Now, this development has potentially game-changing implications for international relations. As one of the most pressurized regions in the world, the Korean Peninsula certainly does not need heightened tensions, nor do any of the involved parties. Although at a first glance, the Koreas may seem rather small and not all that relevant to global affairs, a closer look is definitely due. Marred by strife, tension, and volatility since the Cold War-era Korean War (think early 1950s), the Koreas are a powder-keg waiting to burst with nuclear arms, delusional leaders, and problematic alliances at every turn. For starters, North Korea has the despotic leadership of the Kims (Jong-Il and Jong-Un), tactical nuclear and chemical arms, and fairly close diplomatic ties with China. The leadership of the Kims is a huge mess in and of itself as power is gradually transferring from the ailing Jong-Il to the younger and more unpredictable Jong-Un. What this means for the international community is yet to be seen as all that is known about Jong-Un is that he is a diabetic, drunkard with a very powerful father, but we have more than enough reason to be concerned as Jong-Un certainly does have to prove his worth to a strongly-led totalitarian administration before he is deemed fit to take over (and this proof very well may come in the form of some military muscle-flexing). On the other side of the line of control, South Korea doesn't have despotic leadership or nuclear arms of its own, but it does have fairly close ties with three major nuclear powers (the US included). As such, the battleground is certainly rife for a major international conflict if proper steps aren't taken to subdue the current tensions.
South Korean security ministers are in an emergency meeting as this post is being composed. Hopefully, this will be an isolated incident, allowing the added Korean tensions to dissipate in the coming weeks. If not, two lives have already been lost, billions are at stake. Do you think that this occurrence is a credible threat to the relative peace on the Korean Peninsula or will it simply amount to just another minor skirmish? Should we be worried about escalation?
Are we in store for nuclear war in our near future? (sorry, sensationalism sells)
14 comments:
This is for sure a serious threat to South Korea. The world has known of nuclear weapons presence in South Korea and sooner or later, they would unleash their power on anyone at anytime. But this time, it's an artillery strike that's still a deadly threat to South Korea. The whole world should now take the necessary actions to prepare for escalations and tensions within the Korean Peninsula. If this attack on South Korea is just a preemptive strike, the world must do something fast in order to solve this conflict before possibly going on the brink of World War 3.
This is truly a scary event! All of the elements of a war appear to be in place with, as Amrit described as, "nuclear arms, delusional leaders,and problematic alliances at every turn." To me, I am reminded of the state of Europe during WWI with the volatile Balkan region essentially pulling all of Europe into a war. The same could happen here with the Korean Peninsula. However, this could also just prove to be another Gulf of Tonkin, with all this hoopla over a mistaken firing.
I seriously hope that this conflict does not turn into a World War 3. I would like to think that the United States had learned its lesson about poking its nose into the business of other countries to avoid another situation like Vietnam. I don't know Joshua, should the whole world prepare to join in the war, or should the world attempt to avoid this to avoid escalating the conflict? Of course the United States is not very good at staying neutral...
South Korea does not have the military power to fight North Korea on it's own. If we don't support our allies, the death count will be giant. However, if we do escalate and North Korea does not back down, the death count will be astronomical. South Korea should have never started firing artillery shots in disputed water.
This is definitely a frightening event. I heard about it last night, but I thought it was only rumors until I heard on the news this morning about North Korea's attack on South Korea. As Bobby said, South Korea does not have the firepower and resources to fight and win on its own. The United States, being allies with South Korea can not simply sit back and do nothing. Especially with the reputation of not being able to mind our own business, we act like the police of the world. Being one of the three major powers, it can be understood...but I really do hope this event won't spark a World War 3. It seems there isn't a moment of peace in the world.
This news is indeed disturbing. North Korea is unpredictable as usual and this could escalate, but I don't think that it will. North Korea may be acting quite bold, but it is in the best interests of neither country to engage in full on war. If it came to that, I think that both sides would back down at least enough to avoid any major destruction.
Also, many people have been commenting about how the South Korean military isn't strong enough to fight DPRK by itself. While it is true that DPRK forces outnumber South Korean forces, the South Korean military is actually much stronger. DPRK forces are still using equipment, tanks and planes from the soviet era of technology (try 30-40 years ago). South Korea on the other hand uses the most modern standard of technology for all of their forces. The major wild card here is nukes, so we'll have to see what will happen.
A very delicate issue indeed. One issue dealing with our involvement in a potential WWIII would be China though. If China backs N Korea, wouldn't that make it more difficult to fight against N Korea since we owe China so much? Not like debt has really stopped us before, but...
Anyways, I have to go on a tangent to say that if WWIII were to happen, N Korea would win because they have the son of God and the son of the son of God leading them while we have... a socialist Muslim? Maybe we can get our radical friends in Afghanistan to help us beat N Korea. Guerillas vs Terrorists? Who would win?
I understand the fair amount of worry that people are experiencing, but I am positive that China will NOT back North Korea to create a WWI-like situation. Although China may have a questionable human rights record, its ruling party and top leaders are pretty astute and their ultimate goal is to look out for China's future interests. Although China and North Korea may seem like close allies, China will definitely not back North Korea unconditionally--China's ideal solution is to keep the Korean peninsula stable, preferring the status quo.
One of the reasons China takes a much more lenient stance on North Korea is because if the North and South were to reunify, China would lose the North as a buffer region; keep in mind that the U.S. has military bases in South Korea. However, it is not in China's interest to have a "crazy uncle" in the form of an aggressive North Korea; China is much more interested in keeping favorable relations with countries with big economies. Earlier, in 2006, China warned North Korea against nuclear testing, since a nuclear North Korea is a threat to China as well:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-warns-north-korea-against-nuclear-test-418896.html
For these reasons, China has been a key player in the six-party talks and I believe will continue to try to keep the status quo on the Korean peninsula.
As for Kim Jong-Un, it remains to be seen how effective of a leader he will be. But for now, I don't think a war is imminent; this sounds just like another North Korean outburst, a small but not insignificant skirmish.
While this is indeed alarming and unfortunate, especially for those who live on the Korean penninsula, the real danger to the rest of us is the prospect of China backing North Korea. Admittedly, it's not logical for them to do so, but still, this is what we need to watch.
The United States, and frankly any military power in the world, simply cannot afford to get into a conflict with China, but thisn't really because of the size of the Chinese army or because of the danger of "losing" such a war. The problem is that such a conflict has the potential to go nuclear if the fighting escalates beyond this issue. Even if it doesn't it will sour US-China relations to the point where a future dispute might set off something horrible. The prospect of nuclear war is obviously really really really bad, and that's what we have to avoid. If I were in a position to call the shots and China did, for whatever illogical reason, back North Korea, I wouldn't oppose whatever it is they wanted to do, short of nuclear action, obviously, which is even more irrational than backing the North Koreans in the first place. Antagonizing any nuclear power, especially a P5 nuclear power with a massive arsenal of fully capable devices, is not an option. (Obviously, if I were running the Chinese government and the U.S. intervened on South Korea's behalf, the same principles would apply.) Let's not end the world because of the actions of one berserk leader, all right?
What happens if China stays out of this or backs South Korea is more interesting. Many world leaders, North Koreans and ordinary citizens all over the world are probably secretly not too happy about Mr. Kim and his command of the state he runs. This would be the best "excuse" they would have to take him out of power. During the last Korean War, China opposed the US-lead UN forces, preserving North Korea's status. If this doesn't happen this time around, the DPRK is probably in for it. If China actually attacks (pretty unlikely unless Kim Jong Il has too much to drink and decides to fire on China too), they'll crumple in the face of a two-front war. As Jeff said, the North Korean military may be high in number, but the South Korean military has better technology. In that fight, I'd put my money on the tech. China, of course, has both, and between the two forces the DPRK would crumple.
To be continued...
In all likelihood, however, China will probably stay out of this, leading the North Koreans and South Koreans to duke it out. If this happens, straight up, it will likely end in a stalemate. North Korea really has no business invading South Korea, and frankly, South Korea has no business actually trying to take over North Korea. In either direction, the battle would be long, bloody, and pretty pointless. That will end in a stalemate, I say.
If the West intervenes, then the conflict will probably be over more quickly, but would still probably end in a stalemate. NATO could probably take over the DPRK on its own with help from the massive technology gap, and with help from the South Koreans the fate of the DPRK would theoretically be bleak. That being said, however, NATO and South Korea shouldn't try to take control of North Korea. First of all, it would probably bog down as Afghanistan and Iraq have done, though it's likely there wouldn't be quite as many insurgents this time around. Secondly, no NATO member state gains anything (other than the absence of Kim Jong Il) by doing so. South Korea gains peace of mind about its eternal border issues, of course, but it's better to try and resolve these conflicts through diplomacy, not random NATO invasions. Thirdly, I doubt the Chinese government would appreciate this action, and as I said, avoiding ticking off the Security Council member states should be priority number one for all parties invovled. Finally, it only continues America's proud tradition of neo-imperialism all over the world, although it now would be spread to Asia as well, giving the (North) Koreans, Chinese, and any number of disgruntled anti-American-leaning states like Indonesia even more reason to not like us and spark conflicts in the future.
In short, a list of goals:
1. Avoid nuclear war.
2. All states avoid pissing off the P5.
3. Diplomacy first.
That's all.
"I understand the fair amount of worry that people are experiencing, but I am positive that China will NOT back North Korea to create a WWI-like situation."
While that may be true, we must also realize that China currently supplies North Korea with 95% of its power. In the case of a belligerent North Korea, would China be willing to cut North Korea's power? All indications from Beijing suggest that the answer to this question is a resounding "no." Although the willingness to maintain North Korean power supply during a potential time of war seems to amount to the maintenance of the status quo, such an initiative will serve to back North Korean exploits and amount to China's indirect backing of the DPRK. As such, we have to be extremely vary about the fragile relations between countries in and surrounding the Korean Peninsula.
Can we add a human element to this discussion.. i am almost certain that we are all high school seniors... and most of us here are U.S. citizens... I'd like to remind the fellas in the room that when we all turn 18, we have to register for the draft.
There's a reason why the U.S. has had soldiers stationed in Korea for a while now...in the possible event of the U.S. backing S. Korea in a war with N. Korea, there is a chance that the draft would be needed and activated. We could be mixed into right this the old fashion way.
Hope for the best.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/11/25/florcruz.china.korea.response.cnn
"In the case of a belligerent North Korea, would China be willing to cut North Korea's power? All indications from Beijing suggest that the answer to this question is a resounding 'no.' Although the willingness to maintain North Korean power supply during a potential time of war seems to amount to the maintenance of the status quo, such an initiative will serve to back North Korean exploits and amount to China's indirect backing of the DPRK."
Do you mean to suggest that by NOT completely cutting of North Korea's power supply, which would put millions of suffering people in even greater suffering and increase tensions in the region, China is actually indirectly backing the DPRK, even when there is no war currently taking place? I DO NOT think China should cut off North Korea's power in the minor case of a "belligerent North Korea." I think that's a bit drastic. If a dictator in Mexico (let's pretend Mexico is run by a dictator) suddenly had a border dispute with Guatemala, would people say the U.S. is indirectly supporting Mexico by not being willing to cut off Mexico's energy supply? No.
China's bilateral trade with North Korea is only about 2.6 billion dollars, compared to 140 billion dollars with South Korea (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/11/25/florcruz.china.korea.response.cnn). It really doesn't want any trouble on the Korean Peninsula and the government doesn't seem to be taking sides, either. (It's doing what it always does regarding North Korea--asking other countries to "exercise restraint"). Bottom line, I don't think China will be a force against the U.S. at all. The two countries are even contacting each other via "the hotline" to avoid further conflict (same website).
Minor adjustment: China might resist U.S. attempts to intervene militarily, but I don't think it would DIRECTLY oppose the United States, militarily, in any way. But it doesn't seem that the military issue is going to escalate very much anyway, although this is quite the diplomatic disaster:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/26/koreas.crisis/index.html?hpt=T1
Post a Comment