Coping with more threats

By Tong Kim

An all-out campaign of belligerent rhetoric by North Korea included threats “to turn Seoul and Washington into a sea of fire” by a preemptive nuclear strike. This particular threat does not seem to be taken seriously by Washington, which believes North Korea does not yet have the capability to attack the United States. Many believe the North would not use its nuclear weapons on the South because it would be suicidal for the North.

However, Pyongyang may consider the option of using nuclear weapons, if, and probably only if, it determines its survival is directly threatened toward the point of collapse. North Koreans should also know they would not be able to survive a major war against the combined U.S.-ROK forces. Seoul and Washington are concerned about a possible attack on the South or another provocative missile and/or nuclear test.

Although no signs of another missile or nuclear test have been detected, North Korea is ratcheting up its war preparations on both coasts bordering the South, mobilizing wartime resources and conducting expanded war exercises with live fire and increased aircraft sorties. Kim Jong-un has been inspecting frontline troops, telling them to “destroy the aggressors” when he orders them to do so.

The most vulnerable targets could be any of the five islands under South Korean control close to the Northern Limit Line in the West Sea, where the North sank the South Korean naval vessel, Cheonan. Since the North’s artillery shelling of Yeonpyeong island in November 2011, the South Korean military has reinforced its defense posture by adding more guns and rockets to deter attacks on these islands. Part of the South’s deterrent strategy is to retaliate upon provocation by the North, by destroying “the source of attack, supporting forces and their chain of command.”

Today in the West Sea, the order of battle is not necessarily in favor of the South, since the North Korean military also brought in to adjacent areas more powerful and longer-range guns and multiple rocket launchers. With these weapons, the North can attack from a distance beyond the range of the ROK artillery. Under this situation, the South may have to call in fighter aircraft to destroy the targets, at the risk of North Korea’s anti-aircraft missiles.

North Korea has always reacted to U.N. sanctions by additional provocations and to annual U.S.-ROK military exercises by belligerent statements. The latest UNSC resolution and this year’s combined Key Resolve exercises were followed by the most aggressive reaction from the North, at least in rhetoric, so far.

The North unilaterally declared the abrogation of all agreements that were helpful to maintain peace and security in Korea ― including the 1953 Armistice Agreement, the 1991 non-aggression pact and a joint declaration of denuclearization with the South, as well as the 2005 Joint Statement of the six-party talks. Pyongyang said it would perpetuate its status of a nuclear state, and it threatened to start a “second Korean War” by attacking a South Korean target at a time of its choice. Pyongyang’s threats appear too serious to be discarded as a psychological warfare.

Yet, North Korea is also saying it would launch an attack if it were attacked by foreign forces. In general, especially in view of the continuing operation of the Gaeseong Industrial Complex, the North is unlikely to launch a significant attack during the period of the combined military drills, which will run into April.

The escalation of tension will continue unless somebody does something to stop it. Resolution of the North Korean issue depends on the policies of Seoul, Washington, Beijing and Pyongyang. Seoul and Washington are taking a similar two-track policy on the North ― security against threats and sanctions against bad behavior ― while keeping open the door to dialogue. Pyongyang is likely to stay the course of militant confrontation.

Obama said China is recalculating its North Korea policy. China has long regarded the North as a troublemaker and there have been voices of discontent and opposition in China against the North’s nuclear development. Yet, Beijing is more focused on stability on the peninsula than on abandoning Pyongyang. Xi Jinping is yet to decide if the North is no longer an asset to China.

Washington will never accept the North as a nuclear state. It will not succumb to North Korean blackmail. It will not reward bad behavior. It will work closely with its allies in Seoul and Tokyo and its partners in Beijing. It will not just stand by while Pyongyang keeps developing its nuclear and missile programs. It will protect South Korea with all resources from North Korean attack. It will keep seeking to persuade the North to take the path of dialogue and change.

Neither will Seoul accept Pyongyang’s nuclear status. In coping with North Korean threats, it is focused on security with an option to undertake its trust-building process through dialogue, when Pyongyang slows down its provocations. Seoul’s new unification minister said, “Even in this grave situation, we need inter-Korean dialogue.” Dialogue is better than confrontation. What’s your take?

The writer is a research professor at the Illmin Institute of International Relations at Korea University and a visiting professor at the University of North Korean Studies. He is also an ICAS fellow. Reach him at tong.kim8@yahoo.com.