The Korean Crisis: Playing Devil's Advocate

At this point in the latest Korean Crisis, it seems to us in America that North Korea has committed a foul and deserves to be punished. Given the way the North Korean and Kim Jong-Il have been portrayed in the U.S., the crisis seems as if it's been a long time coming. Kim Jong-Il is obviously a maniac and its a matter of time before he triggers world-wide crisis. It's fair to say he's been demonized at least as much as Saddam Hussein.

And such generalizations have some footing as Kim Jong-Il plays a dangerous game, now armed with nuclear weapons and operating a country which has never signed a formal peace agreement with its ideological opponents to the south. In the West, it would appear that Kim Jong-Il is not a rational actor on the stage of world politics and diplomacy.














But perhaps such generalizations are not true. Perhaps Kim Jong-Il is in fact a rational actor and not the lunatic that the American public, and possibly leadership, thinks. From the lessons of history we learn that even the great enemy of America, Adolf Hitler, was not in fact a maniacal leader drunk with power. He acted with a certain rationale that was little understood, especially in the West, and failure to understand it led to massive diplomatic and strategic errors on the part of the Allies, especially Great Britain and France (appeasement) and the Soviet Union (unpreparedness on the eve of Barbarossa). By no means do I argue that war was avoidable, Hitler was intent on that, but the shape and dynamic of the war that occurred was not unavoidable. Simply put, better understanding of Hitler's logic and rationale could have prevented numerous tragedies from occurring and drastically shortened the war; especially considering Mein Kampf spelled it out with little room for doubt.

But does Kim Jong-Il have a 'mein kampf'? Does he spell out his intentions for the West and the world to see? Well, not entirely to my knowledge. It's no secret North Korea is a paranoid and guarded county with little trust for anyone, especially the West. But they have expressed their opinions, intentions and goals publicly (albeit phrased through the Marxist lexicon so familiar since 1917). On one of my more favorite blogs which investigates the Korean Peninsula and relations with the North, 38 North, the author does an excellent job of analyzing the situation and calling for prudence. Kim Jong-Il and North Korea can be understood and it is vital to realize that North Korean actions have a cause and Kim Jong-Il and his state operate according to a rationale. The current crisis is indeed a disaster for peace on the peninsula, but the future is not set in stone.

Here's the article:
Recommended citation: Georgy Toloraya, “Peace or War: Do We Have to Choose?” 38 North, Washington, D.C.: U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS, Johns Hopkins University, May 27, 2010. Online at: www.38north.org/?p=795.

America's Blank Check?

Today the white house issued their full support for South Korea in its move to take the Cheonan incident to the United Nations in a request for punitive action against the People's Republic of North Korea. The statement reads:

"President Obama fully supports President Lee in his handling of the ROKS Cheonan incident and the objective investigation that followed. The measures that the government of the Republic of Korea announced today are called for and entirely appropriate. The Republic of Korea can continue to count on the full support of the United States, as President Obama has made clear.

"Specifically, we endorse President Lee’s demand that North Korea immediately apologize and punish those responsible for the attack, and, most importantly, stop its belligerent and threatening behavior. U.S. support for South Korea’s defense is unequivocal, and the President has directed his military commanders to coordinate closely with their Republic of Korea counterparts to ensure readiness and to deter future aggression. We will build on an already strong foundation of excellent cooperation between our militaries and explore further enhancements to our joint posture on the Peninsula as part of our ongoing dialogue.

"As President Lee stated in his address earlier today, the Republic of Korea intends to bring this issue to the United Nations Security Council. We support this move. Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice are each consulting very closely with their Korean counterparts, as well as with Japan, China, and other UN Security Council member states in order to reach agreement on the steps in the Council.

"In response to the pattern of North Korean provocation and defiance of international law, the President has directed U.S. government agencies to review their existing authorities and policies related to the DPRK. This review is aimed at ensuring that we have adequate measures in place and to identify areas where adjustments would be appropriate.

"The U.S. will continue to work with the Republic of Korea and other allies and partners to reduce the threat that North Korea poses to regional stability. Secretary Clinton is currently in Beijing and she will travel to Seoul for discussions with President Lee and his senior advisors on May 26 before reporting back to the President on her consultations in the region. Secretary Gates is in close contact with ROK Defense Minister Kim and will meet with him and other counterparts at the June 4-6 Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. President Obama and President Lee agreed to meet in Canada at the time of the G-20 Summit."

One is reminded of the blank check issued by Germany to Austria in the summer days of 1914. It was then that a similar incident, the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne, provoked a similar response from Austria towards its neighbor to the south, Serbia, i.e. an apology and threat of punitive action. However, much is different nearly 100 years after 1914 and history may not repeat itself, but the threat of such a repetition is breathtaking.

Yes, the United States has, as of today, thrown their entire support behind South Korea as required by treaty; a striking parallel to Germany's situation with Austria in 1914. By doing so, Germany assured that a regional conflict between Austria and Serbia would descend into World War. The system of treaties in 1914, designed to prevent war had disastrously resulted in the most terrible war the world had then seen. Does the system of treaties between South Korea and the United States therefore mean America is due for a return to the Korean Peninsula?

Not necessarily.

The primary difference between 2010 and 1914 is that instead of unilaterally attacking their neighbor to the North with the support of a major world power, South Korea is taking the situation to the United Nations. After the UN failed to resolve the Iraqi-American crisis in 2002-03, it seemed the UN was irrelevant to world politics. However, at this point in time, the successor to the League of Nations appears to be working exactly as intended. It has prevented unilateral action on the part of South Korea armed with full American support.

As Sec. of State Clinton corresponds with her counterparts in China, Japan, South Korea and most likely Russia this week, the tragic chain of events that resulted in World War I seem to have been averted. In 1914 the blank check issued by Germany assured Austria would take action against its neighbor which had offended it. In 2010 the same blank check issued by America to South Korea has not assured that South Korea would initiate conflict with North Korea.

But don't celebrate just yet.

The effectiveness of the UN shined forth in the first Gulf War as multinational military action was taken against Iraq, resulting in heavy loss of life on the Iraqi side and a political situation that would be only resolved 12 years later in a long and arduous war. Once it has been revealed where the other world powers stand on the Cheonan incident will we start to see what the future holds for the Korea peninsula and likely the world. Make no doubt about it, South Korea has called for punitive action against North Korea and already has the full backing of the United States. The question that remains is not whether there will be a conflict but what shape the conflict is going to take. The year 1914 shows us the worst scenario that could erupt from such a political situation, let us hope that the lessons of 2010 prove to teach otherwise.

The Militarization of Cyberspace

The US military has appointed its first senior general to direct cyber warfare – despite fears that the move marks another stage in the militarisation of cyberspace.

The newly promoted four-star general, Keith Alexander, takes charge of the Pentagon's ambitious and controversial new Cyber Command, designed to conduct virtual combat across the world's computer networks. He was appointed on Friday afternoon in a low-key ceremony at Fort Meade, in Maryland.

More Here...

Did Kim Jong Il order the attack?

WASHINGTON — A new American intelligence analysis of a deadly torpedo attack on a South Korean warship concludes that Kim Jong-il, the ailing leader of North Korea, must have authorized the torpedo assault, according to senior American officials who cautioned that the assessment was based on their sense of the political dynamics there rather than hard evidence.

The officials said they were increasingly convinced that Mr. Kim ordered the sinking of the ship, the Cheonan, to help secure the succession of his youngest son.

More Here...

Returning to Walled Cities?

I just thought this article was an interesting development of the 'War on Terror.' Apparently, Baghdad is to become a walled city yet again, echoing eras long past. It's not the infidel armies it seeks to keep out, but rather suicide bombers of Islamic origin. I find it interesting to note that as things change very much stays the same.

More here...