Korea Society in New York in November, former U.S. Forces Korea commander Robert Abrams said a South Korean nuclear weapons program is “unnecessary and it could potentially lead to misunderstanding and miscalculation by not just North Korea but other people in the region.”

“There’s been a lot of chatter lately about whether the Republic of Korea should develop its own nuclear weapons program — I’m not in favor of that,” Abrams said during the discussion, referring to South Korea. “I think that would be a bad idea. There’s a lot of unmentioned costs that go towards building a nuclear weapons program that I’m not sure has been well thought out.”

Stars and Stripes · by David Choi · October 13, 2022

15. It’s Time to Accept That North Korea Has Nuclear Weapons

Victory to Kim Jong Un.

Provide sanctions relief and conduct arms control negotiations.

We should ask if taking these actions will deter war? Will they prevent Kim Jong Un from pursuing his strategy that ultimately seeks to dominate the peninsula. Can we make that assumption based on seven decades of evidence?

It’s Time to Accept That North Korea Has Nuclear Weapons

nytimes.com · by Jeffrey Lewis · October 13, 2022

Credit...Illustration by Rebecca Chew/The New York Times; images by Nosyrevy and Komarov Vitaly, via Getty Images

The 30-year U.S. effort to compel North Korea to give up its ballistic missile and nuclear weapons capabilities has rested on offering Pyongyang a simple choice: a relationship with the United States, or weapons and isolation.

North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has made his choice. His government passed a law in September declaring the country a nuclear weapons state. Mr. Kim called that designation “irreversible” and ruled out further talks on denuclearization. The North has fired a dozen ballistic missiles in the past two months, is boasting of the ability to deploy tactical battlefield nuclear weapons and is expected to conduct another nuclear test — its seventh — perhaps as early as next week.

It’s time for the United States to face reality. Efforts to encourage Mr. Kim to abandon his weapons have not only failed, but he is as clear as ever about using them to protect his country.

Washington needs to contemplate the unthinkable: accepting that North Korea is a nuclear state.

Successive U.S. administrations have steadfastly refused to do that. It would be a setback for global nonproliferation and send the message that you can defy the international community — the United Nations has passed a series of resolutions condemning North Korea and imposing sanctions over the years — and get away with it.

But it also, ironically, may be the best way to reduce the persistent and growing threat of an inadvertent conflict on the Korean Peninsula by removing a major obstacle that prevents North Korea and the United States from meeting to work out their differences.

The risk of war has spiked over the past year as the two Koreas engaged in a rhetorical and actual arms race. North Korea’s decision to call itself a nuclear state appears to show Mr. Kim is worried about a pre-emptive strike aimed at killing him and decapitating his regime, and with good reason — South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s administration has placed new emphasis on a strategy of deterring a North Korean nuclear attack by preparing for pre-emptive strikes that could include targeting Pyongyang’s senior leadership.

North Korea vowed last month that any attempt to remove him from power would prompt a nuclear counterattack. But for that to work, it would mean granting other figures in his regime the authority to launch a nuclear counter-strike in his absence. This is deeply worrying. More people with that authority means more scope for a deadly miscalculation. Add to this the fact that North Korea’s actions have prompted calls in South Korea, which does not have nuclear weapons, to acquire them, and in Japan to bolster military spending and develop a stronger strike capability.

Something must be done to de-escalate the situation, but the United States has even fewer cards to play than before due to changes in the wider geopolitical landscape.

The Ukraine war has caused a deep rift between the United States and Russia and, to a lesser extent, Russia’s ally, China. The three big powers were crucial participants in previous multiparty negotiations to disarm North Korea, which ultimately failed. But Russia and China are now less likely to support U.S. pressure on North Korea; after Pyongyang resumed intercontinental ballistic missile tests this year, Beijing and Moscow vetoed a U.S. push for tighter sanctions on the North. Mr. Kim seems to have sensed the changed dynamic and has doubled down on his relationships with China and Russia.

If the past 30 years weren’t convincing enough, the current crisis shows that a new approach is sorely needed.

During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union showed they could sit down and discuss ways to reduce the risk of nuclear war. But nearly any ways in which America’s relations with North Korea might be improved — such as through economic cooperation or development assistance — are held hostage to Washington’s insistence that Pyongyang disarm first.

President Donald Trump’s attempt at diplomacy with Mr. Kim foundered on this very shoal: According to North Korea’s foreign minister, Ri Yong-ho, Mr. Kim had asked for some sanctions to be removed in exchange for his agreement to dismantle the North’s most important nuclear facility (Mr. Trump said Mr. Kim had asked for all sanctions to be removed in exchange for the closing of that facility). Not without complete disarmament, Mr. Kim was told. The talks collapsed in 2019 without an agreement, and Mr. Kim has used the subsequent years to build up his arsenal.

There is precedent for the United States to finesse the situation. Israel, India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, but Washington chose to live with that so long as they didn’t brandish their weapons.

Although Israel has never acknowledged its nuclear capability, it remains the worst-kept secret in the world. But it does not openly flaunt its capability, which made it much easier for Arab neighbors like Egypt not to pursue their own nuclear programs in response. The United States turned a blind eye to India until it conducted a round of tests in 1998. Washington pragmatically set aside its concerns over those tests to enable cooperation in other areas.

Had the Trump administration taken this approach three years ago, we might be in a very different place today. No, North Korea would not be disarmed by now. But we could be exploring other steps to reduce tension, might have secured commitments of good behavior from Pyongyang and perhaps even some gesture toward disarmament in exchange for sanctions relief and economic assistance. This is far from ideal, but vastly preferable to Pyongyang stockpiling weapons.

Mr. Kim may see opportunities in a more relaxed U.S. attitude, too. He wants nuclear weapons as protection but is smart enough to know that they also make him a target. He was willing to engage with Mr. Trump and may eventually be willing to do the same with President Biden.

Turning a blind eye to North Korea’s entry into the nuclear club will sting, but we are essentially already doing that: U.S. officials do little more than talk about how Mr. Kim’s nuclear program is unacceptable, as he builds bomb after bomb. It’s time to cut our losses, face reality and take steps to reduce the risk of war on the Korean Peninsula.

Jeffrey Lewis (@ArmsControlWonk) is an expert on nuclear nonproliferation at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey. He is also the author of a novel that imagines a nuclear war with North Korea.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

nytimes.com · by Jeffrey Lewis · October 13, 2022

16. North Korea still far away from tactical strike ability, experts say

North Korea still far away from tactical strike ability, experts say

Pyongyang said recent tests were a ‘simulation’ of attacking the South

By Sangmin Lee of RFA Korean

2022.10.11

rfa.org

Pyongyang is not yet in a position to deploy tactical nuclear weapons that could hit precise targets in South Korea but is likely to begin testing such weapons in the near future, experts told Radio Free Asia.

Recent high-profile missile tests carried out by the North were described by North Korean state media on Monday as having been a “simulation of loading tactical nuclear warheads” to strike military centers in the South.

But experts say the North is far from reaching such capabilities and was likely readying to test a tactical weapon – a smaller bomb not intended to cause widespread destruction – at its underground Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site, where its six previous nuclear weapons tests took place.

Olli Heinonen, a former deputy director-general for safeguards at the International Atomic Energy Agency, told RFA that Pyongyang did not have adequate fuel to produce multiple tactical nuclear weapons.

“The bulk of its plutonium has the wrong composition for short-range targeted strikes,” Heinonen said, adding that the North was striving “to produce good fissile material for miniaturizing nuclear weapons.”

Yet even once Pyongyang builds up enough of the plutonium, he added, the testing of weapons would lead supplies to be depleted.

“They need to conduct nuclear tests if they want to miniaturize weapons. Once they will test it, they will see if it works,” Heinonen said. “Only then can they manufacture more efficient and smaller weapons.”

‘Not serious operational tests’

The recent missile tests were themselves “not very serious operational tests,” added Bruce Bennett, a senior defense researcher at the RAND Corporation, who said Kim Jong Un may have been driven by a desire “to make sure his personnel really understand how to fire the missiles.”

“In real operations, these theater missiles would need to be fired within a few tens of seconds of each other to then give their launchers time to escape before they could be targeted,” Bennett told RFA.

“But on the North’s five recent test events involving two missiles, the shortest separation in the launches was nine minutes, the longest 22 minutes, and the average 14 minutes. That is not really operational,” he said.

U.S. State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a press briefing on Tuesday that the United States was committed to “dialogue and diplomacy” to defuse tensions with North Korea but was also ensuring that its “deterrent capabilities are where they need to be.”

“We want to see the complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula,” Price said. “We believe that the best way to do that is through diplomacy – through principled, hard-nosed diplomacy with the DPRK,” referring to North Korea. “Clearly the DPRK is not there yet.”

Andrew Yeo, senior fellow for Korea studies at the Brookings Institution's Center for East Asia Policy Studies, said Pyongyang was widely expected to soon shift toward ramping up its tests of tactical nuclear weapons.

“North Korea may be seeking to diversify its nuclear arsenal by advancing tactical nuclear capabilities,” Yeo told RFA, adding that its desire to test tactical weapons was “consistent with speculation from U.S. experts.”

“The U.S. and [South Korea] as well as Japan need to be vigilant in monitoring any military activity or movements in North Korea,” he said.

Written in English by Alex Willemyns, who also contributed reporting.

rfa.org

17. Even a small nuclear test by North Korea would be a big US worry

Even a small nuclear test by North Korea would be a big US worry

americanmilitarynews.com · by Jon Herskovitz - Bloomberg News · October 13, 2022

As North Korea moves closer to its first nuclear test in five years, one of the biggest worries for the U.S. and its allies might be a relatively small blast.

Kim Jong Un has made clear he wants to build an arsenal of “tactical” nuclear weapons, meaning lower-yield bombs that could be used on the battlefield rather than on whole cities. First it must produce miniaturized warheads to fit on the expanding array of short-ranged ballistic missiles it has designed to threaten U.S. troops and their allies in Asia.

This week, Kim said a barrage of missiles launched in recent days were intended for tactical nuclear strikes, while warning Washington that any attempted attack could be met by strikes at American forces in South Korea and Japan. The comments were a fresh sign that North Korea could be preparing for its first nuclear test since September 2017, something the U.S. has been ringing alarm bells about for months.

“To mass-produce tactical weapons, Kim Jong Un would need the seventh nuclear test with the purpose of making more powerful weapons, yet with lighter warheads,” said Moon Seong-Mook, a former general in South Korea’s military who is now the head of the Seoul-based Korea Research Institute for National Strategy.

While there were more than 2,000 tests of nuclear devices in the decades after the U.S. bombed Japan in 1945, North Korea remains the only country that has conducted physical detonations of atomic bombs this century, according to data from the Arms Control Association. Nuclear powers such as the U.S. now rely on supercomputers to simulate tests of their weapons to predict performance and reliability.

“I believe North Korea has succeeded in miniaturizing all warheads available, so they can be mounted on missiles,” Moon said.

Kim has embarked on a two-pronged nuclear strategy of developing tactical weapons for the Asian region and far more powerful thermonuclear devices for longer-range missiles that can hit the U.S. mainland. The U.S., Japan and South Korea have all said North Korea is ready to conduct a test at its mountainous Punggye-ri test site, where it has held all of its previous six tests.

“The DPRK clearly deems nuclear tests essential to be confident of its own nuclear weapons capability,” said Katsuhisa Furukawa, a senior analyst for the Open Nuclear Network, referring to North Korea by its formal name. “It would be reasonable to assume that the DPRK has considerably advanced its capability to develop miniaturized nuclear warheads.”

“Tactical” is an inexact term for a nuclear weapon that could be used within a theater of war, which to North Korea probably includes South Korea, Japan and U.S. assets in places such as Guam. A tactical weapon has a less powerful warhead and is delivered at a shorter range. The explosive yields can be of less than 1 kiloton, but many are in the tens of kilotons.

The atomic bomb the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 had a yield of about 15 kilotons. North Korea’s last test of a nuclear weapon in 2017 had an estimated yield of about 120-250 kilotons.

Tactical nuclear weapons can still cause massive destruction and non-proliferation advocates argue their use could quickly spin out of control. Such concerns were evident in U.S. President Joe Biden’s warning last week that any use of such weapons by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Ukraine could lead to “Armageddon.”

Furukawa, who served on a United Nations panel of experts that monitored sanctions on North Korea, and other experts will be paying close attention whether the regime’s next test is at the site’s Tunnel No. 3. That is considered the likely place to detonate a low-yield warhead for a tactical weapon.

Tunnel No. 4, meanwhile, is believed to be reserved for testing a larger thermonuclear device, said Lee Choon-geun, a senior research fellow at South Korea’s Science and Technology Policy Institute.

Kim laid out a nuclear weapons plan just before Biden’s inauguration in January 2021 that called for smaller and lighter weapons. He also urged the development of a solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile that would be quick to deploy and strike strategic targets within 15,000 kilometers (9,320 miles) — a thinly veiled reference to the U.S.

He has fired his new short-range missiles from train carriages, a submarine and even claimed one in its recent barrage from late September was fired from a lake. That may help deter another confrontation with the U.S. like in 2017, when former President Donald Trump threatened “fire and fury” and officials talked of a “bloody nose” strike on the country as a preemptive warning.

Chang Young-keun, a missile expert at the Korea Aerospace University said there were additional difficulties when it came to building a warhead for an ICBM. Such missiles travel far above the planet and must withstand reentry forces at speeds greater than 3,200 kilometers (1,988 miles) per hour.

Kim has shown that he has mastered tactical delivery systems by testing almost 70 short-range missiles since 2019. These are quick to deploy, designed to evade U.S.-operated interceptors in the region and capable to hitting American military bases in South Korea in less than five minutes after launch.

“This means the short-range missiles are fatal to us,” Chang said.

___

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Flip

americanmilitarynews.com · by Jon Herskovitz - Bloomberg News · October 13, 2022

18.

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Senior Advisor, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

V/R

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Phone: 202-573-8647

Personal Email: d avid.maxwell161@gmail.com

Web Site: www.fdd.org

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Subscribe to FDD’s new podcast, Foreign Podicy

FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

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