The AccessDPRK blog is dedicated to exposing North Korea via satellite imagery. Discussing domestic, economic and military locations and helping to uncover this hermit kingdom.
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Kim Jong Un: Wanted, Dead or Alive
Kim Jong Un hasn't been seen in public since April 11. While the occasional absence isn't unusual, he missed the April 15 "Day of the Sun" holiday for the first time ever. The Day of the Sun celebrates the birth of his grandfather, Kim Il Sung, who founded the state. It's a very important holiday in North Korea and his lack of attendance sent the worldwide rumor mill into motion. Each day since has only added confusion and intensified the mystery.
Does he have coronavirus? Did he have a heart attack? Is being held hostage as his sister or uncle orchestrate a coup with the help of powerful generals? Maybe he's just tired of being in the spotlight all the time and needs a break? Or perhaps he was injured by flying shrapnel during an artillery exercise?
The speculation surrounding his health began in earnest when the DailyNK published a report based on a single unnamed source that claimed Kim had undergone a heart procedure at a special hospital based in Hyangsan and is recuperating.
Within about 48 hours, even reputable media descended into saying he was gravely ill or brain dead, and that a crisis was about to unfold. None of that, absolutely none of it, was supported by the initial report. Since then, some have even gone so far as to claim he's actually dead. And the usual suspects like Gordon Chang have jumped at the opportunity to stir the pot.
North Korea is already a very opaque state and they are not in the habit of publicly discussing the health of their supreme leader. Why should they? It would only invite internal dissent, discredit the idea that the Kim's are somehow special humans, and could court disaster from both within and without. So there has been no direct reference to either his health or whereabouts by state media.
With some notable exceptions, the international press has generally not made things any clearer. Their instance on speculation and running with the most sensationalist headlines has only served to make the waters more murky and caused many people a lot of unnecessary stress, as they add concerns over "lose nukes" to the already considerable stress caused by the global pandemic.
So what, exactly, are the facts? What do we know or at least what is most probable given the evidence?
Two weeks after his disappearance from public view, both the United States and South Korea have made claims that Kim is indeed alive and that he is staying at his seaside palace in Wonsan.
The general consensus of more rational media sources, unnamed officials, and official statements paints this picture: sometime in April Kim had a medical procedure and has since been resting in Wonsan.
Even the unverified claim that a Chinese medical delegation was sent in to help isn't unusual. From Muammar Gadaffi to Kim Jong Il, dictators with limited access to advanced medical equipment and expertise often seek the aid of foreign doctors. Indeed, Kim Jong Un was seen by a French doctor in 2014.
When it comes to what we know (or is most probable), that's basically it.
Lending support to that picture is the fact that commercial satellite imagery has shown one of Kim's armored trains parked at Wonsan since at least April 21. This also makes sense because in the original report from DailyNK, they said he had been recovering at a villa near Pyongyang immediately after surgery. After spending a week or so at that villa, he may be feeling well enough to venture to his favorite home.
Wonsan is not just the best equipped seaside residence in North Korea, it happens to be the place where Kim spent much of his youth outside of Pyongyang and Switzerland.
However, that alone is not conclusive evidence of anything as Kim is said to have at least three trains. His movements are always tightly guarded, and a second train will be used as decoy to help obfuscate his real movements (something he learned from his father). However, lending more credibility to the idea that he's in Wonsan comes from a report which cites an unnamed US official who said that Kim was spotted (via US reconnaissance aircraft) walking outside between April 15 and 20.
Additionally, Moon Chung-in, adviser to the South Korean president, has said that the official position of the ROK government is that Kim is "alive and well". As recently as April 27, President Trump has said that he knows the status of Kim and did not give any indication that he was dead or no longer able to govern the country.
It's important to remember that this is not the first time Kim has gone missing. He disappeared for about six weeks in 2014 after having an apparent procedure done on his ankle.
Kim Jong Un isn't the best example of health. Although he is only 36 years old, he is morbidly obese and is a heavy smoker. Adding to that is a family history of cardiovascular disease and stroke. So it's perfectly understandable for people to wonder about his health. What isn't normal is for journalists to gleefully speculate about his current condition as though it were fact.
There is nothing in any valid public source that would indicate anything more than he is in recovery.
And while I am personally content to read the tea leaves and wait until he shows back up (his dad went missing for nearly two months after his stroke), I am also getting tired of seeing extravagant speculation and rumor spreading. It may have made April slightly more exciting as I (like many of us) sit at home, forbidden to visit favorite restaurants or friends, but it has also consumed an inordinate amount of time to tamp down wild theories.
This is a view I believe I share with many other analysts. Yes, we're all very curious, but one can only say for certain what one knows. And the only ones who know much of anything right now are Kim Jong Un and his associates.
Dead or alive, it's only a matter of time before we know the facts. Turning what could be a simple heart procedure into a sordid dynastic succession struggle between Kim, his sister, and his uncle may make people click on links, but it does little to advance the cause of truth and violates the trust media, analysts, and other experts are supposed to engender.
I would like to thank my current Patreon supporters: Amanda O., GreatPoppo, Kbechs87, Planefag, Russ Johnson, and Travis Murdock.
--Jacob Bogle, 4/27/2020
AccessDPRK.com
JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/accessdprk
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Sunday, August 11, 2019
In Defense of North Korea Travel
In September 2017, the US prohibited American citizens from traveling to North Korea (except under special circumstances). This move was ostensibly in retaliation for the horrific and mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of Otto Warmbier. Then in August 2019, the US State Department announced that foreigners who visited North Korea at any time since March 1, 2011 would no longer be able to qualify for visa-free travel to the United States. This newest restriction applies to several other countries as well, but it will make visiting North Korea an even more difficult decision for foreigners who also have family or business in the US.
The argument against visiting North Korea (or any dictatorial country like, Cuba, China, Russia during the days of the USSR, etc.) is that a person is giving money to these repressive regimes and that travel may even be a tacit sign of support. That the money raised by tourism isn't used to bolster their economies or help employees, but goes towards things like weapons programs. The other argument is that it's just too dangerous, especially for Americans.
If you couldn't tell from the title, I reject the idea that the risks of tourism outweigh the benefits. For one, on a purely philosophical level, I believe that every human being has an inherent right to travel anywhere they want to. (Even if the target country doesn't care about human rights.)
As far as safety risks, anyone visiting any country has to be aware of local laws, especially if they have laws surrounding culture, religion, or the leadership. Plenty of other countries have laws that would seem completely insane through the eyes of an American (like going to prison for insulting a king or dancing with a woman you're not married to), so North Korea isn't unique in having absurd laws. What's unique about North Korea is the extreme and severe consequences of breaking those laws. But in terms of the actual risk level, there have only been 16 Americans arrested in North Korea since 1999. I doubt the same could be said of any nationality visiting the United States.
Tour groups often give lengthy warnings about what not to do, and it should be common sense by now to avoid political and religious discussions, to listen to your minders, and to be as respectful as possible. North Korea is a serious place with serious consequences if you screw up, but statistically, an average tourist doesn't seem to be at much greater risk of being arrested than any other average tourist visiting a place like Saudi Arabia, Thailand, or Iran. In fact, the only group at a higher-than-average risk is ethnic Korean-Americans, particularly those who are Christian.
Getting to terms of economics, only a few hundred Americans visited North Korea each year prior to the ban. The total economic impact on the country from American tourists was likely less than $5 million a year.
If Kim Jong Un is anything like his father in his love for alcohol and parties, that money wouldn't even pay his annual bar tab, let alone be directly responsible for propping up a billion-dollar weapons program nor would it significantly boost spending on luxury items like cars and yachts. Indeed, under Kim Jong Il, the regime spent over $600 million a year just on luxury goods.
North Korea's sources of outside income is vast and includes countless illicit programs. Their cyber theft activity is estimated to have brought in some $2 billion over the years. So I don't buy the argument that the extremely limited American tourism industry to the country was having any significant impact on allowing the country to continue doing what it does.
On the other hand, tourism to the country offers many opportunities that further the goals of democracy and benefits the work of North Korea analysts.
The impacts of cross-cultural engagement can't be underestimated. A couple years ago I had the opportunity to travel to Cuba during the brief window created under the Obama administration (which has since been cut off under the current administration). It was a government approved tour to be sure, but I also got to see a decent amount of reality - not just propaganda. I saw trash in the streets, houses without electricity, and suburban neighborhoods in bad need of repair. I also saw a more managed Cuba with an immaculate downtown, loyal soldiers of the Revolution marching around, and people just trying to live their lives. What I didn't see was goosestepping civilians calling for the death of all Americans. In fact, after everyone got comfortable with each other, the message was pretty clear. Cubans recognize that problems exist and they don't necessarily mind overlooking complicated historical matters if it means having a less antagonistic relationship with the US, so long as both sides can open up and allow the Cubans to finally start moving out of the 1960s thanks to tourism and trade.
Actually getting a change to see the "evil" communist Cubans, Soviets, and North Koreans reveals that they are actually people, just like everyone else. They have their own individual desires no matter how hard the regime tries to subdue them and enforce the "collective-first" ideology. That individuality and their realization that North Korea isn't a paradise on earth, is part of a long and inexorable process that will result in the collapse of the Kim family. It is something that was only made possible by North Koreans seeing other parts of the world like, China and Russia, and from outsiders coming in with their fat bellies, modern fashion, and new technology. Being envious of Levi jeans helped fuel discontent among the Soviet youth and the same thing has been happening in North Korea.
The results of trading, especially with China, has been a flood of outside information flowing into the country. This information (largely in the form of foreign movies and TV shows) is seen as a major threat to the regime. It has broken the spell of the "socialist paradise" while also raising the expectations and dreams of the people. And each time the government fails at meeting those expectations and addressing the people's concerns, even more cracks form between government and citizen. And tourism allows each side to realize that the other is human, too. That Westerners aren't bloodthirsty devils and North Koreans aren't as brainwashed as mass media may lead us to believe.
While I have never been to North Korea, I have read countless accounts, watched a ton of video, and looked at loads of pictures of tourists from multiple countries and during different periods of time. No matter how tightly controlled the visit is, human behavior is universal. Once a level of comfort sets in, people start talking. Sometimes it's just a small amount chatting, but others results in a relative flood of information being quietly exchanged between people. This adds even more fuel to the fire that has severely damaged Pyongyang's ability to blackout information and to squash growing aspirations.
And all of those stories, pictures, and videos help shed light on scores of interesting areas, often inadvertently. They can show new buildings, verify the location of a factory or other place of interest, they show propaganda posters, which allows analysts to get a better grasp of what the government is telling their people (verses what they're telling the world) and where their current interests lie. They can also give us a close look at infrastructure, car and cell phone use, and even more mundane things like current fashions. All of this augments and helps verify what we can learn from defectors and satellite imagery - both of which come with their own problems. If you take away tourism, you take away thousands of new pictures and thousands of hours of video each year. To me, that seems to be the exact opposite of what the West has been trying to do: reveal as much as possible about a country run by dangerous people with nuclear weapons.
--Jacob Bogle, 8/11/2019
www.JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Labels:
opinion,
Otto Warmbier,
tourism,
US State Department
Monday, May 20, 2019
Why Has There Not Been a North Korean Stauffenberg?
The short answer is, there may have been. Maybe even more than once during the seven decades of the Kim family regime. Word of the event(s) simply may have never made it to the outside world, as little does. It’s also possible that the Korean Stauffenberg(s) never made it as far as the real Stauffenberg and were cut down before they could make a serious attempt on the lives of Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il, or Kim Jong Un. But all signs point to there never having been a coup attempt with any realistic chance of success.
For those who may be unaware, Colonel (German: Oberst) Clause von Stauffenberg was a German military officer and minor noble who was a leading figure in the July 20 plot of 1944 to assassinate Adolf Hitler by blowing him up in a conference room. July 20 was the last known attempt to kill Hitler. Despite the murder of 6 million Jews, the deaths of millions of rank and file German soldiers and tens of millions of European civilians, and despite the creation of an authoritarian regime that eliminated nearly every freedom one can think of, no mass uprisings occurred in Germany. Even during the final year of the war, when it was obvious to everyone that the war was lost and that Germany would be destroyed, after July 20, 1944, not one stray bullet or bomb found Hitler, and certainly not a nationwide coup as July 20 had attempted.
So what does World War II history have to do with North Korea? (Besides a lot) North Korea has created a state every bit as brutal and oppressive as Nazi Germany or the Stalinist-era Soviet Union. Nazi Germany was only destroyed from the outside after nearly six years of war. The Soviet Union managed to survive for a staggering 69 years. However, even the USSR wasn’t immune to challenge and revolt. The countries behind Iron Curtain chaffed at Moscow’s reigns and occasionally this spilled out onto the streets, such as during the failed Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Within Soviet Russia itself, you had the Kronstadt Rebellion and anti-Bolshevik peasant revolts. But North Korea appears to lack this kind of internal strife, at least, to a very large degree. It has certainly managed to hold off mass violence and protesters marching in the streets longer than any country I’m aware of, communist or otherwise.
Andrew Scobell’s 2006 monograph Kim Jong Il and North Korea: The Leader and the System mentions the fact that totalitarianism demands tremendous resources, both human and material. By necessity it creates systems for coercion and surveillance. And after a while, resources start to dry up and wear down. The economy suffers, infrastructure breaks down, and people grow weary of constant “ideological struggles”, mass mobilizations, as well as the more immediate and constant struggle of feeding one’s family. This leads to a burnout of faith in the regime and a burnout at a more fundamental level – the people themselves simply become tired of it all. North Korea has managed to hold on for 71 years and counting, longer than any communist country in history. The Nazis fell because of outside forces and the Soviets fell because of unstoppable economic forces. And both countries had to deal with internal dissent and the burnout of their people. The question I’d like to answer is, why has North Korea not only been able to survive, but why hasn’t it even had a Stauffenberg figure?
I suspect that a full answer and explanation would end up being many, many pages long, too long for the purposes of this blog. So, I will attempt to give a satisfactory but abridged answer here as told through a history of the country.
Kim Il Sung
After the July 20 plot, Stauffenberg was viewed by his contemporary citizens as a traitor. This wasn’t necessarily because he tried to kill Hitler the person, but because he tried to kill the leader of the nation during a time of crisis and war. The people of Germany saw this as dishonorable and as an act that, if successful, would have hurt Germany – after all, the average German still saw Hitler as the reason for the economic improvements of the 1930s and directly responsible for the amazing military successes earlier on in the war. Hitler was still viewed as the only one who could bring about ultimate victory. The world may have been collapsing, but the Führer was the personification of their ultimate hope.
Likewise, Kim Il Sung became the embodiment of the hopes and dreams of the North Korean people.
The Kingdom of Korea, it would be fair to say, was one of the last quasi-feudal kingdoms in the world by the time it was annexed by Japan in 1910; slavery wasn’t even officially banned until 1930. Millions of people lived in abject poverty and few had access to education. Japan’s annexation brought with it rapid modernization. The northern half of Korea was industrialized, while the southern half became the breadbasket of the peninsula. But all of this “good” also brought tremendous, continued suffering on the part of the native Korean people. Korean language and culture were banned in favor of Japanization. Japanese citizens were moved into Korea and countless Koreans were forcibly moved out to the far reaches of Japan’s growing empire.
The treatment of the Korean people continued to be abysmal. Then came along a shining example of Korean nationalism and the greatest general of all time, Kim Il Sung. (So says the official myth, anyway.) Japan was defeated in 1945 and a Soviet-backed state was created in 1948, with Kim Il Sung at its head. He instituted broad reforms, imprisoned the landlords and gave the farms to the people. He attacked the Christian minority (seen as a stain of imperialism) and replaced such superstitions that "oppressed" the people with faith in him; a demigod they could see. Education, healthcare, housing, no sector was left untouched by his brand of Korean-Marxism. Then, a short two years later, he launched his country into the most devastating war it had ever seen.
Millions of Koreans died and nearly every building in Pyongyang (and everywhere else) was destroyed. The truth is that North Korea only survived because of Chinese intervention, but the official regime story is that it was the iron-willed leader, Kim Il Sung, who saved the northern half of Korea from American imperialism – while the southern half was forced to languish under the American whip until a new war of unification could be waged. The end of Japanese occupation and the Korean War created a situation that gave Kim Il Sung the opportunity to lay claim to the titles “creator” and “savior” of North Korea. The people, naturally, had been given a front row seat to the horrific abuses of the Japanese and the devastation of modern warfare. North Korea would now forever be at risk. It would always be in the sights of much larger powers just waiting to destroy them.
However, while the peasantry was happy enough to take their anger out on abusive landlords, the apparatus of state was far from settled. Kim Il Sung was only one of many would-be national heroes. In fact, by the end of WWII, he had spent more time outside of Korea than living inside the country. Multiple factions existed and it wasn’t until 1961 before he could really lay claim to being an absolute dictator. But this struggle was largely limited to political machinations on the part of those that opposed him, or at least against his desire to be a dictator. Unfortunately for them, Kim & Co. wasn’t afraid of violence. He and his guerrilla warrior faction cared little for the rules of war (or law) and they didn’t mind purging those who opposed his will – either by exile or outright murder. By the 1960s, his Manchu-based guerrilla faction was the only one that had any real power.
Afterward, the dictatorship he created was constructed to help ensure his continued rule. Some dictatorships are “cooperative”. Those in the military, the bureaucracies, and economic bosses tend to work together within their respective sectors to create a stable state. Lots of other dictatorships lean on a more competitive design. They pit people against each other, and agencies try to usurp one another in the grab for resources and political favor. This creates an inefficient and unstable state, but it also breaks up possible alternate bases of power and limits the risks to the dictator from anyone within government or the military. Kim chose the latter design.
As the country recovered from war and Kim rebuilt the nation, the average person genuinely respected him and had faith in “socialist construction”. It’s important to recall that most Koreans were poor, uneducated farmers and laborers prior to the establishment of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The only education they received after that was education that promoted the state and made Kim Il Sung the center of the universe. And the country’s elite and military leaders knew to respect and fear him. They were also well aware of the threats facing their country and that they would not have their positions without Kim, thus loyalty was required.
Kim Jong Il
Kim Jong Il on the other hand was disliked by basically everyone by the time he died in 2011. When Kim Il Sung died in 1994, many outside observers thought the country would soon collapse. What Kim Jong Il had going for him (and the first hereditary succession of a communist state) was that throughout the 1970s and 1980s, he had been maneuvering himself into being the only viable successor to his father. He built up the personality cult surrounding his father beyond anything Stalin received. He placed himself at the center of every powerful agency, and most importantly, he ingratiated himself with the military. He played up Kim Il Sung’s “divine” bloodline, which he, too, shared. And by necessity to gain the power he needed, he slowly cut the elder Kim out of active politics and control.
Kim Jong Il didn’t escape unscathed in his transition to power. But, once again, the opposition was limited to palace intrigue, with the requisite purges that followed. There wasn’t visible public out crying against this most un-socialist of transitions and there weren’t any overt attempts on his life by the elite. Once again, their own survival depended on his, much like the survival of the Nazi elite depended on the continued patronage of Hitler, even in the last weeks of World War II.
The great famine of the 1990s proved to be his greatest threat and it became the greatest example of the regime’s durability. Around a million people died and the state failed in many of its obligations. This is one of a few periods when consistent, but limited, stories pop up of dissent; however, they’re largely limited to local factory strikes and such. But this dissent wasn’t necessarily aimed at Kim Jong Il himself (although any dissatisfaction or grumble is viewed by the state as going against the Leader and is a crime). The people simply wanted food. Luckily for Kim Jong Il, there were plenty of plausible things to blame the famine on that deflected attention away from him and the inherent flaws within socialism: droughts and floods, corrupt officials stealing, and the perennial favorite, Western hostility.
The closest example of a Stauffenberg-like revolt is rumored to have happened in 1997, while the famine was still ongoing. Elements of the Korean People’s Army Sixth Corps, based in North Hamgyong Province, conspired to begin a general uprising. This is where the regime’s insistence on extreme political surveillance and “centralized decentralization”, where Kim is the only one with an overall view of the nation, while the military and state apparatuses are fragmented – particularly when it comes to communication – came into play. The plotters were unable to reliably contact others to arrange a mass uprising. They also failed to overcome the fact that every high-ranking official has their own (one or more) state security officer watching their every move. The commander of the corps refused to take part and the Sixth Corps was disbanded. The conspirators and their families were never heard from again.
The popular perception of organizations like the Nazi SS or Soviet KGB is that they had absolute control over the people. That they knew everything, saw everything, and heard everything. But that isn’t reality. The reality is that Colonel Stauffenberg was recruited by others and that they had far reaching support (even if that support wasn’t exactly based on mass support). An entire apparatus including military officers and political leaders was able to be assembled for the purposes of the July 20 coup attempt. (Some 7,000 people were eventually arrested in connection to the plot.)
What little we know about the 1997 plot paints a much different picture. The conspirators weren’t even able to reach outside of their own units, and they didn’t seem to have had any political supporters. North Korea’s multilayered approach to state security and the security of the supreme dignity (another term for Kim) far surpass the capabilities of the SS or KGB.
One very plausible reason for the military’s opposition to revolt, even though their own families were suffering during the famine, is that Kim Jong Il switched the center of national power away from the Worker’s Party (WPK) and state bureaucracies and moved it to the military. Kim promoted the military by instituting the Songun (military first) policy. By securing his power base among the largest and most powerful (literally) organization in the country, he ensured his continued survival. He also managed to build up a base of support early on, before his succession, by taking over the ideological and propaganda departments. With these behind him, there was little chance of a sustained or deeply rooted challenge to his authority.
A rare example of popular dissent comes from 2009. The people were protesting unpopular currency reforms which wiped out what little people had managed to save. It was viewed as an attempt by the government to steal wealth and crack down on market activities. However, Kim Jong Il, unlike many dictators, learned to listen to the opinions of others and made just enough limited changes to the reforms in response. He also had the “mastermind” behind the reforms executed. The ability to know when to bend to pressure while maintaining the appearance of personal infallibility served Kim Jong Il well. For the second time in a row, a dictator was able to die of natural causes, as he did in 2011.
Kim Jong Un
Successful dynastic succession is completely unheard of among communist and totalitarian regimes. Within communism, such a thing as hereditary leadership cuts against every aspect of the ideology. And totalitarian systems are largely created by a single strongman and then fall apart as soon as he dies. Kim Jong Un is the grandson of Kim Il Sung. Unlike his father, Kim Jong Il, he didn’t have decades of grooming. In fact, he didn’t have more than two or three years. To outside observers none of this bode well for the young man. However, Kim the Third seems to have taken rapid actions to secure his reign. A series of purges and executions allowed him to consolidate his power. He took steps to reaffirm the authority of the Party while emphasizing a parallel track that allowed the military to hold on to its power.
Kim Jong Un has also managed to accomplish what his father and grandfather couldn’t - the completion of the nuclear program, the successful test of a missile that could hit any part of the US, and face-to-face meetings with the leader of their greatest enemy, President Donald Trump. Furthermore, whatever problems arise from sanctions, Kim Jong Un has still managed to oversee a billion-dollar construction boom. He has also learned the lessons of his forefathers and struck against those who could harm him (like his uncle Jang Song-thaek and his half-brother Kim Jong Nam), and he has begun to reach out and rebuild relationships with old allies. His personal characteristics play in his favor, too. Like his grandfather, he is outgoing and more charismatic than his father. Not to mention his striking physical resemblance to Kim Il Sung.
From the outside, it seems like he is in a very good position to maintain power.
Conclusion
Kim Il Sung was the father of the nation. Kim Jong Il led the country out of famine and protected it while it was weakest. Kim Jong Un has managed to accomplish multiple regime promises. And all were able to maintain ruthless control, even if absolute power has waned slightly generation-to-generation. North Korea’s take on Confucianism, filial piety, ultra-nationalism, and severe coercive and security systems has meant that at any given time, the people were either unwilling or unable to reject the Kim’s. Kim Il Sung is viewed as the father of each of the 25 million North Koreans alive today and the Kim dynasty is the personification of the people’s will and of the state. A lyric to a North Korean song goes, “without you, there is no motherland. Without you there is no us.” The leadership has built for itself a system in which the people are instinctively opposed to the very idea of open dissent or overthrowing the Kim’s, and built a system in which broad dissent or revolt is all but impossible.
The regime’s ability to react positively, but only just, to popular demands and its ability to navigate and command the numerous group interests within the “competitive dictatorship”, has enabled the Kim family to rule for 71 years. In 2019, there is no real outward sign of imminent collapse. Going back to Andrew Scobell, perhaps instead of collapsing the way Libya or the Soviet Union did, North Korea will take the path of China (albeit more slowly) and manage a gradual transition toward a post-totalitarian system. Pyongyang’s total control over the flow of information and economic activity has been greatly reduced over the years. The average citizen no longer relies solely on the state for their needs, but instead relies on their own ingenuity to get what they want. And, the system has become highly corrupt. These weaknesses may enable the transition to a post-totalitarian state, or they may simply be the first visible cracks before the entire edifice comes crashing down. Either way, a Korean Stauffenberg seems as unlikely today as yesterday.
For those who may be unaware, Colonel (German: Oberst) Clause von Stauffenberg was a German military officer and minor noble who was a leading figure in the July 20 plot of 1944 to assassinate Adolf Hitler by blowing him up in a conference room. July 20 was the last known attempt to kill Hitler. Despite the murder of 6 million Jews, the deaths of millions of rank and file German soldiers and tens of millions of European civilians, and despite the creation of an authoritarian regime that eliminated nearly every freedom one can think of, no mass uprisings occurred in Germany. Even during the final year of the war, when it was obvious to everyone that the war was lost and that Germany would be destroyed, after July 20, 1944, not one stray bullet or bomb found Hitler, and certainly not a nationwide coup as July 20 had attempted.
So what does World War II history have to do with North Korea? (Besides a lot) North Korea has created a state every bit as brutal and oppressive as Nazi Germany or the Stalinist-era Soviet Union. Nazi Germany was only destroyed from the outside after nearly six years of war. The Soviet Union managed to survive for a staggering 69 years. However, even the USSR wasn’t immune to challenge and revolt. The countries behind Iron Curtain chaffed at Moscow’s reigns and occasionally this spilled out onto the streets, such as during the failed Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Within Soviet Russia itself, you had the Kronstadt Rebellion and anti-Bolshevik peasant revolts. But North Korea appears to lack this kind of internal strife, at least, to a very large degree. It has certainly managed to hold off mass violence and protesters marching in the streets longer than any country I’m aware of, communist or otherwise.
Andrew Scobell’s 2006 monograph Kim Jong Il and North Korea: The Leader and the System mentions the fact that totalitarianism demands tremendous resources, both human and material. By necessity it creates systems for coercion and surveillance. And after a while, resources start to dry up and wear down. The economy suffers, infrastructure breaks down, and people grow weary of constant “ideological struggles”, mass mobilizations, as well as the more immediate and constant struggle of feeding one’s family. This leads to a burnout of faith in the regime and a burnout at a more fundamental level – the people themselves simply become tired of it all. North Korea has managed to hold on for 71 years and counting, longer than any communist country in history. The Nazis fell because of outside forces and the Soviets fell because of unstoppable economic forces. And both countries had to deal with internal dissent and the burnout of their people. The question I’d like to answer is, why has North Korea not only been able to survive, but why hasn’t it even had a Stauffenberg figure?
I suspect that a full answer and explanation would end up being many, many pages long, too long for the purposes of this blog. So, I will attempt to give a satisfactory but abridged answer here as told through a history of the country.
Kim Il Sung
After the July 20 plot, Stauffenberg was viewed by his contemporary citizens as a traitor. This wasn’t necessarily because he tried to kill Hitler the person, but because he tried to kill the leader of the nation during a time of crisis and war. The people of Germany saw this as dishonorable and as an act that, if successful, would have hurt Germany – after all, the average German still saw Hitler as the reason for the economic improvements of the 1930s and directly responsible for the amazing military successes earlier on in the war. Hitler was still viewed as the only one who could bring about ultimate victory. The world may have been collapsing, but the Führer was the personification of their ultimate hope.
Likewise, Kim Il Sung became the embodiment of the hopes and dreams of the North Korean people.
The Kingdom of Korea, it would be fair to say, was one of the last quasi-feudal kingdoms in the world by the time it was annexed by Japan in 1910; slavery wasn’t even officially banned until 1930. Millions of people lived in abject poverty and few had access to education. Japan’s annexation brought with it rapid modernization. The northern half of Korea was industrialized, while the southern half became the breadbasket of the peninsula. But all of this “good” also brought tremendous, continued suffering on the part of the native Korean people. Korean language and culture were banned in favor of Japanization. Japanese citizens were moved into Korea and countless Koreans were forcibly moved out to the far reaches of Japan’s growing empire.
The treatment of the Korean people continued to be abysmal. Then came along a shining example of Korean nationalism and the greatest general of all time, Kim Il Sung. (So says the official myth, anyway.) Japan was defeated in 1945 and a Soviet-backed state was created in 1948, with Kim Il Sung at its head. He instituted broad reforms, imprisoned the landlords and gave the farms to the people. He attacked the Christian minority (seen as a stain of imperialism) and replaced such superstitions that "oppressed" the people with faith in him; a demigod they could see. Education, healthcare, housing, no sector was left untouched by his brand of Korean-Marxism. Then, a short two years later, he launched his country into the most devastating war it had ever seen.
Millions of Koreans died and nearly every building in Pyongyang (and everywhere else) was destroyed. The truth is that North Korea only survived because of Chinese intervention, but the official regime story is that it was the iron-willed leader, Kim Il Sung, who saved the northern half of Korea from American imperialism – while the southern half was forced to languish under the American whip until a new war of unification could be waged. The end of Japanese occupation and the Korean War created a situation that gave Kim Il Sung the opportunity to lay claim to the titles “creator” and “savior” of North Korea. The people, naturally, had been given a front row seat to the horrific abuses of the Japanese and the devastation of modern warfare. North Korea would now forever be at risk. It would always be in the sights of much larger powers just waiting to destroy them.
However, while the peasantry was happy enough to take their anger out on abusive landlords, the apparatus of state was far from settled. Kim Il Sung was only one of many would-be national heroes. In fact, by the end of WWII, he had spent more time outside of Korea than living inside the country. Multiple factions existed and it wasn’t until 1961 before he could really lay claim to being an absolute dictator. But this struggle was largely limited to political machinations on the part of those that opposed him, or at least against his desire to be a dictator. Unfortunately for them, Kim & Co. wasn’t afraid of violence. He and his guerrilla warrior faction cared little for the rules of war (or law) and they didn’t mind purging those who opposed his will – either by exile or outright murder. By the 1960s, his Manchu-based guerrilla faction was the only one that had any real power.
Afterward, the dictatorship he created was constructed to help ensure his continued rule. Some dictatorships are “cooperative”. Those in the military, the bureaucracies, and economic bosses tend to work together within their respective sectors to create a stable state. Lots of other dictatorships lean on a more competitive design. They pit people against each other, and agencies try to usurp one another in the grab for resources and political favor. This creates an inefficient and unstable state, but it also breaks up possible alternate bases of power and limits the risks to the dictator from anyone within government or the military. Kim chose the latter design.
As the country recovered from war and Kim rebuilt the nation, the average person genuinely respected him and had faith in “socialist construction”. It’s important to recall that most Koreans were poor, uneducated farmers and laborers prior to the establishment of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The only education they received after that was education that promoted the state and made Kim Il Sung the center of the universe. And the country’s elite and military leaders knew to respect and fear him. They were also well aware of the threats facing their country and that they would not have their positions without Kim, thus loyalty was required.
Kim Jong Il
Kim Jong Il on the other hand was disliked by basically everyone by the time he died in 2011. When Kim Il Sung died in 1994, many outside observers thought the country would soon collapse. What Kim Jong Il had going for him (and the first hereditary succession of a communist state) was that throughout the 1970s and 1980s, he had been maneuvering himself into being the only viable successor to his father. He built up the personality cult surrounding his father beyond anything Stalin received. He placed himself at the center of every powerful agency, and most importantly, he ingratiated himself with the military. He played up Kim Il Sung’s “divine” bloodline, which he, too, shared. And by necessity to gain the power he needed, he slowly cut the elder Kim out of active politics and control.
Kim Jong Il didn’t escape unscathed in his transition to power. But, once again, the opposition was limited to palace intrigue, with the requisite purges that followed. There wasn’t visible public out crying against this most un-socialist of transitions and there weren’t any overt attempts on his life by the elite. Once again, their own survival depended on his, much like the survival of the Nazi elite depended on the continued patronage of Hitler, even in the last weeks of World War II.
The great famine of the 1990s proved to be his greatest threat and it became the greatest example of the regime’s durability. Around a million people died and the state failed in many of its obligations. This is one of a few periods when consistent, but limited, stories pop up of dissent; however, they’re largely limited to local factory strikes and such. But this dissent wasn’t necessarily aimed at Kim Jong Il himself (although any dissatisfaction or grumble is viewed by the state as going against the Leader and is a crime). The people simply wanted food. Luckily for Kim Jong Il, there were plenty of plausible things to blame the famine on that deflected attention away from him and the inherent flaws within socialism: droughts and floods, corrupt officials stealing, and the perennial favorite, Western hostility.
The closest example of a Stauffenberg-like revolt is rumored to have happened in 1997, while the famine was still ongoing. Elements of the Korean People’s Army Sixth Corps, based in North Hamgyong Province, conspired to begin a general uprising. This is where the regime’s insistence on extreme political surveillance and “centralized decentralization”, where Kim is the only one with an overall view of the nation, while the military and state apparatuses are fragmented – particularly when it comes to communication – came into play. The plotters were unable to reliably contact others to arrange a mass uprising. They also failed to overcome the fact that every high-ranking official has their own (one or more) state security officer watching their every move. The commander of the corps refused to take part and the Sixth Corps was disbanded. The conspirators and their families were never heard from again.
The popular perception of organizations like the Nazi SS or Soviet KGB is that they had absolute control over the people. That they knew everything, saw everything, and heard everything. But that isn’t reality. The reality is that Colonel Stauffenberg was recruited by others and that they had far reaching support (even if that support wasn’t exactly based on mass support). An entire apparatus including military officers and political leaders was able to be assembled for the purposes of the July 20 coup attempt. (Some 7,000 people were eventually arrested in connection to the plot.)
What little we know about the 1997 plot paints a much different picture. The conspirators weren’t even able to reach outside of their own units, and they didn’t seem to have had any political supporters. North Korea’s multilayered approach to state security and the security of the supreme dignity (another term for Kim) far surpass the capabilities of the SS or KGB.
One very plausible reason for the military’s opposition to revolt, even though their own families were suffering during the famine, is that Kim Jong Il switched the center of national power away from the Worker’s Party (WPK) and state bureaucracies and moved it to the military. Kim promoted the military by instituting the Songun (military first) policy. By securing his power base among the largest and most powerful (literally) organization in the country, he ensured his continued survival. He also managed to build up a base of support early on, before his succession, by taking over the ideological and propaganda departments. With these behind him, there was little chance of a sustained or deeply rooted challenge to his authority.
A rare example of popular dissent comes from 2009. The people were protesting unpopular currency reforms which wiped out what little people had managed to save. It was viewed as an attempt by the government to steal wealth and crack down on market activities. However, Kim Jong Il, unlike many dictators, learned to listen to the opinions of others and made just enough limited changes to the reforms in response. He also had the “mastermind” behind the reforms executed. The ability to know when to bend to pressure while maintaining the appearance of personal infallibility served Kim Jong Il well. For the second time in a row, a dictator was able to die of natural causes, as he did in 2011.
Kim Jong Un
Successful dynastic succession is completely unheard of among communist and totalitarian regimes. Within communism, such a thing as hereditary leadership cuts against every aspect of the ideology. And totalitarian systems are largely created by a single strongman and then fall apart as soon as he dies. Kim Jong Un is the grandson of Kim Il Sung. Unlike his father, Kim Jong Il, he didn’t have decades of grooming. In fact, he didn’t have more than two or three years. To outside observers none of this bode well for the young man. However, Kim the Third seems to have taken rapid actions to secure his reign. A series of purges and executions allowed him to consolidate his power. He took steps to reaffirm the authority of the Party while emphasizing a parallel track that allowed the military to hold on to its power.
Kim Jong Un has also managed to accomplish what his father and grandfather couldn’t - the completion of the nuclear program, the successful test of a missile that could hit any part of the US, and face-to-face meetings with the leader of their greatest enemy, President Donald Trump. Furthermore, whatever problems arise from sanctions, Kim Jong Un has still managed to oversee a billion-dollar construction boom. He has also learned the lessons of his forefathers and struck against those who could harm him (like his uncle Jang Song-thaek and his half-brother Kim Jong Nam), and he has begun to reach out and rebuild relationships with old allies. His personal characteristics play in his favor, too. Like his grandfather, he is outgoing and more charismatic than his father. Not to mention his striking physical resemblance to Kim Il Sung.
From the outside, it seems like he is in a very good position to maintain power.
Conclusion
Kim Il Sung was the father of the nation. Kim Jong Il led the country out of famine and protected it while it was weakest. Kim Jong Un has managed to accomplish multiple regime promises. And all were able to maintain ruthless control, even if absolute power has waned slightly generation-to-generation. North Korea’s take on Confucianism, filial piety, ultra-nationalism, and severe coercive and security systems has meant that at any given time, the people were either unwilling or unable to reject the Kim’s. Kim Il Sung is viewed as the father of each of the 25 million North Koreans alive today and the Kim dynasty is the personification of the people’s will and of the state. A lyric to a North Korean song goes, “without you, there is no motherland. Without you there is no us.” The leadership has built for itself a system in which the people are instinctively opposed to the very idea of open dissent or overthrowing the Kim’s, and built a system in which broad dissent or revolt is all but impossible.
The regime’s ability to react positively, but only just, to popular demands and its ability to navigate and command the numerous group interests within the “competitive dictatorship”, has enabled the Kim family to rule for 71 years. In 2019, there is no real outward sign of imminent collapse. Going back to Andrew Scobell, perhaps instead of collapsing the way Libya or the Soviet Union did, North Korea will take the path of China (albeit more slowly) and manage a gradual transition toward a post-totalitarian system. Pyongyang’s total control over the flow of information and economic activity has been greatly reduced over the years. The average citizen no longer relies solely on the state for their needs, but instead relies on their own ingenuity to get what they want. And, the system has become highly corrupt. These weaknesses may enable the transition to a post-totalitarian state, or they may simply be the first visible cracks before the entire edifice comes crashing down. Either way, a Korean Stauffenberg seems as unlikely today as yesterday.
Labels:
Andrew Scobell,
assassination,
Kim Il Sung,
Kim Jong Un,
Kim Jong-il,
Nazi,
opinion,
revolt,
Stauffenberg
Friday, December 21, 2018
North Korea to the United States - You First
Any North Korea watcher worth their salt knows that North
Korea and Western countries have a problem with definitions. What denuclearization
means to one is quite different from what it means to the other. Despite having
decades of experience with North Korea, successive US administrations appear to
know that this difference exists but have refused to adjust their actions
accordingly. Well, North Korea just made it impossible to ignore the reality of
the situation.
On December 20, 2018, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA)
released a statement saying, “The United
States must now recognize the accurate meaning of the denuclearization of the
Korean Peninsula, and especially, must study geography, when we talk about the
Korean Peninsula, it includes the territory of our republic and also the entire
region of (South Korea) where the United States has placed its invasive force,
including nuclear weapons. When we talk about the denuclearization of the
Korean Peninsula, it means the removal of all sources of nuclear threat, not
only from the South and North but also from areas neighboring the Korean
Peninsula…”
This provides an all too clear meaning to the otherwise
vague terms agreed to during the June Trump-Kim summit, and to the many other general
agreements signed over the years.
When America talks about denuclearization, it
means no nuclear or long-range ballistic technology for the North. It means no peaceful
nuclear power capacity that could be converted to weapons use. It means North
Korea pledging to never engage in preemptive attacks. From the perspective of
the North (as reinforced by this latest announcement), denuclearization means
the removal of the United States’ nuclear umbrella over not only South Korea,
but Japan as well. It means an agreement by the United States to never launch a
preemptive attack (nuclear or otherwise) against the DPRK. It means the United
States drawing down its forces in South Korea and the removal of nuclear-capable
bombers from the country (there are no nuclear weapons stationed in South
Korea). And it means that the path toward denuclearization must be taken across
the whole peninsula, jointly, and accompanied by sanctions relief as Pyongyang is
loathe to take any action without some kind of reciprocal action by either (or
both) South Korea and the US.
North Korea has shown that it prefers joint action over the
years, but that it will quickly revert to bellicose language and even take
military actions if they don’t feel like the other side is keeping its end of
the deal. Continuing inter-Korean cooperation is evidence of this. At the same
time, their language has shifted regarding the United States as the US has, in
the northern mind, only given token concessions while North Korea has refrained from any nuclear or ballistic testing since November 2017.
2017 Pukguksong-2 ICBM test launch. (KCNA)
I feel it’s important to quickly discuss why nuclear weapons
are so important to the DPRK and why the regime seems quite content to let
their people starve while they spend billions of dollars trying to acquire these
weapons. Korea as a whole has always been a “shrimp squeezed between two whales”.
It has long had to stave off being the play thing of Japan and China, and since
WWII, it has had to contend with Soviet/Russian and American influences. Kim Il
Sung began North Korea’s nuclear ambitions practically from day one of liberation
from Japan. It was spurred on after the devastation of the Korean War and has slowly
become incorporated into the national psyche.
Nuclear weapons are seen as the final guarantor of the
regime’s survival, as countries that gave up their nuclear ambitions have a
history of falling to the United States (namely Gaddafi’s Libya and Saddam’s
Iraq). Generations of North Koreans have grown up with government propaganda
praising the importance of nuclear weapons, spurring them to take on greater hardships to enable their development. And the leadership has spent
generations promising to deliver them and promising that achieving such a goal will also guarantee
national economic strength and put and end to hardship. For the regime to
relent and simply turn over everything after they have finally constructed
dozens of functional warheads as well developed needed missile delivery systems
would be seen as a betrayal of the people.
Kim Jong Un must be seen to get security assurances and to get the United States to step
back before taking any concrete steps toward true disarmament. Otherwise, he
risks losing everything and a stable rule is the only thing that matters to the
country’s elite. That’s why it should come as no surprise to anyone who has
observed the country for more than five minutes, that North Korea will continue
the operation of hidden missile bases, continue the operation of nuclear
facilities, and continue to develop and expand their conventional military forces
until such time as real, highly detailed and specific agreements are signed.
Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump at the June 2017 Singapore Summit. (Evan Vuccia/AP)
Getting full, verified, and permanent denuclearization up
front is basically like trying to eat an elephant in one bite. As the moral implies, though, you can only accomplish a major goal if you take lots of small bites. The United
States has been preoccupied with getting North Korea to comply entirely and
immediately while ignoring the reality of the matter. Nuclear weapons to North
Korea aren’t like some random weapons system the US may discard because it’s
too costly or the technology fails. Nuclear weapons are intimately tied to the
country’s identity and their belief that it ensures their survival. The decades-long
game we have been playing has resulted in failure. They will never give up
their weapons overnight and it’s time we came to understand this.
Achieving the goal of denuclearization is one that may take
years of consistent work and countless small steps. Trust building measures are
a must. Understanding that North Korea will likely deflect, obfuscate, and
outright lie in the process must also be expected. However, it’s these small
steps that will lead to ultimate success. We can’t underestimate the value of
trust building measures or small steps. To quote the Bible, “despise not small beginnings” (Zechariah
4:10). Recent examples of these small beginnings, taken by both Koreas, is
evidence that they can deescalate, defer further testing and cross-border attacks,
and accomplish the dismantling of a portion of the DMZ. In other words, from
North Korea’s view, it’s up to the United States to make bold concessions for
every bold concession they demand from North Korea, otherwise, we're all just wasting our time.
As I said, reaching the full goal may take years. In fact,
it may take an entire generation. New ways of thinking and having the
willingness to act outside of the tried and failed current box of
tricks will take time to permeate leadership and bureaucracies. The question is will we create an environment that gives us the time needed, or will we continue shouting at each other until someone makes a very big, very bad mistake?
--Jacob Bogle, 12/21/2018
www.JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Labels:
denuclearization,
KCNA,
nuclear,
opinion,
weapons program
Sunday, August 13, 2017
Why Are We in Korea and Why Do We Care?
Image Source: Vitorr.com
Once again tensions are high and concerns of impending nuclear Armageddon can be heard from some of the more embellishing talking heads on cable news. North Korea's nuclear and ballistic technology has rapidly advanced under Kim Jong-un and their path towards becoming a fully capable nuclear weapons state is appearing much shorter than many had projected.
Kim Jong-un has tested more missiles than his father and grandfather combined, and the individual components of a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile capable of hitting the US mainland seem fairly complete. The main hurdles now revolve around joining those components together into a functional weapon. That isn't to say North Korea is only a matter of days or weeks away from having a true nuclear missile: the mating of a miniaturized warhead onto a missile has its own difficulties, and there are other questions surrounding the program. But with North Korea threatening to fire missiles into the sea near the US territory of Guam (a major cornerstone of our ability to operate in the Pacific), and with President Trump likewise threatening "fire and fury" against any Northern threat, many question why we're even involved in Korea in the first place, and why do we care. Particularly among younger generations. After all, the Korean War earned the moniker "The Forgotten War" in my father's generation. If it was "forgotten" then, how much more distant must it seem to the proceeding generations?
So, why are we there and why do we care?
A little backstory is required. A unified Korea was occupied by Japan in 1910.
After WWII, the USSR took over the northern half of the Korean peninsula and we took over the south with the agreement
that at some point in the near-ish future, a free and general election would be held
under UN supervision so that the Korean people (they’re all the same blood)
could decide if they wanted to be a free and democratic country, or set up a
communist state.
That election never happened. The Soviets took a small-time anti-Japanese guerrilla fighter named Kim Il Sung and installed him as leader, and we put in the Harvard and Princeton educated Syngman
Rhee. Both sides claimed to represent all of Korea (even now, defectors who
make it to the South are automatically granted citizenship) and both sides
wanted to reunite the peninsula under their respective systems. After a few
years, the American and Soviet troops withdrew from Korea. Not wanting to wait any longer and assuming the US wouldn't come back to defend an Asian backwater, Kim
invaded the South in 1950 with overwhelming force. However, since the United States pledged to help keep our new ally safe from Communism, we certainly did come back (under the authority of United Nations and with dozens of other countries directly supporting the war). The resulting war the North initiated left half a million Allied soldiers (including 140,000 Americans) dead or wounded, and over 2 million Korean casualties.
No peace treaty was ever signed, but an armistice was signed in 1953, technically putting the war on hold. And our agreement with South Korea turned into a formal treaty, also signed in 1953, to which we are still bound. The Mutual Defense Treaty requires each country to come to the aid of one another in the event one is attacked. I feel it's important to note, that South Korea has sent troops and matériel to assist all major conflicts the US has been a part of since that time.
As part of the terms of the Treaty, American forces were to be stationed in South Korea to help prevent another invasion. This "status of forces agreement" is updated every so often.
Since the signing of the 1953 Armistice (which created the Demilitarized Zone -DMZ), North Korea has violated the terms of it over 220 times. North Korean soldiers hacked to death with axes two American soldiers on the southern side of the DMZ. North Korea captured the USS Pueblo and tortured its crew. North Korea has kidnapped hundreds of Japanese and South Korean citizens. North Korea has bombed South Korea islands, sunk Southern ships, and launched a raid on the South Korean president’s residence in an assassination attempt. They even continue to secretly lay landmines by infiltrating the DMZ.
As part of the terms of the Treaty, American forces were to be stationed in South Korea to help prevent another invasion. This "status of forces agreement" is updated every so often.
Image Source: Metrovaartha.com
But it's been 64 years since the armistice was signed! Why should we remain?
Since the signing of the 1953 Armistice (which created the Demilitarized Zone -DMZ), North Korea has violated the terms of it over 220 times. North Korean soldiers hacked to death with axes two American soldiers on the southern side of the DMZ. North Korea captured the USS Pueblo and tortured its crew. North Korea has kidnapped hundreds of Japanese and South Korean citizens. North Korea has bombed South Korea islands, sunk Southern ships, and launched a raid on the South Korean president’s residence in an assassination attempt. They even continue to secretly lay landmines by infiltrating the DMZ.
North Korea has sold weapons to Cuba, Iran, Syria, and others (and worked with them on nuclear matters). They have supported terrorist groups like the radical Japanese Red Army. They blew up a passenger jet killing all 115 on-board. They have engaged in economic warfare against the US via counterfeiting US currency. They are a large source of illegal drugs (like methamphetamine) in East Asia, and a source of other counterfeited goods. (For more information, read Criminal Sovereignty: Understanding North Korea's Illicit Activities by the Strategic Studies Institute.)
North Korea attempted another assassination attempt on a
South Korean president, this time while he was visiting a foreign country. The
bomb, planted in Rangoon, killed 21 and injured 46. Kim Jong-un also murdered
own brother by using a WMD (VX nerve agent); the use of which in a foreign
state is an act of terrorism.
Even if you ignore the nuclear weapons (and their long-held desire to develop them going back to the 1950s, and their continual threats to use them), North Korea still controls one of the largest conventional militaries in the world. They have over 1 million active-duty soldiers, 180,000 special forces, enough artillery within range of Seoul to lob half a million shells into the city within the first hour, and nearly 6 million belonging to reserves and paramilitary organizations. Plus numerous underground and hidden sites throughout the North that store fuel, food, and munitions to launch a full-scale war and carry it out for 6 months before reserves run out.
US-ROK 2010 Naval Exercise "Invincible Spirit". Image Credit: US Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class (SW/AW) Adam K. Thomas
OK, but other than protecting South Korea, what do we get out of it?
Besides keeping our word? The Korean peninsula has been a contested region for thousands of years. Its importance today has not diminished. Some of the world's most important trading routes pass through and near Korean waters. The combined GDPs of South Korea, China, and Japan equals nearly $18 trillion, or more than 20% of the entire world's economic output.
Bilateral trade between the United States and South Korea amounts to $112 billion annually (up from $82 billion since 2007). Globally, South Korea is a key production center of electronics like cell phones, LCD screens TVs, and semiconductors, as well as automobiles, shipping, and petrochemicals. South Korea's impact on the global economy amounts to over a trillion dollars, and during periods of heightened tensions, global markets connected to the region tend to slow down and even drop until the immediate threats end. Aiding in the defense of South Korea enables that trade to continue to grow. It preserves the jobs of countless American workers who work for South Korean firms here and sell South Korean goods (and the many products that rely on parts from South Korea). It helps stabilize the overall world economy by keeping shipping lanes and factories open, allowing products that are vital to every industrial nation to get to their destinations.
Despite signing an armistice to end hostilities, North Korea has a 64 year-long history of open and active aggression. In the event of a war, yes, they’d lose. That isn’t quite the point. The North wants to harass and intimidate South Korea into giving them massive amounts of concessions (which has happened before). They want to hold the South hostage via threats and cause them to weaken and buckle. And yes, they want to preserve their regime, but that regime's survival means not having to reform their economic and political systems. It means the continuation of starvation, torture, attacks against its neighbors, and the perpetuation of one of the longest-running prison camp systems in world history.
The world is faced with a handful of choices that can be boiled down to two: do we accept a nuclear-armed North Korea, or do we prevent that from happening? The implications of either choice are not simple nor are they necessarily comforting, but the time to figure out which path we're going down is closer than ever. And despite which path we (and they) take, the fact remains, it is in America's best interest to help guide this long tale to its conclusion.
Further Reading
1. Terrorism and the Future of North Korea at the UN (AccessDPRK, March 2017)
2. The Nuclear Question (AccessDPRK, March 2013)
3. Arsenal of Terror (Joshua Stanton/HRNK, 2015)
--Jacob Bogle, 8/13/2017
JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Bilateral trade between the United States and South Korea amounts to $112 billion annually (up from $82 billion since 2007). Globally, South Korea is a key production center of electronics like cell phones, LCD screens TVs, and semiconductors, as well as automobiles, shipping, and petrochemicals. South Korea's impact on the global economy amounts to over a trillion dollars, and during periods of heightened tensions, global markets connected to the region tend to slow down and even drop until the immediate threats end. Aiding in the defense of South Korea enables that trade to continue to grow. It preserves the jobs of countless American workers who work for South Korean firms here and sell South Korean goods (and the many products that rely on parts from South Korea). It helps stabilize the overall world economy by keeping shipping lanes and factories open, allowing products that are vital to every industrial nation to get to their destinations.
Despite signing an armistice to end hostilities, North Korea has a 64 year-long history of open and active aggression. In the event of a war, yes, they’d lose. That isn’t quite the point. The North wants to harass and intimidate South Korea into giving them massive amounts of concessions (which has happened before). They want to hold the South hostage via threats and cause them to weaken and buckle. And yes, they want to preserve their regime, but that regime's survival means not having to reform their economic and political systems. It means the continuation of starvation, torture, attacks against its neighbors, and the perpetuation of one of the longest-running prison camp systems in world history.
The world is faced with a handful of choices that can be boiled down to two: do we accept a nuclear-armed North Korea, or do we prevent that from happening? The implications of either choice are not simple nor are they necessarily comforting, but the time to figure out which path we're going down is closer than ever. And despite which path we (and they) take, the fact remains, it is in America's best interest to help guide this long tale to its conclusion.
Further Reading
1. Terrorism and the Future of North Korea at the UN (AccessDPRK, March 2017)
2. The Nuclear Question (AccessDPRK, March 2013)
3. Arsenal of Terror (Joshua Stanton/HRNK, 2015)
--Jacob Bogle, 8/13/2017
JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Labels:
1953,
America,
Armistice,
conflict,
Guam,
history,
Korean War,
North Korea,
nuclear,
opinion,
reason,
South Korea,
Trump,
war
Saturday, March 18, 2017
Terrorism and the Future of North Korea at the United Nations
Image source: Outside the Beltway
North Korea was placed on the US terror list in 1988,
following the bombing of Korean Air Flight 858 in 1987 which killed 115 people. The
country was removed from the list twenty years later in 2008 by president George
W. Bush after appearing to satisfy the demands of a nuclear agreement based on
the Six Party Talks. And while North Korea has since violated many nuclear
terms and agreements, their last "official" act of international terrorism remains the
1987 bombing. That is, until the death of Kim Jong-nam.
What makes Kim Jong-nam’s death more than a simple case of a
country assassinating one of its own citizens, is the fact that he was killed in a foreign country and that he was ostensibly
under the protection of China – which is also North Korea’s main patron. Jong-nam had
been in a state of quasi-exile ever since trying to visit Tokyo Disneyland with
a fake Dominican Republic passport in 2001. His main residence since that time
had been Macau. Despite no longer holding any official titles, it is alleged
that he had a role in maintaining the Kim family slush fund (operated via
Office 39), which holds an estimated $5 billion. Kim Jong-un’s motivation for
having his half-brother killed are unknown, but it could be for any number of
reasons – from coup rumors, to being displeased with public statements Kim
Jong-nam had made, to even mismanagement of funds (if he was indeed involved).
Since there is no single supreme definition the United States works with, it could be difficult pin the label "terrorism" onto the incident. The US has several definitions of what constitutes terrorism and what might constitute a state sponsoring terrorism, and these legal standards vary across agencies and have changed over time. However, the use of VX, the deadliest nerve agent known, changes the game. For some background, Section 3 of the Export Administration Act of 1979 says:
This is where the use of VX becomes very important. VX is classified as a weapon of mass destruction and is banned under the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (to which North Korea is not party to). The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) defines “terrorist activity” at Section 212(a)(3)(B)(iii):
Additionally, since definitions of "international terrorism" obviously include the activities being carried in other countries, the involvement of a multinational force of conspirators to accomplish the killing (the two women accused of wiping Jong-nam’s face with the nerve agent are from Malaysia and Vietnam), lends weight to the argument that North Korea should be re-listed. However, one possible impediment to this is the fact that many of the standards require that terrorism have a political motive. While there are many theories, there's no smoking gun pointing to a direct political motive to kill Kim Jong-nam. That said, when you consider North Korea's extensive arms trade, including to countries like Syria and Iran (both of which are currently on the list), the case to re-list can be enhanced.
"It is the policy of the United States to use export controls to encourage other countries to take immediate steps to prevent the use of their territories or resources to aid, encourage, or give sanctuary to those persons involved in directing, supporting, or participating in acts of international terrorism."
This is where the use of VX becomes very important. VX is classified as a weapon of mass destruction and is banned under the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (to which North Korea is not party to). The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) defines “terrorist activity” at Section 212(a)(3)(B)(iii):
(IV) An assassination.
(V) The use of any—
(a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device,Additionally, since definitions of "international terrorism" obviously include the activities being carried in other countries, the involvement of a multinational force of conspirators to accomplish the killing (the two women accused of wiping Jong-nam’s face with the nerve agent are from Malaysia and Vietnam), lends weight to the argument that North Korea should be re-listed. However, one possible impediment to this is the fact that many of the standards require that terrorism have a political motive. While there are many theories, there's no smoking gun pointing to a direct political motive to kill Kim Jong-nam. That said, when you consider North Korea's extensive arms trade, including to countries like Syria and Iran (both of which are currently on the list), the case to re-list can be enhanced.
Complicating matters, though, is America’s need to bring North Korea
to heel when it comes to the nuclear question, which is America’s key concern
and colors every dealing with the country. Re-listing North Korea would result in even greater economic pressures on the state. While this may sound positive, the long-term trend is that whenever North Korea gets backed into a corner, they either strike out in retaliation or proceed with their plans clandestinely. Kim Jong-un has shown no sign of
slowing down the nuclear program he inherited and having his regime once again labeled a
state sponsor of terrorism is likely to have the opposite wanted effect. Kim
Jong-il paid close attention to the destinies of Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam
Hussein. Gaddafi disarmed Libya of WMDs and was overthrown with the help of the
West regardless. Likewise, Saddam Hussein, despite lacking verifiable WMDs,
made up part of the Axis of Evil and had his country invaded. No doubt Kim
Jong-un has learned the lesson of despots as his father did – disarmament alone
is no guarantee of safety.
While the likelihood of North Korea ending back up as a state sponsor of terror is at least 50/50, if history is a guide, the real world long-term results aren't likely to be the desired results.
While the likelihood of North Korea ending back up as a state sponsor of terror is at least 50/50, if history is a guide, the real world long-term results aren't likely to be the desired results.
That takes us to the possibility of having North Korea
suspended from the United Nations.
Such an act has never occurred and would require the UN
Security Council to recommend the action, from where it would then be approved or disapproved by the
General Assembly. As mentioned,
North Korea’s last confirmed act of international terrorism was in 1987. Prior
to that, North Korea engaged in a number of terrorist activities and supported
terrorist groups like the Japanese Red Army. The North’s activities were
carried out all around the Asia-Pacific region.
In 1968 North Korean commandos infiltrated South Korea and
tried to assassinate then president Park Chung-hee after they raided the Blue
House (the South Korean equivalent of the White House). Unsuccessful and
undaunted, a second assassination attempt was carried out in 1983. The 1983 attack
occurred in Rangoon, Burma when North Korean agents bombed a wreath laying
ceremony at which the South Korean president, Chun Doo-hwan, was in attendance.
The attack resulted in 67 casualties, including the death of four top-ranking
South Korean officials and 17 others.
Apart from the Korean Air Flight 858 bombing in 1987, North
Korea had previously hijacked Korean Air Lines YS-11 in 1969. The hijacking
ended without any casualties, though, North Korea refused to release eleven of
the crew and passengers. To this day their ultimate fates are unknown.
None of these events led to North Korea being suspended from
the United Nations. Nor did the killing of two United States Army officers with
axes along the DMZ in 1976, or the naval clashes near Yeonpyong Island in 1999
and 2002, or the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan in 2010, or the other 200 plus violations of the 1953 Armistice Agreement by North Korea.
The fact is, so long as China (which is a permanent member of the UN Security
Council) remains an ally of North Korea, despite whatever troubles may exist
between them, China will likely not allow North Korea to be suspended. China,
and to some extent Russia, have opposed many would be actions against North
Korea by the international community. North Korea continues to serve as a
useful buffer state between China and a liberal South Korea (with their
entrenched military alliance with the United States) - with their new THAAD missile defense system. North Korea
has also shown itself more than capable of developing ballistic and nuclear
technology domestically, and
cutting them off from all international associations and possible avenues of
rapprochement would only push their backs against the wall even further. As mentioned earlier, each
time North Korea has been increasingly isolated they have lashed out, but, in the past, there also remained ways for them to reach out and seek de-escalation (which did occur to varying degrees).
Unilateral actions by other countries can have an effect,
although such actions by countries long opposed to the North Korean regime are
having diminishing returns. Malaysia has taken steps to show their displeasure
with the assassination like expelling North Korea’s ambassador Kang Chol, and
rescinding the ability of North Korean citizens to travel to Malaysia without a
visa. However, China remains the key figure in any attempt at punishing North
Korea or affecting change outside of reigniting war.
Recently, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said during his visit to China that, every option was on the table, including military options, regarding North Korea. China of course tried to play both sides of the fence and suggested we be "cool headed". An all out war is no real option, but the fact remains that the last 20+ years of "cool headed" diplomacy hasn't stopped their nuclear or ballistic missile programs, or led to a more open DPRK. Despite many efforts, their economy remains in tatters and millions still go hungry. China's insistence that we calm down while offering to help in any way possible to relieve tensions on the Korean Peninsula, belies the fact that China has a long history of saying one thing while doing another. China has allowed North Korea to exploit loopholes in UN resolutions to acquire luxury goods and foreign currency (which often ends up in the hands of the military), and even China's latest unilateral action against North Korea - the banning of North Korean coal imports - must be taken with a grain of salt.
Without doubt, North Korea has been squeezed. But we have watched a slow-motion multi-decade catastrophe unfold before our very eyes while we have tried to placate North Korea through the misguided notion that all they want is food and they'll give up their bombs for it. Not only does North Korea have nuclear weapons (and it's time we acknowledge they're a nuclear weapons state instead of pretending they're not), they're on the verge of having a credible first strike capability. Additionally, not only do they have a vast arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, we now know they're not afraid to use them. We are edging ever closer to a point of absolutely no return. Until China is really on-board, any international actions against North Korea will be blunted.
--Jacob Bogle, 3/18/17
JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Recently, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said during his visit to China that, every option was on the table, including military options, regarding North Korea. China of course tried to play both sides of the fence and suggested we be "cool headed". An all out war is no real option, but the fact remains that the last 20+ years of "cool headed" diplomacy hasn't stopped their nuclear or ballistic missile programs, or led to a more open DPRK. Despite many efforts, their economy remains in tatters and millions still go hungry. China's insistence that we calm down while offering to help in any way possible to relieve tensions on the Korean Peninsula, belies the fact that China has a long history of saying one thing while doing another. China has allowed North Korea to exploit loopholes in UN resolutions to acquire luxury goods and foreign currency (which often ends up in the hands of the military), and even China's latest unilateral action against North Korea - the banning of North Korean coal imports - must be taken with a grain of salt.
Without doubt, North Korea has been squeezed. But we have watched a slow-motion multi-decade catastrophe unfold before our very eyes while we have tried to placate North Korea through the misguided notion that all they want is food and they'll give up their bombs for it. Not only does North Korea have nuclear weapons (and it's time we acknowledge they're a nuclear weapons state instead of pretending they're not), they're on the verge of having a credible first strike capability. Additionally, not only do they have a vast arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, we now know they're not afraid to use them. We are edging ever closer to a point of absolutely no return. Until China is really on-board, any international actions against North Korea will be blunted.
--Jacob Bogle, 3/18/17
JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Additional Reading
Arsenal of Terror: North Korea, State Sponsor of Terrorism, by Joshua Stanton
Labels:
assassination,
China,
Kim Jong Un,
Kim Jong-nam,
Malaysia,
North Korea,
opinion,
state sponsor,
terrorism,
United Nations,
VX nerve gas
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
The Nuclear Question
Kim Il-sung, North Korea's founder, had seen the devastation wrought by the bombs dropped on Japan in WWII and witnessed the obliteration of the Korean Peninsula by Allied forces during the Korean War. Almost from the start Kim Il-sung desired to develop his own nuclear weapons program. But his desires were placed on hold as more pressing issues were on the table at the end of the Korean War, namely, rebuilding the country and completing his restructuring of the entire economy, military, and culture.
With the Soviets as allies, North Korea felt relatively safe from American "imperial aggression" and so they went about more basic national concerns. However, they engaged in lower level nuclear activities with the USSR. In 1956 their scientists were given basic knowledge on how to begin a nuclear program and in 1959 the DPRK and USSR signed a "nuclear cooperation" agreement.
The collapse of the USSR marked the beginning of many changes in North Korea. It precipitated the famine, helped to wreck their economy, and a few years later they restarted their nuclear program after losing their primary defensive shield - the Cold War threat of all out nuclear war with the ruin of the US. Their nuclear program had been on hold since 1994 but in 1998 they tested a ballistic missile and restarted processing nuclear fuel.
Today, North Korea lacks any ability to sustain a long-term, full-scale war. Most of their tanks and other weapon systems are around 25-30 years old and many sit idle or broken because North Korea lacks sufficient fuel, replacement parts and even bullets. But we should not let that lull us into a false sense of security. The North Korean soldier is one who is strongly motivated, loyal to the point of religious zealotry, and is constantly reminded that all of their problems are directly caused by the US.
For us, the Korean War ended in 1953. For the North Koreans, it's still happening. The country's leadership knows full well that without Soviet and Chinese support during the War the North Koreans would have been wiped off the face of the earth...and they very nearly were. And so today, they see South Korea flourishing, they see thousands of US troops stationed in the South and they realize they probably can't count on Russia or China in the event of a new war. At the same time, they also remember that prior to the early 1980's they had a stronger economy and better infrastructure than their southern cousins. So, what is a tiny country with a schizophrenic superiority/inferiority complex to do?
Their insistence on developing a serious nuclear defense program is one we find difficult to understand. After all, the money they've spent pursuing this goal could have fed the entire population for several years. We have to realize that what the national leadership does is for its own survival alone and not necessarily for the well-being of ordinary citizens.
For decades, North Korea has promoted itself to its people as a strong nuclear power and fully capable of sending satellites into space; at the forefront of any and all technologies. The reality is that they're bumbling about with little to go on except what they learned via the Soviets and their interactions with Iran, Syria and Iraq. Their brightest scientists are decades behind the modern world. And so, in an effort to ensure their legitimacy in the eyes of the people, and to reap the benefits of aid monies and arms deals, they have become hellbent on developing nuclear weapons and all the ancillary technologies that goes along with it.
The military is the lifeblood of North Korea. The official policy of North Korea is "Songun" (military-first) which means, in essence, the entire purpose of the nation, its economy, agriculture, technology, everything is to serve and enhance the military. And while the Kim family seems like they have had an iron-fisted grip on the county's affairs the reality is that they (more precisely, he; Kim Jong-un) must maintain an uneasy alliance between himself and the military leadership. It would go a long way toward cementing his rule if the military was well taken care of, which would include a nuclear arsenal.
This leaves us with a few questions:
What about sanctions?
What is the real threat?
Where does all this leave us today?
The first question deals with sanctions. The US and UN has levied multiple rounds of sanctions against North Korea since 2004. The problem with this is sanctions more often than not hurt the people of a country more than the leadership. Sanctions have attempted to squeeze the ruling elite into submission, in reality they have played right into their hands. The sanctions have drastically limited the amount of fuel oil and other necessities flowing into the country thus exacerbating their economic problems and hampering the ability of everyday Koreans to thrive. Exceptions have been made in the realm of food aid but this too has had a negative effect. By their very nature any aid that goes to North Korea must first go through government bureaucracies and the military is usually the one who ends up with the aid. Then soldiers take truck loads of food and sell it on the black market fueling the corrupt and the terminal kleptocratic state of the country.
The international community has also failed to realize that what constitutes "luxury goods" to the West is not what people in North Korea consider luxury. A simple TV is a luxury good in the North, not necessarily a gold-plated toilet. And the elite have had little problem getting their "luxury" goods since the UN doesn't provide a strict list of what exactly luxury means, rather they let each member country determine what is or isn't.
Sanctions, normally US led, also fits into the propaganda. By engaging in sanctions and severely harming their domestic economy the North can easily blame all their woes on the US and can use them as an excuse to use their sovereign imperative for self-defense by citing a "need" for a nuclear deterrence. So, while sanctions may make the West feel good about "stopping a rouge regime", the North is busy working their starving people into a frenzy of anti-American sentiment, ready to wage war at the drop of a hat. Not to mention that despite sanctions the North has recently tested two nuclear devices and multiple long-range rockets. Sanctions are clearly not working.
Furthermore, North Korea is not as dependent on outside help as one might expect. Their successful "satellite" launch in 2012 was a prime example. Based on the examination of rocket parts found in the ocean the world was shocked to discover that much of the rocket was domestically made. North Korea also has a fair amount of natural uranium deposits (32,000 TONS of pure uranium to be exact). Uranium enrichment is a rather straightforward process and the technical skills needed to produce a uranium-based nuclear device is much less than needed to produce a plutonium bomb. All of this tells us that while sanctions may make things difficult for the North, they are not preventing them from moving forward with their programs...obviously.
North Korea, more a socialist nightmare than utopia. A broken economy and starving people with an obsolete military. What could they possibly do? Well, obviously they can build nuclear weapons and place objects into orbit and we dismiss or poke-fun of North Korea at our own risk.
There is no way the North could currently launch a nuclear missile (or any missile) at the US mainland and even dream of hitting it with any certainty. Theoretically, they could however send a bomb over in a shipping container. The North has been able to maintain an arms, drug and information trade with multiple nations the world over so it is conceivable that they could blow up the Port of Los Angeles by sneaking something on board one of the 8 million shipping containers (using another country as a 3rd-party mediator) that flow through the port. After all, ports are a notorious weak spot.
More realistically, I think we should focus on South Korea and the mood within the North. When Kim Jong-un came to power as a young, European educated man, the world hoped for real reforms. Unfortunately, it seems that the young Kim suffers from youth induced arrogance and a desire to prove himself to his people (undoubtedly egged on by seasoned and hawkish military advisers). The North has also been "gearing-up" for war since 1953 and I imagine that the citizenry is growing tired of constant war propaganda without ever releasing the tension.
Historically, North Korea has engaged in small hit & run tactics such as the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan and the bombing of Yeonpyeong Island or limited incursions. In fact, the North has technically violated the terms of the 1953 Armistice 221 times. So there is little question that the North is capable of hits, the question is, are they ready to engage in a full blown war? Politically speaking, the time is ripe for an escalated conflict. We've seen the North take provocative actions but now South Korea has also stepped up its rhetoric. The newly elected ROK (Republic of Korea) president has made it clear he is willing to be much more aggressive in the face of any threat from North Korea and this willingness on both parts will make it very easy for an otherwise small event to blow up into war.
North Korea maintains a secretive and elite rapid strike force of about 180,000 men. These troops are well trained in asymmetric tactics and have a network of tunnels beneath the DMZ which, in the event of war, means that the South could be taken off guard as 180,000 enemy soldiers surround their forward defensive lines. Additionally, Seoul is within reach of thousands of field guns and rocket launchers which could inflict massive damage. North Korea could use its 500-forward deployed, long-rang guns to rain down 500,000 shells an hour for several hours. All of this would result in up to 1 million South Korean casualties within the first few days of war. Not to mention the rest of the North Korean military which in terms of raw numbers dwarfs the South's. And while the North lacks any real ability to engage in a sustained invasion, the goal may not be to "win." Like the Taliban, the goal could be to bleed the US dry. We would be forced (by treaty) to send large amounts of aid and soldiers to back up the 28,500 US soldiers already stationed in the South and to help the South Korean military. The disruption in trade between the US and South, as well as the disruption of South Korea's overall $560 billion in global exports, could cause very real economic problems for the "enemies" of North Korea.
In the end, North Korea would be turned into a pile of ashes, as was the case during the Korean War but, not without costing the US and its allies a great deal first.
What do we do now?
I doubt North Korea genuinely wants an all out war. The end game of war would be bad for everyone involved. It is more likely that the North is simply wanting some breathing room. If it weren't for their nuclear program it's doubtful the world would even give the North the time of day. But there can be a positive outcome. Although sanctions haven't worked to stop their weapons programs, they have succeeded in making life very hard for them and rumors of assassinations and internal power struggles surface from time to time.
I think it is time we re-evaluate our position with North Korea. The North is like a spoiled child and our approach to keep him from doing bad things is by starving him to death. To me, this doesn't sound very wise -or moral. It is obvious that all of their bellicose language has been in an attempt to gain attention and aid. It is equally obvious that the international community lacks the ability to stop the North from doing as they please since they have a fair amount of domestic capability (even if it's at the expense of other sectors). At the height of the Cold War, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, both sides understood that any escalation would result in both sides losing. There is no doubt that while we would technically win the war, we would also lose it. Sanctions against the USSR did little to stop their activities and in the end the USSR collapsed from internal forces and a never-ending asymmetric war in the Middle East.
Today, the US trades with many of our mortal enemies, Russia, China, Germany, Japan, Vietnam etc. Russia and China maintain militaries that could easily take our military to task if pushed to. Russian and Chinese human rights abuses are well known and their systems of government and economics are not the same as America's. That being said, the lives of modern Russians and Chinese are better now than at any point in history and at the same time the Chinese Communist Party has never been stronger. I am not saying that their horrid human rights record, or the deaths of millions caused directly by their governments should be ignored. I am saying that there are ways of opening up societies, of making lives better, without bombing the hell out of them or holding such threat above their heads. As is evident by Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, you cannot bomb "freedom" into a culture unable or unwilling to accept it. Sometimes change must be gradual.
The US and China have been at odds over rare-earth metals and there is a grave threat to the world economy if China decided to play bully. North Korea, surprisingly enough, has up to $6 trillion (yes, trillion) in rare-earth metals. Would it not make more sense to extend an olive branch to the North Koreans, to not demand the end of their ruling elite, and instead allow them to implement gradual economic reforms while we reap the benefit of another source of needed materials? Economic freedom breeds personal freedom. The only way for North Korea to really benefit from their natural resources is to change their economic model and in doing so the yoke of serfdom which pervades North Korean society will naturally lessen.
As long as we threaten them directly or indirectly, they will never relent. Morally, North Korea does have every sovereign right to defend itself and to develop nuclear technologies, and we have no moral (or Constitutional) right to stop them. We do have the moral and legal right to trade with them and if they launched an actual attack against us then fine, we'll erase them from the universe. I would rather have a country of full bellies which still has a Kim leading it than further continue a nation where 1/3 of those under 5 have stunted growth as a result of malnourishment with a Kim leading it.
I think we owe it to the millions of starving North Koreans, to our South Korean friends, and to ourselves to try a new path. Instead of holding on to Cold War fears and maintaining policies which clearly do not work, let us engage.
Additional Reading:
Timeline of North Korea's nuclear program, Wikipedia
Study on nuclear terrorism against US trade, Abt Associates (PDF)
North Korea's nuclear program, International Institute for Strategic Studies
--Jacob Bogle, 3/20/2013
www.JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle
Labels:
$6 trillion,
history,
hot war,
Kim Jong Un,
missile,
new war,
North Korea,
nuclear,
opinion,
rocket,
satellite,
South Korea,
uranium,
US,
weapons
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)