War Drums: North Korea edition

[Hereward]

1 hour ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Having said that China has vested interests in keeping the situation in NKorea the same as it is. NK is a huge buffer between them and SKorea and the collapse of the country would be very damaging to China. They only put sanctions on NK after pressure from the UN, they probably are being influenced by Trumps actions actually, otherwise their preference is to do nothing.

 

That's begging the question. China has interests in North Korea not unifying with a US allied South Korea. It doesn't necessarily have a vested interest in things being as they are, and therefore their preference is not necessarily to do nothing. Their current actions are also therefore not necessarily a response to Trump.

North Korea is expensive for them in terms of cash, reputation and risk. I think they would be happier with someone more stable and amenable. If they judge that North Korea is not viable without a Kim in charge, and there isn't a suitable Kim available, a unified neutral Korea would be much preferable to the current disaster. 

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Or how about it is a combination of all of the above?

OK, how about that?

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Clearly the US is applying more pressure on China now than under Obama as far as North Korea is concerned. It is said outright, in Tillerson's very statement today, as reported on CNN, for reference.

Rex Tillerson telling people he's doing a better job than his predecessor is not very persuasive evidence. Sorry. If this is 'clearly' the case, you ought to be able to produce something better than that.

[Lordsteve666]

I think one of the biggest concerns about NK putting a nuke on a missile is that their missile program is still relatively untested and they've certainly not managed anything over a few hundred miles in range. Accuracy has to be a big concern.
So launching something at the US count land literally anywhere in it's target arc, imagine the shit-storm if it lands in Russia, or China.

I just don't have faith in their tech not to land the dammed thing in the wrong place and create all hell. Heck they'd probably land it in their own backyard by accident, it's not like they have access to the tech and resources other countries have.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

There are numerous articles talking about Kim's level of rational thought, many experts believe he behaves in a perfectly rational manner, which is one of the reasons I'm sceptical there will be any real military development.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-39269783

 

Quote

"North Korea needs the capability to strike the US with nuclear weapons in order to pressure both adversaries into signing peace treaties. This is the only grand bargain it has ever wanted," said Prof Myers.

 

Quote

"The lesson North Koreans learned from the invasion of Iraq was that if Saddam Hussein really possessed those weapons of mass destruction, he might have survived."

So I think its in his interests to keep the weapons but never use them. Nuclear weapons, anyone who's listened to the Dan Carlin podcasts are best when they are held but never used. 

[TheKitttenGuard]

China is no way is going to allow a unified Korea that is a U.S ally. They will do things economically if needed. Any thoughts of China doing anything in a military sense is pure fantasy.

[Kalbear]

As to the Trump and China interpretation: Trump has so far backed down on EVERY SINGLE PLEDGE he's made about China. The only thing that has been gained is, as far as I can tell, China giving the Trump family trademarks. 

Trump has not only backed down, he's gone so far as to parrot specific Chinese talking points - things like "South Korea was once part of China" and Tillerson's use of the specific Chinese branding for their Asia strategy. Again, without gaining a single thing. The Chinese trade talks have been shuttered, though we're now going against Canada and South Korea for trade - both things that benefit China directly. 

China pivoting to be more stern against North Korea can be a whole lot of things. If you like, you can give the credit to Trump for that, and that's fine, though there's a reasonable interpretation that the reason they did so is because they do not trust the US to be reasonable or good in their approach, and are now stepping in. That's a win, in the same way my repeated breaking of the dishes forces my wife to do the dishes to avoid more breakage, but it's not exactly a great win for competence or influence. It means China, not the US, is going to lead there, and the end result may be a North and a South Korea that are far more aligned with China than they are with the US. 

[Werthead]

 

Quote

 

China is no way is going to allow a unified Korea that is a U.S ally. They will do things economically if needed. Any thoughts of China doing anything in a military sense is pure fantasy.

 

They would prefer a unified Korea not to be a US ally on their doorstep. On the other hand, Korean reunification would bankrupt South Korea and likely cost its allies trillions, to their economic detriment. The difference between North and South Korea in economic output and quality of life is many orders of magnitude greater than between East and West Germany, and almost thirty years later that gap is still problematic and was vastly expensive to bridge.

China has a sliding scale of preferences and possible outcomes. A reunified pro-US Korea is not particularly desirable but is preferable to full-scale nuclear war on its doorstep.

[Kalbear]

Just now, Werthead said:

China has a sliding scale of preferences and possible outcomes. A reunified pro-US Korea is not particularly desirable but is preferable to full-scale nuclear war on its doorstep.

Especially if the resulting unified Korea is being pushed away from being a US ally (as Trump has done in the last week) and is being pushed towards being a Chinese ally (China is already South Korea's #1 trading partner). China opening arms to SK and making some pushes towards  SK going away from the US would be a massive win for them, one that they likely couldn't even  imagine as a possibility last year, but now looks like a real opening.

[TheKitttenGuard]

2 hours ago, Werthead said:

 

 

China has a sliding scale of preferences and possible outcomes. A reunified pro-US Korea is not particularly desirable but is preferable to full-scale nuclear war on its doorstep.

China will not be looking to use military force that will benefit someone else (unlike the U.S did for Iran with Iraq).

I am a little surprise no one think there can be quite a nasty insurgency with the occupation. I do not think China wants to have their Vietnam.

The only way Korea becomes a full nuclear war will be the U.S using its nuclear forces. North Korea nuclear arsenal is not that extensive.  

Not looking to minimize their danger but there lots of could be with North Korea than what they actually are.

[TerraPrime]

China is balancing the cost and benefits of what it takes to keep crazies like Jong-Un in NK under control versus having a US military presence in the Korean peninsula. I believe that China would push for re-unification of the two Koreas much more readily if they knew it would mean kicking out of US military from the region.

 

Meanwhile, the US has no strong interests to push for reunification.

 

So here we are.

[Werthead]

Reunification would allow the US to pull its troops out, as keeping them there is quite expensive.

Of course, reunification would mean a war which would cost the USA the same amount as maintaining troops in South Korea for another generation, so swings and roundabouts. Probably preferable to pick the option that doesn't kill millions of people (although whether that's trying to maintain the status quo or stopping Kim Jong-un getting nukes is the problem).

Also, at this point China is the most rational actor in the region.

[TerraPrime]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Reunification would allow the US to pull its troops out, as keeping them there is quite expensive.

 

Have you seen our military budget? Cost is not an obstacle. The benefit of having 3 different bases in the region to curb  China is not to be underestimated.

[Werthead]

The UN Security Council voted last night to block about one-third of North Korea's exports, which will have massive ramifications for its economy. It's surprising, but welcome, that China and Russia got on board with this quite enthusiastically. Maybe the suggestion that Trump has been actively exploring military options (with resulting mass casualties and a refugee crisis on China's doorstep) has alarmed them into ramping up diplomatic and economic pressure.

The question is if this will have any impact on the situation, and if it may make North Korea feel pressed into the corner and more likely to lash out. South Korea has been making constructive diplomatic noises, so hopefully we may see North Korea pick up the offer of talks and negotiations.

[James Arryn]

On 2017-04-24 at 6:27 PM, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What bothers me is the tone I hear of "lets get this over with" even from people who dislike and distrust Trump.

Yes, those people making those noises are an integral part of the war chorus.

[James Arryn]

On 2017-04-24 at 6:38 PM, The Mance said:

 

 

Still, I get the urgency.  Nobody wants a NK with balistic nuclear capabilities.

You know the U.S. has freaked out every time another state acquired nukes, right? Even allies. And yet, to date, the only state crazy enough to use them is the state that keeps freaking out. It's kinda like the Cuba thing...missiles being that close to the US was an existential threat, worth potentially having Armageddon over...and yet our side had had missiles just as close/closer to the USSR forever without Russia wanting WWIII over it. 

I think because of the natural borders that have kept us safe for so long, there's a tendency to overreact when something makes those safety zones less secure. 

 

[norwaywolf123]

On 25.4.2017 at 1:01 PM, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Does anyone genuinely believe the US or anyone else will be invading North Korea any time soon? 

No, i think the Trump administration is trying to project a strongman image and to make PRC give into some American demands. Like stop the south china sea troubles or temper down the situation there. Besides i dont think it is USAs decision to go to war with North Korea, it should be the choice of the South Koreans. Best thing is if the current North Korean regime is replaced by a pro unification and pro south regime. Maybe a revolution or military coup. No matter what the crimes that have been commited in North Korea are likely to remain unpunished and be a open wound in the Korean nation/tribe/people.

On 25.4.2017 at 1:33 PM, Lordsteve666 said:

I think the biggest issue here is that any refugee crisis will be heading straight for China, because they can't go south on account of the massive DMZ/minefield blocking the path.
That's why China is getting worried, they know what is coming if this goes south in a hurry, and they haven't got a clue (or the wishes) to have to look after millions of refugees flooding their border.

China also wants to keep North Korea as a buffer against the American allies South Korea and Japan.

On 25.4.2017 at 8:00 PM, Kalbear said:

Yes, and yes, and that's a risk to South Koreans that Lindsey Graham is willing to take. 

It is not like Linday Graham has any children of his own to be concerned with. Maybe it is just a game to him?

On 25.4.2017 at 8:00 PM, Kalbear said:

And yes, there is a lot of press about going to war with NK, and it is precisely the kind of leadup that we've seen to other wars. I saw an article about this recently but can't find it right now - but basically the press is acting as if war is coming up, and is doing the kind of prep that they have previously.

Conditioning people to accept a new reality?

On 26.4.2017 at 10:36 AM, Gorn said:

Also, the danger of artillery shelling of Seoul is greatly overrated. I lived through the Siege of Sarajevo, where 3600 artillery pieces and 110 tanks bombed the city at point-blank range for almost four years. Damage that several hundred obsolete North Korean artillery pieces could do during the couple of days before they are silenced by airstrikes (at 80 km range) is comparatively negligible. It is also negligible when compared to a WMD strike of any kind.

Did the attackers intend to cause civilian casualties?

 

[norwaywolf123]

On 26.4.2017 at 7:31 PM, TerraPrime said:

Did you know that in North Korea, you can be captured to "re-education camp" for 5 to 8 years of hard labor in the coal mines for "offenses" like using a newspaper with the Great Leader's picture on it to wrap things? Similarly, you can be jailed for criticizing the way the Great Leader's wife dresses. 

Also, it's not just you. It's 3 generations - your parents, you, and your children, are all guilty. 

There are no trials. 

Most people believe that people in South Korea are constantly fighting starvation in ways that are worse than what they have. They believe that South Koreans are work slaves in factories serving the U.S. interests. 

That's what generational totalitarian dictatorship looks like. 

Your question, FNR, is similar to asking victims of domestic abuse: "Why did you let him hit you over and over? Surely, at some point, you were angry? I can't figure out why you didn't leave him, lol." 

 

Sounds similar absulut monarchy and the "divine" right to rule that the nobles of ASOIAF embody. Like the mad king and his daughter.

[norwaywolf123]

If South Korea was a allied with China instead of USA, would unification be more likely or possible?

[Maithanet]

On 8/6/2017 at 6:49 AM, Werthead said:

The question is if this will have any impact on the situation, and if it may make North Korea feel pressed into the corner and more likely to lash out. South Korea has been making constructive diplomatic noises, so hopefully we may see North Korea pick up the offer of talks and negotiations.

Well, before we answer that question, the big question is whether China and Russia actually abide by the sanctions.  If they do, it will put real economic pressure on NK, but they've circumvented (less broad) sanctions in the past, and there's a good chance they'll do it again.  And of course, the US has very little leverage to force China and Russia to abide by these agreements if they don't want to. 

[norwaywolf123]

15 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Well, before we answer that question, the big question is whether China and Russia actually abide by the sanctions.  If they do, it will put real economic pressure on NK, but they've circumvented (less broad) sanctions in the past, and there's a good chance they'll do it again.  And of course, the US has very little leverage to force China and Russia to abide by these agreements if they don't want to. 

Would not China and Russia be fools to support sanctions on north korea?