[A-List] Fwd: Gregory Elich: Spiralling out of Control - The Risk of a New Korean War
Suzanne de Kuyper
suzannedk at gmail.com
Sun Dec 5 13:08:46 MST 2010
This does not read as a risk but as a certainty. In either case, it is
tragic. As she has done so many many times, Hilary Dear is settting a
meeting up in order to inflame the situation. Wonder when the U.S. will
send thousands of new military forces to re-occupy one of the Koreas? U.S.
plans way in advance, as was evident when that South Korean boat hit a
floating mine, 'news' came out they were shelled by the North. Needed
alarums on the way to divisive, crippling, deadly, modern war.....a second
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Global Research E-Newsletter <crgeditor at yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Subject: Gregory Elich: Spiralling out of Control - The Risk of a New Korean
To: suzannedk at gmail.com
Having trouble viewing this email?
By Gregory Elich
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22252
Global Research, December 4, 2010
An artillery duel between North and South Korean forces on November 23 has
set in motion a series of events which threaten to spiral out of control.
On November 22, South Korea began its annual military exercise, involving
including 70,000 troops, dozens of South Korean and U.S. warships and some
500 aircraft. The following day, South Korean artillery stationed on
Yeonpyeong Island began a live ammunition drill, firing shells into the
The island is situated quite near to the North Korean mainland, and lies in
disputed waters. At the end of the Korean War in 1953, U.S. General Mark
Clark unilaterally established the western sea border to North Korea's
disadvantage. Rather than in a perpendicular line, the Northern Limit Line
was drawn to curve sharply upwards, handing over islands and a prime fishing
area to the South that would otherwise have gone to North Korea. The North,
having had no say in the delineation of its sea border, has never recognized
the Northern Limit Line. (1)
South Korean troops have been based on the island since the end of the
Korean War. There is also a small fishing village in close proximity to the
military base; unavoidably so, given that the island is less than three
square miles in size.
In response to the South Korean announcement of an impending artillery
drill, North Korea telephoned the South Korean military on the morning of
November 23, urging them to cancel plans to fire shells into what the North
regarded as its territorial waters. The North warned that if the drill
proceeded, they would respond with a "resolute physical counter-strike." (2)
Nevertheless, the artillery drill proceeded and four hours later, North
Korean artillery fired on the island. In the first round, 150 shells were
shot, of which 60 hit the island. Then 20 more shells were fired in a second
round. In all, four people on the island were killed and 18 wounded. (3)
The South Korean military telegraphed the North, asking them to cease, but
to no avail. Then their artillery returned fire at the North, firing 80
shells. One shell directly hit a North Korean military barracks. Although
many of the shells appeared to have inflicted little damage, an official at
the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff noted, "Satellite images show our
shells landed on a cluster of barracks in North Korea, so we presume there
have been many casualties and considerable property damage." (4)
Facing a barrage of criticism from domestic hawks for having responded in
too tepid a manner, South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae-young resigned
from his position. Yet the South Korean response probably could not have
been increased significantly without risking a wider conflict.
During the drill, South Korean artillery on Yeonpyeong Island fired in a
southward direction, away from the North Korean mainland, and this was not
the first time that such drills had been conducted. North Korean forces
could have made their point sufficiently by splashing some shells into the
sea. Instead, they overreacted in a manner that manifested an inexcusable
disregard for human life by targeting the island.
Why the North did so can best be explained by recent developments in
relations between the two Koreas. This was, after all, the first artillery
duel between the two nations in forty years, so something led to it.
President Lee Myung-bak of the conservative Grand National Party took office
in February 2008, vowing to reverse the Sunshine Policy of warming relations
with North Korea. The government of Lee's predecessor, Roh Moo-hyun, had
signed several agreements on economic cooperation with North Korea,
including joint mining operations in the North. Lee killed every one these
agreements, ensuring that they would never be implemented. The railroad
leading from the South to the North, which had just been reconnected under
former President Roh, is now closed for good. That project had promised to
benefit both Koreas, providing the South with a cheaper and more convenient
route for shipping goods to China and Russia, and giving the North added
income through user fees. South Korean tourist operations at Mt. Kumgang in
the North are closed. Reunions of family members separated by the border
have stopped. The only remaining remnant of the Sunshine Policy is the
presence of South Korean firms operating at an industrial park in Kaesong,
North Korea, and its days are probably numbered.
Then there was the incident in which the South Korean corvette Cheonan was
sunk, in May of this year. In a stacked investigation, South Korea concluded
that a North Korean submarine had targeted the vessel with a torpedo. The
evidence, however, does not fully back that assertion and a Russian team's
investigation determined that an accidental encounter with a sea mine was a
more likely cause. (5) North Korea's repeated requests to participate in an
investigation, or to at least view the evidence, were consistently rebuffed.
Instead the Lee Administration utilized the incident to further sour
relations between the two Koreas.
Perhaps most significantly, when Roh Moo-hyun was president of South Korea,
emergency communication channels were established between the two Koreas,
specifically for the purpose of opening dialogue and limiting or preventing
armed conflicts whenever they arose or threatened to do so. On a number of
occasions, those communication channels stopped potential conflicts before
they either occurred or escalated. Those channels no longer exist, thanks to
Lee's dismantling of agreements with North Korea, and as a result four South
Koreans and an unknown number of North Koreans are now dead. (6)
That North Korea would feel threatened is not surprising. Its economy is
crippled by the imposition of draconian Western sanctions, and the annual
South Korean-U.S. military exercises are intended to intimidate.
Furthermore, the rhetoric from Washington has been unremittingly hostile,
and now with a more conservative government, so is South Korea's.
Nor is North Korea unaware of the fact that in February 2003, President Bush
told Chinese President Jiang Zemin that if the nuclear issue could not be
solved diplomatically, he would "have to consider a military strike against
North Korea." (7) One month later, Bush ordered a fleet into the region,
including the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson. Six F-117 Stealth bombers
were sent to South Korea, and nearly 50 fighters and bombers to Guam. The
possibility of military action was on the table, Bush told a South Korean
official. (8) Due to the efforts of China and South Korea's progressive
president at the time, Bush chose dialogue, albeit offset to a large degree
by his imposition of further sanctions against North Korea. It has also
certainly not gone unnoticed by North Korea that any halting diplomatic
efforts have ceased altogether once President Obama took office. And with
the pronounced deterioration in relations set in motion by President Lee
Myung-bak, his administration has made it clear that he has no interest in
Following the clash over Yeonpyeong, China called for dialogue and a
reduction of tensions, sending envoys to both South and North Korea. It
proposed that the six nations that had at one time participated in
denuclearization talks, South and North Korea, the U.S., Japan, China and
Russia, meet for emergency discussions "to exchange views on major issues of
concern to the parties at present." The meetings would not be a resumption
of talks on denuclearization, although China hoped that "they will create
conditions for their resumption." Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong
Lei stated, "The starting point for China proposing emergency consultations
is to ease the tensions on the Korean Peninsula and provide a platform of
engagement and dialogue." (9)
The Chinese proposal should have been welcomed as the only sensible approach
to the problem. But officials of the Obama Administration condemned China
for being "irresponsible" by putting forth such a proposal. Instead, they
urged China to get on board with the program of pressuring North Korea and
further escalating tensions and the risk of war. White House spokesman
Robert Gibbs snottily dismissed the proposal by saying that the U.S. and
other nations "are not interested in stabilizing the region through a series
of P.R. activities." (10)
South Korea, too, rejected China's proposal. The U.S., South Korea, and
Japan willfully misrepresented China's proposal as merely being a call for a
resumption of the six-party talks on denuclearization. Domestic audiences
were not hearing that the proposal's purpose was to prevent further
conflict. Instead, Japan said that talks would be "impossible" under the
circumstances, while a South Korean official said that President Lee "made
it clear that now is not the time for discussing" six-party talks. (11)
Indeed. Not when one's goal is to further inflame the situation. To further
that objective, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is meeting with the
foreign secretaries of South Korea and Japan to map out a common program in
dealing with North Korea. (12) It goes without saying that dialogue with
North Korea will not be part of that program.
President Lee has promised to take a much harder line on North Korea, and
already the South has sent 400,000 propaganda leaflets across the border on
balloons. (13) There has also been talk of resuming loudspeaker broadcasts
across the border. The sending of leaflets was in violation of a 2004
agreement between the two sides to halt propaganda campaigns aimed at each
By the end of December, South Korea plans to hold another round of artillery
drills on islands lying in disputed waters, including, dismayingly enough,
Yeonpyeong Island. Nothing could be calculated to be more provoking under
the circumstances. In preparation for the response to the drills that are
expected from North Korea, island defenses are being beefed up. South Korea
has added multiple rocket launchers, howitzers, missile systems and advanced
precision-guided artillery to the Yeonpyeong arsenal. (14)
According to a South Korean official, "We decided to stage the same kind of
fire drill as the one we carried out on the island on November 23 to display
our determination." (15)
The new drills appear calculated to provoke a conflict, and this time South
Korea is intent on an asymmetrical response. The military is revising its
rules of engagement so as to jettison concerns about starting a wider
conflict. If former Defense Minister Kim Tae-young is to believed, if there
is another North Korean strike, then warships and fighter jets of both South
Korea and the U.S. will launch attacks on the North. (16)
Incoming Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin is if anything even more determined
to fan the flames of conflict into a wider conflagration. The South Korean
military will immediately launch "psychological warfare," including,
presumably, loudspeaker broadcasts across the border. The North has promised
to target loudspeakers if they are put in operation, and that would in turn
provide the pretext for the South Korean military to launch combat
operations. If there is another exchange of fire with the North, Kim
announced, "We will definitely air raid North Korea." All combat forces
available would be mobilized, he promised. The newly minted rules of
engagement are also going to permit "preemptive" strikes on North Korea
based on the presumption of a possible attack. In other words, if North
Korea fails to provide a pretext for military action, the Lee Administration
can attack the North without provocation, if it chooses to do so. (17)
Lee Myung-bak has already achieved his dream of demolishing the Sunshine
Policy. Relations between the two Koreas are at their lowest point since the
end of military dictatorship in South Korea. Now he aims to deliberately
trigger armed conflict in order to demonstrate "toughness," and not
incidentally, drive the final nail into the coffin of the Sunshine Policy.
Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin feels that the risk of war is low. "It will be
difficult for North Korea to conduct a full-scale war because there are some
elements of insecurity in the country, such as the national economy and
power transfer." (18) Those may be arguments against North Korea's ability
to successfully sustain a long-term war over the course of a year or two,
but it seriously misreads the ability and will of the North Korean military
to put up a determined fight. The extent of possible South Korean air
strikes on the North is not clear, but anything other than an extremely
limited and localized action is likely to trigger total war. And that is a
war that the U.S. will inevitably be drawn into. Even presuming a quick
defeat of the North (which would be unlikely), eighty percent of North Korea
is mountainous, providing ideal terrain for North Korean forces to conduct
guerrilla warfare. The U.S. could find itself involved in another failing
military occupation. With both sides heavily armed, the consequences could
be much worse for Koreans, and casualties could reach alarming totals. Four
million Koreans died in the Korean War. Even one percent of that total in a
new war would be unconscionable, and Lee Myung-bak is deluded if he believes
he can ride the tiger of armed conflict and remain in control of the path it
(1) For a map of the Northern Limit Line and Yeonpyeong's placement, see:
blue line identifies the Northern Limit Line recognized by South Korea and
the U.S., and the red line, the border as recognized by North Korea.
Yeonpyeong Island is marked #1 on the map.
(2) "Panmunjom Mission of KPA Sends Notice to U.S. Forces Side," KCNA
(Pyongyang), November 25, 2010.
(3) "Military Under Fire for Response to N. Korean Attack," Chosun Ilbo
(Seoul), November 25, 2010.
(4) "Military Suggests Counterfire Caused 'Many Casualties' in N. Korea,"
Yonhap (Seoul), December 2, 2010. Jung Sung-ki, "Satellite Image Shows
Damages in NK Artillery Site," Korea Times (Seoul), December 2, 2010.
(6) "Containment After N.Korea's Unacceptable Provocation," Hankyoreh
(Seoul), November 24, 2010.
(7) Hwang Doo-hyong, "Bush Expresses Frustration at China's Reluctance to
Dissuade N. Korea from Going Nuclear: Memoir," Yonhap (Seoul), November 10,
(8) "Bush Admits He Considered a Military Strike Against North Korea,"
Korean Broadcasting System (Seoul), March 18, 2004. "Carl Vinson Strike
Group CVN-70 'Gold Eagle'," www.globalsecurity.org Will Dunham, "U.S.
Military Operations for N.Korea Fraught with Peril," Reuters, April 25,
(9) Kim Young-gyo, "China Calls for Emergency Talks on N. Korean Nukes,"
Yonhap (Seoul), November 28, 2010. "China Calls for Resumption of Dialogue,
Negotiations for Korean Peninsula Situation," Xinhua (Beijing), November 30,
2010. "Chinese FM Talks with DPRK, ROK, U.S. Diplomats on Korean Peninsular
Situation," Xinhua (Beijing), November 26, 2010.
(10) Helene Cooper and Sharon LaFraniere, "U.S. and South Korea Balk at
Talks with North," New York Times, November 30, 2010.
(11) Hwang Joon bum and Park Min-hee, "Lee Administration Rejects Six-Party
Talks Proposal," Hankyoreh (Seoul), November 29, 2010. Tania Branigan, "US
Rejects Talks with North Korea," The Guardian (London), November 30, 2010.
(12) "Kim, Clinton Agree to Reject China's Proposal for Talks on N. Korea,"
Yonahp (Seoul), December 1, 2010.
(13) "S. Korea Sent Propaganda Leaflets to N. Korea After Artillery Attack,"
Yonhap (Seoul), November 26, 2010.
(14) Jung Sung-ki, "Seoul Plans Live-Fire Drill Next Week," Korea Times
(Seoul), December 1, 2010. "New Defence Minister to Decide When to Stage
Firing Drills in Yellow Sea," Yonhap (Seoul), December 3, 2010. "Tension
Mounts as Firing Drill Planned," JoongAng Ilbo (Seoul), December 2, 2010.
(15) "S. Korea to Stage Fresh Firing Drill on Yeonpyeong Island," Chosun
Ilbo (Seoul), November 30, 2010.
(16) Jung Sung-ki, "Seoul Vows Naval, Air Strikes on NK," Korea Times
(Seoul), November 29, 2010.
(17) "Defense Minister Nominee Vows Air Strikes if Attacked by N. Korea,"
Yonhap (Seoul), December 3, 2010. Kim Kwang-tae, "SKorea Defense Nominee
Vows Airstrikes on North," Associated Press, December 2, 2010. Song Sang-ho,
"Kim Warns Air Strike on North Korea," Korea Herald (Seoul), December 3,
2010. Na Jeong-ju, "Defense Chief-Nominee Vows Air Strikes if Attacked,"
Korea Times (Seoul), December 3, 2010. Mark McDonald, "South Korean Outlines
Muscular Military Postures," New York Times, December 3, 2010.
(18) "Defense Minister Nominee Vows Air Strikes if Attacked by N. Korea,"
Yonhap (Seoul), December 3, 2010.
Gregory Elich is on the Board of Directors of the Jasenovac Research
Institute and on the Advisory Board of the Korea Truth Commission. He is the
author of the book Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit
Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.
Your endorsement is greatly appreciated
Subscribe to the Global Research e-newsletter
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility
of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for
Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole
responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization
will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements
contained in this article.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on
community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The
source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of
Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial
internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in
an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and
social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and
educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes
other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com
© Copyright Gregory Elich, Global Research, 2010
The url address of this article is:
© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007
This email was sent to suzannedk at gmail.com by crgeditor at yahoo.com.
Update Profile/Email Address
Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM)
Email Marketing by
GLOBAL RESEARCH | v | Montreal | Canada
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 24233 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the A-List