• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Norks' New Strategy?

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
Interesting article. Not a happy one.


The situation on the Korean Peninsula is more dangerous than it has been at any time since early June 1950. That may sound overly dramatic, but we believe that, like his grandfather in 1950, Kim Jong Un has made a strategic decision to go to war. We do not know when or how Kim plans to pull the trigger, but the danger is already far beyond the routine warnings in Washington, Seoul and Tokyo about Pyongyang’s “provocations.”

...A failure to understand the history of North Korean policy over the past 33 years is not simply an academic problem. Getting that history wrong has dangerous implications for grasping the magnitude of what confronts us now. Without grasping in detail what, why, and how North Korean policy retained its central goal of normalizing relations with the United States from 1990 until 2019, there is no way to understand the profound change that has taken place in Pyongyang’s thinking since then. This bedrock policy shift by Kim to gird for a war would only come after he concluded all other options had been exhausted, and that the previous strategy shaping North Korean policy since 1990 had irrevocably failed.

...Beginning with the crucial, strategic decision by Kim Il Sung in 1990, the North pursued a policy centered on the goal of normalizing relations with the United States as a buffer against China and Russia.

...The June 2018 Singapore summit with President Donald Trump was to Kim the realization of what his grandfather had envisioned, and his father had attempted but never attained—normalization of relations with the United States. Kim poured his prestige into the second summit in Hanoi (2019). When that failed, it was a traumatic loss of face for Kim.

...The evidence of the past year opens the real possibility that the situation may have reached the point that we must seriously consider a worst case—that Pyongyang could be planning to move in ways that completely defy our calculations. Kim and his planners may target the weakest point—psychologically as well as materially—in what the three capitals hope is a watertight US-ROK-Japan military position. The literature on surprise attacks should make us wary of the comfortable assumptions that resonate in Washington’s echo chamber but might not have purchase in Pyongyang. This might seem like madness, but history suggests those who have convinced themselves that they have no good options left will take the view that even the most dangerous game is worth the candle.
 

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Interesting article. Not a happy one.


The situation on the Korean Peninsula is more dangerous than it has been at any time since early June 1950. That may sound overly dramatic, but we believe that, like his grandfather in 1950, Kim Jong Un has made a strategic decision to go to war. We do not know when or how Kim plans to pull the trigger, but the danger is already far beyond the routine warnings in Washington, Seoul and Tokyo about Pyongyang’s “provocations.”

...A failure to understand the history of North Korean policy over the past 33 years is not simply an academic problem. Getting that history wrong has dangerous implications for grasping the magnitude of what confronts us now. Without grasping in detail what, why, and how North Korean policy retained its central goal of normalizing relations with the United States from 1990 until 2019, there is no way to understand the profound change that has taken place in Pyongyang’s thinking since then. This bedrock policy shift by Kim to gird for a war would only come after he concluded all other options had been exhausted, and that the previous strategy shaping North Korean policy since 1990 had irrevocably failed.

...Beginning with the crucial, strategic decision by Kim Il Sung in 1990, the North pursued a policy centered on the goal of normalizing relations with the United States as a buffer against China and Russia.

...The June 2018 Singapore summit with President Donald Trump was to Kim the realization of what his grandfather had envisioned, and his father had attempted but never attained—normalization of relations with the United States. Kim poured his prestige into the second summit in Hanoi (2019). When that failed, it was a traumatic loss of face for Kim.

...The evidence of the past year opens the real possibility that the situation may have reached the point that we must seriously consider a worst case—that Pyongyang could be planning to move in ways that completely defy our calculations. Kim and his planners may target the weakest point—psychologically as well as materially—in what the three capitals hope is a watertight US-ROK-Japan military position. The literature on surprise attacks should make us wary of the comfortable assumptions that resonate in Washington’s echo chamber but might not have purchase in Pyongyang. This might seem like madness, but history suggests those who have convinced themselves that they have no good options left will take the view that even the most dangerous game is worth the candle.
The article fails to address the most important part of the equation... What reward would Kim seek to gain by nuking Japan and SK? There is clear and obvious risk, so there must be an even greater achievable reward on the table for the argument to make sense, unless you assume Kim is not a rational actor (which they do not).

I don't buy it for a second. Kim isn't dumb or suicidal. NK has altered their strategy back to what it was before Trump... Posturing and building up their military to satisfy their Western-induced paranoia.
 

JTS11

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Nork's new (continuing) strategy... highest possible levels of attention whoring in hopes that someone will notice.

This authors conclusions are silly.
His ultimate goal is to die a natural death and pass off his wealth/regime to his heirs. He doesn't want his end to be in a ditch, with a stick up his fat ass, like Gaddaffi. The dictator's dilemma. Hence, his nuclear blackmail.

Of course that's assuming he's somewhat rational.

Apparently, he's even written love letters to one our leaders in the past...
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
What steered me to the linked article was one by Nicolas Kristof in the NYTimes, behind a paywall…


I’ve seen many false alarms since I began covering and visiting North Korea in the 1980s. I wouldn’t write about this latest warning except that it comes from two particularly credible experts who bluntly conclude that “Kim Jong-un has made a strategic decision to go to war.”

That’s speculation without hard evidence to back it up, and they acknowledge that this kind of prediction is fraught. But one of those experts is Robert Carlin, who has been analyzing North Korea for 50 years for the C.I.A., State Department and other organizations. The other is Siegfried Hecker, a nuclear expert at Stanford who has visited North Korea seven times and was given extensive access to that country’s nuclear programs; he’s apparently the only American to have held North Korean plutonium (in a jar) in his hands.

Carlin and Hecker both told me that they don’t know when an attack by Kim, the country’s leader, would happen or what form it might take.
“Is it going to be an all-out attack?” Carlin asked. “I have no idea what the thinking of his army is right now. I suspect it is making plans and they’re arguing about it. And some of them are saying, ‘This is nuts. We can’t do it.’ Others are saying: ‘This is what the leader wants, and we’re going to do it. And actually, we have enough missiles and nuclear warheads that we can.’ ”

North Korea excels in bluster and insults (remember “dotard”?), and my general view is that Kim is a pragmatist who uses bombast for bargaining leverage. That may be the case this time: We’ve never much understood what’s going on with North Koreans, and perhaps they’re just seeking attention. My inclination would be to dismiss these warnings — if they were coming from anyone else. But Carlin and Hecker are pros who deserve to have their alarm taken very seriously.

It has been evident for some time that something is afoot in North Korea. Kim invested his hopes in a 2019 summit with President Donald Trump in Hanoi — and that fell apart, leaving Kim humiliated. For decades under three leaders, North Korea sought a deal with the United States involving trade, prestige and economic benefits, but now it seems to have given up on that. Instead, it has bolstered ties with Russia, improved its nuclear weapon capabilities and escalated its rhetoric.

…On the other hand, one reason for skepticism is that it’s hard to see how North Korea benefits by attacking its neighbors. Carlin and Hecker don’t have a solid answer for that, but they note that there is a long history of surprise attacks around the world that were surprising precisely because they didn’t make sense to those attacked…
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
I know Carlin’s work quite well. He is a solid guy, but tends to approach issues with a State Department mentality (let’s send the Harvard and Yale kids to sort this out - only WE can fix it!). So, he looks at a very real issue and amps it up to crisis mode telling we need to fox this, but not offering a plan (kind of like the State Department) In truth, this is what those stationed in Korea call Tuesday. I don’t have a crystal ball and I certainly don’t grasp the fundamentals of Kim’s mind but I am confident that he will not fire a single round south unless he gets an explicit “Go for it!” from China. Right now, China isn’t in a great place to deal with a regional war, much less a world war.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
His ultimate goal is to die a natural death and pass off his wealth/regime to his heirs. He doesn't want his end to be in a ditch, with a stick up his fat ass, like Gaddaffi. The dictator's dilemma. Hence, his nuclear blackmail.

Both Libya and Iraq tried and failed to gain nuclear weapons, both leaders ended up being executed by their enemies in the end. Exhibits A and B why 'lil Kim wants a credible nuclear deterrent.
 

BattlingTrain

SNA Pro-Rec Y
Exhibits A and B why 'lil Kim wants a credible nuclear deterrent.
Speaking of nuclear deterence, while I don't think anything will develop from Iran and Pakistan's recent spat, I did find it interesting that Iran was willing to lash out at a "nuclear power".
 

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Both Libya and Iraq tried and failed to gain nuclear weapons, both leaders ended up being executed by their enemies in the end. Exhibits A and B why 'lil Kim wants a credible nuclear deterrent.
Kim has succeeded where they failed and already has a credible nuclear deterrent. It almost feels like he is like a dog who was chasing a car, caught it, and now he doesn't know what to do.

Nobody is going to attack him since he has nukes, so now what?
 

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
Color me skeptical for now. Election year? This seems like a rebranding of the same old NK saber rattling, in an attempt to maintain a credible threat.

It’s tiresome, but I’m not convinced Kim is about to drop a nuke. The caveat is if he does, it’s doubtful a degenerate reservist like me is going to see it coming.

Good fodder for WR discussion though.
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
Speaking of nuclear deterence, while I don't think anything will develop from Iran and Pakistan's recent spat, I did find it interesting that Iran was willing to lash out at a "nuclear power".

For all the talk about the Norks, Pakistan will always be voted Most Likely to Explode a Nuke. Mix poorly controlled weps, enemies on three sides, tribes that cross boundaries, and religious fundamentalism, and I will not be surprised if there isn't a surprise mushroom cloud somewhere over there in the future.
 

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
For all the talk about the Norks, Pakistan will always be voted Most Likely to Explode a Nuke. Mix poorly controlled weps, enemies on three sides, tribes that cross boundaries, and religious fundamentalism, and I will not be surprised if there isn't a surprise mushroom cloud somewhere over there in the future.

I would put my money on Iran. Or one of the crazy groups they support. Paki is up there in terms of likelihood, though.
 
Top