Quotes of the Day:
“World War III is a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation.”
- Marshall McLuhan, “Culture Is Our Business”, 1970, p. 66
"All political revolutions, not affected by foreign conquest, originate in moral revolutions. The subversion of established institutions is merely one consequence of the previous subversion of established opinions."
- John Stuart Mill
"Of our political revolution of '76, we all are justly proud. It has given us a degree of political freedom, far exceeding that of any other nation of the earth. In it the world has found a solution of the long mooted problem, as to the capability of man to govern himself. In it was the germ which has vegetated, and still is to grow and expand into the universal liberty of mankind."
- Abraham Lincoln
1. Missiles on a train (north Korea)
2. Is China losing South Korea?
3. N. Korea confirms missile launches from train
4. North blasts South for calling tests 'provocations' ― but look at that train
5. China strengthens efforts to curb US influence on South Korea
6. Diplomats of S. Korea, Japan hold talks on peninsula security, history
7. N. Korean ambassador to U.N. likely to attend upcoming U.N. General Assembly session
8. North Korea distributes food on the country's foundation day
9. China Stymies Once-United U.N. Panel on North Korea Sanctions
10. Cheong Wa Dae: no comment on N. Korea's criticism of President Moon
11. S. Korea, U.S. share urgent need for N.K. dialogue following missile launches
12. Two students in Haeju put on public trial for watching and distributing South Korean videos
13. North and South Korea unveil new missile systems
14. China, S. Korea vow to boost bilateral ties, strengthen cooperation
15. Nuclear weapons no real advantage for South Korea, former USFK commander says
16. Has an Arms Race Begun on the Korean Peninsula?
17. North Korea’s latest missile provocation was entirely predictable
18. Opinion | There’s a simple option for defusing the coming crisis with North Korea
19. "Threat To World": UN Security Council On North Korea's Missile Test
20. The North Korean Regime Continues To Get Away With Some Of The Worst Atrocities Of The 21st Century
21. Twitter Reacts to Kim Jong-Un's Weight Loss Transformation
1. Missiles on a train (north Korea)
I think we will see a change in ROK/US Alliance targeting strategy and priorities when the war begins. The Air Forces will go back to the future and ,like in WWII, will go after the rail infrastructure.
As an aside Mr. Salmon is patently wrong here and this is why the OPCON transition process needs an effective IO plan to inform and educate the press, the pundicts, the politicians, and the people.
While North Korean strategic weapons deter attack and grant international relevance, Moon has sought to upgrade his military in order to win “OPCON Transfer” – that is, the wartime operational control of his own forces – from the United States.
The ROK is not going to "win" wartime OPCON. The US does not control South Korean troops. A US commander commands the ROK/US Combined Forces Command and he answers to both presidents through the Military Committee which consists of representatives of both nations' National Command and Military Authorities. When the change of command eventually takes place and a ROK general officer assumes command of the ROK/US CFC, he or she will still answer to the Military Committee as the current commander does. And as they do now both countries will retain command over their forces even when under the OPCON of the ROK/US CFC.
Missiles on a train
North Korea makes a creative tactical point as South Korea completes sub-launched missile tests
SEOUL – North Korea test-fired two short-range ballistic missiles from a railroad launch platform into the Sea of Japan on Wednesday, state media revealed on Thursday.
While the unusual nature of the platform drew the attention of military pros, its contravention of United Nations resolutions also drew condemnation from the UN Security Council. The test-firing on Wednesday followed the North’s test-launch of cruise missiles over the weekend.
However, the North is not the only Korean state that is accelerating its missile programs.
Also on Wednesday, South Korea conducted the latest round of intense tests of its submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) program – the fruits of the recent lifting of a US cap on the kinds of missiles it is permitted to develop – with President Moon Jae-in present in person.
While North Korean strategic weapons deter attack and grant international relevance, Moon has sought to upgrade his military in order to win “OPCON Transfer” – that is, the wartime operational control of his own forces – from the United States.
Missiles on a train
In recent years, North Korea has not only been developing various forms of missiles, it has also been expanding its mix of delivery platforms.
The most notable are giant, multi-wheeled TELs (transporter-erector-launchers) for intercontinental ballistic missiles, which have been showcased in military parades, and various multiple-launch rocket systems, such as those that fired the cruise missiles last weekend. The country also has an SLBM program, though the exact status of that is unclear.
The ability to disperse assets, rather than anchoring them to fixed base, grants them survivability against an enemy first strike. The latest addition to North Korea’s armory of launch platforms, trialed on Wednesday, is novel, if not quaint.
“The railway-borne missile regiment took part in the drill with a mission to strike the target area 800 kilometers away from its location after moving to the central mountainous area at dawn on September 15,” Pyongyang’s Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said, according to reports monitored in Seoul on Thursday.
A KCNA photo showed a missile being fired from the bed of a train amid forested, hilly terrain. It is not clear if the train was in motion or was stationary.
Rail-borne artillery is not new: The first such weapon was used during the American Civil War, and as late as World War II, the German army deployed heavy siege artillery via train.
Such weapons fell out of use post-1945, but the concept was resurrected during the 1980s, when both Moscow and Washington drew up plans for rail-born ICBMs.
“The idea was, instead of putting all ICBMs in a fixed silo where the enemy could pre-empt them, they would be on these extensive rails and constantly move and it would be impossible to destroy all of them,” said Chun In-bum, a retired South Korean general.
In the event, neither superpower executed the plan, but North Korea appears to be doing so – albeit on a smaller scale. And leveraging an existing civilian transport net offers some advantages.
A weaponized train could feasibly be disguised as a passenger train, providing camouflage against satellite identification. And given the large number of rail tunnels in North Korea’s mountainous terrain, a missile-carrying train parked inside could be protected by what is, in essence, a ready-made bunker.
As far back as summer 1950, in the early days of the Korean War, North Korean forces, facing US air superiority, used caves and tunnels as top cover for their self-propelled artillery. And today, its long-range artillery regiments are dug into casements in hills just north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).
However, tunnels have tactical cons as well as pros.
A key disadvantage has been pointed out by military observers who have commented on North Korea’s airbases dug into tunnels in the sides of mountains: In the event of hostilities, enemy fire directed above the entrance to the tunnel could cause a landslide, blocking egress.
Another issue is that the rail network in North Korea is both limited and mapped.
“The USSR and US are huge territories,” said Chun, referring to the 1980s plan. “But North Korea is small and predictable, and the rail net is not that complex.”
South Korea’s SLBM tests bear fruit
While North Korea is banned by UN Security Council resolutions from owning or testing ballistic-missile technologies, South Korea is not.
However, South Korea historically had a ceiling placed on the types of missiles it can develop by its ally the United States. That ceiling, which dates back to the 1960s, was lifted after the summit between Presidents Joe Biden and Moon Jae-in in Washington in May.
As it muscles up to counter North Korean assets in the wake of the May summit, South Korea has also announced the development of large ballistic missiles with 3-ton conventional warheads. And in July, it tested solid-fuel boosters for space vehicles – widely seen as dual-use technologies.
But despite these impressive capabilities, it looks highly unlikely that Moon will gain OPCON Transfer before he leaves office next spring, meaning that it will more likely be his successor who earns this high-profile political win.
UN Security Council convenes
However, it was the North Korean test that refocused the attention of the security and diplomatic communities from Afghanistan back to perennial boogeyman North Korea.
The UN Security Council held a 45-minute emergency meeting behind closed doors to discuss the test.
“Everyone is very concerned about the situation,” France’s ambassador to the UNSC, Nicolas de Riviere, told AFP. “This is a major threat to peace and security, it’s a clear violation of the Council’s resolutions.”
North Korea is currently heavily sanctioned by the global community. However, it routinely defies UNSC resolutions that ban it from owning or testing ballistic-missile technologies.
“It’s a threat to the non-proliferation regime, it’s a threat to the world, it’s a threat to the neighbors of North Korea,” de Riviere said.
Provocations and messages
Chun argues that Pyongyang always has a dual domestic/overseas purpose in conducting weapons tests: to check the status of new military technologies, and to send a message to the global community.
When South Korea and the US held military drills in August, North Korea vowed to respond – and this week’s launches may be a belated response, delayed because of technical or weather conditions, suggested Go Myong-hyun, a research fellow at Seoul’s Asan Institute.
But it may also be a signal to the Biden administration: Significantly, Kim Jong Un himself has not personally attended the latest launches.
“They are doing these events in a low-key manner,” Chun said. “I think they are saying, ‘OK we are having a hard time but it is not stopping us developing WMD capability, but we are still open to talks if you surrender to our demands.’”
When it comes to demands, North Korea has made clear that it wants sanctions relief, and is willing to give up certain elements of its WMD (weapons of mass destruction) programs to earn this. But experts are divided over how much priority North Korea accords to an end to the Korean War, or to the establishment of diplomatic relations with the US.
Very, very few experts believe the Kim will ever give up his entire WMD arsenal.
But North Korea’s weapons are not merely deterrents; weapon tests also win attention.
“This is classic North Korea, there is nothing new about this, their strategy is always the same: They alternate between dialogue and provocation phases,” Go said. “They want to create a new framework for negotiations now that Biden is in power. He does not seem to be paying attention, so they are showing that they can be troublemakers – ‘If you want to be free to focus on China and other matters, you have to talk to us.’”
It is unclear if the tests will be enough to put North Korea at the top of Biden’s agenda. While the UNSC met and condemned the launch, this week’s tests are not top-tier provocations – the last of which took place in 2017.
That year North Korea detonated what it claimed was a hydrogen bomb and test-launched an ICBM that analysts assessed could hit anywhere in the continental US. Amid soaring tensions, Kim Jong Un and then-US president Donald Trump engaged in a high-profile war of words that included talk of nuclear buttons.
Pundits fretted, sources close to the US military in South Korea told Asia Times, off the record, that they anticipated action, and the US Army put in orders for new stocks of artillery ammunition, suggesting a potential conventional battle.
That high-tension atmosphere was defused in 2018 when – in a surprise move – Kim came out of his self-imposed isolation to summit with a succession of world leaders: Chinese President Xi Jinping, South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and then US president Donald Trump.
However, the promise of those engagements fizzled in 2019, when Trump walked out of his second summit with Kim, in Hanoi. Since then, working-level talks have gone nowhere.
Even so, the Biden administration has reached out to North Korea publicly.
Most recently, Sung Kim, the US special envoy for North Korea, met with his South Korean and Japanese counterparts in Tokyo on Tuesday. According to the US State Department, the three reaffirmed their commitment to the “complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula” – the wording agreed between Trump and Kim Jong Un at their first summit in Singapore, in 2018.
Beyond the public space, there have also been meetings behind closed doors – a protocol favored by North Korea. Asia Times understands that working-level discussions between the US and North Korea have taken place in Europe.
2. Is China losing South Korea?
South Korea will have to continue to walk the geopolitical, geostrategic, and geoeconomic tightrope between the PRC and the US. but eventually the Korean people may not stand for Chinese actions toward the ROK. It is interesting that Japan now is slightly ahead of China in favorability ratings in South Korea.
Excerpts:
A 2020 Pew Research Center poll of 14 nations’ attitudes, “Unfavorable views of China reach historic highs in many countries” found that 75% of South Koreans held negative views toward China. Korea was the sixth-ranking country on the list (ahead of the US, seventh).
A domestic June 2021 poll by Hankook Research concurred with Pew’s 2020 findings almost exactly: It found that just 26% of South Koreans had warm feelings toward China.
Remarkably, China’s score was worse than that of the traditional bete noire: In a country where anti-Japanese sentiment is a pillar of nationalism, 28% of South Koreans had positive feelings toward Japan. In another blow to Beijing, the poll found that 58% of Koreans were pro-US.
Is China losing South Korea?
Koreans increasingly dislike Chinese – but trade stays healthy and Seoul can't copy Tokyo’s anti-Beijing stance
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had much to smile about when he pressed flesh with his South Korean counterparts in Seoul on Wednesday – but he should also be asking his advisors why his country’s image is taking such a battering among the Korean public.
“China and South Korea are close neighbors that cannot relocate themselves and partners that can’t part ways with each other,” Wang said during a meeting with South Korean Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong.
Calling on Beijing and Seoul to foster a “sense of community” amid a “major shift” in global affairs, he urged South Korea not to join the US-led “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing group – as has recently been discussed – calling the arrangement “outdated.”
Wang, in Seoul on a two-day visit following stops in Singapore, Cambodia and Vietnam, later met President Moon Jae-in, who asked for China’s cooperation in Seoul’s attempts to engage Pyongyang.
Beijing’s upbeat foreign minister is on a charm offensive at a time when a noteworthy shift in South Korean public opinion toward China is driving a hairline crack into what otherwise looks like a fruitful, if pragmatic, partnership.
On the one hand, trade remains vibrant and the two capitals will have plenty to laud when they celebrate the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties next year. Moreover, Moon has remained faithful to the “Three Nos” he offered Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2017 – seen as a diplomatic victory for China.
But the left-leaning Moon leaves office following presidential elections next March. And even Moon swallowed multiple humiliations from the Donald Trump administration in order to keep Seoul’s alliance with Washington alive.
Meanwhile, China, which has been acting with increasing regional and global assertiveness in recent years, has lost the Korean street.
China’s brand image has been blackened by issues that range from violent fishing confrontations to severe economic/cultural retaliation following the establishment of a US anti-missile battery on Korean soil to furious online disputes – disputes that have even impacted superstar boy band BTS.
Just days prior to Yi’s visit, a Chinese cinematic blockbuster was yanked from screening after a public uproar, and polls find that Koreans now dislike China more than customary whipping boy Japan.
For Beijing, there is much to play for.
The US presence in, alliance with, and influence over democracies Japan and South Korea has long loomed over China’s eastern flank. While the two economic powerhouses are similarly reliant upon China for trade, Tokyo has, in recent years, increasingly leaned toward the United States. Japan’s ruling party is promoting wider military links with distant democratic partners and agitating for a tougher stance on Taiwan.
Thus far, Seoul has been more reticent than Tokyo. After all, beyond commercial ties Seoul needs Beijing to support its policymaking toward North Korea.
While South Korea’s future posture will primarily depend upon who wins the presidential Blue House next March, in the meantime it is in Beijing’s interest to keep Seoul as on-side as possible.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (left) and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Pyongyang, North Korea, September 20, 2019. Seoul needs Beijing on side in its policies toward Pyongyang. Photo: AFP / Xinhua
Trade and tourism follow the money
For decades, South Koreans saw China as an enemy that had prevented a US-led reunification of the peninsula. In October 1950, US-led UN forces, having defeated Kim Il Sung’s invasion of the South, counter-invaded the North, routing Kim’s battered forces. The end seemed near.
Beijing’s response was an undeclared, shock intervention that drove US-led forces south in a harrowing retreat. The drama ensured the survival of the North Korean state and set in stone the continued division of the peninsula.
Things changed after the earth-shaking collapse of East European communism. Having successfully hosted the 1988 Summer Olympics, a newly democratized Seoul leveraged its Games contacts to establish relations with countries beyond the fallen iron curtain. Beijing and Seoul exchanged ambassadors in 1992.
South Koreans could at last visit the ancient source much of their own culture – agriculture, religions, social systems, medicine, literature and more. Tourism boomed. So did demand for Chinese-language lessons. Meanwhile, the two countries enthusiastically bashed Japan for its imperialist aggressions.
On the economic front, as the “workshop of the world” revved up and geographic proximity took effect, China-Korea trade surged. In 2003, according to World Bank data, China replaced the United States as the country’s leading destination for exports; In 2007, China replaced Japan as the leading source of Korea’s imports.
Today China is, far and away, South Korea’s most critical trade partner.
In 2020, according to research site Trading Economics, China was the number one destination for South Korea exports, taking up 27%, worth $132.5 billion. The US was a distant second, with 15% (74.4 billion) with Vietnam in third place with 9.8% ($48.5 billion Adding to the Mainland’s heft, the number four spot was held by China’s Hong Kong, with 6.2% ($30.6 billion).
Imports follow a similar pattern. China is responsible for 24% (worth $108 billion) of South Korea’s imports, followed by the US with 13% ($57.7 billion) and Japan in third place, with 10% ($46 billion).
Beyond economics, an important political matter links the two countries. China is the only significant trade partner and investor in North Korea, making the latter hugely dependent upon the former. When it comes to Seoul’s policy toward Pyongyang, Chinese support is critical.
However, not all is amicable. China has also put its foot down on South Korea.
The city of Shanghai is a poster child of China’s surging economy – an economy with a powerful hunger for Korean imports. Photo: Asia Times
‘Big Brother’ flexes its muscles
In the 2000s, clashes between Chinese fishermen and Korean coast guards led to fatalities on both sides in disputed Yellow Sea fishing grounds. In 2013, China unilaterally established an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) over Iedo Reef, which Korea claims as national territory.
In 2016, China was infuriated after US troops set up a THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense) anti-missile battery on Korean soil. Though the system was deployed against North Korean missiles, Beijing insisted the radar could snoop on its own territory.
Beijing retaliated in the commercial sphere. Chinese tour groups to Korea dried up, bans were placed on imports of Hallyu (the “Korean Wave” of pop culture – notably, pop music, TV dramas, films and online games), and Korean companies in China were hard hit.
Hyundai suffered a more than 50% sales plunge in China, while Lotte Group was forced to close its retail operations in the country. The absence of Chinese tourists cost $6.5 billion in lost revenue; the spat knocked 0.4 percentage points off Korea’s economic growth.
In damage control mode in 2017, Moon offered Xi the “Three Nos:” Korea would deploy no more THAAD batteries, would not join a broader US missile defense system and would not join any formal trilateral alliance with Japan and the US.
Those conditions raised multiple eyebrows in Washington, but did not entirely defuse Chinese sanctions.
This US Department of Defense/Missile Defense Agency handout photo shows two THAAD interceptors and a Standard-Missile 3 Block IA missile being launched. Photo: AFP/ DoD / Missile Defense Agency
Culture wars
To this day, there are no performances of K-pop in China, Seoul’s Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism told Asia Times. Likewise, no Korean film has been screened in China since 2015, and no Korean drama has played on Chinese TV since 2017.
The most lucrative, albeit lowest-profile aspect of Hallyu, the online games, suffered massively: Only three Korean games have been permitted to enter the Chinese market since the THAAD issue blew up.
Still, South Korea has some leverage – and it appears to have applied it.
Last year, after Washington placed restrictions on the export of advanced system semiconductors to China, Korea’s Samsung, the number-two player in the foundry space after Taiwan’s TSMC, toed the US line. The resultant lack of high-end chipsets has cast a dark cloud over the future of Huawei, China’s electronics flagship.
Moreover, Samsung has this year announced a massive expansion of its foundry capacity in the US.
In recent days, new controversy has arisen over Hallyu, after Beijing lambasted so-called “sissy boy” entertainers – referencing the androgynous look favored by many K-pop boy bands – and cracked down on what it considers unhealthy fan culture.
Amid Korean concerns that these steps were aimed specifically at K-pop, Beijing’s embassy in Seoul and Seoul’s embassy in Beijing issued statements making clear that it was a blanket policy, not aimed at any specific nationality.
Even so, social media sites set up by Chinese fans of bands including BTS have reportedly been shut down, further withering Hallyu’s shrunken presence in China. A spokesperson for Seoul’s Culture Ministry told Asia Times it was “keenly paying attention on measures taken.”
While Chinese media exports are not nearly as competitive as those of South Korea, Seoul has recently hit back.
Just days before Wang’s visit, a Chinese film set during the Korean War, The Sacrifice, was withdrawn from nationwide distribution after a public uproar. Though Britons and Americans may now watch German or Japanese war films with some equanimity, The Sacrifice, which promoted the heroism of Chinese military “volunteers,” proved a bridge too far for Korean audiences.
Its license was withdrawn on September 14.
Nationalism is not restricted to the policy level. With Beijing apparently gearing up its society and economy for long-term confrontation with the US, related emotion among its citizenry has spilled over.
The uncrowned kings of Hallyu – who have never played a gig in China – ignited a storm of online anger from Chinese last year when BTS member RM referred to the Korean War alliance between Seoul and Washington. As a result, ads in China featuring BTS were withdrawn.
Angry debates over China’s crackdown on Hong Kong, and even scuffles, were reported last year between Korean and Chinese students on Korean campuses. Netizens have clashed furiously online in insult-laden historical and cultural debates – such as whether an ancient kingdom, Goguryeo, which fell in 668 AD, was Chinese or Korean, or whether or not kimchi may be of Chinese origin.
Such issues may strike outsiders as frivolous. But they are adding to a very real pool of ill will.
A 2020 Pew Research Center poll of 14 nations’ attitudes, “Unfavorable views of China reach historic highs in many countries” found that 75% of South Koreans held negative views toward China. Korea was the sixth-ranking country on the list (ahead of the US, seventh).
A domestic June 2021 poll by Hankook Research concurred with Pew’s 2020 findings almost exactly: It found that just 26% of South Koreans had warm feelings toward China.
Remarkably, China’s score was worse than that of the traditional bete noire: In a country where anti-Japanese sentiment is a pillar of nationalism, 28% of South Koreans had positive feelings toward Japan. In another blow to Beijing, the poll found that 58% of Koreans were pro-US.
BTS, Korea’s top act and arguably the leading pop act on earth, have never played in China. They have, however, been entangled in emotive China-Korea political disputes. Photo: AFP
Public sentiment, national interest
However, even if South Korean politicians – as in the case of The Sacrifice – must cleave to public opinion, it is not clear whether the growing unpopularity of China will impact policy.
And when it comes to “public sentiment,” one expert warns that observers must not overlook “national interest.”
“Most Koreans have bad sentiment toward China because of the mass media environment, which has been taking an anti-China stance in line with US mass media,” said Moon Chung-in, chairman of think tank the Sejong Institute. “But South Koreans talk about trade – that is in our interest – and I think a majority of South Koreans will say that military intervention in the South China Sea or in the Taiwan Strait is not in our interest.”
“Government and business are being pulled in two directions, because government is extremely sensitive to public sentiment,” added Michael Breen, Seoul-based author of “However, government understands that its mission in life is to keep the economy improving. And with China as the biggest trade partner, it will make every effort to keep the trade relationship.”
Yet in the decoupling era, even the successful trade relationship carries risk.
“There is the issue of diversification: I don’t think anyone would want to put 25% of their business into one customer or supplier,” said James Kim, who heads the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea. “I think the THAAD situation created a lot of memories.”
The challenge for the next Seoul government and its diplomatic corps is “to maneuver as skillfully as possible, so as not to offend China,” Breen said.
He forecast that no South Korean administration will follow the example of Canada – which is holding the daughter of Huawei chief Ren Zhengfei pending an extradition request from the United States – or Australia, which has demanded full transparency from China on the outbreak of Covid-19.
“They won’t do what the Canadians and Australians did, which pissed off China, with the result that citizens were arrested and contracts ripped up,” Breen said.
Tokyo has been less assertive than Ottawa or Canberra, but is a member of the US-led, semi-official Indo-Pacific “Quad” alliance, and has raised its voice.
Yet, so sensitive is South Korea’s geopolitical position that it is unlikely even to follow Tokyo’s stance, given its position as one state on a divided peninsula.
“It is very difficult for Korea to move in that direction, as South Korea has North Korea,” Moon said. “Japan does not.”
Pushing China away could encourage Beijing to align itself more closely with its 1950 Korean War ally.
“China has not been supporting North Korea in terms of weapons or logistics since it withdrew troops from North Korea in 1958,” Moon said. “If there were strengthened military ties between Beijing and North Korea, South Korea would face an enhanced threat.”
Millennial South Korea faces multiple challenges: Demographic plunge; socio-political conflicts between genders and generations; massive household debt; and the ever-constant background threat of North Korea.
But Moon, who has advised three separate South Korean presidents, considers the risks posed by intensifying China-US rivalry – and the possibility that Seoul be forced to make an “either-or” choice – the most serious threat.
“We should maintain our alliance with the US, and also cooperative, strategic ties with China,” said Moon, who pleads for China-US rapprochement. “In terms of priorities, the US comes first – but we cannot give up China for the US! That is our existential dilemma.”
For millennia, Korean culture – from architecture to attire – was influenced by China. In 21st century politics, too, it is extremely difficult for Korea to move out from under China’s shadow. Photo: Tom Coyner
3. N. Korea confirms missile launches from train
The War on the Rails
I will bet we can do much better against north Korean rail infrastructure today than we did in Germany and France in WWII.
(2nd LD) N. Korea confirms missile launches from train | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: ADDS military's comments, more info in paras 9-12)
By Yi Wonju
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (Yonhap) -- North Korea said Thursday that a railway-borne missile regiment held a firing drill a day earlier, confirming the launches, apparently from a train, of two short-range ballistic missiles into the East Sea.
"The railway-borne missile regiment took part in the drill with a mission to strike the target area 800 kilometers away from its location after moving to the central mountainous area at dawn on September 15," the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said.
The KCNA said the North accurately struck the target in the East Sea.
The missiles appeared to have been launched from a train rather than a transporter erector launcher (TEL), according to photos released by state media.
The launches came just days after the North tested a newly developed long-range cruise missile.
The KCNA said that the drills were organized to "increase the capability of dealing an intensive multi-concurrent blow at the forces posing threats to us at a time of conducting necessary military operations."
The test-firing was also conducted to confirm the "practicality of the railway-borne missile system deployed for action for the first time" to judge combat readiness and to "attain proficiency in case of fighting an actual war," the KCNA said.
The KCNA said that Pak Jong-chon, member of the Presidium of the Politburo of the ruling Workers' Party, guided the latest drills, along with other top officials. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un did not oversee the test-firing.
South Korea's military said the North has been developing various mobile launchers.
"Our military's assessment is that North Korea has been continuing to develop various forms of transporter launchers," the South's Joint Chiefs of Staff spokesman Col. Kim Jun-rak said during a regular press briefing, adding that an analysis is under way.
The new system is expected to allow the North to have better mobility when firing missiles using its railroad network across the country.
Such a train could also be disguised as a passenger train to avoid surveillance from military satellites, making it harder to detect signs of an imminent missile launch, experts said.
Under the U.N. Security Council resolutions, North Korea is banned from ballistic missile activity.
The latest test is the second ballistic missile launch by the North so far this year, and its fifth known major weapons test if the cruise missile tests are taken into account.
julesyi@yna.co.kr
scaaet@yna.co.kr
(END)
4. North blasts South for calling tests 'provocations' ― but look at that train
Kim Yo-jong threatens a "total deadlock" in north-South relations and called President Moon 'stupid." How would we describe the current state of relations if not a deadlock?
Excerpt:
Kim Yo-jong, the sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and director of the propaganda department of the ruling Workers’ Party, released a statement late Wednesday blasting South Korean President Moon Jae-in for calling the North’s tests as a “provocation” and threatened a “total deadlock” of inter-Korean relations.
The statement was released after Moon attended the test-launch of a domestically developed submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from the Navy submarine Dosan Ahn Chang-ho and delivered remarks that called the successful test a sign that South Korea has a “sufficient deterrence to respond to North Korea’s provocations at any time.”
Kim called Moon “too stupid” to be the president of a country and warned that inter-Korean relations will end up in a total deadlock if Moon continues to support “the act of faulting and hurting the dialogue partner,” while adding that this was not what the North desired.
North blasts South for calling tests 'provocations' ― but look at that train
A ballistic missile is fired from a train-borne missile regiment in an undisclosed location in North Korea on Wednesday. [NEWS1]
The North's official news agency on Thursday revealed that its latest ballistic missiles were fired from a train-borne launcher, following Pyongyang's criticism of Seoul late Wednesday for labeling the missile tests as provocations.
Kim Yo-jong, the sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and director of the propaganda department of the ruling Workers’ Party, released a statement late Wednesday blasting South Korean President Moon Jae-in for calling the North’s tests as a “provocation” and threatened a “total deadlock” of inter-Korean relations.
The statement was released after Moon attended the test-launch of a domestically developed submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from the Navy submarine Dosan Ahn Chang-ho and delivered remarks that called the successful test a sign that South Korea has a “sufficient deterrence to respond to North Korea’s provocations at any time.”
Kim called Moon “too stupid” to be the president of a country and warned that inter-Korean relations will end up in a total deadlock if Moon continues to support “the act of faulting and hurting the dialogue partner,” while adding that this was not what the North desired.
Even as Pyongyang lambasted Seoul’s attitude towards its weapons program, its state news agency detailed the delivery method employed in its missile tests.
“The railway-borne missile regiment took part in the drill with a mission to strike the target area 800 kilometers [500 miles] away from its location after moving to the central mountainous area at dawn on September 15,” reported the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
The official news agency said the missiles accurately struck the target in the East Sea.
Unlike the cruise missiles the North tested over the weekend, the ballistic missiles appear to have been launched from a train instead of a transporter erector launcher (TEL), a type of vehicle which transports, prepares and fires a missile.
The South's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said that the North fired two ballistic missiles into the waters east of the Korean Peninsula around 12:38 p.m. and 12:43 p.m. on Wednesday. The missiles flew a distance of approximately 800 kilometers while reaching an altitude of 60 kilometers.
Both train-borne launchers and TELs enhance the North’s ability to fire missiles without prior detection by South Korean and U.S. intelligence as they do not require a long period of preparation in a stationary location.
Unlike the North’s missile tests on March 21 and 25, when authorities detected the North’s tests but did not release the news for several days, both South Korean and U.S. military authorities were reportedly unaware of this past weekend’s cruise missile tests before the KCNA released a report on Monday, according to a government official who admitted to the intelligence lapse on Monday to the JoongAng Ilbo on the condition of anonymity.
The official revelation of the weekend cruise missile tests from the North’s state news agency reportedly “shocked” the South Korean military and government, according to the official.
Experts view the addition of cruise missiles to the North’s arsenal as a potentially lethal upgrade to its ability to neutralize South Korean defenses in the event of war because such weapons can surgically target radar systems to blind missile defense systems.
Modern cruise missiles are also harder to detect and intercept because they are often self-navigating and able to fly on extremely low-altitude trajectories compared to ballistic missiles.
Under United Nations Security Council resolutions, the North is prohibited from testing ballistic missiles, such as the ones it fired on Wednesday, but not cruise missiles.
While condemning the North’s defiance of the UN Security Council by conducting the ballistic missile tests, the United States reiterated Thursday its readiness to engage with the North in dialogue.
“We do condemn the DPRK’s missile launches. These missile launches are in violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions,” said State Department spokesman Ned Price. DPRK is the acronym for the North’s official name, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Although the U.S. military's Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii said the North Korean ballistic missile test did not pose any “immediate threat,” it described the launch as highlighting “the destabilizing impact of the DPRK's illicit weapons program."
That assessment was repeated by Price, who said, “We know that [the missiles] pose a threat to DPRK’s neighbors and other members of the international community.”
However, Price added that the United States is “committed to a diplomatic approach to the DPRK, and we call on the DPRK to engage in a meaningful and substantive dialogue with us.”
Price said that Pyongyang remains unresponsive to Washington’s diplomatic efforts, but said the U.S. will continue to attempt engagement with the North.
“We are saying that we continue to believe that diplomacy is the means by which we can achieve the goal that our policy review identified, and that is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” he said.
The spokesman also emphasized the strength of U.S. security ties with its allies in the region, including South Korea.
“Our commitment to our allies, including Japan and the Republic of Korea, is iron-clad,” said Price, using South Korea’s official name.
BY MICHAEL LEE [lee.junhyuk@joongang.co.kr]
5. China strengthens efforts to curb US influence on South Korea
Can China be successful? I certainly hope not. And public opinion does not seem to be in China's favor.
China strengthens efforts to curb US influence on South Korea
President Moon Jae-in bumps fists with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi during the latter's visit to Cheong Wa Dae, Wednesday. Yonhap
By Nam Hyun-woo
China has reaffirmed its stance of countering U.S. influence on South Korea, with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi calling for "mutual respect" regarding the two countries' different interests during a meeting with President Moon Jae-in.
"China and South Korea have been in different situations, but both countries so far have each been supporting the development paths that the other has chosen and paid respect to each other's key interests," Wang said during the meeting with Moon at Cheong Wa Dae, Wednesday. "And we should maintain this good tradition in the future as it will be an important factor in developing healthy bilateral relations."
The remarks are being interpreted by some as an indication that China and South Korea have different interests amidst the rivalry between Washington and Beijing, and as pressure on Seoul to "respect" a more assertive China in the future.
Wang arrived in Korea, Tuesday, and met his South Korean counterpart, Chung Eui-yong, hours before meeting Moon.
After the ministerial meeting, reporters asked Wang's opinion about South Korea's stance on the China-U.S. rivalry, and he replied, "You should ask yourself whether you prefer the U.S. or China," and, "One thing is clear, that China and South Korea are close neighbors and partners that cannot abandon each other."
Noting that 2022 will be the 30th anniversary of China and South Korea forming bilateral ties, Wang said, "There have been many changes over the past 30 years, and they have brought very practical benefits. We want bilateral relations to develop further."
Regarding the possible idea of expanding the U.S.-led "Five Eyes" intelligence alliance, which currently is made up of the U.K., Australia, New Zealand and Canada, to include South Korea, Wang reacted sensitively and said that the intelligence-sharing agreement was a "byproduct of the Cold War era" and "completely outdated."
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi speaks during a meeting with President Moon Jae-in at Cheong Wa Dae, Wednesday. YonhapWang's visit is being seen as pressure on the Moon administration, which has been exercising a balancing act between the U.S. and China. The two superpowers currently have a fierce rivalry in terms of their economic and diplomatic influence in the region.
On the North Korea issue, China has been pursuing a "freeze-for-freeze" plan, in which South Korea and the U.S. agree to stop their combined military exercises and the North agrees to discontinue its missile and nuclear weapon programs. This is widely interpreted as Beijing's strategy to weaken U.S. influence on South Korea, by using North Korea as leverage.
Beijing has been strengthening its ties with Pyongyang in recent months, with the leaders exchanging letters and attending each other's diplomatic events. In doing so, China has been expressing its voice on sanctions relief for North Korea.
Against this backdrop, the South Korean government has been hoping for China to play a larger role in improving inter-Korean relations, and Moon expressed this during his meeting with Wang.
"I expect China's steadfast support for denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula," Moon said. "I hope the upcoming Beijing Winter Olympics will become another opportunity for improving relations with North Korea, following the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympics."
During the 2018 Winter Olympics, Kim Yo-jong, sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, took part in the opening ceremony, and her participation led to a series of inter-Korean and U.S.-North Korea summits later that year. Since then, the Moon administration has been seeking to use international sporting events as a vehicle for facilitating talks with the North.
This, however, hit a major setback earlier this month, after the International Olympic Committee (IOC) suspended North Korea from participation in the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.
Despite the suspension, there seems to be a chance that China could invite North Korean politicians to the Games anyway. Wang told Moon that China will make every effort to "turn the Beijing Games into an opportunity for improvements in inter-Korean relations," adding, "If there's political will, a historic event could happen overnight."
6. Diplomats of S. Korea, Japan hold talks on peninsula security, history
Both countries need to put national security and national prosperity first while pledging to manage their historical issues.
Diplomats of S. Korea, Japan hold talks on peninsula security, history | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (Yonhap) -- Diplomats of South Korea and Japan held talks in Tokyo on Thursday to discuss the security situation on the Korean Peninsula and historical issues between the two countries, the foreign ministry said, after tensions flared anew with North Korea's recent missile launches.
The talks between Lee Sang-ryol, the ministry's director general for Asian and Pacific affairs, and his Japanese counterpart, Takehiro Funakoshi, came after the North fired off two short-range ballistic missiles on Wednesday following its weekend cruise missile launches.
Lee and Funakoshi reaffirmed the importance of cooperation between South Korea and Japan, and between the two countries and the United States, for stability on the peninsula and progress in efforts for lasting peace here, the ministry said.
Touching on the issues of Japan's wartime forced labor and sexual slavery, Lee stressed the need to accelerate bilateral consultations, particularly through various high-level exchanges.
When Funakoshi explained Tokyo's position on its claims to South Korea's easternmost islets of Dokdo, Lee reiterated that Seoul can't accept any such territorial claim to the East Sea outcroppings.
The two sides, however, agreed to continue close communication for the "future-oriented" development of relations between the two countries.
Concerning people-to-people exchanges in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Lee underscored the urgent need for measures to allow business people and students to travel freely between the countries "under certain conditions," the ministry said.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
7. N. Korean ambassador to U.N. likely to attend upcoming U.N. General Assembly session
Will north Korea try to "one-up" President Moon with some kind of action during the UNGA? Does Kim assess he could exploit an action around the UNGA to gain a political and economic advantage?
Excerpts:
North Korea had sent its foreign ministers, Ri Su-yong and Ri Yong-ho, to the U.N. event in 2015 and 2016-2018, respectively. Kim Song has been attending the session since 2019.
Unlike last year's general assembly, which took place via video links over COVID-19 concerns, the session will resume on an in-person basis, with more than 150 heads of state expected to visit New York for face-to-face meetings.
President Moon Jae-in will fly to New York on Sunday to attend the event and is scheduled to deliver his speech next Tuesday.
Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong, who will be accompanying Moon on the upcoming trip, plans to hold a series of bilateral and multilateral talks on the sidelines, the ministry official said.
N. Korean ambassador to U.N. likely to attend upcoming U.N. General Assembly session | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (Yonhap) -- North Korean Ambassador to the United Nations Kim Song is expected to attend an upcoming session of the U.N. General Assembly later this month, a foreign ministry official said Thursday.
The provisional speakers' list for the high-level week of the 76th U.N. General Assembly, slated for Sept. 21-27, shows Kim will be delivering remarks as the North's representative, the official said.
Kim is scheduled to give a speech on the last day, along with the U.N. envoys of Myanmar, Guinea and Afghanistan, according to the timetable as of last Friday, the official said.
North Korea had sent its foreign ministers, Ri Su-yong and Ri Yong-ho, to the U.N. event in 2015 and 2016-2018, respectively. Kim Song has been attending the session since 2019.
Unlike last year's general assembly, which took place via video links over COVID-19 concerns, the session will resume on an in-person basis, with more than 150 heads of state expected to visit New York for face-to-face meetings.
President Moon Jae-in will fly to New York on Sunday to attend the event and is scheduled to deliver his speech next Tuesday.
Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong, who will be accompanying Moon on the upcoming trip, plans to hold a series of bilateral and multilateral talks on the sidelines, the ministry official said.
elly@yna.co.kr
(END)
8. North Korea distributes food on the country's foundation day
How nice of the regime. They "distributed" food and allowed the people to buy it at lower than market prices. What happened to the public distribution system that provided free food, etc? Oh yes, that failed during th eArduous March of the famine of 1994-1996.
Excerpt:
According to a Daily NK source in North Korea on Wednesday, North Koreans recently received at least 10 days of food. The state followed past practice and sold the food at lower-than-market prices—KPW 4,000 per kilogram of rice.
North Korea distributes food on the country's foundation day - Daily NK
North Korean authorities distributed food to mark the 73rd anniversary of the founding of the country on Sept. 9, but many people in areas outside of Pyongyang failed to receive much in this latest distribution.
According to a Daily NK source in North Korea on Wednesday, North Koreans recently received at least 10 days of food. The state followed past practice and sold the food at lower-than-market prices—KPW 4,000 per kilogram of rice.
After implementing economic reform measures on July 1, 2002, North Korea raised the state-set prices of food, consumer goods and housing—which, until that point, had been more or less free—and adopted so-called “ration pricing” and “purchase pricing.” This system was applied to the latest food provision as well.
In Pyongyang, the authorities supplied food between Sept. 1 and Sept. 8. The food was distributed to all households who wanted it, not just destitute families devoid of food and cash.
A view of Hyesan, in North Korea’s Yanggang Province. / Image: Daily NK
In North Hamgyong Province’s city of Chongjin, however, food distribution began from Sept. 12. The pricing system used was similar to that in Pyongyang.
Daily NK understands, however, that despite the fact North Korean authorities had clamored about coming food distributions, many people failed to receive anything due to insufficient supplies.
Moreover, while the authorities promised three months of food, locals in Chongjin received just 15 days of food over two rounds of distributions.
This suggests that the North Korean authorities are in such dire straits that they cannot provide food and that, short of new efforts by the government, this food situation will continue.
“Due to the coronavirus situation, the people are very dispirited with the shortage of food,” said the source. “However, with the authorities distributing even small amounts of food in a discriminatory way, they are dragging down general morale even further.”
Please direct any comments or questions about this article to dailynkenglish@uni-media.net.
9. China Stymies Once-United U.N. Panel on North Korea Sanctions
China and Russia are supporting north Korea. We should have no doubt that they are undermining the sanctions regime and are directly and indirectly complicit in north Korean sanctions evasion activities.
China Stymies Once-United U.N. Panel on North Korea Sanctions
A draft panel report is filled with perfunctory responses and dissenting footnotes from Beijing
China’s reluctance to cooperate bedeviled the drafting of the report, which is expected to be released this month, the people familiar with the matter said. The Chinese government gave perfunctory responses to the panel’s questions, hindering investigation into a range of issues including ships suspected of engaging in sanctions-busting while operating in Chinese waters, the people said.
China’s expert on the panel also filled the report with dissenting footnotes, questioning his colleagues’ findings and raising objections to issues unrelated to North Korea, such as China’s sovereignty and the status of Taiwan, a self-ruled island Beijing claims as its own, the draft shows.
A result is that the panel is increasingly hobbled in providing information to the U.N.’s major powers as North Korea ratchets up the kinds of provocative moves that led to the sanctions, the people said. Pyongyang recently has fired up a plutonium-producing reactor and launched two short-range ballistic missile tests on Wednesday in what some U.S. officials and North Korea watchers say are actions to test the Biden administration.
China’s Foreign Ministry expressed concern over leaks about the expert panel report and criticized the media for chasing what it described as hearsay. China’s government “has all along conscientiously implemented Security Council resolutions on North Korea,” a statement said, and “the Chinese side has conscientiously investigated and responsibly provided responses to each case raised by the expert panel.”
North Korea’s mission to the U.N. didn’t respond to requests for comment.
An undated image released last week by North Korea showed the country’s leader Kim Jong Un greeting military members.
Photo: kcna/Reuters
The North Korea sanctions committee, which the expert panel reports to, declined to comment via a U.N. representative from Norway, which chairs the committee.
A representative for the U.S.’s mission to the U.N. said in a statement that North Korea presents a threat to international security and that the U.S. has long urged the sanctions committee to work collaboratively with the expert panel.
Beijing’s apparent effort to block the panel’s research is shortsighted, said Hugh Griffiths, a British expert on trafficking who served as panel coordinator from 2014 to 2019.
“It’s not an American problem, it’s a global problem. And it will come back to bite China later on because the North Korean leadership doesn’t like the Chinese that much either,” Mr. Griffiths said.
A half decade ago, Washington and Beijing, joined by Moscow, cooperated to impose a bevy of sanctions on Pyongyang to punish it after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un conducted nuclear tests and missile launches.
Political calculations then changed, with Chinese leader Xi Jinping coming to view North Korea’s weapons program as more of a problem for the U.S. than for China, according to former U.S. officials and Chinese foreign-affairs specialists. Then-President Donald Trump’s efforts to engage Mr. Kim in 2018 and 2019 foundered when Washington refused Pyongyang’s demands for broad sanctions relief in exchange for a partial surrender of its nuclear capabilities.
The U.S.-China rivalry has since come to the fore, spilling over to the once-united U.N. sanctions committee, which hasn’t agreed to add a business or other entity to its targeted list since 2018. Beijing has sought to ease the restrictions on North Korea and curtail investigations on sanctions evasion, the people familiar with the matter said.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping views North Korea’s weapons program as more of a problem for the U.S. than for China, according to former U.S. officials.
Photo: Huang Jingwen/Zuma Press
Beijing wants to block information that shows how actively North Korea is circumventing U.N. restrictions to protect its neighbor, said Bruce Bechtol, a political-science professor at Angelo State University in Texas and a former analyst with the U.S.’s Defense Intelligence Agency. “Any money the North Koreans make off illicit activities is money they don’t have to get from the Chinese,” he said.
In compiling its latest report, the expert panel asked Beijing about “the repeated and routine presence” in Chinese waters of vessels suspected of evading sanctions. China’s U.N. mission said only that ships suspected of delivering fuel to North Korea “have not entered Chinese ports since 2020.”
China also refused to investigate potential sanctions violations that appeared in a Danish documentary. “The Mole: Undercover in North Korea” used hidden camera footage to show purported North Korean arms dealers meeting in Beijing. China’s U.N. mission said the 2020 film “is suspected to be made by illegitimate means” and thus “shall not be taken as a credible source of information,” according to the draft.
In response to panel questions about academic exchanges between North Korea and Chinese universities—where some North Korean scientists have studied—China disputed that such activity was prohibited, asked the panel to stop sending inquiries to universities and said the report should omit the schools’ names “to avoid sending any wrong signals.”
The panel’s Chinese member, a Foreign Ministry official named Li Xiangfeng who worked in its international treaties and law department, was responsible for researching North Korea’s conventional weapons activities. But the report doesn’t show any substantial investigations into those activities, said Mr. Griffiths, the former panel member. Mr. Li didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Mr. Li, however, actively contributed dissenting footnotes. In one case, he objected to the panel’s reference to a company whose name contains the word Taiwan without noting China’s sovereignty claim. “One expert expressed the view that after the company name there is a need to insert ‘located in Taiwan Province of China’,” reads footnote 120.
Alastair Morgan, a former British ambassador to North Korea who served as coordinator of the U.N. panel until April, said while it is normal for panel reports to contain footnotes recording dissenting positions, experts are supposed to be independent, not representatives of their governments.
“You can get to the point where you feel members representing the Chinese government—and of course the panel members are supposed to be independent—may be taking more interest in terminology and nomenclature than in the effective prevention of violations of sanctions,” he said.
Russia’s expert joined China’s to allege the panel lacks evidence to make some of its conclusions, the people said. When the draft report notes that North Korea conducted missile tests this spring that were confirmed by Japan, South Korea and the U.S., footnote 8 reads: “Two experts expressed the view that the nature and technology of the projectiles launched by the DPRK on 25 March 2021 was not clear.”
Russia’s mission to the U.N. didn’t reply to a request for comment.
10. Cheong Wa Dae: no comment on N. Korea's criticism of President Moon
How do you respond to the tantrums of a petulant child like Kim Yo-jong?
Cheong Wa Dae: no comment on N. Korea's criticism of President Moon | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (Yonhap) -- The office of President Moon Jae-in said Thursday it would not respond formally to North Korea's direct condemnation of Moon over what it describes as "improper" and "stupid" remarks.
Cheong Wa Dae is apparently seeking to prevent inter-Korean tensions from escalating especially in advance of Moon's speech at the U.N. General Assembly next week, which is widely expected to include Seoul's unswerving commitment to the peace process. Cheong Wa Dae has attached a special meaning to the 30th anniversary this year of the two Koreas becoming members of the U.N. simultaneously.
Regarding the latest statement issued by Kim Yo-jong, sister of the North's leader Kim Jong-un, a Cheong Wa Dae official told reporters, "(We) will not make any mention (of the issue)."
Kim, who holds the official job title of vice department director of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party, strongly criticized Moon by name Wednesday night. It was unusual for Kim to level a verbal attack on the president. She met with Moon at his office in Seoul in early 2018, effectively serving as a peace messenger.
She was taking issue with remarks Moon made right after inspecting the country's underwater test-firing of a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM).
He stressed the South's enhanced missile capabilities will help deter North Korea's "provocation."
Kim said, "We express very great regret over his thoughtless utterance of the word 'provocation,' which might be fitting for hack journalists." She then warned of the breakdown of inter-Korean relations.
lcd@yna.co.kr
(END)
11. S. Korea, U.S. share urgent need for N.K. dialogue following missile launches
As I heard an eminent Korean expert say the other day, we cannot negotiate with ourselves. And the alliance cannot negotiate with itself. It is Kim who refuses to negotiate. It surely appears that Kim is waiting until he receives concessions inthe form of sanctions relief before he will negotiate. We must not be duped by the regime. Lifting sanctions will not result in a sincere negotiating effort by the Kim family regime. It will only result in continued political warfare and blackmail diplomacy.
(3rd LD) S. Korea, U.S. share urgent need for N.K. dialogue following missile launches | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: ADDS more info on talks with unification ministry official)
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and the United States shared the urgent need for an early resumption of dialogue with North Korea during their working-level talks on Thursday, the foreign ministry said, after Pyongyang fired off two ballistic missiles the previous day.
Seoul's deputy nuclear envoy, Lee Tae-woo, and his U.S. counterpart, Jung Pak, held talks in Seoul, as tensions flared anew with the North's short-range missile launches following its weekend test-firings of a new type of long-range cruise missile.
Pak arrived in Seoul earlier this week after she accompanied the U.S. special representative for the North, Sung Kim, during bilateral and trilateral talks in Tokyo with his South Korean and Japanese counterparts, Noh Kyu-duk and Takehiro Funakoshi, respectively.
"The two sides shared assessments of the recent Korean Peninsula situation, including the North's short-range missile launches, and shared the understanding that it is urgent to resume dialogue at an early date and make progress in denuclearization negotiations," the ministry said in a press release.
"Going forward, the two sides agreed to continue to strengthen water-tight cooperation to achieve the compete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula," it added.
On the same day, Pak also met with Rim Kap-soo, director general at the ministry's peninsula peace regime bureau.
"The two sides held working-level consultations over the recent Korean Peninsula situation and various ways to engage with North Korea so as to make substantive progress on the peninsula peace process, the ministry said, referring to the talks between Rim and Pak.
Later in the day, Pak held working-level talks with unification ministry officials and shared views on the recent situation on the peninsula, officials said.
The two sides also discussed bilateral cooperation on humanitarian assistance to North Korea and agreed to continue working in close consultation, they said.
On Wednesday, South Korea's First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-kun and the chief nuclear envoy, Noh Kyu-duk, also held separate phone talks with their U.S. counterparts, Wendy Sherman and Sung Kim, respectively.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
12. Two students in Haeju put on public trial for watching and distributing South Korean videos
Another example of how afraid Kim Jong-un is of the Korean people, especially when they are armed with information from the South. I guess like in all countries universities are hotbeds for rebellion and resistance! :-)
Two students in Haeju put on public trial for watching and distributing South Korean videos - Daily NK
Two students at Haeju University of Agriculture in South Hwanghae Province were recently put on public trial for watching, copying, and distributing South Korean videos.
A source in South Hwanghae Province told Daily NK on Wednesday that two 21-year-old male students at the university were arrested by the “unified command on non-socialist and anti-socialist behavior” for “watching a video from South Korea and brazenly sharing it in an indiscriminate way.”
They were put on public trial at the university’s sports ground on Sept. 4, he added.
Hailing from wealthy families, the two students used their comfortable family circumstances to donate needed money and goods to their school and the Socialist Patriotic Youth League. This allowed them to engage in “non-socialist behavior” such as skipping events and social mobilizations whenever they pleased.
According to the source, the public trial of the students—identified by their surnames of An and Lee—took place at the sports ground of Haeju University of Agriculture at 10:00 AM on Sept. 4. Sitting on the court’s bench were Socialist Patriotic Youth League cadres from major city institutions, three members of the unified command on non-socialist and anti-socialist behavior, and the vice heads of the provincial branches of the Ministry of State Security and Ministry of Social Security.
North Korean farmers in South Hwanghae Province cleaning up a damaged farm field after Typhoon Lingling in 2019. / Image: Rodong Sinmun
The trial proceedings generally recounted what the two had confessed to after being arrested in early August. The students allegedly watched South Korean videos “countless times,” copied them to CDs and USBs and distributed them to other students.
Using computers unregistered with the Ministry of State Security, they illegally copied South Korean films onto “innumerable” CDs and USBs, selling them to students who asked for them. They then squandered the money on food, drink, and entertainment.
The court’s judges pointed out that the two students were able to brazenly engage in this behavior because the university and Socialist Patriotic Youth League turned a blind eye while the two were entrusted with “economic tasks” (the donations of money and goods).
The judges slammed the students, condemning them for “boldly engaging in reactionary behavior upsetting public sentiment and ideologically agitating the masses” by distributing South Korean videos, for “instigating reactionary behavior, hanging out with those with the black worldly desires of capitalism,” and for “degenerating ideologically in the end, despite having long received ideological education in an organized and persistent fashion.”
Calling on organizations to strengthen ideological control over young people, the court warned that “the enemies are trying to overthrow our style of socialism by making our youth collapse from the inside and by infiltrating reactionary thought and culture” and “if your ideology degenerates, you could become a traitor who would sell out even the nation.”
The source reported the province has been in an uproar over the incident. “The provincial unified command on non-socialist and anti-socialist behavior ordered local residents to turn themselves in if they’ve watched illegal videos, and that those who turn themselves in would be forgiven,” he said.
Please direct any comments or questions about this article to dailynkenglish@uni-media.net.
13. North and South Korea unveil new missile systems
The photos at the link and in other reports look like a train launch from a movie clip.
North and South Korea unveil new missile systems
By Thomas Maresca
SEOUL, Sept. 16 (UPI) -- North Korea confirmed on Thursday that it has indeed launched a pair of ballistic missiles from a train-based system, which was part of a flurry of activity in a week that also saw South Korea unveil missiles of its own.
South Korean and Japanese defense officials first announced the missile tests on Wednesday, but Pyongyang did not immediately confirm. The missiles landed inside of Japan's exclusive economic zone, Tokyo's defense ministry said late Wednesday, correcting an earlier report.
Advertisement
The test marked the first time Pyongyang used the mobile railway system, a report from the state-run Korean Central News Agency said, and the missiles accurately struck their targets in the sea between Korea and Japan.
"The railway-borne missile regiment took part in the drill with a mission to strike the target area [about 500 miles] away from its location," KCNA reported.
U.S. officials condemned the launches, saying they're a violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions.
"We do condemn the [North Korean] missile launches," State Department spokesman Ned Price said at a press briefing. "We know that they pose a threat to ... neighbors and other members of the international community."
Advertisement
Hours after the North Korean launches on Wednesday, South Korea unveiled its own new military hardware -- four missiles, including a submarine-launched ballistic missile and a supersonic cruise missile.
President Moon Jae-in, who witnessed the launches, said the tests were already scheduled and were not a response to North Korea's launch. Moon added, however, that the weapons demonstrate Seoul's increasing military strength and send a message to Pyongyang.
"Our increased missile power can be a definite deterrent to North Korea's provocations," Moon said Wednesday. "The success of today's missile power launch tests has shown that we have sufficient deterrence to respond to North Korean provocations at any time."
South Korea is the seventh country in the world -- and the only one without nuclear weapons -- to develop its own submarine-launched ballistic missile. North Korea has announced its own SLBM, but there has been no clear evidence that it's operational.
North Korea responded angrily to Moon's remarks, with Kim Yo Jong, sister of Kim Jong Un, calling them "too stupid ... to be fit for the president of a state."
Advertisement
"We express very great regret over his thoughtless utterance of the word 'provocation,' which might be fitting for hack journalists," she said, according to KCNA. "What we did is part of normal and self-defensive action."
The missile tests this week came during a burst of diplomatic activity in the region. The United States' top North Korea envoy, Sung Kim, held a trilateral meeting in Tokyo with his Japanese and South Korean counterparts on Tuesday, while Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was in Seoul on Wednesday for talks with Moon and senior officials.
Analysts said North Korea's missile launches were timed with the diplomatic visits to grab international attention and potentially send a jolt into negotiations with the United States that have been mired in stalemate for more than two years.
Pyongyang "wants to change the course that the United States is taking right now in dealing with the North Korea issue," Jung Kim, an assistant professor at the University of North Korean studies in Seoul, told UPI.
"One of the clear messages that Washington is sending is that it will not make any first-move concessions to get Pyongyang back to the negotiating table," he added. "North Korea is trying to change that default state by demonstrating a credible threat."
Advertisement
Jung Kim said, however, that the latest provocations may not be seen as significant enough to impact Washington's approach, leaving North Korea to walk a fine line.
"There is a dilemma for North Korea," he said. "If they cross a red line, like an ICBM test or a nuclear test, that may instead provoke a counter-productive response."
On Tuesday, ahead of the ballistic missile launches, Sung Kim said the United States "continues to reach out to Pyongyang to restart dialogue" and remains open to meeting without preconditions.
14. China, S. Korea vow to boost bilateral ties, strengthen cooperation
The view of Wang Yi's visit from a Chinese propaganda mouthpiece.
China, S. Korea vow to boost bilateral ties, strengthen cooperation
Source: Xinhua| 2021-09-15 23:45:27|Editor: huaxia
Video PlayerClose
South Korean President Moon Jae-in (R) meets with visiting Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Seoul, South Korea, Sept. 15, 2021. (South Korea Presidential Blue House/Handout via Xinhua)
Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the two sides should take the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties as an opportunity to push for greater development of bilateral relations.
SEOUL, Sept. 15 (Xinhua) -- South Korean President Moon Jae-in and visiting Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi agreed on Wednesday to promote bilateral ties and strengthen cooperation.
During the meeting with Wang, Moon said that South Korea is ready to work with China to maintain the momentum of high-level exchanges, expand people-to-people exchanges and push for more fruitful cooperation in economy, trade and environmental protection.
South Korea supports China in hosting the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympic Games and appreciates China's contribution to maintaining peace on the Korean Peninsula, Moon said, hoping that China will continue to play a constructive role in the Korean Peninsula issue.
For his part, Wang said the two sides should take the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties as an opportunity to push for greater development of bilateral relations.
On the same day, Wang also met with South Korean Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong, with both sides agreeing to establish a regular communication mechanism between foreign ministers of the two countries.
The two sides also agreed to hold a new round of high-level strategic dialogue between foreign ministries of the two countries and China-South Korea "2+2" dialogue on diplomacy and security as soon as possible.
During their meeting, Wang said that since the establishment of diplomatic relations nearly 30 years ago, China-South Korea relations have reached new heights and become more mature and stable.
The two countries have not only achieved mutual benefit and win-win results at the bilateral level, but also played a role as a guardian of peace and stability and facilitator for development and prosperity in international and regional affairs, he added.
Visiting Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi (L) meets with South Korean Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong in Seoul, South Korea, Sept. 15, 2021. (Xinhua/Wang Jingqiang)
In the face of a major shift in the international landscape, the two countries should further establish a sense of community, continue to expand common interests and tap the potential of cooperation, so as to promote the upgrading of bilateral relations, Wang said.
Wang said that China, which opposes politicizing the COVID-19 origins tracing and instrumentalizing the origins tracing work, is ready to work with South Korea to deepen cooperation in fighting the pandemic.
China is willing to speed up the alignment of development strategies of the two countries, accelerate the process of second-phrase negotiations on China-South Korea free trade agreement, and make the China-South Korea Year of Cultural Exchanges a success, he added.
Wang said that China and South Korea could strengthen cooperation on global issues such as climate change under multilateral frameworks including the United Nations, jointly safeguard the security and stability of regional and global industrial chains and supply chains, and facilitate the entry into force of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership free trade agreement as scheduled.
For his part, Chung hoped that the two sides will continue to strengthen high-level interactions, promote anti-epidemic cooperation, deepen cooperation in artificial intelligence, semiconductors and new materials, so as to inject new impetus into the development of bilateral relations.
South Korea supports carrying out global virus origin tracing in an open and transparent manner, and disagrees with politicizing origins tracing, Chung said.
The two sides also had in-depth exchanges on international and regional issues of common concern.
During his visit, Wang also met with Lim Chae-jung, chairman of the South Korean side of the committee for future development of China-South Korea relations. ■
15. Nuclear weapons no real advantage for South Korea, former USFK commander says
A conference with the interns of the Korean Defense Veterans Association makes the news.
When former commanders in Korea make comments they often make the news.
But for those who advocate returning US nuclear weapons to the peninsula or the ROK developing their own nuclear weapons, I have to ask, how do you think that will contribute to deterrence? Please describe what you think deters Kim Jong-un from attacking the South? How will nuclear weapons on the peninsula contribute to deterrence in any appreciable way that outweigh the risks or the negative blowback?
Nuclear weapons no real advantage for South Korea, former USFK commander says
Then-U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. Vincent Brooks greets South Korean President Moon Jae-in at Yongsan Garrison, South Korea, June 13, 2017. (Sean Harp/U.S. Army)
A retired Army general who oversaw all U.S. troops on the Korean Peninsula said he believed nuclear weapons would not give South Korea a strategic advantage and may instead escalate tensions to “an unnecessary degree of danger.”
Vincent Brooks, the former commander of U.S. Forces Korea and United Nations Command, spoke during a virtual roundtable discussion hosted by the Korea Defense Veterans Association on Tuesday.
He described South Korea as a “mature democracy” that had “withstood great pressures and tests,” but possessing a nuclear weapon would not help it deter threats from North Korea. In light of North Korea’s ongoing nuclear program, the subject of Seoul possessing nuclear weapons has been raised by many South Korean politicians in recent years, including primary candidates in the upcoming presidential election.
President Moon Jae-in has ruled out the deployment of nuclear weapons in South Korea, warning during a television interview in 2017 that it may “lead to a nuclear arms race” in the region.
“I’m of the view that South Korea and the alliance have the advantage,” Brooks said. “They have the military advantage and the addition of nuclear weapons … does not help that.”
The U.S. withdrew its nuclear weapons from the peninsula in 1991 and signed a bilateral defense treaty to protect South Korea from external attacks.
South Korea does not possess nuclear weapons but has made advances in developing its missile program. On Wednesday, it became one of the few nations to successfully test-fire a submarine-launched ballistic missile, an accomplishment Moon described as a deterrent to North Korea's continued provocations.
In addition to its technological advances, decades-old guidelines limiting the range of South Korean-developed ballistic missiles to a maximum range of roughly 500 miles were scrapped by the U.S. and Seoul in May.
Given these advances, Brooks said, he believed the idea of South Korea possessing nuclear weapons “escalates the threshold to one that is an unnecessary degree of danger.”
“It’s going to be debated and must be debated by the sovereign nation of [South Korea], to decide for itself,” Brooks said. “But there are a lot of things that come with the possession of nuclear weapons and it’s not all good.”
The 42-year Army veteran said Seoul “should be very careful not to open the door to these types of things when they have strength already; and not to do it just to be equalizing” against Pyongyang.
“North Korea is imitating South Korea,” Brooks said. “South Korea does not need to imitate North Korea.”
North Korea on Wednesday announced it had fired two ballistic missiles across its eastern coast. The missiles flew about 500 miles at a maximum altitude of 37 miles, according to South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff.
North Korea’s Wednesday test happened just two days after it fired long-range cruise missiles that flew 932 miles for over two hours, according to the country’s state-run news agency.
Brooks said that despite North Korea having “numerical superiority,” its military lacks technical capabilities and “a will to fight.”
North Korea is estimated to have roughly 1.2 million troops, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, compared to South Korea’s active-duty force of around 550,000. Roughly 28,500 U.S. troops are also stationed in South Korea.
David Choi
16. Has an Arms Race Begun on the Korean Peninsula?
Arms race? I think that might be a little disingenuous. The ROK has been very transparent in its pursuit of advanced weapons systems as outlined in its defense White Papers and Defense Reform initiatives.
The SLBM capability does not necessarily mean the ROK is going to build nuclear weapons.
Has an Arms Race Begun on the Korean Peninsula?
The ejection test makes South Korea the first country without nuclear weapons to field SLBMs, which are typically designed for compatibility with nuclear warheads.
Both Koreas test-fired ballistic missiles within hours of one another, reigniting long-running military tensions on the peninsula.
The DPRK military fired two ballistic missiles into waters off its Eastern Coast on Wednesday, with South Korean defense officials announcing that the missiles were launched from Central North Korea. The ballistic missile launches follow North Korea’s earlier announcement that the country had tested a new long-range cruise missile. DPRK authorities hinted that their cruise missile can carry a nuclear warhead, though its full capabilities remain unclear.
Seoul responded within several hours with a test of its own, launching a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) aboard the new Dosan Ahn Changho-class submarine, ROKS Dosan Ahn Changho, in an event attended by President Moon Jae-in. The 3,800-ton Dosan Ahn Changho was commissioned last month and is expected to embark on its first deployment by August 2022.
The ejection test makes South Korea the first country without nuclear weapons to field SLBMs, which are typically designed for compatibility with nuclear warheads. The SLBM, reportedly named Hyunmoo 4-4, appears to be derived from the country’s new Hyunmoo-2B ballistic missile. The Hyunmoo 4-4 reportedly has a range of 500 kilometers, enough to cover all of North Korea.
Although South Korea’s military is already capable of credibly threatening large swathes of DPRK infrastructure and key military assets, the Hyunmoo 4-4 could help Seoul to more effectively target North Korea’s heavily fortified bunkers and underground facilities. “The increase in our missile power can be a sure deterrent against North Korean provocations,” said Moon said in a statement on Wednesday. The new SLBM is part of Seoul’s broader effort to lessen its military dependence on the United States, encompassing a $271 billion, five-year defense procurement plan. The plan likewise envisions a homegrown missile defense network that has been called the “Korean Iron Dome.” The Hyunmoo 4-4 is set to undergo further testing before entering service.
Analysts have remarked on the tests’ unusual timing, as the DPRK’s flurry of missile activity comes amid a bilateral meeting between Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi and Moon. It is arguably uncharacteristic for Pyongyang to stage a provocation of this kind even as its prime benefactor, Beijing, is engaged in high-level diplomatic talks.
Japanese prime minister Yoshihide Suga condemned North Korea’s ballistic missile launches, calling them a “threat to the peace and security” of the region. “It is in violation of UN Security Council resolution, and I strongly protest and condemn this,” Suga said.
The DPRK has lashed out at its southern counterpart, threatening the “complete destruction” of bilateral relations over Seoul’s forceful response to the North’s missile tests. “If the president joins in the slander and detraction (against us), this will be followed by counteractions, and the North-South relations will be pushed toward a complete destruction,” said Kim Yo-jong, sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and influential player in Pyongyang’s internal politics. “We do not want that,” she added.
Mark Episkopos is a national security reporter for the National Interest.
Image: Reuters
17. North Korea’s latest missile provocation was entirely predictable
Some of the best analysis of north Korea is always provided by Professor Sung Yoon Lee.
Excerpts:
And Pyongyang has been steadily putting pressure on the Biden administration to see how far it can push things. The International Atomic Energy Agency noted in August 2021 that North Korea had restarted the Yongbyon plutonium reactor, one North Korea agreed to shut down in 1994, 2008 and 2018.
As such, a major weapons test this fall should not be unexpected. It would fall into the pattern of alternatively playing nice, then acting belligerently, that has marked North Korea’s diplomatic routine for decades. And it is entirely predictable.
North Korea’s latest missile provocation was entirely predictable
The firing off of two long-range missiles by North Korea shows that rather than being unpredictable, the isolationist state is quite the opposite.
Announced on Sept. 13, 2021, the testing of the cruise missiles – which reportedly can hit targets roughly 930 miles away (1,500 kilometers) – follows a well-worn playbook for North Korea: act belligerently, fire off missiles and then pivot to post-provocation peace mode and watch the concessions flow in. It was followed up by tit-for-tat missile testing on Sept. 15 by North and South Korea, further escalating tensions on the peninsula.
The concern for the international community now is that with some key North Korean anniversaries coming up – including Party Foundation Day on Oct. 10 – leader Kim Jong Un could mark the occasion by ratcheting up tensions further.
So why fire off the cruise missiles now? The short answer is, it was time. The last missile tests were on March 25, 2021. And North Korea, like all other states armed with missiles, periodically needs to test and upgrade its arsenal.
But again, such an apparent overture fits into a cycle. I noted in a tweet on Sept. 9 that the low-key parade might be a deliberate move, to be followed by a provocative act:
And indeed the very next day, missile tests resumed.
The response by Washington has been muted. Meeting on Sept. 14, senior diplomats from Japan, the United States and South Korea called on North Korea to return to the negotiation table over its nuclear and missile program. U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Policy Sung Kim asked North Korea to “respond positively to our multiple offers to meet without preconditions.”
North Korea replied by firing two short-range ballistic missiles on Sept. 15, marking the 71st anniversary of the Inchon Landing, a pivotal event in the Korean War that changed the tide for both Koreas. The South replied by conducting an underwater missile launch.
For North Korea, the timing is ripe for a gradual escalation. The Biden administration is still reeling from the Afghanistan withdrawal, and history has shown that Pyongyang tends to raise tensions when it perceives military weakness.
And Pyongyang has been steadily putting pressure on the Biden administration to see how far it can push things. The International Atomic Energy Agency noted in August 2021 that North Korea had restarted the Yongbyon plutonium reactor, one North Korea agreed to shut down in 1994, 2008 and 2018.
[Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world. Sign up today.]
As such, a major weapons test this fall should not be unexpected. It would fall into the pattern of alternatively playing nice, then acting belligerently, that has marked North Korea’s diplomatic routine for decades. And it is entirely predictable.
18. Opinion | There’s a simple option for defusing the coming crisis with North Korea
Victor is one of the eminent Korean watchers. However, while I think we should continue to offer humanitarian assistance I do not think this is the pathway to diplomacy because of Kim Jong-un's instransience and unwillingness to take care of the Korean people living in the north. I do not think an offer of humanitarian assistance (which the ROK and the US have made repeatedly) is going to change Kim's behavior. And I believe he will only accept humanitarian assistance if it is provided on his terms, withostanard transparency and if he can use it to his advantage which most likely will not help the Korean people in the north. I do not think Kim is going to come to the negotiating table to negotiate a humanitarian assistance deal. That said I would make the offer that Dr. Cha purposes. If Kim does not agree it will simply be another indicator that he refuses to act as a responsible member of the international community.
And we should not forget that Kim has his own recommendation for defusing the coming crisis (that he will cause): provide sanctions relief in return for a promise to negotiate. That is what he wants and it may lead to a short term defusing of the crisis but will only lead to continued political warfare and blackmail diplomacy because Kim will assess it works.
Excerpts.
But there’s another option. The United States and its allies could consider negotiating some form of humanitarian assistance for North Korea to address its declining domestic situation. After all, Kim is not unlike every other leader today whose main concern is to stem covid transmission, and he’s not open to Chinese help. He’s already rejected an offer of Chinese vaccines from Covax, the World Health Organization-backed initiative to distribute vaccine doses, because he does not trust them. Western humanitarian assistance, under the appropriate verification protocols, would not violate any of the current sanctions against North Korea under current United Nations Security Council resolutions and U.S. law.
Delivering vaccines or food might seem like a detour from denuclearization. But the utility of an agreement negotiated by the U.S. government in conjunction with humanitarian NGOs at this moment is broader than appears. A humanitarian assistance agreement will address the needs of the people inside the country. It will promote alliance solidarity with the engagement-oriented South Korea. It could stave off escalating provocations, as Kim is unlikely to act out while in dialogue with the United States. Finally, an agreement reduces Chinese influence on the peninsula, and just might create some momentum for further diplomacy.
If the United States is unwilling to pursue such assistance, then it can simply wait for the next nuclear test by North Korea and roll the dice in hopes that diplomacy can pull us back from the brink. But with all else that Biden needs to deal with at home, does he really need another crisis?.
Opinion | There’s a simple option for defusing the coming crisis with North Korea
Victor Cha is senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a professor at Georgetown University and author of “The Impossible State: North Korea.”
We are stuck in a rut on North Korea. The absence of any forward progress on denuclearization diplomacy is the result of a unique intersection of American distraction and North Korean disinterest. Now, by test-firing two short-range ballistic missiles and a long-range cruise missile, the North Koreans have signaled that they aim to shake things up, confronting President Biden with a predicament he’s so far been able to dodge. There are two paths out of it — one that the United States and its allies can control and another that they cannot.
The Biden administration has kept its North Korea policy deliberately low-key. White House press secretary Jen Psaki promised in April a policy that would avoid both Donald Trump’s made-for-TV summitry and Barack Obama’s hands-off version of “strategic patience.” No administration official has since chosen to elaborate on her vague statement. For the past few weeks, the State Department has been focused entirely on the diplomatic mission in Afghanistan, leaving little time for high-level attention on North Korea.
U.S. distraction is complemented by North Korean disinterest. Pyongyang has no interest in answering the calls for engagement from what it perceives as the lame-duck government of South Korean President Moon Jae-in. A desperate economic situation, exacerbated by floods and a pandemic-induced 19-month border shutdown with China, has caused the North Korean leadership to turn inward. Meanwhile, China has done nothing to promote diplomacy. If anything, its conditioning of cooperation on North Korea with U.S. concessions in bilateral relations with Beijing means that China won’t do anything to break the stalemate.
All this explains why we haven’t seen the saber-rattling nuclear tests or mega-missile launches from North Korea that we would normally expect in the first year of an American presidency. Remember when Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sat huddled over reports of North Korean missile tests during dinner at Mar-a-Lago only three weeks after his inauguration? Or when Obama was greeted with a rocket launch in April 2009 only to be followed by a nuclear test during Obama’s first memorial day weekend as president? Thus far, Biden has had to deal with none of that — despite events that usually provoke North Korea, like a U.S.-South Korea summit (May) or U.S.-South Korea military exercises (August).
But the absence of North Korean fireworks does not mean a crisis is not brewing. Satellite imagery suggests that, as early as March, Kim Jong Un fired up the reactor that North Korea uses to make nuclear bombs. Development of long-range ballistic missiles that reach the U.S. homeland continues unabated. The tests this week suggest Kim’s ambition to become one of a handful of countries to field a nuclear cruise missile.
The usual answer to this problem is to apply more sanctions to North Korea in order to compel them to stop the programs. That option might make for good politics in Washington, but it is likely to have little effect. North Korea has put itself under the most stringent sanctions in its history by closing the border since January 2020 to prevent covid-19 transmission. The only answer to stemming the threat is diplomacy.
We can get to diplomacy in one of two ways. One is through crisis. North Korea appears to be laying a path to a major provocation such as another nuclear test, a long-range ballistic missile test (with multiple reentry vehicles), or a sea-launched ballistic missile test that will precipitate a spiraling near-war crisis. One hopes that diplomacy could pull us back from the brink, but there is no guarantee that things would not spiral out of control as they did at the end of 2017 under Trump.
But there’s another option. The United States and its allies could consider negotiating some form of humanitarian assistance for North Korea to address its declining domestic situation. After all, Kim is not unlike every other leader today whose main concern is to stem covid transmission, and he’s not open to Chinese help. He’s already rejected an offer of Chinese vaccines from Covax, the World Health Organization-backed initiative to distribute vaccine doses, because he does not trust them. Western humanitarian assistance, under the appropriate verification protocols, would not violate any of the current sanctions against North Korea under current United Nations Security Council resolutions and U.S. law.
Delivering vaccines or food might seem like a detour from denuclearization. But the utility of an agreement negotiated by the U.S. government in conjunction with humanitarian NGOs at this moment is broader than appears. A humanitarian assistance agreement will address the needs of the people inside the country. It will promote alliance solidarity with the engagement-oriented South Korea. It could stave off escalating provocations, as Kim is unlikely to act out while in dialogue with the United States. Finally, an agreement reduces Chinese influence on the peninsula, and just might create some momentum for further diplomacy.
If the United States is unwilling to pursue such assistance, then it can simply wait for the next nuclear test by North Korea and roll the dice in hopes that diplomacy can pull us back from the brink. But with all else that Biden needs to deal with at home, does he really need another crisis?
19. "Threat To World": UN Security Council On North Korea's Missile Test
"Threat To World": UN Security Council On North Korea's Missile Test
"This is a major threat to peace and security, it's a clear violation of the Council's resolutions," French ambassador said.
North Korea's missile are a threat to the world, United Nations Security Council said.
United Nations:
The UN Security Council on Wednesday gathered behind closed doors for an emergency meeting about North Korea's latest ballistic missile test which member states consider a "major threat," the French ambassador said.
In the past, such meetings -- this one called by Estonia and France -- have often resulted in a joint statement by European members of the Security Council.
But France's ambassador to the UN, Nicolas de Riviere, said there was consensus among the group.
"We all condemned what happened, the tests," he said. "Everyone is very concerned about this situation," de Riviere told several journalists after the 45-minute meeting.
"This is a major threat to peace and security, it's a clear violation of the Council's resolutions," he added, saying that the missiles had fallen "within Japan's exclusive economic zone."
"Of course we need a political dialogue, a political solution, but the precondition is compliance (by) the DPRK with UN Security Council resolutions," de Riviere said, using an acronym for North Korea.
"It's a threat to the non-proliferation regime, it's a threat to the world, it's a threat to the neighbors of DPRK: South Korea, Japan," he said.
He added that no joint draft statement was expected to come from the Security Council.
"We fully understand the concerns in this region and we urge DPRK to compliance and resumption of talks."
In a statement from London, the British Foreign Office meanwhile condemned the test as a "clear violation" of Security Council resolutions and a "threat to regional peace and security," as the United States has also done.
"We urge North Korea to refrain from further provocations, and to return to dialogue with the US," the British statement said.
Earlier Wednesday, South Korea fired a submarine ballistic missile and North Korea again fired two ballistic missiles into the sea, in what seems to have become an arms race between two countries still technically at war.
South Korea is not subject to bans on launching ballistic missile tests, according to UN diplomatic sources.
Promoted
That is in contrast to North Korea, which has faced a series of heavy economic sanctions, especially since 2017, as the international community seeks to limit the North's ballistic and nuclear weapons programs.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
20. The North Korean Regime Continues To Get Away With Some Of The Worst Atrocities Of The 21st Century
We must never overlook the human rights atrocities of the Kim family regime. It is not only a moral imperative but a national security issue because Kim Jong-un denies the human rights of the Korean people living in the north in order to remain in power. we must have a human rights upfront approach.
The North Korean Regime Continues To Get Away With Some Of The Worst Atrocities Of The 21st Century
Forbes · by Dr. Ewelina U. Ochab · September 15, 2021
... [+]Getty Images
The report presented findings of violations of the rights to freedom of thought, expression and religion; discrimination on the basis of State-assigned social class, gender and disability; violations of the freedom of movement and residence, including the freedom to leave one’s own country; violations of the right to food and related aspects of the right to life; arbitrary detention, torture, executions, enforced disappearance and political prison camps; and enforced disappearance of persons from other countries, including through abduction. The Commission of Inquiry classified the atrocities as crimes against humanity and even considered the suitability of some of the crimes against the legal definition of genocide, although without making such a finding at the time. The Commission of Inquiry made several recommendations aimed at addressing the atrocities, and considering their nature, severity and scale. Nonetheless, seven years later, the majority of these recommendations have not been implemented and the violations continue to this day.
Because of this stagnation, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on North Korea (APPG on North Korea), a caucus of British parliamentarians focused on the human rights situation in North Korea, conducted an inquiry into human rights in North Korea between 2014 and 2020/1. The findings of the inquiry suggest that, despite the Commission of Inquiry’s 2014 report shedding light on the nature and severity of the atrocities, and its several recommendations for the U.N. and Member States, the situation of human rights in North Korea has not improved. The inquiry members have seen evidence of North Korea officials being involved in killings, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; sexual and gender-based violence, including rape and sexual violence, sex trafficking, forced abortions and infanticide; modern day slavery; persecution based on religion or belief; and much more. The report re-states that the atrocities amount to crimes against humanity. The inquiry members further indicate that there are reasons to believe that some of the atrocities reach the threshold of genocide, particularly in relation to three groups: Christians; half-Chinese children; and the so-called “hostile” group, namely, a group of people considered to be at the lowest level of the North Korean socio-economic caste system.
Writing in the foreword to the report, Justice Kirby, praised the report as an important contribution towards keeping the North Korea issues alive and on the agenda of the international community, the United Nations, and others. He further identified some of the failures of the international community that need to be addressed, including, the failure of the U.N. Security Council to refer the case of North Korea and its crimes against humanity to the International Criminal Court. This stagnation on the situation in North Korea is not out of lack of evidence. The issue is the lack of political will. Indeed, as the report states on the issue of accountability: “There was no appetite to set up a large-scale independent mechanism.” Instead, the U.N. established an accountability team, a small team, primarily based within the field-based structure located in Seoul, collecting and analyzing information received from recent arrivals in South Korea from North Korea. While doing important work, the team does not have the capacity and resources to address the nature, severity and scale of human rights violations in North Korea, a state without parallel.
Other recommendations from the Commission of Inquiry also await to be implemented. The APPG on North Korea wants to trigger action to help the people of North Korea. However, the lack of political will globally may stand in the way.
North Korean people deserve more international focus and action. Just because they are stuck behind an information blackout, it does not mean that their suffering should be neglected too. The international community has led on some important initiatives to help those persecuted globally, even if such responses are fragmented. Now it is time to help North Korean people, who do not know a better life, but deserve it by virtue of their humanity, human dignity and inalienable human rights. The North Korean regime cannot continue to get away with some of the worst atrocities of the 21st Century.
Forbes · by Dr. Ewelina U. Ochab · September 15, 2021
21. Twitter Reacts to Kim Jong-Un's Weight Loss Transformation
And something a little lighter (pun intended).
Twitter Reacts to Kim Jong-Un's Weight Loss Transformation
Hypebeast · by Ambrose Leung · September 15, 2021
After staying out of sight from the public since May, North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un has returned to shock spectators at a recent military parade in Pyongyang.
Many could not tell it was even him as he appeared much thinner, darker, and sported a new haircut. Looking like a different person, it was reported that the 37-year-old Kim Jong-Un lost close to 45 pounds over the course of several months after past complications with his health. Now, the internet is reacting to the body transformation as well as some questionable headlines about the Supreme Leader of North Korea.
If I’m not mistaken about the timeline, Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump fell in love in 2018, broke up in 2020, and now in 2021 this is his revenge body. https://t.co/0LqAXugQWq
Hypebeast · by Ambrose Leung · September 15, 2021
V/R
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Phone: 202-573-8647
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
