Posted on Sep 19, 2017
Bringing North Korea into the World By Acknowledging Their Nuclear Weapons and Strike Capabilities
42.4K
239
152
42
42
0
I recently read a great position article by Victor Cha from the Center for Strategic and International studies on how to play the China card in regards to handling the events we are seeing out of North Korea. For the most part, the general consensus to dealing with North Korea will be through their closest friend, China. To this point, I completely agree. It is likely that we will (and are) attempting to pressure China to, in turn, pressure North Korea. However, as Victor points out, this pressure is not likely to lead to our best envisioned end state of a regime change and diminished focus on weapons of mass destruction. Why? Multiple factors of competition, mistrust, history, regime collapse and more lead to a litany of variables that China just doesn’t want to be responsible for or tied to. As Victor argues, it’s time to consider a change in diplomacy; I argue that it also is a time to consider a change in end state expectations and how we get there. [1]
Multiple presidential administrations have attempted to curb North Korean weapons development and engage the hermit country in a way that would stabilize the peninsula and tone down the rhetoric. From the “preventive defense” attempts of the 1994 U.S.- North Korea Framework to curb nuclear power ambitions to the crippling sanctions of today, all attempts to change the regime’s trajectory towards nuclear weapons have been some sort of a failure.[2] However, I believe the actions themselves aren’t the failure, but the underlying assumptions with a focus on the stabilization of the country rather than the stabilization of the Kim Regime itself is the underlying issue.
Although I am by no means an expert on the Kim Jong-un regime or the Kim Dynasty as a whole, from the discussions I have had to the research I have conducted, I am thoroughly convinced every action conducted by the leader is for the security of his Regime, not the country. So, as initiatives have consistently worked to deter action and stabilize a country, I argue it is time we work to stabilize the regime and, in turn, help manage its actions. Now, before we talk about this, let’s acknowledge that working with a regime like this goes against our moralistic nature, as the regime of North Korea is brutish and just down right horrible to its population. However, to that point, its brutal practices are likely actions driven by a regime who consistently is working to secure itself and thereby, has the potential to diminish as the regime’s future is secured.
So, where would we begin to stabilize what seems to be a regime of non-rational actors? First, I believe we need to start by treating them as rational actors. Although their actions may not seem rational to us, as former Joint Chief of Staff General Dempsey once pointed out to a poor reporter, that doesn’t mean they aren’t rational actors. I do believe the regime has an envisioned future and understands where they want to sit in the world. What is that position? Likely, a mid-level country like their cousins to the South. A regime who holds an array of respect and positions in the international system. A position that can influence trade, maritime operations, or weigh in on regional and international issues. Essentially, a position that projects the regimes divinity and strength from within. What is important to remember is that we are talking about the regime, not the country, and thereby we have to acknowledge that this will look vastly different than the free and connected society in the south, but with all the basic tenants of holding a position in the world. This fundamental change in an underlying assumption and focus is a strong facet to seeing that the regime has the potential to stabilize as their envisioned future comes to fruition.
Operating off this assumption, I believe to bring a regime like Kim’s to that point of stability, we have to employ a preventative style of strategy that integrates North Korea into the world system. This would be very familiar to post-Cold War strategies for integrating a fledgling Russian federation back into the world. We’d utilize methods like inviting the Russians into peacekeeping operations in Bosnia-Kosovo, which developed communication frameworks and enabled Russia to find their prideful place in the world structure. Similar activities like investment and repurposing of military personnel in the Ukraine, post Soviet collapse, helped to secure the region and denuclearize a once heavily nuclear country. Many of these strategies of preventative defense, outlined by former Secretaries of Defense Carter and Perry in their book, “Preventative Defense” could yield positive results, as long as their strategies are employed with a focus on the Kim Jong-un regime, rather than the country itself.
To put these ideas into perspective a little more, let’s expand on a few things. To date, the regime is clearly not deterred from developing their weapons of mass destruction and I believe that is because the regime believes it is their most effective and most feasible entry to the international community. To support this, we have to understand that the hermit nation really has no place in modern society. They are not a world player in exports or imports. They do not possess advanced technology which they can offer to the world, and they do not carry any cultural or historic envy in the world. So, what do they have? What do they have to offer? From the regime’s eyes, I believe its only option is their military capability or threat. Basically, “a pay attention to us by force” motto.
Beyond attention-seeking, let’s talk about the potential personal ambitions of Kim Jong-un and his Regime. Kim is a leader, a divinity to some, and one of the privileged few that gets to look beyond the gates of the Regime. Enter the mind of a man in that position, looking out and knowing his influence has significant limits and that those limits actually threaten the life span of his regime, and thereby, his influence. Wouldn’t that drive you to build a mechanism to gain more, or to at least secure your regime’s future both within the country and the international community? I believe it would. This goes back to the understanding that the regime’s survival is priority number one and, therefore, any and all mechanisms to strengthen it must be pursued, no matter the cost.
Moving on to the next piece of bringing North Korea into the world; allowing their sustained nuclear strike capability. Before we talk about nuclear weapons as a means of communication vs. a threat, let's first acknowledge a few other issues that are likely to come up with a reliable nuclear strike platform. With an increased capability like this, the conventional military threat could be emboldened as well, and the regional stability could be threatened. Additionally, we could see increased rhetoric and open threats as North Korean leaders learned how to negotiate and communicate on the world stage - threats would likely be their default response. Further, we could see an intrepid nuclear-capable regime backtrack or cheat on negotiated deals, which could deteriorate security worldwide. These, and many more, are all risks we must acknowledge and account for. We must be heavily involved in the management of regime actions as they move forward as a nuclear power.
Now, with all that we have outlined here - the changes in the assumptions and the changes in focus from country to the regime - we can talk about nuclear capability in North Korea as a potential conduit of communication rather than strictly a threat. Acknowledging their nuclear capability and immediately bringing them into established frameworks for nuclear capable countries could potentially open lines of communication that have not yet been achieved. With a strong deterrence in his pocket from “western interdiction”, Kim could possibly be more willing to establish norms and predictability in their military exercises and actions as they attempt to garner an image of a world player. To circle back to Victor Cha’s article, these lines of communication will likely never be directly with the U.S. or “West” due to the regime’s lack of trust, but would more likely be directed through China. However, the closer the regime gets to established frameworks, the closer those lines of communication can become.
Years of attempting to deter a nuclear North Korea have seem to have little effect, and the time for acknowledging their capability may be presenting itself. So, there are interesting questions that need to be asked. If Kim Jong-un has his desired nuclear program with strike capabilities around the world, could that actually be the missing piece that brings him within the international framework? Will it actually be the conduit that brings stability to the regime and, thereby, the entire region of North Korea? Or are we actually sitting at the brink of a mad-man ready to destroy the world? Either way, these are two extremely interesting and important questions.
What do you think?
-----
Luke Jenkins is an Active Duty Army officer and founder of OweYaa.com, a veteran service organization. He is a passionate student of strategy and matters relating to national defense strategy. This article reflects his personal analysis and thoughts and does not reflect an official stance of the U.S. Army, Department of Defense, or any organization related to national defense framework.
-----
[1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/right-way-play-china-card-north-korea
[2] https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/agreedframework
Photo by Roman Harak - https://www.flickr.com/photos/roman-harak/ [login to see]
Multiple presidential administrations have attempted to curb North Korean weapons development and engage the hermit country in a way that would stabilize the peninsula and tone down the rhetoric. From the “preventive defense” attempts of the 1994 U.S.- North Korea Framework to curb nuclear power ambitions to the crippling sanctions of today, all attempts to change the regime’s trajectory towards nuclear weapons have been some sort of a failure.[2] However, I believe the actions themselves aren’t the failure, but the underlying assumptions with a focus on the stabilization of the country rather than the stabilization of the Kim Regime itself is the underlying issue.
Although I am by no means an expert on the Kim Jong-un regime or the Kim Dynasty as a whole, from the discussions I have had to the research I have conducted, I am thoroughly convinced every action conducted by the leader is for the security of his Regime, not the country. So, as initiatives have consistently worked to deter action and stabilize a country, I argue it is time we work to stabilize the regime and, in turn, help manage its actions. Now, before we talk about this, let’s acknowledge that working with a regime like this goes against our moralistic nature, as the regime of North Korea is brutish and just down right horrible to its population. However, to that point, its brutal practices are likely actions driven by a regime who consistently is working to secure itself and thereby, has the potential to diminish as the regime’s future is secured.
So, where would we begin to stabilize what seems to be a regime of non-rational actors? First, I believe we need to start by treating them as rational actors. Although their actions may not seem rational to us, as former Joint Chief of Staff General Dempsey once pointed out to a poor reporter, that doesn’t mean they aren’t rational actors. I do believe the regime has an envisioned future and understands where they want to sit in the world. What is that position? Likely, a mid-level country like their cousins to the South. A regime who holds an array of respect and positions in the international system. A position that can influence trade, maritime operations, or weigh in on regional and international issues. Essentially, a position that projects the regimes divinity and strength from within. What is important to remember is that we are talking about the regime, not the country, and thereby we have to acknowledge that this will look vastly different than the free and connected society in the south, but with all the basic tenants of holding a position in the world. This fundamental change in an underlying assumption and focus is a strong facet to seeing that the regime has the potential to stabilize as their envisioned future comes to fruition.
Operating off this assumption, I believe to bring a regime like Kim’s to that point of stability, we have to employ a preventative style of strategy that integrates North Korea into the world system. This would be very familiar to post-Cold War strategies for integrating a fledgling Russian federation back into the world. We’d utilize methods like inviting the Russians into peacekeeping operations in Bosnia-Kosovo, which developed communication frameworks and enabled Russia to find their prideful place in the world structure. Similar activities like investment and repurposing of military personnel in the Ukraine, post Soviet collapse, helped to secure the region and denuclearize a once heavily nuclear country. Many of these strategies of preventative defense, outlined by former Secretaries of Defense Carter and Perry in their book, “Preventative Defense” could yield positive results, as long as their strategies are employed with a focus on the Kim Jong-un regime, rather than the country itself.
To put these ideas into perspective a little more, let’s expand on a few things. To date, the regime is clearly not deterred from developing their weapons of mass destruction and I believe that is because the regime believes it is their most effective and most feasible entry to the international community. To support this, we have to understand that the hermit nation really has no place in modern society. They are not a world player in exports or imports. They do not possess advanced technology which they can offer to the world, and they do not carry any cultural or historic envy in the world. So, what do they have? What do they have to offer? From the regime’s eyes, I believe its only option is their military capability or threat. Basically, “a pay attention to us by force” motto.
Beyond attention-seeking, let’s talk about the potential personal ambitions of Kim Jong-un and his Regime. Kim is a leader, a divinity to some, and one of the privileged few that gets to look beyond the gates of the Regime. Enter the mind of a man in that position, looking out and knowing his influence has significant limits and that those limits actually threaten the life span of his regime, and thereby, his influence. Wouldn’t that drive you to build a mechanism to gain more, or to at least secure your regime’s future both within the country and the international community? I believe it would. This goes back to the understanding that the regime’s survival is priority number one and, therefore, any and all mechanisms to strengthen it must be pursued, no matter the cost.
Moving on to the next piece of bringing North Korea into the world; allowing their sustained nuclear strike capability. Before we talk about nuclear weapons as a means of communication vs. a threat, let's first acknowledge a few other issues that are likely to come up with a reliable nuclear strike platform. With an increased capability like this, the conventional military threat could be emboldened as well, and the regional stability could be threatened. Additionally, we could see increased rhetoric and open threats as North Korean leaders learned how to negotiate and communicate on the world stage - threats would likely be their default response. Further, we could see an intrepid nuclear-capable regime backtrack or cheat on negotiated deals, which could deteriorate security worldwide. These, and many more, are all risks we must acknowledge and account for. We must be heavily involved in the management of regime actions as they move forward as a nuclear power.
Now, with all that we have outlined here - the changes in the assumptions and the changes in focus from country to the regime - we can talk about nuclear capability in North Korea as a potential conduit of communication rather than strictly a threat. Acknowledging their nuclear capability and immediately bringing them into established frameworks for nuclear capable countries could potentially open lines of communication that have not yet been achieved. With a strong deterrence in his pocket from “western interdiction”, Kim could possibly be more willing to establish norms and predictability in their military exercises and actions as they attempt to garner an image of a world player. To circle back to Victor Cha’s article, these lines of communication will likely never be directly with the U.S. or “West” due to the regime’s lack of trust, but would more likely be directed through China. However, the closer the regime gets to established frameworks, the closer those lines of communication can become.
Years of attempting to deter a nuclear North Korea have seem to have little effect, and the time for acknowledging their capability may be presenting itself. So, there are interesting questions that need to be asked. If Kim Jong-un has his desired nuclear program with strike capabilities around the world, could that actually be the missing piece that brings him within the international framework? Will it actually be the conduit that brings stability to the regime and, thereby, the entire region of North Korea? Or are we actually sitting at the brink of a mad-man ready to destroy the world? Either way, these are two extremely interesting and important questions.
What do you think?
-----
Luke Jenkins is an Active Duty Army officer and founder of OweYaa.com, a veteran service organization. He is a passionate student of strategy and matters relating to national defense strategy. This article reflects his personal analysis and thoughts and does not reflect an official stance of the U.S. Army, Department of Defense, or any organization related to national defense framework.
-----
[1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/right-way-play-china-card-north-korea
[2] https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/agreedframework
Photo by Roman Harak - https://www.flickr.com/photos/roman-harak/ [login to see]
Posted in these groups: 
North Korea
Nuclear
World Affairs
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
Command Post
North Korea Nuclear World Affairs Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Command Post
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 40
17
17
0
RallyPoint Members and Connections check out this great Command Post Article by our very own
2LT (Join to see) - Great Read - Your thoughts and Comments are welcome!
Click on this link: https://www.rallypoint.com/command-post/bringing-north-korea-into-the-world-by-acknowledging-their-nuclear-weapons-and-strike-capabilities
CAPT Michael MoranLTJG Josh ThaxtonSGT Thomas HeinoldSSG Ronald BloodworthCOL Bill Madden
2LT (Join to see) - Great Read - Your thoughts and Comments are welcome!
Click on this link: https://www.rallypoint.com/command-post/bringing-north-korea-into-the-world-by-acknowledging-their-nuclear-weapons-and-strike-capabilities
CAPT Michael MoranLTJG Josh ThaxtonSGT Thomas HeinoldSSG Ronald BloodworthCOL Bill Madden
Bringing North Korea into the World By Acknowledging Their Nuclear Weapons and Strike...
I recently read a great position article by Victor Cha from the Center for Strategic and International studies on how to play the China card in regards to handling the events we are seeing out of North Korea. For the most part, the general consensus to dealing with North Korea will be through their closest friend, China. To this point, I completely agree. It is likely that we will (and are) attempting to pressure China to, in turn, pressure...
(17)
(0)
(1)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
SFC Dave Beran - extremely valid point. The point that I am making, is giving the options. The current rhetoric coming from our side is only escalatory. This is an option for the regime to take, if he doesn't take it, we stand at the ready and that is a battle he surely will not win. Simply looking to keep doors open here as there is so much at risk.
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
An interesting write up. The current Kim is in a "no win" situation. A conventional forces attack
on S. Korea, while promising at first, would see his forces defeated. This isn't 1950, the South
Koreans have a well trained, well armed military, there is no Soviet Union, or Maoist China willing
back his play. Also, I don't believe the N. Koreans are as brain-washed as we think, more a case of
If someone holds a gun to your head and says, cheer the dear leader, you cheer the dear leader.
Use of nukes...? Again folly in the extreme. Their capability does not match their showmanship.
I liken it to muskets vs. M16's. They'll get off a couple of shots, poorly aimed, and be met with
hundreds of shots, well aimed, in response.
His bargaining position is, to be charitable, weak. N. Korea doesn't have anything anyone wants.
Conventional, nuclear, EMP, or kimchi, N. Korea gains nothing in an aggressive act.
Possible scenarios are:
Under covert Chinese direction, rebels form in the mountain regions, later spreading to urban areas. Civil unrest, after decades of oppression, takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.
Under covert Chinese direction, the Kim regime is infiltrated. Following chubby's tragic, and
unexplained death, no doubt a heart attack during some sort of athletic contest, a military junta
takes over.
Do to a lack of proper safety protocols, a test goes horribly wrong, and a nuke is detonated in
Pyongyang. Oh no, how terrible, chubby and his cohorts are all gone. China and S. Korea step in
to help in the crisis.
N. Korea invades the south and is beaten back by the ROK forces. Under Chinese direction, civil
unrest erupts, and takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.
N. Korea actually launches a nuke against U.S., or an ally. Retaliatory strike, non-nuclear, is
overwhelming. Kim regime falls.
It's a no win.
on S. Korea, while promising at first, would see his forces defeated. This isn't 1950, the South
Koreans have a well trained, well armed military, there is no Soviet Union, or Maoist China willing
back his play. Also, I don't believe the N. Koreans are as brain-washed as we think, more a case of
If someone holds a gun to your head and says, cheer the dear leader, you cheer the dear leader.
Use of nukes...? Again folly in the extreme. Their capability does not match their showmanship.
I liken it to muskets vs. M16's. They'll get off a couple of shots, poorly aimed, and be met with
hundreds of shots, well aimed, in response.
His bargaining position is, to be charitable, weak. N. Korea doesn't have anything anyone wants.
Conventional, nuclear, EMP, or kimchi, N. Korea gains nothing in an aggressive act.
Possible scenarios are:
Under covert Chinese direction, rebels form in the mountain regions, later spreading to urban areas. Civil unrest, after decades of oppression, takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.
Under covert Chinese direction, the Kim regime is infiltrated. Following chubby's tragic, and
unexplained death, no doubt a heart attack during some sort of athletic contest, a military junta
takes over.
Do to a lack of proper safety protocols, a test goes horribly wrong, and a nuke is detonated in
Pyongyang. Oh no, how terrible, chubby and his cohorts are all gone. China and S. Korea step in
to help in the crisis.
N. Korea invades the south and is beaten back by the ROK forces. Under Chinese direction, civil
unrest erupts, and takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.
N. Korea actually launches a nuke against U.S., or an ally. Retaliatory strike, non-nuclear, is
overwhelming. Kim regime falls.
It's a no win.
(9)
(0)
GySgt Charles O'Connell
2LT (Join to see) - We have responded, I feel, in direct proportion to actions and rhetoric coming out of N. Korea. Little has been done, by the N. Korean regimes since the armistice, to develop what assets the country has, building a viable economy, allowing them to join the community of nations. The regime, to maintain its existence, has, through diabolical oppression, kept the country in a state of isolation and fear. For many years N. Korea, again in my opinion, was manipulated by China, and to a lesser extent the Soviet Union, to be a destabilizing factor in the Pacific rim, requiring the U.S., and others, to waste time, attention, and assets, better used elsewhere, a situation, despite what is coming out of China, may still be going on.
N. Korea is insignificant, in and of itself. It is DPRK that started this nonsense. They are the ones that fired first. I think the world has shown amazing restraint in dealing with their actions.
N. Korea is insignificant, in and of itself. It is DPRK that started this nonsense. They are the ones that fired first. I think the world has shown amazing restraint in dealing with their actions.
(1)
(0)
SGM Joseph Joyner
2LT (Join to see) - You give them to much credit! His forefathers were extortionist that learned to rattled their sabers to get money and goods from the world but they grew tired of the little scraps they were getting from the world table so they started thinking big and with help from Russia and "others" they started their pursuit of nuclear weapons in order to force the world to give them the table. They know that they can't win a war but they sure as hell can try to bluff the idiots and lib hearted dummies of this world. They want to sit at the head of the table and call the shots and all they will understand is for one of the big boys to stand up and say shut up asshole and that is what our POTUS is doing.
(2)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
You said it exactly right, they know they can't win a war, but want to bluff their way in to the international community. So, if they know they can't win, would we ever truly expect an imminent threat? Doubtful, therefore, a preemptive strike on our behalf will just simply look more like personal aggression in a war of words. The problem is we can tell them to quiet down all we want, but they are a sovereign nation to do what they please and to stop or influence their means through military options simply isn't feasible, based upon our national acceptance of acceptable casualty rates as the casualties both militarily and civilian would be massive compared to what the population is willing to accept these days. There is no good military option, that is why there has to be another avenue out
(1)
(0)
GySgt Charles O'Connell
I don't believe that a preemptive strike, on our part, is in the cards. Perhaps, only in response to a massive build up of DPRK forces along the DMZ, and that strike would have to be initiated by the ROK. N. Korea needs to start the process of being accepted to the community of nations by acting like a responsible government, one that has the best interests of it citizens at heart. They can do this, winning support of the world community, and their own populace. But let us not lose sight of the fact that the aggressive acts are coming from them, they are launching missles over neighboring states, they are threatening detonation of nuc/hyd bombs, they are threatening U.S. aircraft outside their own airspace. Granted the remarks by Pres. Trump, while proportional in response, are the best propaganda tool for the N. Korean regime.
Agreed, cooler heads need to prevail, but not at the expense of our allies, or ourselves.
Agreed, cooler heads need to prevail, but not at the expense of our allies, or ourselves.
(0)
(0)
9
9
0
We are actually sitting at the brink of a mad-man ready to destroy the world. The only solution is the military solution, as distasteful as that may be; our choice is either to take him on with his current conventional forces or wait until we must face him with his nuclear forces later.
We cannot afford to kick the can down the road any longer, IMHO.
We cannot afford to kick the can down the road any longer, IMHO.
(9)
(0)
SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]
~1050829: PO3 Bob McCord] - I was Om the Island Of Kyushu at Camp Hakata near Fukuoka when the war started. . Non combat people came out of Korea and because we were closet to Korea we had to process them .Today their thousand and thousand American In Korea do we leave the people to the mercy of the NK . Their would be a Blood Bath in Korea .The whole world sat on their ass as the problem grew worse as the years went by after the cease fire was sign in July 1953 .Raids across the DMZ kill troops for cutting tree limbs for better observing . Carrying out attacks from November 2 1966-December 3 1969 [Second Korean War]. With each action you get these results they became bolder with each event now the world has a mad man with a death wish. when you let a problem go for 67 years. We never learn from history . Look at the build up to WW!! sign 40 yards
(1)
(0)
SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]
SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]] -Their are some 136 , 633 American living in South Korea today @ they are all military personal . sign 40 yards
(1)
(0)
SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]
SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]] - Sorry they are not all military personal sign 40 yards
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
2LT (Join to see) Though you bring up some points...I disagree. If Kim were a leader who cared about his people... I may have agreed with a lot of your points.......or, at least taken them into consideration.......however, Kim is an OPPRESSOR....His people/country are scared to death of him...He has the largest number of Political Prisoners in the world....He is a TRYANT...He is just down right mean/EVIL.......Giving someone like this the ....the power of Nuclear weapons/warheads/missiles....... is like taking a gun and putting it to all of our heads and pulling the trigger. He has no compassion........... he is power hungry. To send missiles over Japan and make threats to Guam and other places...is uncalled for and not necessary....it is Kim pounding on his chest like the leader of a GORILLA group in the JUNGLE telling the rest of the WORLD...look at me! I am it! I am the BOMB...I am the leader....and I'm going to one day be everyone's leader...just wait and see.... Give him an inch and he'll take 10 miles... By treating the Regime like "RATIONAL Actors?" Yeah, I don't see this happening. They are not rational and never will be. Take out Kim and we would deal with their military...which may be even worse than dealing with KIM. BRUTISH to it's people is an understatement. ..Look what they did to that poor kid who was there visiting with his fellow student from his university. What they did to this poor boy just because it took a poster off of the wall at the airport is beyond inhumane...it's down right BARBARIC. No way ever should we or any other country give NK a chance to be treated equally...and he's not doing this for his country or his people...he is doing this because he's just like HILTER.....Give him a chance....or Opportunity and He'll try to conquer and take over the whole world because he's just that crazy.
We gave his father $4 million dollars... after they agreed to the Nonproliferation Treaty ...which they ended up breaking nearly as quickly as it was signed back in 1985...then NK straighten up....and then they broke the treaty again....THEY CANNOT EVER BE TRUSTED.... He is the DEVIL...EL DIABLO.... He had his OWN BROTHER KILLED...or wait...was that his Uncle???. MURDERED him with a nerve agent...in COLD BLOOD...this is not a man we can reason with.
Just my two cents.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Mia Mason Capt Seid Waddell SGT Jim Arnold SPC Joe Davenport SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]] GySgt Charles O'Connell
We gave his father $4 million dollars... after they agreed to the Nonproliferation Treaty ...which they ended up breaking nearly as quickly as it was signed back in 1985...then NK straighten up....and then they broke the treaty again....THEY CANNOT EVER BE TRUSTED.... He is the DEVIL...EL DIABLO.... He had his OWN BROTHER KILLED...or wait...was that his Uncle???. MURDERED him with a nerve agent...in COLD BLOOD...this is not a man we can reason with.
Just my two cents.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Mia Mason Capt Seid Waddell SGT Jim Arnold SPC Joe Davenport SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]] GySgt Charles O'Connell
(8)
(0)
Emerald S
just found the article today , best two cents noted' yet the kimy issue is not totally the issue for other kimies can come along (sorry to the computer having a problem with the new word i made up kimies is it used in entanglement theory ? if not it is now) isolation and no servants to order around / food he has to get for himself etc. the concern is nuke issues , the world powers do know lots , must be having a chitchat somewhere .. um oddly a earthquake in the wrong debris area or location etc is too a Kimy= blow a little , apparently hard on for dominate placement with no friend left. i hear and understand the two cents , hopefully some will record him and play his backroom words to his apparent own people while he is in public place , have you read about the musicians ,what k did to them... infront of his loving crowds ....give those people their before stressing about the little k
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I don't imagine there would be a ton of political or international support for essentially legitimizing relations with nK, however that doesn't mean it wouldn't be better than our current situation
(6)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
One important factor is that in the past nK aggression has encouraged the U.S. to negotiate for a cessation of unwanted activities (see President Clinton's negotiations in 1994.) Lately, the international community has enforced stricter sanctions and does not seem willing to come to the table. If nK is no longer able to secure aid through provocation then they may rethink their strategy in dealing with the powers in East Asia and the U.S.
(0)
(0)
SGM Joseph Joyner
SPC (Join to see) - that would be like all the dummies that tried to do so with hitler.
(0)
(0)
CPT John Sheridan
2LT (Join to see) - I think we have to deal with the reality of the situation. We've had a good means of dealing with North Korea for a long time. Panmunjom. It's never been pretty, but it works. A simple perspective change is helpful. The Kim regime sees itself as a small nation threatened my the most powerful imperial force in the world. Why wouldn't they? We have military bases in almost every time zone, troops deployed in dozens of countries, more combat aircraft than most of the rest of the world combined, and so many carrier battle groups that we can't keep track of them all. We have more missiles in silos than they have combat aircraft and boomer boats hiding in oceans around the globe. No reason for them not to believe that boomer boats are sitting offshore in the Sea of Japan.
The last opportunity to keep NK from getting the bomb slipped away when we failed to follow through on the 1994 framework. Nuclear North Korea has been in existence for a long time. It is not new. Escalation of rhetoric only reenforces their rationale belief that the possibility of the irrational option is the only way they can protect themselves.
Sanctions? WTF is that. The US doesn't trade with North Korea. North Korea doesn't do trade transactions through US Banks. It's just lip service and saber rattling.
Nice job on the article. Well researched, well thought out, and well written. I thought butter bars aren't supposed to be that smart ;)
The last opportunity to keep NK from getting the bomb slipped away when we failed to follow through on the 1994 framework. Nuclear North Korea has been in existence for a long time. It is not new. Escalation of rhetoric only reenforces their rationale belief that the possibility of the irrational option is the only way they can protect themselves.
Sanctions? WTF is that. The US doesn't trade with North Korea. North Korea doesn't do trade transactions through US Banks. It's just lip service and saber rattling.
Nice job on the article. Well researched, well thought out, and well written. I thought butter bars aren't supposed to be that smart ;)
(2)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
Appreciate the note Sir! I couldn't agree more about your comments on the 94 framework. It would be so interesting to see what this all looks like if that had came through. Thanks again!
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
Kim Jong Un is a Malignant, Narcissistic, sociopath. We should have aborted him by killing his grandfather years ago. We have let these Miscreants get away with murder for years with little penalty. The artillery that threatens Seoul is emplaced and simply multiple targets. Maybe we should take out Pyongyang, The best thing we could do for NKPRK is eliminate Kim Jong Un. The second best would be to force him to abdicate. China could offer him asylum. To negotiate with this monster is not in our interest and to let this malignant idiot have nukes is not acceptable any more than letting those Jihadi Mullahs in Iran have nukes.
(5)
(0)
PO2 (Join to see)
The problem with all of this is the complexity of "what to do"? Most regional actors are more concerned with China's growing regional sphere and this is just another factor that plays into China's hand frankly. China offering Kim Jong asylum would not fit into their own regional playbook simply because they don't benefit from him then. China benefits from Kim Jong Un being the great leader of the DPRK. If the Chinese lose the DPRK, they lose the tight hold they have on an external nation. On the other hand, DPRK also holds some influence over China, as Kim Jong knows his effect on Chinese legitimacy, he created (In my opinion) a web of interdependence which transcends simple economics between the two governments. I think the approach that is being taken to pressure China is a good start. I have not yet considered whether further legitimizing the DPRK on the international stage will further open up the doors of diplomacy.
(1)
(0)
SSgt Bruce Probert
The biggest mistake would be to presume any benevolence in China's behavior, anyone who is thinking about any relationship with China should read Sun Tzu and take it to heart especially the more ruthless attitudes out lined.
(1)
(0)
PO2 (Join to see)
SSgt, I agree, China, while it has become a relatively rational actor by force, is traditionally rooted in instability, after all, the communist party of China IS an insurrectionist government who expelled an earlier legitimate government in China (Cheng Kai Chek AKA Taiwan)...
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
It sounded nice but reflect on this- 1. We only have a truce with NK, technically we are still at war with them. 2. Ever since the truce talks, NK has sent infiltrators, assassins, etc. thru the DMZ into South Korea (SK). NK has funded elements in SK to riot and demonstrate in SK politics. NK does not recognize SK as a true government and demands re-unification only on their (NK) terms. 3. Each succeeding NK leader appears more delusional, than his predecessor. NK civilian population is forced to starve, while the NK regime and its military eat. NK has one of the largest armies in the area and the capital of SK lays will within artillery range. NK has threatened to exterminate and force re-unification of the Koreas by force constantly since 1952. Also are you thinking that the regime leader alone has the button to start a nuclear exchange, what if and probably a member of his Rocket Forces, decides that the regime is too soft and pushes the button himself? Please remember that the world has misjudged nut leaders before- Who thought that Hitler would execute 7 million folks, or that Stalin would kill millions, or that the Pathet Laos forces would kill almost 1/3 of their own people. We could go on and on. Nuts are nuts how can you rationalize with people who aren't?
(4)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
These are excellent points! He certainly exhibits behavior, along with much of his staff, that is very concerning. However, what I believe that is different from this situation to the others you mention, is that NK today, is significantly more cut off from the world, international norms, and best practices than those previous leaders were. Therefore, I believe we must learn more in to his underlying assumptions, wants, and desires. If they turn out to be as determintle as the pessimistic estimates then we stand at the ready to close width and destroy the regime. But, with out a clearer picture, we must keep avenues like this open, to learn more, give room for descalation, and normalizing of behavior. But I certainly hear your concerns, and they are valid!
(0)
(0)
SGM Bill Frazer
2LT (Join to see) - You must remember that they are cut off, because anything from outside NK regime is viewed by that regime as a threat to it's existence. All totalitarian governments have believed that, and coupled with the imprisonment/execution of anyone the regime thinks is a threat to it, makes it unlikely that any outside force can change them and they have damn few survivors who could change it internally.
(0)
(0)
SGT John Meredith
We also have to remember the regime of North Korea has been increasingly threatening not only South Korea but Japan,Guam and the mainland of the USA.Shooting missiles over Japan should make everyone nervous.Threatening to drop a bomb on Guam should make everyone nervous.Saying that an unstable regime leader should have access to nuclear weapons and just sit back a wait to see what they are willing to do with them if they don't get their way is going to end up killing millions of people.You're not only risking our lives you're risking the lives of future generations.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I'm sure most if not all would not like to see us NOT go to war with NK, however in many ways the ball is figuratively speaking, in their court. If I recall past POTUS had tried economic aid to hopes of eventually working towards normalized relation. I believe Pres Clinton gave NK almost 1 billion US dollars in economic aid with their agreement to curtail their nuclear program and most of that aid went to their military and look where we are now. I am not pretending there are any easy answers to this but how do you work with a dictator who cares very little if his subjects live or starve to death??
(4)
(0)
SGM Joseph Joyner
Give him more and more money every year plus control of the entire country or make him room temperature.
(0)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
His extortion and croupt practices can only go so far outside his borders as the international community would like draw some unspoken line of accepted behavior from him. It would take a minut and it wouldn't be pretty, moreover, really bringing a regime like this into the fold is really a long shot. Border line insanity. However, with conservative military operations accounting for hundreds of thousands of causalities in a very short period of time, it's an avenue of approach that has to be accounted for
(0)
(0)
CSM Thomas McGarry
One other interesting point is that no one really wants to see a regime change especially South Korea or China because of the large number of destitute refugees that would have to be dealt with. If you want some confirmation regarding this just try talking to a small business owner in Germany, after the initial euphoria over the fall of East Germany, heavy taxes were needed to support social programs required to help integrate those that immigrated from the East as well as help to modernize the East. Certainly East Germany was probably in better condition than NK. Still one has to feel bad for those forced to live under the oppressive NK regime.
(1)
(0)
PO2 (Join to see)
2LT (Join to see) - I agree the stakes have become simply too high. I think the stakes have become too high because of the constant 'attempts' at creating a legitimate actor out of the DPRK in the past. the world has given this regime so much time, time and attention speaking in front of the U.N., diplomatic posts/privileges in many countries, economic interdependence (SOMEONE is doing business with them), I think the world has given the DPRK more than it deserves in the name of diplomacy.
I believe Most past U.S. administrations had hoped for a similar outcome to modern China. Most strategists in the early parts of the fall of the USSR and later the Communist curtain in China, had hoped would usher in a new era of diplomacy, cooperation, and inter-dependence. I just don't see where it has brought us in the realm of the DPRK.
where I personally think you are correct is a possible paradigm shift in how we as outsiders try to change our perspective towards nation building rather than destruction. At the same time its so difficult of course because of the heavy oppression that this regime has committed. It just depends on how involved foreign powers are willing to invest. Is it a matter of time and economic pressure? Maybe, the question is how long do WE maintain the status quo within the pretext of the DPRK's daily advancements in weaponize nuclear weapons. What can we tolerate in the name of diplomacy?
I believe Most past U.S. administrations had hoped for a similar outcome to modern China. Most strategists in the early parts of the fall of the USSR and later the Communist curtain in China, had hoped would usher in a new era of diplomacy, cooperation, and inter-dependence. I just don't see where it has brought us in the realm of the DPRK.
where I personally think you are correct is a possible paradigm shift in how we as outsiders try to change our perspective towards nation building rather than destruction. At the same time its so difficult of course because of the heavy oppression that this regime has committed. It just depends on how involved foreign powers are willing to invest. Is it a matter of time and economic pressure? Maybe, the question is how long do WE maintain the status quo within the pretext of the DPRK's daily advancements in weaponize nuclear weapons. What can we tolerate in the name of diplomacy?
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
While I acknowledge Victor Cha's credentials to speak on the issue and recognize the points you have made Lieutenant, that is one big elephant sized pill to swallow. I am not sure that it will quell his ego and it will remove any pressure on his leadership. Essentially he will be able to say internally that his methods were right and that the only language that works on the international stage is military threat. He is a child playing with adult toys; when he doesn't get what he wants he will fall back on what has worked in the past.
I believe he is rational, or at least his behavior can be rationalized. I believe the characterizations of him are accurate, just the prediction of stabilization is not an accurate one. You named all the risks...they are not risks, they are predictable eventualities. Kim is not "crazy", he just doesn't think like we do and not every world-view is OK. His needs to be crushed. The sad truth is, it should have been done at birth, or shortly thereafter.
This is just history repeated. The Japanese had a similar mindset at the turn of the last Century and decided to act on it at the start of WWII. They suffered brutally because of a false belief that a demonstration of military strength would vault them to prominence on the world stage. The reason the Japanese are so anxious about this situation, besides being so close to NK, is they have seen this before, up close and personal. Hopefully we haven't waited too long and it's not too late. If China doesn't act and act aggressively to intervene, via whatever means necessary; I am afraid this will end the only way it can outside of that...and no one will like it.
I believe he is rational, or at least his behavior can be rationalized. I believe the characterizations of him are accurate, just the prediction of stabilization is not an accurate one. You named all the risks...they are not risks, they are predictable eventualities. Kim is not "crazy", he just doesn't think like we do and not every world-view is OK. His needs to be crushed. The sad truth is, it should have been done at birth, or shortly thereafter.
This is just history repeated. The Japanese had a similar mindset at the turn of the last Century and decided to act on it at the start of WWII. They suffered brutally because of a false belief that a demonstration of military strength would vault them to prominence on the world stage. The reason the Japanese are so anxious about this situation, besides being so close to NK, is they have seen this before, up close and personal. Hopefully we haven't waited too long and it's not too late. If China doesn't act and act aggressively to intervene, via whatever means necessary; I am afraid this will end the only way it can outside of that...and no one will like it.
(3)
(0)
2LT (Join to see)
Your thoughts and concerns here are completely valid. I too feel we are rapidly approaching the too late phase or possibly even in it already. This was the intention behind the article, to be thought-provoking so that great American minds can explore all options before we commit to a course of action. Too much is at risk to only push towards regulatory actions, there must be balances and counterbalances that exhaust all options. Similiar to cold war era moments where the brink of destruction simply took a few great minds, making the right decision, at the very right moment, that pulled the world back from potentially some of the most disastrous situations to date. Thanks for the reply SGT!
(0)
(0)
SGM Joseph Joyner
2LT (Join to see) You can well assured that past U.S. admins and other world leaders have attemptedthe "thought provoking" approach to coax the hermits out of their shells and become part of the world stage but they have failed. The kims are extortionist and will always be. They have a population for the most that is illiterate, very little industry and they grow corn instead of rice. So there isn't to much for them as a nation to look forward to. The world would have to go in and educate and train the people and then rebuild their nation and all that would do is encourage other rogue nations to pursue the nuclear option so they can better their nations standing among world leaders.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Well thought out piece sir. one MAJOR piece of the puzzle too few of us Americans know about is just what (leading the UN units) did to the north in a very short time. Pilots were out of targets! We dropped more bombs on them we did in the entire Pacific theatre in WW2. Also many of the leaders of the government set up in South Korea had been working WITH the occupying Japanese AND Rhee's military had tried several times to invade the north BEFORE the 1952 attack.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google