News & commentary by Dave Maxwell. Edited and published by Daniel Riggs.
1. Don’t Leave North Koreans in the Dark
2. It’s Time to End the Korean War
3. South Korea defends ban on anti-Pyongyang leaflets after ‘inane’ law slammed in US
4. DEATH CAMP North Korean prisoners worked to death rearing pigs to feed Kim Jong-un & then used as human fertiliser on ‘flower hill’
5. US commands in Japan and South Korea report weekend coronavirus count
6. Albright calls for U.S.-S. Korea cooperation on N. Korea's denuclearization
7. South Korean officials defend controversial propaganda law
8. Fresh Virus Wave Is Testing South Korea’s No-Lockdown Strategy
9. Understanding Recent Revisions to the "Inter-Korean Relations Development Act"
10. Chinese, Russian military aircraft violate S. Korea's air defense zone
11. Denuclearizing North Korea: Six Options for Biden
12. Incoming Biden gov't likely to seek N.K. dialogue in 2021 rather than sanctions: think tank
13. China's top legislator calls for enhancing exchanges with ROK
14. Status Quo Ante with a Twist: Biden’s Probable East Asia Policy
15. Assessing the impact of North Korea's border blockade
16. N. Korea claims no confirmed cases of coronavirus: WHO
17. Ruling party chief expresses regret over criticism of new law banning anti-Pyongyang leaflets
18. North Korea first lady Ri Sol Ju leads makeup trends, defector says
19. HBO Max Hit “The Flight Attendant” Has a Surprise North Korea Angle
1. Don’t Leave North Koreans in the Dark
Foreign Affairs· Jieun Baek · December 21, 2020
When Jieun Baek speaks we should listen. This latest law will not lead to peace nor improved relations with north Korea. It will only cause Kim Jong-un to double down on his political warfare strategy and blackmail diplomacy.
Excerpt: The legislation is the latest step in Moon’s quest to secure peace on the Korean Peninsula through reconciliation with Pyongyang. Whatever the merits of that goal, Moon’s agenda has led to the suppression of many activities promoting North Korean human rights. In its desperation to placate Kim, Moon’s government has turned its back on basic principles of liberal democracy, and the new law represents a new low. Seoul is now directly aiding and abetting Pyongyang’s repression. The South Korean government should be supporting efforts to supply information to North Koreans, not criminalizing them.
2. It’s Time to End the Korean War
The American Prospect · by Jessica J. Lee · December 21, 2020
Let me say this:
I support peace on the Korean peninsula
I support a diplomatic solution to the north Korean nuclear threat
I support ROK engagement with the north
I do not support a weakening of the ROK and ROK/US defensive capabilities
I believe there cannot be success for US, ROK, and Japanese interests without strong ROK/US and Japan/US alliances
Despite the above I think we have to accept that north Korea may have a continued hostile strategy and therefore while we prioritize diplomacy we have to remain prepared for the worst cases. I hope I am wrong here and that Kim Jong-un will dismantle his nuclear weapons and seek peaceful co-existence.
The Moon administration is going to continue to pursue its engagement strategy and peace and reconciliation strategy at any cost. Some of those bearing the highest cost are the Korean people living in the north, but the Koreans in the South will suffer as well if this strategy leads to the north using force especially if it is successful in driving a wedge in the ROK/US Alliance.
Also, touting the “Vietnam model” is a grave mistake. I think north Korea would love to adopt a "Vietnam model." Unfortunately, we are all focused on the post 1975 economic "Vietnam Model." The regime is likely unwilling to adopt that model given the current conditions, to include the regime's assessment of security conditions.
But there is a "Vietnam model" that we overlook but one that the regime is actually pursuing. Like north Vietnam it would like to broker a peace treaty with the US that would cause the withdrawal of US troops. It would like to see the US become overly focused on domestic issues. Once troops are fully withdrawn the regime will redouble its efforts to dominate the entire peninsula and if necessary it will use force to do so because it will believe it has created the conditions to be successful. it will attack the South, assuming the US has lost the will to come to the aid of the South because there is no longer a US force presence, and seek to unify the peninsula under the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State just as north Vietnam did with the South. That is the "Vietnam model" the Kim family regime would like to copy. We need to understand the regime's political warfare strategy as well as its military strategy. They are mutually supporting.
We should keep in mind that the two belligerents are the north and South. The UN recognized the north's aggression against the South and called on member nations to come to its defense ("to assist the Republic of Korea" which I think is an important phrase). The Chinese Peoples' Volunteers (an unofficial military organization) intervened to assist the north.
Of course if the north and South sign a peace treaty ending their hostilities it is logical to argue that the UN command should be dissolved. But I do not think there is any international precedent for this. Also, there is nothing in the Armistice that says the signatories of the Armistice must also sign a peace treaty. Again international lawyers are going to has this out but now we have two member nations of the UN (north and South) and if they choose to end the war who can stop them. And of course once they do that all kinds of arguments will be made (like Moon Chung-in) that there is no more rationale for the UN command or US troops.
However, USFK and CFC exist and are present as a result of bi-lateral agreement in the Mutual Defense Treaty of 1953. Note below that the MDT makes no mention of north Korea or the DPRK. A peace treaty should technically have no impact on the presence of US forces and bilateral ROK/US agreements and US troops are present by mutual agreement but if the South wants them to leave I expect we will immediately leave - we are not a nation that would occupy a sovereign country against its wishes - even if it were for its own good!!. (there is also the ROK/US Terms of Reference and the Strategic Directive from the Military Committee but those are classified ROK/US only). See the MDT below for details.
If on June 12th, the day after the Singapore Summit the US, nK and ROK say that the war is officially ended I do not think that officially changes anything until there is a peace treaty negotiated between north and South with mechanism put in place to ensure the peace. I see the US and possibly the Chinese role as mere guarantors of security but I do not think they have to be signatories on a peace treaty since the US was acting for the UN and the Chinese only sent "volunteers." The treaty obligations of both the US with the ROK and China with nK are separate agreements and do not necessarily impact on the peace treaty. I also see no way for the US, China, or the UN to "veto" a peace treaty between the north and South. I also think it would be political suicide for any party to do so. I think a declaration of the end of the war would be symbolic only but would have tremendous political influence (and popular influence).
Lastly, if there is a declaration of the end of the war we should ask how will that guarantee the security of South Korea and the 50 million Koreans living in the South. What will prevent north Korea from executing its campaign plan to unify the peninsula by force? The north Korean People's Army (nKPA) remains postured to attack the South and continues to modernize its military capabilities. The north has not reciprocated with any substantive confidence building measures from the 2018 Comprehensive Military Agreement. There can be no end of war declaration or peace treaty unless the threat on the DMZ is sufficiently reduced. As a minimum the nKPA should be withdrawn to defensive positions in depth much as the South Korea military is arrayed for defense.
The bottom line is we have to deal with north Korea and the Kim family regime as they really are and not as we would wish them to be.
3. South Korea defends ban on anti-Pyongyang leaflets after ‘inane’ law slammed in US
SCMP Park Chan-kyong · December 21, 2020
The ROK government has made an egregious mistake and we cannot sit idly by and not call it out. We are allies with shared values. This law goes against those shared values.
The ROKG cannot put a positive spin on this with its argument that this is about defending Korean citizens in the South from north Korean hostile action.
Unfortunately the real rationale is simply the misguided belief that appeasing the regime will change its behavior.
I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin's quote: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
4. DPRK DEATH CAMP
We listened to Joe Bermucez brief this report yesterday afternoon. The full report can be downloaded here.
5. US commands in Japan and South Korea report weekend coronavirus count
Stars and Stripes· by Joseph Ditzler · December 21, 2020
6. Albright calls for U.S.-S. Korea cooperation on N. Korea's denuclearization
en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · December 22, 2020
But did the former SECSTATE address the impact of the "Kim Yo-jong law" on the Korean people in the north and South and on the alliance?
7. South Korean officials defend controversial propaganda law
washingtontimes.com · by Ben Wolfgang
My comments in the article.
8. Fresh Virus Wave Is Testing South Korea’s No-Lockdown Strategy
Bloomberg · by Youkyung Lee · December 21, 2020
The graph in the article makes it appear the 3d wave is the worst so far.
9. Understanding Recent Revisions to the "Inter-Korean Relations Development Act"
38north.org · by Young Gil-Song · December 21, 2020
An explanation from a South Korean assembly and the chair of the Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee at the National Assembly responding to his US "counterpart" Rep. McCaul, ranking member of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee.
The real issue that should be discussed is how should the ROK/US alliance conduct effective information and influence activities to target the three target audiences in the north: the regime elite, the 2d tier leadership, and the population. What the assemblymen is really describing is the ROK and the ROK/US alliance have too long neglected the information instrument of national power. Because of this the escapees (defectors) have been left to their own devices and as outlined in this excerpt have conducted some activities that are probably counter productive to effective messaging.
Excerpts:
“South Korea and the US have repeatedly said that they have no intention of invading North Korea and causing a regime change so that the North would give up the willingness to develop nuclear weapons. However, allowing anti-North Korea propaganda broadcasts and sending leaflets with photoshopped naked pictures of Kim Jong Un’s wife, Ri Sol Ju, from the near-border area are considered psychological warfare, which would be viewed as an act of war.
The Korean Peninsula is legally in a state of war. The end of the war has not been declared. It is quite difficult to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program while neglecting such psychological warfare. The core content of the several inter-Korean agreements is the prohibition of mutual slander and mutual recognition of each other’s governmental system. North Korea does not distribute propaganda leaflets to South Korea. On the other hand, it is difficult to force North Korea to abide by inter-Korean agreements while South Korea does not.
We really need to develop a comprehensive and effective Alliance information and influence activities campaign. “
10. Chinese, Russian military aircraft violate S. Korea's air defense zone
en.yna.co.kr · by 오석민 · December 22, 2020
The Chinese and Russians seem to be getting bold and taking advantage of the conditions and perceived stress among the friends and allies of Northeast Asia.
This. seems to be a pretty significant air operation in the KADIZ.
11. Denuclearizing North Korea: Six Options for Biden
warontherocks.com · by Victor Cha · December 22, 2020
As a wise diplomat once told me, everything that could be done diplomatically with north Korea has been tried at one time or another. At best we can try to repackage and try different combinations of actions.
Dr.Cha provides a useful summary of what has occurred and many of the key issues on the Korean peninsula. He provides some useful recommendations but I do not think he has gone far enough.
Unification is mentioned only once in passing Dr. Cha's essay. There is no discussion of solving the "Korea question". which I believe is the only way we will achieve an acceptable, durable political arrangement that will serve US and ROK/US alliance interests.
As we have written: "Any effective approach toward North Korea should be based on two new assumptions. The first recognizes that Kim will give up his nuclear program only when he concludes that the cost to him and his regime is too great – that is, when he believes possession of nuclear weapons threatens his survival. But external pressure alone, although important, will almost certainly fail to create the right cost-benefit ratio. It is the threat from the North Korean people that is most likely to cause Kim to give up his nuclear weapons.26 As former CIA analyst Jung Pak of the Brookings Institution has argued, “Kim fears his people more than he fears the United States. The people are his most proximate threat to the regime.”27 The ROK-U.S. alliance has yet to adopt a strategy with this in mind."
Again, there is no silver bullet to the north Korea problem. This is why we need to focus on the long-term solution to the security and prosperity challenges on the Korean peninsula. That is to focus on resolving the Korean question,' the unnatural division of the peninsula.” Solve that and the nuclear issues and the human rights abuses and crimes against humanity will be fixed. The question to ask is not what worked and what did not, but whether our action advanced our interests and moved us closer to the acceptable, durable political arrangement that will protect, serve, and advance US and ROK/US alliance interests? That is: A secure, stable, economically vibrant, non-nuclear Korean peninsula unified under a liberal constitutional form of government with respect for individual liberty, the rule of law, and human rights, determined by the Korean people. In short, a United Republic of Korea (UROK)
The way ahead is deterrence, defense, denuclearization and solving the “Korea question” (e.g., unification) with the understanding that denuclearization of the north will only happen when we resolve the Korea question.
12. Incoming Biden gov't likely to seek N.K. dialogue in 2021 rather than sanctions: think tank
en.yna.co.kr · by 송상호 · December 22, 2020
An obvious shaping operation is taking place by pro-Moon administration think tanks. Just as an aside we have never been opposed to substantive productive dialogue with the north. I also feel confident the incoming Biden administration is not going to make unilateral concessions such as sanctions relief only in the hope that it will lead to dialogue. The Biden administration is not going to operate under the same assumptions regarding the nature and objectives of the Kim family regime that the Moon administration is operating under. Rather than trying to shape the Biden administration policy, ROK thank tanks should be recommending that the Moon administration should reassesses and change its erroneous assumptions to more realistic ones that will allow the ROK and US alliance to develop mutually supportive ad reinforcing policies and strategies - or better yet - a combined ROK/US alliance strategy.
13. China's top legislator calls for enhancing exchanges with ROK
Of course it wants more engagement with the ROK.
14. Status Quo Ante with a Twist: Biden’s Probable East Asia Policy
cato.org· by Ted Galen Carpenter
Here is the argument of the appeasement pundits. "Greater flexibility" means to provide unilateral concessions in return for hopes of dialogue. All of these proposals focus on the US as the problem. But the problem is Kim Jong-un and the nature of the Kim family regime. While our demand for denuclearization may be a non-starter to north Korea, China, and some pundits, the Kim family regime's objective to dominate the Korean peninsula is also a non-starter. However, we must recognize what are the north Korean objectives and strategies and develop appropriate policies and strategies based on a realistic understanding of the nature of the Kim family regime.
15. Assessing the impact of North Korea's border blockade
dailynk.com· by Ha Yoon Ah · December 22, 2020
Please do not compare north and South Korean Special Forces. They are not equivalent.
North Korea has deployed the Storm Corps (11th Corps), a special forces unit, along the entire Sino-North Korean border to enforce the border blockade. A military organization equivalent to the South Korean army’s Special Warfare Command, it is considered the country’s most elite unit, so much so that within North Korea, the force is called a “murder weapon.”
The unit’s original purpose was to secretly infiltrate enemy positions and attack rear areas to sow confusion in wartime. But now, with North Korean authorities making quarantine efforts their top priority, members of the unit are monitoring the border for smugglers and performing general guard duty at the border.
But there is likely to be a long-term impact of the border blockade and it is possible that it will not only lead to great suffering of the Korean people in the north, it could lead to internal instability if the military and security services suffer breakdowns in discipline due to a COVID outbreak.
16. N. Korea claims no confirmed cases of coronavirus: WHO
en.yna.co.kr · by 이원주 · December 22, 2020
"Move along. Nothing to see here."
17. Ruling party chief expresses regret over criticism of new law banning anti-Pyongyang leaflets
en.yna.co.kr · by 김나영 · December 21, 2020
Rep. Lee: I think you should regret the passage of this law, not the criticism of it. It is obviously going against human rights, freedom of expression, and the norms of free and democratic countries in the international community despite the rationalization of its supporters. The basic argument is to restrict freedom of expression to protect citizens of south Korea. As I have said, if defense of Koreans in the South is your concern (and it rightly should be) then you should improve the defensive capabilities of the nation. This action puts the Korean people at greater risk because it not only protects the Kim family regime it strengthens and emboldens it. We can expect even greater provocations in the future because you have proven the regime's blackmail diplomacy works.
18. North Korea first lady Ri Sol Ju leads makeup trends, defector says
upi.com· by Elizabeth Shim
Something of a little less substance though it is important to see how cultural trends evolve and how public (party) personas influence change.
But perhaps now that there are skincare [products for men, the north will succumb to the cultural bankruptcy of the west (note sarcasm).
19. HBO Max Hit “The Flight Attendant” Has a Surprise North Korea Angle
The National Interest · by Stephen Silver · December 21, 2020
Okay, now for something in the entertainment world. I had no desire to see this show but now with the north Korean connection I may have to take a look.
------------------------
"Nothing in life is as important as you think it is when you are thinking about it."
- Daniel Kahneman
“In foreign policy, a modest acceptance of fate will often lead to discipline rather than indifference. The realization that we cannot always have our way is the basis of a mature outlook that rests on an ancient sensibility, for tragedy is not the triumph of evil over good so much as triumph of one good over another that causes suffering. Awareness of that fact leads to a sturdy morality grounded in fear as well as in hope. The moral benefits of fear bring us to two English philosophers who, like Machiavelli, have for centuries disturbed people of goodwill: Hobbes and Malthus.”
- Robert D. Kaplan, Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Requires a Pagan Ethos
“If you concentrate exclusively on victory, while no thought for the after effect, you may be too exhausted to profit by peace, while it is almost certain that the peace will be a bad one, containing the germs of another war.”
- B.H. Liddel-Hart