Following a two and a half month hiatus the North Koreans are back to testing missiles.
Fired on a lofted trajectory North Korea’s new Hwasong 15 ICBM flew 4,475 km high and 950 km downrange on its maiden flight. If the missile were fired on a normal trajectory it would have a range of 13,000 km; long enough to strike my house in the D.C suburbs and the entirety of the continental United States.Read More »
At midnight on October 15 the Iraqi Army, with Iranian backed militias leading the way, launched an assault on Iraqi Kurdistan to conquer the city of Kirkuk and control the vital oil infrastructure in the surrounding countryside.
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is in danger of being scrapped. Widely known as the “Iran Deal” the agreement was designed to block Iran’s path toward a nuclear bomb by limited their ability to produce the necessary fissile material.
By all accounts, including by the Trump administrations own admission, the deal been complied with. However, Iran hawks and the President have been seeking to scrap the deal citing Iran’s belligerence, growing regional power and sponsorship of terrorism. Recently, Trump announced that he plans to decertify the deal, sending it back to the U.S Congress to work out.
On September 2, 2017 Kim’s regime revealed what appears to be a 2-stage thermonuclear device. Shaped roughly like a peanut the device was shown next to Kim Jong Un being loaded into a HS-14. In the following hours the North Korean’s detonated the device with of roughly 1 Megaton.Read More »
North Korea has developed and begun deploying nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Alaska, Hawaii and parts of the western United States. Tensions are rising and Kim Jong Un and Trump are now sparing over a threat to the U.S territory of Guam issued by the regime to fire a salvo of IRBMs at the waters surrounding the American island.
As if attempting to troll the United States, the DPRK test fired it’s first ICBM on the Fourth of July. The test was a high altitude “lobbed” trajectory affair that hit 2800 km at its apogee and landed 930 km downrange of the test site. If fired for distance at a normal trajectory the missiles range is estimated at between 6700 km and 8000 km; enough to strike Anchorage and Seattle respectively.
Since Donald Trump took office nuclear hawks have been on a quest to redevelop America’s nuclear arsenal and dismantle non-proliferation efforts. Senators like Tom Cotton have called for scrapping roughly 30 years of nuclear treaties dating back to the Reagan administration in response the Russia’s violation, with possibly the most important treaty on the chopping block being the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF).
On May 30th the Ground Based Mid-Course Missile Defense system (GMD) successfully intercepted it’s first ICBM. Authorized in 1999 by the Missile Defense Act and offically deployed over a decade ago, the GMD has been plagued with problems. The test on May 30th was the first time the system was successfully tested against the threat it was designed to defeat.
After years of war Yemen is on the brink of catastrophe. Food and medical supplies are running low across the country. In the Houthi controlled areas and the nations medical infrastructure has been critically damaged by bombing from the Arab coalition and supplies cut off by the blockade.
Yemen was already on the brink of famine, but a few a weeks ago a new threat emerged: Cholera.
Transmitted through unpurified water. The disease causes severe dehydration, vomiting and diarrhea. In the west such a disease would be rare and relatively easy to contain, but in Yemen over half the population does not have access to clean drinking water, meaning the disease is spreading like plague.
The disease has already spread to tens of thousands and killed hundreds. Without adequate health infrastructure containment has failed. The fact that many Yemenis are already malnourished is no doubt exacerbating the deadliness of the disease. The result has been a four to five fold increase in the case mortality rate.
With a suspected 2,000 new cases a day, experts expect the disease could reach 300,000 cases in the next six months. If the math holds we can expect three to fifteen thousand fatalities from Cholera alone; more than those killed by the fighting itself.
With the food and medical food already a planned offensive against the port of Hodeidah is threatening to turn them in catastrophe. With malnutrition already rampant and many areas on the brink of famine, the planned offensive against the port of Hodeidah would threaten 70 to 80 percent of Yemen’s external trade, essentially cutting off food imports.
While the coalition claims the operation would only last for six weeks. A recent Vice article noted that this is wildly optimistic; and I agree.
Given the way the coalition has fought I see no evidence that they are capable of quickly capturing a complex urban environment or being able to avoid destroying vital port infrastructure necessary to keep Yemen from famine.
Such operations are possible. In World War II the allies captured the French Port of Brest in a similar time-frame and Cherbourge in half that duration. Before that, in 1940 the Wehrmacht secured several french ports as part of it’s thrust to cut off French and British forces. If an assault is coordinated well in both the operational and strategic sense, a port can be taken in a matter of days.
In the case of Yemen the circumstances are much different. Such an operation would require land based maneuver forces to land around the port or come in from the North from the coastal plain. The mechanized forces would then have to surround to port and quickly reduce the pocket in a series of coordinated combined arms assaults. Essentially they would have to fight like a modern western marine or army corps, not a slow moving tactically and operationally inept Arab army.
This is not purely conjecture; we already have a data point to work from. The battle to recapture the port of Aden in 2015 took nearly 4 months and the coalition still has not made much headway into the Houthi heartland. The idea they could launch a seaborne direct assault against a port and take without knocking it out for an extended period is fanciful.
There was a time not long ago when I did support a new American backed offensive against the Houthis to gain leverage over them and restore security to the Mandeb Al-Bab strait. That time has passed. The situation is so fragile that an intensification of the fighting could lead to the deaths of tens of thousands by disease and starvation.
In Hodeidah we must find another way. If we don’t the bodies could start to pile up very fast.
With North Korea on the precipice of an nuclear deterrent the United States will face some very tough choices in the coming years that will determine the course of the American policy in East Asia.
I’ll be frank; I have no confidence that we can stop the North Korean missile or nuclear program at this point with diplomacy or any other non-Kinetic means. Even with a whirlwind shift from both China and the Trump administration I don’t see a positive outcome given the time constraints and the political situation.
The window for denuclearization has passed. Even peace advocates agree that North Korea is unlikely to accept, or even consider such a proposal given the current state of their nuclear program and the investment in pro-nuclear propaganda both domestically and internationally.
The Perry doctrine then, where the end result of pressure and sanctions are negotiations to stall the DPRK’s missile and nuclear programs is becoming increasingly unrealistic given the advanced state of those programs. Freezing this program where it stands is simply not a politically viable option. The North already has the ability to mount a warhead onto a missile that could reach American bases in the region.
An agreement to freeze their program would also come at the cost unacceptable political and military cost to the United States. Kim has made his demands clear: the U.S would be asked to abandon or roll back it’s commitments to South Korea and release most of the sanctions on the North in exchange for a deal that would allow North Korea to keep it’s nuclear weapons.
With political options lacking viability we find ourselves on the losing end of a stalemate, where the North Korean’s are able to use our risk aversion of it’s advantage.
With the United States is in willing to accept a De Jure nuclear armed North Korea or lose face to the Kim Regime in the domestic or international arenas, the crisis has festered. As time passes Kim will continue to build up it’s nuclear program.
Donald Trump’s approach to the DPRK is essentially a more aggressive rebrand of the failed Bush and Obama policies. Trump (really Mattis and McMaster) are sending carriers to the region and continuing to hold exercises with South Korea. There is also engagement with China to stop accepting coal shipments from the DPRK and new sanctions are being discussed. It’s what you might call “strategic impatience.”
Trump’s strategy, much like the past two administrations, is less of a strategy and more of a tactic. There is no clear political end game in mind. The U.S continues to impose sanctions and shift military assets around the Pacific as a show of strength hoping that Kim Jong Un will either be deposed or the regime will ask seek terms. This is also highly unrealistic given the goals and strategic position of the regime.
Goals of the Kim Regime
The primary goal of the North Korean regime is to sustain itself regardless of the cost. With the bomb they see themselves as safe from an American intervention A la Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Grenada, Panama. etc.
In this calculus the needs of the North Korean people, biological or otherwise are not given much weight. Their society is militarized to the extreme. Billions of dollars out of North Korea’s tiny economy are spent on it’s nuclear program and the military even as basic needs like subsistence go unmet. Even with the food shortages the regime still pushes large families to keep the population up. Any argument that the regime sees the populace as anything more than potential soldiers is hardly a strong one.
Because of this, sanctions that effect the ability of the people to live will not weigh heavily on the regime unless the situation becomes completely unbearable as in the 1990s where an estimated three million people died of starvation.
There is little chance the people would rise up against the regime in any case. The DPRK is a sealed society based around the cult worship of the Kim family. The denizens of the DPRK are virtual slaves; many of which know no other reality than the one presented to them by the regime. A coup would only possible from the higher echelons of regime where the power is concentrated and then, only if they believed catastrophe was imminent.
The threat of force also has little effect on the regime. Kim knows the bluff. He knows the United States is hesitant to attack him when he has over 1100 pieces of artillery aimed at the South Korean capital, along with dozens of submarines and an arsenal of ballistic missiles that could kill thousands of Americans, Japanese and South Koreans.
To Kim, both approaches, the sanctions and the threat of force become two sides of same regime change strategy. He does not trust the United States to keep a bargain and every day the United States fails to topple his regime is a day the North gets closer to a functional nuclear deterrent. Kim has every reason to keep going ahead with his nuclear weapons program and very little reason to negotiate.
The Strategic Dynamic
Clausewitz noted that war (and politics by extension) is like a duel where two opponents actively attempt to overpower each other. American views of North Korea however, describe them as a problem, rather than as an active and dynamic opponent that has it’s own goals and will resist attempts to disarm it.
There is also an element of hubris that is blinding America to the reality of the situation. There is a belief that because the United States is so powerful it can exercise unlimited control over another country if it is willing to try hard enough. We see this today with people who still contend that we lost in Vietnam because we were unwilling to use enough force.
The same basic issue applies today in the politics of North Korea. Even though America’s power dwarfs the DPRK in nearly every dimension, the advantages of the defense put Kim on the high ground. America has limited goals but is unwilling to employ even limited force (i.e “all measures short of war”). North Korea on the other hand has even more limited goal (survival) and is willing to use unlimited force (i.e begin a nuclear war) to achieve to it.
There is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the DPRK’s nuclear program. It is not some token they are willing to part with, it is an integral part of their defense complex and increasingly, their society. They view it as an existential necessity and unless the U.S and South Korea are willing to wage total war there will be no disarmament. The force needed to take away the bomb is likely equivalent to the amount of force needed to topple the regime.
These strategic imbalances and misunderstandings make it impossible for the U.S to stop the DPRK nuclear program through current measures and has created a path toward continued nuclear weapons development in North Korea.
It’s time to admit that North Korea’s program cannot be stopped through non-kinetic means. The United States has nothing to offer the regime and they do not trust The U.S to keep promises. Nor do they care if their people starve. All of the pressure in the world is not going to make Kim humble himself and put a gun to his head, especially when he’s so close to a functional deterrent.
In short; the Kim dynasty has played their hand extraordinarily well and will likely achieve it’s deterrent. But, as Clausewitz said, one of the things that keeps war from it’s extremes is the fact that there is almost always a round two. This is next stage is what the United States needs to be preparing for, not doubling down on a failed policy with an unachievable goal.