South Koreans protest US Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile deployment

https://youtu.be/knkmDTsGTYA

• South Koreans protest US missile deployment
  People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

  South Koreans protest US missile deployment

• South Koreans protest US missile deployment. Thousands of South Koreans from Seongju county gathered in Seoul to protest against the government’s decision to deploy a U.S.-built THAAD missile defense unit in their home town. People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners...

"Stop the deployment! NO THAAD! NO THAAD! NO THAAD!" Protesters said.

"The way that the government made the decision completely on their own, without talking to residents first, is completely wrong. We are here to express the people's anger living in Seongju," Protest organiser Seok Hyeon-Cheol said.

"The missile deployment site is right in the middle of a city that has around 20,000 people. I can see it when I open the door of my house, the door of my house! And I can see it from my living room. That is why we strongly oppose the THAAD deployment. We oppose it for our children, and their children -- for the future of our county, for our health, and our right to live," Protester form Seongju County Kim An-Su said.

The protest follows a raucous standoff last week between residents and the country's prime minister, Hwang Kyo-ahn, who was pelted with eggs and plastic bottles and trapped inside a bus for several hours when he visited the county to explain his decision to deploy the missile system there.

South Korea's President Park Geun Hye has called for people to support the government's plans. She said the move was "inevitable" because of a growing threat from the DPRK. South Korea's defense ministry says the country's THAAD missile system will become operational before the end of 2017.

A senior official of Seongju county (2nd L, front) attends a rally to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016.

People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

People from Seongju county hold banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

HAAD poses real threat to security of China

https://youtu.be/rhlxr6BRv4E

A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor is launched during a successful intercept test, in this undated handout photo provided by the US Department of Defense, Missile Defense Agency. [Photo/Agencies]

What has historically been ours is ours. Even if others say it is not. That is why, annoying as it is, the Philippines-initiated South China Sea arbitration is actually not worth the limelight it is being given.

It is time for Beijing to get down to real, serious business. It has bigger issues to attend to, the most imperative of which is the anti-missile system being deployed on its doorsteps. Because, while it was coping with the worthless arbitral award from The Hague, Washington and Seoul finalized their plan for the deployment of the US' Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile system in the Republic of Korea.

The arbitral ruling, which is null and non-executable, will have little effect on China's interests and security in the South China Sea. But not THAAD, which is a clear, present, substantive threat to China's security interests.

The installment of the US system in the ROK should be of far greater concern to Beijing, and warrants a far stronger reaction. Or should we say retaliation? The ROK has legitimate security concerns, especially with Pyongyang constantly threatening nuclear bombing. With that in mind, Beijing has been adamant about de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and worked closely with Seoul and Washington in implementing and upgrading United Nations sanctions, and appealed tirelessly for restarting the Six-Party Talks.

But Seoul has brushed aside Beijing's security interests while pursuing those of its own.

Washington and Seoul did claim that THAAD would be focused "solely" on nuclear/missile threats from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and would not be directed toward any third-party nation. But THAAD far exceeds such a need. Besides the far more credible threat from Pyongyang's artillery, short-range and lower-altitude missiles is simply beyond the system's reach.

While it will deliver a limited security guarantee to the ROK, THAAD's X-band radar will substantially compromise the security interests of China and Russia, no matter how the United States shrouds its purpose.

Yet having made such a beggar-thy-neighbor choice, Seoul has in effect turned its back on China. By hosting THAAD, it has presented itself as Washington's cat's-paw in the latter's strategic containment of China. All rhetoric about friendship is meaningless lip service with the deployment of THAAD.

Beijing must review and readjust its Korean Peninsula strategies in accordance with the latest threat from the peninsula, including its ROK policies.

That does not mean forsaking its commitment to de-nuclearization, or UN resolutions. But Beijing must concentrate more on safeguarding its own interests, both immediate and long-term.

Source: China Daily Updated: 2016-07-15

China can counter THAAD deployment

https://youtu.be/QTVgIJT1DaY

The US and South Korea on Friday announced their decision to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system on the Korean Peninsula.

Apart from monitoring missiles from North Korea, THAAD could expand South Korea's surveillance range to China and Russia and pose serious threat to the two countries.

Though South Korea claims it can reduce the surveillance range, the country cannot make the call as the system will be controlled by US forces in South Korea, and such cheap promises mean nothing in international politics.

We recommend China to take the following countermeasures.

China should cut off economic ties with companies involved with the system and ban their products from entering the Chinese market.

It could also implement sanctions on politicians who advocated the deployment, ban their entry into China as well as their family business. In addition, the Chinese military could come up with a solution that minimizes the threat posed by the system, such as technical disturbances and targeting missiles toward the THAAD system.

Meanwhile, China should also re-evaluate the long-term impact in Northeast Asia of the sanctions on North Korea, concerning the link between the sanctions and the imbalance after the THAAD system is deployed.

China can also consider the possibility of joint actions with Russia with countermeasures.

The deployment of THAAD will surely have a long-term and significant influence. South Korea will be further tied by its alliance with the US and lose more independence in national strategy.

North Korea's nuclear issue has further complicated the situation on the Korean Peninsula, but the country's possession of nuclear weapons also results from outside factors.

The biggest problem of the peninsula's messy situation lies in US' Cold-War strategy in Northeast Asia, and its mind-set of balancing China in the region. Neither Pyongyang nor Seoul could make their own decisions independently, as the region's stability and development are highly related to China and the US.

The whole picture of the situation on the Korean Peninsula could not been seen merely from the view of Pyongyang and Seoul. China's relationship with North Korea has already been affected, and ties with South Korea are unlikely to remain untouched.

China is experiencing the pains of growing up. We have to accept the status quo of "being caught in the middle."

China should neither be too harsh on itself, nor be self-indulgent. Being true to itself, China will fear no challenges

Source: Global Times Published: 2016-7-9

North Korea: launched a long-range rocket, cannot repeat China’s nuclear weapons path

North Korea launched a long-range rocket on Sunday morning. Pyongyang authorities said they had successfully launched the Kwangmyongsong-4 earth observation satellite, while the US, South Korea and Japan considered the launch to be a long-range missile test.

Pyongyang has made progress in long-range rocket and missile technology, but it is far from mastering mature long-range missile system and building a strategic deterrence. North Korea hopes it can effectively threaten the US homeland, but it views the matter too simply. Washington regards Pyongyang’s rocket launch as “severe provocation.” The majority of the international community doesn’t believe that in the foreseeable future, Pyongyang can miniaturize warheads and have the long-range nuclear strike ability to coerce Asia-Pacific countries and the US.

Long-range missile technology is similar to rocket technology, but there are differences. The deterrence of long-range missiles using liquid propellant is limited due to their restrained mobility and slow response times. According to analysis from the US and South Korean side, Pyongyang's liquid propellant is backward and unreliable. North Korea has no successful record in long-range missile launch. As long as the Kwangmyongsong-4 enters the target orbit, it can be considered successful. But after all, the launch of a rocket and a missile is different.

Long-range missiles need a huge supportive system, for instance, the ability to measure flight attitude, orbit accuracy and landing location, but Pyongyang doesn’t have any of this. Washington and Seoul believe that North Korea has a rather limited missile testing ability. With the missile and rocket launched by the North landing in the ocean with little possibility of it being retrieved, it is extremely difficult for Pyongyang to collect the test data. Its industry is also not able to manufacture all the materials necessary for developing long-range missile and nuclear bomb.

Some believe Pyongyang's research into nuclear weapons and long-range missiles is similar to China's atomic and hydrogen bomb development in the 1960s. Since China succeeded, so will North Korea.

This is a serious misreading. China faced a different environment than North Korea today in developing nuclear weapons. It was before the Non-Proliferation Treaty was adopted in 1968. Plus, China has a vast territory, and has nuclear test sites in the desert, while North Korea’s limited space makes this impossible.

China’s strategic deterrent power of nuclear bomb and missile, limited at the beginning, were enhanced as science and technology improved in the country. It has become even more credible with the mobility of land-based ICBMs and the upgrading of sea-based missile launching system.

Pyongyang is at the stage of developing nuclear equipment and long-range rockets, which however has developed far from the reality of the country's technology and economic development. So far, it is hard to tell whether it brings more strategic security or strategic harm to Pyongyang.

How far can Pyongyang’s nuclear bomb and missile develop? It is not up to the political determination of Pyongyang, since it involves complicated geopolitical forces which North Korea can hardly harness. Pyongyang must think carefully how to extricate itself from the increasingly grave situation. - Global Times

Related:

Discussion of THAAD deployment is shortsighted move of Seoul and Washington

However, China’s determination to safeguard its national security should be clearly shown, so that the other stakeholders will have to think carefully before they make any decision that might challenge China’s position.

Beijing won’t allow war on Peninsula

China will “by no means allow war on the Korean Peninsula” a foreign ministry spokesperson said Wednesday, stressing Beijing was deeply concerned over Pyongyang’s announced plan to launch a satellite later this month, only weeks after it tested a nuclear bomb in defiance of international sanction

U.S. Ambassador Mark Lippert attacked by South Korean

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — The U.S. ambassador to South Korea struggled with pain as he recovered Friday from a knife attack, while police searched the offices of the anti-U.S. activist who they say slashed the envoy while screaming demands for Korean reunification.

The attack Thursday on Mark Lippert, which prompted rival North Korea to gloat about "knife slashes of justice," left deep gashes and damaged tendons and nerves. It also raised questions about security in a city normally seen as ultra-safe, despite regular threats of war from Pyongyang.

While an extreme example, the attack is the latest act of political violence in a deeply divided country where some protesters portray their causes as matters of life and death.

Lippert, 42, was recovering well but still complaining of pain in the wound on his left wrist and a finger where doctors repaired nerve damage, Severance Hospital official Yoon Do-Heum said in televised briefing. Doctors will remove the 80 stiches on Lippert's face on Monday or Tuesday and expect him to be out of the hospital by Tuesday or Wednesday. Hospital officials say he may experience sensory problems in his left hand for several months.

Police, meanwhile, searched the offices of the suspect, Kim Ki-jong, 55, for documents and computer files as they investigated how the attack was planned and whether others were involved. Police plan to soon request a warrant for Kim's formal arrest, and potential charges include attempted murder, assaulting a foreign envoy, obstruction and violating a controversial South Korean law that bars praise or assistance of North Korea, Jongno district police chief Yun Myung-sung told reporters.

Police are investigating Kim's past travels to North Korea — seven times between 1999 and 2007 — during a previous era of inter-Korean cooperation, when Seoul was ruled by a liberal government. Kim attempted to build a memorial altar for former North Korean leader Kim Jong Il after his death in December 2011, police said.

Kim, who has a long history of anti-U.S. protests, said he acted alone in the attack on Lippert. He told police it was meant as a protest of annual U.S.-South Korean military drills that started Monday — exercises that the North has long maintained are preparations for an invasion. Kim said the drills, which Seoul and Washington say are purely defensive, ruined efforts for reconciliation between the Koreas, according to police officials.

While most South Koreans look at the U.S. presence favorably, America infuriates some leftists because of its role in Korea's turbulent modern history.

Washington, which backed the South during the 1950-53 Korean War against the communist North, still stations 28,500 troops here, and anti-U.S. activists see the annual military drills with Seoul as a major obstacle to their goal of a unified Korea.

"South and North Korea should be reunified," Kim shouted as he slashed Lippert with a 25-centimeter (10-inch) knife, police and witnesses said.

Kim is well-known among police and activists as one of a hard-core group of protesters willing to use violence to highlight their causes.

Police didn't consider the possibility that Kim, who has ties to the Korean Council for Reconciliation and Cooperation, which hosted the breakfast meeting where Lippert was attacked, would show up for the event, according to a Seoul police official who didn't want to be named, citing office rules.

U.S. ambassadors have security details, but their size largely depends on the threat level of the post. Seoul is not considered to be a particularly high threat post despite its proximity to the North Korean border. It's not clear how many guards Lippert had, but they would have been fewer than the ambassadors in most of the Mideast.

Seoul's Foreign Ministry said it was the first time a foreign ambassador stationed in modern South Korea had been injured in a violent attack.

However, the Japanese ambassador narrowly escaped injury in 2010 when Kim threw a piece of concrete at him, according to police. Kim, who was protesting Japan's claim to small disputed islands that are occupied by South Korea, hit the ambassador's secretary instead, media reports said, and was sentenced to a three-year suspended prison term over the attack.

The website of the Woorimadang activist group that Kim heads describes the group's long history of anti-U.S. protests. Photos show him and other activists rallying last week in front of the U.S. Embassy in Seoul to protest the U.S.-South Korean military drills, which are to run until the end of April.

North Korea's state-controlled media crowed Thursday that Kim's "knife slashes of justice" were "a deserved punishment on war maniac U.S." and reflected the South Korean people's protests against the U.S. for driving the Korean Peninsula to the brink of war because of the joint military drills.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, in Saudi Arabia for meetings with regional leaders, said the U.S. "will never be intimidated or deterred by threats or by anybody who harms any American diplomats."

Activists in Seoul, meanwhile, expressed worries that the attack on Lippert would harm the public image of peaceful protesters, or prompt the conservative government to suppress their activities.

Small to medium-sized demonstrations regularly occur across Seoul, and most are peaceful.

But scuffles with police do break out occasionally, and the burning of effigies of North Korean and Japanese leaders is also common. Some demonstrators have also severed their own fingers, thrown bodily fluids at embassies and tried to self-immolate.


Lippert became ambassador last October and has been a regular presence on social media and in speeches and presentations during his time in Seoul. He's regularly seen walking his Basset Hound, Grigsby, near his residence, not far from where the attack happened. His wife gave birth here and the couple gave their son a Korean middle name.

-  Associated Press writers Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul and Matthew Lee in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, contributed to this report.

Related posts:

The life force to Koreans: hiking the fabulous Koreas' mountains

More spell-binding Korean landscapes are found beyond Seoul in the Seoraksan mountain range. Mountain culture and customs are hot-wired ...

"Super China" Boom in South Korea

Sony comedy film: The Interview looms cyber war as US-N.Korea tension spikes

The Interview is a 2014 American political comedy film directed by Seth Rogen and Evan 
Goldberg in their second directorial work, following This Is the End. The screenplay by Dan Sterling is from a story by Rogen, Goldberg and Sterling. The film stars Rogen and James Franco as journalists instructed to assassinate North Korean leader Kim Jong-un (played by Randall Park) after booking an interview with him. It received mixed reviews from critics.

In June 2014, the North Korean government threatened "merciless" action against the United States if the film's distributor, Columbia Pictures, went ahead with the release. Columbia delayed the release from October 10 to December 25, and reportedly edited the film to make it more acceptable to North Korea. In November, the computer systems of parent company Sony Pictures Entertainment were hacked by the "Guardians of Peace", a group the FBI believes has ties to North Korea. After leaking several other then-upcoming Sony films and other sensitive internal information, the group demanded that Sony pull The Interview, which it referred to as "the movie of terrorism". On December 16, 2014, the Guardians of Peace threatened terrorist attacks against cinemas that played The Interview.

On December 17, after a number of major North American cinema chains canceled screenings in the interest of safety, Sony canceled the theatrical release of The Interview, drawing criticism from the media, Hollywood figures and U.S. President Barack Obama. After initially stating that it had no plans to release the film, Sony made The Interview available for online rental on December 24, and in a limited release at selected cinemas on December 25. - Wikipedia



 Cyber war looms as US-NK tension spikes

North Korea's Internet and 3G networks were back to normal by midday Tuesday after hours of a strange shutdown. This blackout led to speculation that North Korea had been under cyber-attack from the US. It remains unknown whether the purported US-North Korea conflict will flare up into full-blown cyber war.

Sony Pictures, which has caught global attention for filming The Interview, a movie featuring the fictional assassination of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, was attacked by a group of hackers recently. The FBI asserted that these hackers were sponsored by North Korea, and US President Barack Obama declared the US would make a "proportional response." Thus, there are high suspicions that Washington is behind the attack.

Neither Washington nor Pyongyang has commented officially on the incident. There are more threats to cyber security than ever before, and hacking groups not backed by governments have become mainstream. Countries like the US have established cyber armies, but there has been no declaration of a cyber war so far. Any party suspected of launching cyber invasions using its regular cyber army always denies its involvement.

We hope that Washington and Pyongyang will not engage in war in cyberspace. Once they cross the Rubicon, there is no way back.

The current suspected tit-for-tat situation between North Korea and the US raises the risks of a cyber war. Pyongyang has shown its abomination toward Sony Pictures. However, having denied any connections with the attacks, it hailed these actions as justified.

Washington has revealed its inclination to retaliate against Pyongyang, which is why many assume the Internet blackout in North Korea was its doing. Washington's response could be an overreaction, as it is implying that cyber attacks can be seen as a kind of legitimate state action, which will set a precedent for cyber wars.

Antagonism between North Korea and the US will remain a hot topic for quite a while in the international community. If more cyber attacks are launched in the near future, many people will believe that a cyber war between them has already broken out. It is possible that Washington is trying to teach Pyongyang a lesson and show its strength through cyber attacks. But it must keep in mind that its advanced networks also have loopholes, which might be taken advantage of by a single hacker and a computer.

The US must not set an example by engaging in cyber warfare. It might prevail in the short term, but the already vulnerable Internet order will be mired in countless trouble.

This North Korea-US cyber conflict has also reminded China that it must reinforce its cyber security and act as a constructive role to guard peace across the Internet. As for the speculation that it was China that cut off North Korea's Internet connections, these are spurious and do not merit our attention.- Global Times

Related posts:

2015 Hack of a year ahead!

2014 has seen a tsunami of epic hacks and identity thefts, including the recent massive cyber attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment. Sec... 

The game-changing trends: social media, cloud, big data in information technology

Information technology players believe Malaysia is beginning to tap into the potential of the Internet of things. KUALA LUMPUR: Social m...

China sends peace message

The Boao Forum reiterates the need for regional stability for Asia to continue to enjoy economic prospects.



THE Boao Forum for Asia, which concluded in the small town of Boao on southern China’s Hainan island, has reached an important consensus from Asia.

Major Asian leaders want every country in the continent to ensure regional stability so that Asia will continue to enjoy its fast-paced economic prosperity.

Speaking at the opening of the forum, which was running for its 12th year, Chinese President Xi Jinping was the first to make clear his stand – China will not wage a war unless its enemy severely threatened its sovereignty.

He said that China would continue to resolve any differences and disputes it has with its Asian counterparts amicably while expanding cooperation in the continent.

“On the basis of maintaining the sovereignty and safety of our territories, we will work hard to maintain good relations with our neighbours as well as overall peace and stability in our region,” he said.

Xi said China is a peace-loving nation whose people have deep and painful memories of the war and revolt era.

He said China and its Asian neighbours relied on each other as China could not develop in isolation from the rest of Asia and the world, while the world could not enjoy prosperity and stability without China.

“Over the past decade, trade among Asian nations jumped from US$800bil (RM2.4 trillion) to US$3 trillion (RM9 trillion). Trade between Asian nations and other countries increased from US$1.5 trillion (RM4.6 trillion) to US$4.8 trillion (RM14.6 trillion).

“That means trade in Asia is open. Regional and global cooperation goes hand in hand and does not go against each other. Everyone benefits from such cooperation.”

Myanmarese President U Thein Sein said that his government would place great emphasis on collaboration, transparency, accountability and inclusiveness in its political, economic and social reform processes.

He said in spite of the increasing global challenges, uncertainties and high risks, all Asian nations should be able to remain successful in the continent by upholding regional political, social and economic stability continuously.

Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev said in order to boost the efficiency of cooperation, all Asian nations need to work together, coordinate with each other more and have a common action agenda.

He said they should explore their decision-making mechanism, accommodate the position of all countries and be more open to the outside world because no country could stay immune from the global impact.

Sultan of Brunei Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah said Asean has a role to play in promoting peace and collaboration.

Brunei’s Asean Chairmanship theme of “Our People, Our Future Together” this year reflects the vision of the Asean founders who believed open conflict would endanger the development prospect of its members.

Thus, they would be committed to refrain from the use of force.

“As the world becomes more and more connected, Asia’s success will contribute to a greater good in the global arena. We all share a collective responsibility in shaping a successful future.

“We are about to face competing political and economic interests and this will pose a threat to our resolve for partnership and harmony,” he said.

Indian Corporate Affairs Minister Sachin Pilot said Asia was one of the fastest growing continents in recent years but rapid growth would not occur if each country does its own thing in isolation.

“Good economics and robust growth are only attainable when there is understanding with each other.

“I am delighted to hear what the Chinese President was saying about how we need to have more peace and prosperity for us to grow.

“The global economic recovery can take 10 or 20 years, depending on how focused we are in Asia,” he said.

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard pointed out that what North Korea and South Korea were doing on the Korean Peninsula by provoking each other was the last thing Asia wanted to see.

“There, any aggression is a threat to the interest of every country in the region.

“For this reason, I do welcome the growing cooperation of all regional governments to prevent conflict on the Korean peninsula and to counter North Korean aggression.

“That cooperation is also a sign of what would be needed in future as we face other security challenges.

“Asia must be a region of sustainable security in which habits of cooperation are the norm,” she said.

Besides the latest tension on the Korean peninsula, Asia faces other security threats, especially the Kashmir conflict, Gaza Strip tension and counter-claims of islands and sea borders by China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines and Indo-China.

For the sake of regional stability and integration, to start off with, the forum’s vice-chairman Zeng Peiyan proposed for more infrastructures to be built to connect Asian nations together.

“There are two main things we need to work on.

“Firstly, we should establish exchanges and cooperation between each Asian economy on planning and building infrastructures such as electricity, railway, road and telecommunication.

“Secondly, we need to find a solution to the huge financing gaps in infrastructure development in Asia.

“Between 2010 and 2020, Asia will need some US$8 trillion (RM24 trillion) or more to fund infrastructure projects to sustain the current levels of economic growth.

“It will be good that each nation sets up an investment fund which specialises in providing financing services for the construction of such infrastructures,” said Zeng.

Made in China
By CHOW HOW BAN

Related posts:

North Korea likely launch nuclear missiles: China warns troublemakers at her doorsteps!

Boao Forum for Asia opens in China 

China, Brunei to foster ties 

Why North Korea conducts nuclear test?

The fallout from North Korea’s nuclear test will reach beyond its neighbours to the south. AAP/Yonhap



Overnight North Korea conducted its third nuclear weapons test. The test came in the wake of a successful long-range rocket launch in December and resulting condemnation from the United Nations Security Council via UNSC Resolution 2087.

This latest development raises two obvious questions: Why did North Korea conduct the test, and how might the international community react?

Pyongyang’s motives

The seismic signature of this blast registered 4.9 on the Richter scale, larger than a reading of 4.52 from a similar explosion in 2009.

There are several ways of interpreting the larger yield of the most recent blast.

It could have been a bigger bomb, ergo the larger explosion. This seems unlikely given Pyongyang’s need for a miniaturised weapon to demonstrate its deterrent capability.

It may have been North Korea’s first test of a uranium-based weapon using fissile material from Pyongyang’s advanced High Enriched Uranium (HEU) program. Uranium-based nuclear devices are more technologically sophisticated than plutonium bombs, but the uranium feedstock does not have to pass through the numerous processes of the nuclear fuel cycle to be weaponised. HEU installations are more efficient in producing fissile material and harder to detect because they bypass the reactor burn process, hence their appeal.

Or the test may have been of a smaller device packing a stronger punch. Miniaturisation is the next technological milestone for the North’s nuclear scientists in order to produce a nuclear warhead that is deliverable atop a missile. To confirm itself as a nuclear weapons power, North Korea must demonstrate it has developed a deployable nuclear device. A nuclear bomb has no deterrence value unless it can be reliably and accurately delivered to an enemy target.

International reaction

After every North Korean provocation, journalists and colleagues usually ask me how the international community is likely to react.

The international reaction is the most predictable variable in the equation. The answer is: more sanctions.

Why sanctions? Military force is essentially off the table. A casual glance at a map of the Korean peninsula will show that Seoul is essentially indefensible against North Korean rockets and artillery due to its close proximity to the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).

The estimated cost of war and reunification should an American military action escalate to full-scale war is estimated in the trillions of dollars and millions of lives, borne largely by South Korea. For any rational military strategist, the risks of an armed response to North Korea’s pin-prick provocations are prohibitive.

China fears the potential for economic and social dislocation in its northeastern provinces cause by large refugee flows from North Korea in the event of war or state collapse.

The pre-existing sanctions regime imposed by previous Security Council resolutions and domestic legal instruments includes measures such as restrictions on North Korean exports, asset freezes applied to specific North Korean citizens and enterprises, and controls on North Korean imports of dual-use technologies. The sanctions regime is enforced via the Proliferation Security Initiative, a global naval interdiction effort aimed at disrupting WMD trafficking.

Despite its stern rhetoric, the expansion of sanctions in UNSC 2087 was relatively mild. It placed travel bans and asset freezes on four officials and six state-owned enterprises from the North Korean space program and Pyongyang’s amorphous network of foreign exchange banks and dummy companies. This network exists to subvert international sanctions and fund North Korea’s nuclear and missile proliferation activities.

The sanctions regime has been largely ineffective in controlling North Korea’s nuclear and missile proliferation activities. There is a limit to the number of individuals and state-owned entities in North Korea that can be targeted for sanctions. One would therefore expect a new round of sanctions to include a crackdown on foreign entities thought to be assisting North Korean sanction-busting.

A stronger sanctions regime also requires cooperation from Beijing, as China is the country with the greatest economic leverage over the DPRK. Chinese foreign policy elites have been engaged in intense debate over the appropriate approach to North Korea for some time, however it is likely that the official policy of restrained disapproval will continue to carry the day.

Determined proliferation

The inability to prevent North Korea testing a nuclear device is evidence of its weak leverage over Pyongyang. Indeed it is the international community’s weak hand that creates the strategic space for relatively scot-free North Korean provocations.

North Korea is a determined nuclear weapons and ballistic missile proliferator, driven by a number of economic, strategic, political and bureaucratic motivations all linked to the regime’s over-arching goal of survival.

The successful test sends a powerful strategic signal that North Korea is serious about expanding its nuclear arsenal.

A South Korean official said that North Korea had notified the US and China of its nuclear test plan a day earlier.

Source: The Conversation - An independent analysis and commentary from academics and researchers.
.
Related 

World Insight 02/17/2013 Security concerns; civil strife; securing supply; sea of humanity CCTV News - CNTV English


Related post:
North Korea confirms successful satellite launch