Columnists

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

The Koreas risk miscalculation

By: Gwynne Dyer

Posted: 03/15/2013 1:00 AM | Comments: 0

South Korean and American soldiers take part in military exercises south of Seoul. (LEE JIN-MAN / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ARCHIVES)

The joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises known as Key Resolve and Foal Eagle are underway, and so far the heavens have not fallen.

The American forces have not launched an unprovoked assault on North Korea, despite the strident claims of Pyongyang's media that the exercises are a cover for exactly such a plan. In fact, joint exercises on this scale -- they only involve 13,000 American and South Korean troops -- have been held every year of the past 40 and pose no threat whatever to North Korea.

Neither has North Korea chosen to "defend its sovereignty," as it recently threatened to do, by launching pre-emptive nuclear strikes against both the United States and South Korea. It could certainly do huge damage to South Korea, but despite its successful nuclear and missile tests in the past three months, it still lacks all but the most rudimentary capability to hit the United States.

Pyongyang's nuclear test in February had twice the explosive power of the last one in 2009, but nobody believes North Korea's claim it has also made its bomb small enough to fit on the tip of an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Nor does the Unha-3 missile, which Pyongyang used to launch a satellite in December, have the guidance systems and re-entry technology necessary to deliver such a nuclear weapon onto an American target -- which would have to be in western Alaska, since that is the limit of the rocket's range.

There is no doubt Kim Jong Un's regime is feeling extremely peeved about the international response to its weapon and missile tests, which has included tighter United Nations trade sanctions that got unanimous support in the Security Council. Even North Korea's only ally, China, voted for them.

In a particularly peevish gesture, he has even cut the military hotline between the two sides at Panmunjom. (If you think there's going to be a crisis, the last thing you want is a secure and rapid means of talking to the other side.) But it's really just an empty gesture: An alternative military communications line, used to monitor cross-border workers at the Kaesong Industrial Complex, remains open.

But it's a long way from feeling peeved to feeling suicidal. Any North Korean nuclear attack on an American target would be answered by immediate U.S. strikes that would annihilate the military and civilian leadership in Pyongyang, obliterate its nuclear facilities and probably destroy much else besides. So North Korea's threat to launch a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike against the United States, or even against South Korea, is totally implausible.

The young and inexperienced North Korean leader, however, might feel the need to prove his mettle to his own military commanders by taking some more limited action against the American-South Korean exercises. That sort of thing can easily go wrong.

There is a widespread perception in South Korea that Seoul was caught off-guard by North Korea's sinking of the warship Cheonan and its artillery attacks on Yeonpyeong island in 2010. North Korea paid no military price for either action, and South Korea's newly elected president, Park Geun-hye, who took office only two weeks ago, needs to show South Koreans she is not going to let that happen again.

She probably also hopes a promise of prompt and severe retaliation will deter North Korea from any future attacks of that sort.

So she has engaged in some rhetorical escalation of her own.

She has warned North Korea that any further attacks will be met by instant retaliation that targets not only the units involved in the attack, but also North Korea's high command.

No doubt this is only intended to deter any such North Korean attack, but in practice it means there will be much more rapid and uncontrollable escalation if Pyongyang makes a token attack anyway.

Even a conventional war in the Korean peninsula would be hugely destructive. Just north of the "Demilitarized Zone" between the two countries is the largest concentration of artillery in the entire world, and the mega-city of Seoul is within long artillery range of the border.

North Korea's population is considerably smaller than South Korea's, but the North maintains the fourth-largest army in the world. Its armed forces operate mostly last-generation weaponry, but the equipment is well-maintained and the soldiers appear to be well-trained. The last war between the two countries killed more than one million people and left all the peninsula's cities in ruins -- and that was more than 60 years ago.

If North Korea ignored Park's warning and made some local attack to demonstrate its displeasure, and Park then felt obliged to act on her threat to go after the North Korean leadership in Pyongyang in retaliation, things could get very ugly very fast.

So far, the American-South Korean exercises have gone off smoothly, but the risk of a serious miscalculation first in Pyongyang and then in Seoul is real, and the exercises still have until March 25 to run.

Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition March 15, 2013 A11

Factual inaccuracy? Something missing? Help improve our journalism.

Know about news? Share your story suggestions, photos and video.

Spelling error? Punctuation problem? Send us an email if you’ve found a typo.

More Columnists

Undock

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.