China and Japan via NK

[Annie]

http://www.strategypage.com/onpoint/articles/20068205338.asp

Lose Face, Face Sanctions: China's Lesson to North Korea
by Austin Bay
August 2, 2006


Don't ever cost the Chinese face -- do so and you'll be slapped with UN economic sanctions.

Lost in last month's tsunami of war news was the UN Security Council's decision to sanction North Korea for its ballistic missile tantrum.

Despite years of pressure from the U.S. and Japan, China had been reluctant to chastise North Korea, but Beijing was clearly surprised by North Korea's July 5th missile volley. Saving face is important in every human group -- "face" is particularly important in North Asia, in social relationships and in diplomacy. The North Korean tantrum cost China a bit of public embarrassment.

Chinese embarrassment cost North Korea the humiliation of international economic sanctions.

Economic sanctions are crude weapons, but North Korea is in a particularly crude financial and political situation. The U.S. contends North Korea launders stolen money through corrupt banks in Macao (the Chinese port formerly run by Portugal). Chinese cooperation also enhances U.S. efforts to curb North Korea's counterfeiting operations. That's right -- counterfeiting. Minting fake U.S. currency has been one of North Korea's few profit centers.

The U.S. and Japan have proposed other economic penalties. Both countries have already used anti-organized crime and anti-terror techniques to thwart currency remittances to Pyongyang from North Koreans living abroad.

North Korea's Kim Jong-Il operates an extortion racket. The North Korean totalitarian police state is a totalitarian crime state. The criminal enterprises (counterfeiting, smuggling drugs) keep its Communist elites in caviar.

While North Korea's clique trumpets the development of nuclear weapons, over 2 million of its citizens suffer from malnutrition. North Korea can build bombs and test missiles, but only international aid prevents mass starvation. Given the dictator's ample paunch, it's a good bet Kim and his elites eat well.

The number of North Koreans fleeing to north China from their country-wide gulag has increased sharply. A Chinese army now sits on the Korean border, tasked with stopping the refugees fleeing Kim. The refugee issue is one reason, among many, to doubt China's long-term commitment to supporting Kim's depraved junta.

In the past, North Korean bouts of international madness occasionally served Beijing's strategic ends. Kim's Stalinist regime rattles the U.S. and scares Japan. However, China and Russia now have extensive trade relations with Japan and South Korea. The South Korean economic powerhouse invests in China.

Japanese fear is producing changes in Japanese military doctrine. No one in Asia wants a militarily resurgent Japan, particularly China.

But North Korea's ballistic missile barrage has ignited The Rising Sun.

The Japanese government is now openly cooperating with the U.S. on anti-ballistic missile defense, including the deployment of U.S.-made Patriot Pac-3 anti-missile missiles to Okinawa.

Defense is one thing -- Japan's "Self-Defense Forces" are designed to defend Japan. Offensive strike capability is something else entirely.

Last month, the London Times wrote that "Kim's adventures" had radicalized Japanese opinion. "'The vast majority of Japanese agree that we need to be able to carry out first strikes,' said Yoichi Shimada, a professor of international relations at Fukui Prefectural University." According to Shimada, Japan must "have an offensive missile capability."

Japan could have offensive missiles in a couple of months. For that matter, Japan could produce a nuclear weapon within a few weeks.

Chinese and South Korean diplomats argue that North Korea's regime may be crazy but it isn't suicidal. Firing a missile at Japan -- whether it has a nuke or not -- would be a suicidal act, and the diplomats argue that won't happen. But Beijing and Seoul cannot guarantee North Korea won't try to sell a nuclear device to terrorists, which is one of Washington's central concerns.

Swap a nuke for a cool billion? Pyongyang's crooked track record suggests Kim would do the deal.

Beijing has no interest in a nuclear-armed, U.S.-allied, economically powerful and reunified Korea -- a little bulldog of a peninsula on China's border. Propping up North Korea prevents reunification. Dropping the North Korean props could be traded to Korean reunification if the peninsula were politically neutral and nuclear-free.

Consider that a succinct look at "future diplomacy" -- if North Asia succeeds in avoiding a Korean nuclear war in the dicey interim.

 

[akiboy]

North Korea has almost finished researching Taepodong 3 Long Range Missiles which can strike as far as Los Angeles. This threatens almost the whole Western Seaboard of U.S.A. Sanctions have no use for D.P.R.K as Kim is determined to have the highest strike capability possible with his missile. No stopping him. Plus if it comes to a full scale nuclear exchange with either Japan or U.S.A I feel North Korea will strike without any hesitation. N.korea is prepared to lose cities but not the Japanese or the U.S. I dont think Japan would like Tokyo wiped out of its map or the U.S would fancy L.A being wiped out from its map. Thats where N.Korea has the advantage . They are prepared for their casualties. Kim has hundreds of solid bunkers in the Korean mountains from where he can fire atleast 2-3 of his nukes. And , even if N.Korea gets pulverized by the U.S I am sure that America will lose atleast two of its cities!!!

Akshay

 

[Annie]

North Korea has almost finished researching Taepodong 3 Long Range Missiles which can strike as far as Los Angeles. This threatens almost the whole Western Seaboard of U.S.A. Sanctions have no use for D.P.R.K as Kim is determined to have the highest strike capability possible with his missile. No stopping him. Plus if it comes to a full scale nuclear exchange with either Japan or U.S.A I feel North Korea will strike without any hesitation. N.korea is prepared to lose cities but not the Japanese or the U.S. I dont think Japan would like Tokyo wiped out of its map or the U.S would fancy L.A being wiped out from its map. Thats where N.Korea has the advantage . They are prepared for their casualties. Kim has hundreds of solid bunkers in the Korean mountains from where he can fire atleast 2-3 of his nukes. And , even if N.Korea gets pulverized by the U.S I am sure that America will lose atleast two of its cities!!!

Akshay

There are links:

http://www.missilethreat.com/

First Aegis Cruiser Arrives in Japan
August 29, 2006 :: Reuters :: News

The U.S.S. Shiloh, the first missile defense-capable ship to be deployed in Japan, arrived in the port of Yokosuka today. The Shiloh is armed with the Aegis combat system, including Standard Missile-3 interceptors capable of shooting down medium-range ballistic missiles in mid-flight. Its deployment is a symbolic step in a joint U.S.-Japanese missile defense alliance to shield Japan and the region from missile attack. A second line of defense is to commence in September, when the U.S. military will begin installing Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) interceptors at its Kadena Air Base on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa. North Korea’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper immediately condemned the U.S.-Japanese deployment, stating that “the scheme of the U.S. war-thirsty quarters to deploy dense MD [missile defense] networks in the U.S. mainland, Japan, and the Pacific reveals their wild ambition to rule the world by strength.” (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Allies, Deployment and Japan
» Missile system details for: Aegis Ship-Based BMD and Japanese Ballistic Missile Defense

 

[Hamiltonian]

I'll start by saying I spend part of my summer in Seoul and rather enjoyed it there. South Korea is not really afraid of North Korea, they're more like brothers. I'm more scared of Japan than North Korea honestly. North Korea has had the ability to strike anywhere in South Korea for a while know, and a strike on Seoul would have crippled the Asian economy if that's what Kim Jong Il wanted. He probably fired the missile more from internal pressure in North Korea, from the military, who he still needs to support him if he wants to stay in power.

I'm more scared of Japan than North Korea here. North Korea loves to do the marketing campain of rattling it's swords, but the Japanse "National Guard" has been enlarged way beyond any sort of rational need, and I think they'd be more likely to become frustrated and create a need for such a large army and strike at North Korea first.

 

[Annie]

I'll start by saying I spend part of my summer in Seoul and rather enjoyed it there. South Korea is not really afraid of North Korea, they're more like brothers. I'm more scared of Japan than North Korea honestly. North Korea has had the ability to strike anywhere in South Korea for a while know, and a strike on Seoul would have crippled the Asian economy if that's what Kim Jong Il wanted. He probably fired the missile more from internal pressure in North Korea, from the military, who he still needs to support him if he wants to stay in power.

I'm more scared of Japan than North Korea here. North Korea loves to do the marketing campain of rattling it's swords, but the Japanse "National Guard" has been enlarged way beyond any sort of rational need, and I think they'd be more likely to become frustrated and create a need for such a large army and strike at North Korea first.

Let me make sure I understand what you are saying. NK is way less threatening to your mindset, than the West backed South. Gotcha? Cool.

 

[Hamiltonian]

Let me make sure I understand what you are saying. NK is way less threatening to your mindset, than the West backed South. Gotcha? Cool.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but no I don't feel threatened at all by South Korea, or by the West (and I am an American Citizen by the way). I think that Japan is going to see Kim Jong Il putting on his show (which he needs to maintain support from his military) and Japan is going to get scared, or annoyed, and strike North Korea. Maybe then might North Korea start launching missiles at Japan, or very doubtfully the US.

North Korea hates Japan much more than it hates the US. Japan had the whole repression and enslavement going on after that Russo-Japanese War until South and North Korea became liberated from them. NK might only decide to strike the US if we decide to then come to Japan's help and declare war against them. The point is I can see Japan starting something much more easily than I can see North Korea starting something.

 

[theHawk]

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but no I don't feel threatened at all by South Korea, or by the West (and I am an American Citizen by the way). I think that Japan is going to see Kim Jong Il putting on his show (which he needs to maintain support from his military) and Japan is going to get scared, or annoyed, and strike North Korea. Maybe then might North Korea start launching missiles at Japan, or very doubtfully the US.

North Korea hates Japan much more than it hates the US. Japan had the whole repression and enslavement going on after that Russo-Japanese War until South and North Korea became liberated from them. NK might only decide to strike the US if we decide to then come to Japan's help and declare war against them. The point is I can see Japan starting something much more easily than I can see North Korea starting something.

Yea, God forbid the people of a democratic country may want to do something other than wait for some maniac with a nuclear bomb to kill them at the time of his choosing. People have a right to preserve their own existance. Its utterly rediculous that the Japanese people are under such a real threat of being attacked, what more can these people do after being so peaceful and practicing democracy for 60 years now? There hasn't been a more productive and peaceful generation of people than the Japanese of the last 50 years, and if they're feeling so threatened that they are considering first strike action....then I don't think anyone on this planet is in a position to tell them otherwise.

Not sure exactly what you mean by "NK might only decide to strike the US if we decide to then come to Japan's help and declare war against them", the US and Japan are staunch allies, there is no question at all that if Japan is attacked the US will be right there with them.

 

[onedomino]

Yea, God forbid the people of a democratic country may want to do something other than wait for some maniac with a nuclear bomb to kill them at the time of his choosing. People have a right to preserve their own existance. Its utterly rediculous that the Japanese people are under such a real threat of being attacked, what more can these people do after being so peaceful and practicing democracy for 60 years now? There hasn't been a more productive and peaceful generation of people than the Japanese of the last 50 years, and if they're feeling so threatened that they are considering first strike action....then I don't think anyone on this planet is in a position to tell them otherwise.

Not sure exactly what you mean by "NK might only decide to strike the US if we decide to then come to Japan's help and declare war against them", the US and Japan are staunch allies, there is no question at all that if Japan is attacked the US will be right there with them.

By treaty, attacking Japan is the same as attacking the US. All NE Asian nuclear deterence (v. Russia, China, and North Korea) is the responsibility of America. The only alternative is to allow the Japanese to build nukes. By the way, if we do not get more cooperation from the Chinese regarding Iran and North Korea, then we should ask Beijing how they would like it if Japan went nuclear in response to NK aggression (e.g., as has previously happened: NK shooting missiles over Japanese airspace).

 

[Annie]

By treaty, attacking Japan is the same as attacking the US. All NE Asian nuclear deterence (v. Russia, China, and North Korea) is the responsibility of America. The only alternative is to allow the Japanese to build nukes. By the way, if we do not get more cooperation from the Chinese regarding Iran and North Korea, then we should ask Beijing how they would like it if Japan went nuclear in response to NK aggression (e.g., as has previously happened: NK shooting missiles over Japanese airspace).

I agree. At this point in time, I'm more in favor of Japan getting nukes, though I'd prefer that US defended in that realm than add to proliferation, than Iran or Syria. Can we take back India and Pakistan? No, too bad, they may be the death of us all.

It is getting more and more terrifying out here, moreso from China, Pakistan, India, Japan, Israel, than from the wannabes. There are so many fronts.

 

[Hamiltonian]

Yea, God forbid the people of a democratic country may want to do something other than wait for some maniac with a nuclear bomb to kill them at the time of his choosing. People have a right to preserve their own existance. Its utterly rediculous that the Japanese people are under such a real threat of being attacked, what more can these people do after being so peaceful and practicing democracy for 60 years now? There hasn't been a more productive and peaceful generation of people than the Japanese of the last 50 years, and if they're feeling so threatened that they are considering first strike action....then I don't think anyone on this planet is in a position to tell them otherwise.

One thing Japan could do is donate food supplies to NK, which has massive famine ever since the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. Another thing they could do is reduce the size of their "self defense force." I mean it is technically the 4th largest army in the world. Why is Japan so much more peaceful than North Korea? Yes North Korea is still at war with the US and South Korea, but they haven't taken any military action in the past 50 years either. NK has the ability to strike some major cities in Japan already. If NK wanted to attack them, then they would have already. Japan used to be pretty peaceful, but recently they've been experiencing a dose of revisionist history which edits out their past disgraces, and extreme nationalism. The current Japanese government is not very peaceful at all, and rather hawkish. Japan proposed an attack on NK after the Taepodong firings, but that idea was quickly shot down as belligerent by, among other countries, South Korea.

Not sure exactly what you mean by "NK might only decide to strike the US if we decide to then come to Japan's help and declare war against them", the US and Japan are staunch allies, there is no question at all that if Japan is attacked the US will be right there with them.

I don't dispute that. My point is that NK isn't going to do a preemptive strike against the US. I don't care if they have missiles that can reach Alaska, or Hawaii, or California. They're not going to attack the US unless the US declares war on them first. The only probable way that we'll declare war on them is if NK and Japan are at war. That's what I meant.

 

[Annie]

One thing Japan could do is donate food supplies to NK, which has massive famine ever since the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. Another thing they could do is reduce the size of their "self defense force." I mean it is technically the 4th largest army in the world. Why is Japan so much more peaceful than North Korea? Yes North Korea is still at war with the US and South Korea, but they haven't taken any military action in the past 50 years either. NK has the ability to strike some major cities in Japan already. If NK wanted to attack them, then they would have already. Japan used to be pretty peaceful, but recently they've been experiencing a dose of revisionist history which edits out their past disgraces, and extreme nationalism. The current Japanese government is not very peaceful at all, and rather hawkish. Japan proposed an attack on NK after the Taepodong firings, but that idea was quickly shot down as belligerent by, among other countries, South Korea.





I don't dispute that. My point is that NK isn't going to do a preemptive strike against the US. I don't care if they have missiles that can reach Alaska, or Hawaii, or California. They're not going to attack the US unless the US declares war on them first. The only probable way that we'll declare war on them is if NK and Japan are at war. That's what I meant.

So, NK is the victim here? The West and Japan are aligning against them? Am I getting your gist?

 

[Hamiltonian]

I agree. At this point in time, I'm more in favor of Japan getting nukes, though I'd prefer that US defended in that realm than add to proliferation, than Iran or Syria. Can we take back India and Pakistan? No, too bad, they may be the death of us all.

It is getting more and more terrifying out here, moreso from China, Pakistan, India, Japan, Israel, than from the wannabes. There are so many fronts.

Nuclear proliferation is not a good strategy for foreign policy. It is just an inevitability we should try to avoid for as long as possible. In the modern age people are just learning to fight without resorting to nuclear weapons despite having them anyways. If both sides use nukes all over, both loose. On the other hand, if both sides can avoid using them, one country will loose in the short run, but in the long run they can make a great economic recovery: NK, SK, and Japan all had great recoveries from wars.

I agree that it is more terrifying because of Isreal and Japan. I don't think China is very hungry for war, and although India and Pakistan dislike each other I don't think that they'll be going to war either.

 

[Annie]

Nuclear proliferation is not a good strategy for foreign policy. It is just an inevitability we should try to avoid for as long as possible. In the modern age people are just learning to fight without resorting to nuclear weapons despite having them anyways. If both sides use nukes all over, both loose. On the other hand, if both sides can avoid using them, one country will loose in the short run, but in the long run they can make a great economic recovery: NK, SK, and Japan all had great recoveries from wars.

I agree that it is more terrifying because of Isreal and Japan. I don't think China is very hungry for war, and although India and Pakistan dislike each other I don't think that they'll be going to war either.

We disagree. Most likely outbreak in my opinion-Pakistan v India. Israel, like the US would only use in response. Japan, not yet an issue.

 

[onedomino]

I agree. At this point in time, I'm more in favor of Japan getting nukes, though I'd prefer that US defended in that realm than add to proliferation, than Iran or Syria. Can we take back India and Pakistan? No, too bad, they may be the death of us all.

It is getting more and more terrifying out here, moreso from China, Pakistan, India, Japan, Israel, than from the wannabes. There are so many fronts.

More even than NK, the most terrifying nation to possess nukes is Pak. I do not think that NK is suicidal and traditional deterrence may work against them. However, if the religious crazies in Pak get their hands on the button, I have no confidence that MAD will work against them. For the same reason, that is why it is so scary if Iran gets the bomb. Why cannot the Euros, Russians, and Chinese understand that? The answer is that geopolitical combat v. the US is more interesting (and rewarding) to those countries than is nuclear detterence. somehow we have got to get the Pakis to destroy their nukes. And under zero circumstance can we allow Iran to get a nuke.

 

[Hamiltonian]

So, NK is the victim here? The West and Japan are aligning against them? Am I getting your gist?

I don't think that the west is aligning against NK, although I think Japan is moreso with it's lack of aid and trade. If countries can avoid war with NK it will reunite with SK in the next 20 to 30 years I would predict. Now the options are to basically ignore NK and let them reunify, or to have Japan start another war with them which will put everyone in a bad spot. NK can wreck the whole Asain economy if it wants to. If Japan wants to start a war over some missile testing or an exchange of words, then yes NK would be the victim.

We disagree. Most likely outbreak in my opinion-Pakistan v India. Israel, like the US would only use in response. Japan, not yet an issue.

Yes we disagree there. I meant we agree that Japan and Isreal are more likely to start a War than Iran or NK, if that's what you meant by "looking more terrifying."

 

[Annie]

I don't think that the west is aligning against NK, although I think Japan is moreso with it's lack of aid and trade. If countries can avoid war with NK it will reunite with SK in the next 20 to 30 years I would predict. Now the options are to basically ignore NK and let them reunify, or to have Japan start another war with them which will put everyone in a bad spot. NK can wreck the whole Asain economy if it wants to. If Japan wants to start a war over some missile testing or an exchange of words, then yes NK would be the victim.




Yes we disagree there. I meant we agree that Japan and Isreal are more likely to start a War than Iran or NK, if that's what you meant by "looking more terrifying."

I disagree. I think Japan and Israel are the least likely to 'start' a war, though they may jump start a preemption against themselves. To ignor the difference is foolhardy.

 

[theHawk]

One thing Japan could do is donate food supplies to NK, which has massive famine ever since the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. Another thing they could do is reduce the size of their "self defense force." I mean it is technically the 4th largest army in the world. Why is Japan so much more peaceful than North Korea? Yes North Korea is still at war with the US and South Korea, but they haven't taken any military action in the past 50 years either. NK has the ability to strike some major cities in Japan already. If NK wanted to attack them, then they would have already. Japan used to be pretty peaceful, but recently they've been experiencing a dose of revisionist history which edits out their past disgraces, and extreme nationalism. The current Japanese government is not very peaceful at all, and rather hawkish. Japan proposed an attack on NK after the Taepodong firings, but that idea was quickly shot down as belligerent by, among other countries, South Korea.

Wow. Why would it be up to Japan to feed North Koreans? NK itself could feed them if they spent less money on their military. Why is Japan more peaceful than NK? Are you kidding me? Japan isn't a totalitarian run state for starters. They also aren't trying to bully their neighbors around by making threats with nuclear weapons either. Do you honestly think NK wouldn't have already attacked Japan if the Japanese didn't have their army and the US to back them up? The only reason they haven't attacked Japan is because of the large military presense. North Korea is one of the most brutal and oppresive places in the world, and Japan is the exact opposite. I don't see how anyone can think anything good could come out of North Korea after its population has been brainwashed for decades. And proposing an attack after the missle firings isn't hawkish, its called wanting to preserve your own existance. Hawkish would be wanting to attack when unprovoked, say if North Korea totally gave up its nuclear ambitions and stopped its saber-waging.


And by the way, I would hardly say the North Koreans haven't taken any military action in the last 50 years (aside from nuclear ambitions and missle tests). Many infiltration attempts have been made and succeeded by North Korean military, firefights along the DMZ, ROK Navy vessels fired on and even sunk....
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/dmz-list.htm

 

[Hamiltonian]

Wow. Why would it be up to Japan to feed North Koreans? NK itself could feed them if they spent less money on their military.

Becuase they should want a war that would cripple the Asian and world economy.

Why is Japan more peaceful than NK? Are you kidding me? Japan isn't a totalitarian run state for starters. They also aren't trying to bully their neighbors around by making threats with nuclear weapons either.

No, they're just failing to recognize past crimes against their neighbors and threatening military action over North Korea's right to test missiles.

Do you honestly think NK wouldn't have already attacked Japan if the Japanese didn't have their army and the US to back them up?

Who wouldn't have attacked Japan by now if Japan had no army or international support? China, NK, SK, and Russia are just a couple in the region you could name. On the other hand Japan wants to attack NK even though NK has a decent army.

The only reason they haven't attacked Japan is because of the large military presense. North Korea is one of the most brutal and oppresive places in the world, and Japan is the exact opposite. I don't see how anyone can think anything good could come out of North Korea after its population has been brainwashed for decades. And proposing an attack after the missle firings isn't hawkish, its called wanting to preserve your own existance. Hawkish would be wanting to attack when unprovoked, say if North Korea totally gave up its nuclear ambitions and stopped its saber-waging.

Saying you're trying to preserve your own existance is an excuse to be hawkish. There is nothing logical or provable about that statement and it is just a rationalization.

And by the way, I would hardly say the North Koreans haven't taken any military action in the last 50 years (aside from nuclear ambitions and missle tests). Many infiltration attempts have been made and succeeded by North Korean military, firefights along the DMZ, ROK Navy vessels fired on and even sunk....
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/dmz-list.htm

These are not ordered attacks from the North Korean government, but isolated cases of troops accidentally crossing the DMZ for both sides and then shots being fired. It is irrelevant to North Korea waging a war to capture part of another country.