Categories: Need to know

North Korea threatens to annihilate U.S.

Pentagon calls it “silliness”

by macleans.ca on Wednesday, June 24, 2009 6:18pm - 18 Comments

North Korean officials are ramping up the rhetoric in advance of military exercises off the country’s eastern coast. The country’s reclusive regime has already said it plans to fire a long-range missile in response to the international community’s criticism of its rocket launch in April, and it may also be looking to test the sanctions imposed on it after it conducted a nuclear test last month by shipping weapons to the similarly secretive regime in Myanmar. On Wednesday, North Korean authorities warned that it would consider any attempt to intercept the shipment a declaration of war. They specifically said the U.S. would be starting a second Korean War and that North Korea would “wipe out” the aggressors. U.S. authorities say they haven’t decided whether or not to request an inspection of a ship while, Pentagon spokesperson Geoff Morrell dismissed North Korea’s threat to “wipe out” the U.S. as “silliness.”

New York Post

Dieter Sprockets

They'll have to take a number and wait in line. First of all there's the beardo brothers bin ladden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Those boys made good on 911, the USS Cole and a few other warm-up acts. And they still have two more installments to make. Next there's McQuack who has ripped the red white and blue to shreds since his days at uni, where he fell in love with the art of disdainful expression.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

I may need to brush up on my international relations, but what do you call a North Korean government threat to "wipe out" another country if not a declaration of war? Any reason the Pentagon wouldn't be justified in carpet-bombing every nuclear and government facility and every palatial presidential estate in NoKo overnight? And anyone who brings up the UN in their answer will deserve the smirk I have prepared…

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

"Any reason the Pentagon wouldn't be justified in carpet-bombing every nuclear and government facility and every palatial presidential estate in NoKo overnight?"

Nope, no reason why not. Though it may be more bark than bite. China might come on side with North Korea as an ally. And the Americans have neither the military depth nor the financial means (again, I think China plays a role somewhere) to engage in another substantive war front.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Oh, and they'd better do it right or South Korea would cease to exist.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Totally agreed that it's high-risk. And no question that there is likely more bark than bite coming from the leadership of that incredibly sad cult, uh, country. But how many reasons do "we" need before finally having the spine to free the North Korean people from their plight?

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

When I can remember where I read an excellent piece considering the China-NKor relationship, and the extent to which China would likely cease to be neutral in this affair, I'll post it here. But that is a HUGE part of the equation, as I understand it. The likelihood of an all-out attack remaining a USA-North Korea affair is low. And that is scary.

As for the plight of the North Korean people – that seems to be the question of the week (in the broader sense). Pretending that China would stand back, this still begs the question of what fuels the regime in NKor. I don't mean we leave people hanging out on a limb, but I am coming to the postion that the only real change is one that is rooted in the citizens of a nation (I say this with hesitation, because they aren't just ruled by a dictator, they're living in the stone age in many respects as a result). And there's always the aftermath – do we even know how to help a nation rebuild itself after we create a vacuum?

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Very well said, Sean. China is as much a wild card as is the degree of insanity within the NoKo leadership. But, as evil as the Chinese leadership is, I don't see them as completely stupid. They would have a hard time, I think, picking a fight with their number one debtor, unless they have no problem guaranteeing that their wealth (currently expressed in Uncle Sam IOU's) just disappears.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I agree, MYL. This is one helluva complicated question, but if push (God forbid) came to shove, how could China possibly be willing to endanger the US trade partnership? All their economic progress over the last 15 years would be erased; the massive recession they're currently experiencing would look very mild by comparison. They would risk this for a bunch of utter lunatics in Pyongyang? Seems unlikely to me.

So, eventually North Korea will have the bomb. Given the lack of realism in its rhetoric and actions, that will be a real existential threat to South Korea and Japan. What will the US do then? What will China do? If the North Koreans nuked Osaka and/or Seoul, China would presumably cooperate in obliterating them; but the Japanese and South Koreans can't live with the possibility of such a scenario. It is extremely cruel of China to be nurturing this unpredictable little pit bull. Anyway, it'll be interesting to watch what happens.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

myl and Jack – while it's true I waste too much time on these boards, it's conversations like these that make it worthwhile.

I think we tend to assume that China operates with the same goals, logic and motives as many other nations in the world. There's some reason to be cautious in that respect. The short version is that China has survived quite nicely for thousands of years without the rest of the world, and that 'our' need for their labour and resources far exceeds their need for our markets. I'm not saying they're itching for a fight with anyone, but that if push comes to shove they will circle the wagons. It's been almost twenty years since I travelled China, but I'm still profoundly struck by the sense that they have more or less maintained a continuous civilizataion for what feels like forever. It's true they are adopting certain Western habits of consumerism, and growing something of a middle class, but at the end of the day, China serves China's interests.

http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

Interesting comments all around, but the thing that keeps getting overlooked is the massive loss of civilian life and infrastructure that would occur in South Korea within the first two hours, let alone if any conflict stretched on for a couple of days or a week. This is such a tough nut to crack because the people of northern South Korea are essentially held hostage by North Korea. This is what disgusts me about China's (publicly at least) ho-hum attitude about letting the Kim regime have nukes.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

They have the time, the history and the population to outwait and outsurvive the rest of the world, and they view themselves as qualitatively different than "us" in many ways. (I'm not trying to paint an "us and them", a la Steyn, portrait, but to reflect the degree to which our interpretations of China are often more a projection of our desires than their outlook).

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Ah, interesting, Sean, thanks. So basically you're saying there's no underestimating Chinese exceptionalism, given its 4000-year history? Do you think their pride, which is colossal, would require them to defend North Korea once they'd backed it, with nukes or without?

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

I don't want to say that China would immediately or overtly back North Korea if the gloves were dropped. However, it worth considering the broader regional game at play – including Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and the like. China enjoys the benefit of a large buffered North Korea zone as things stand now. A destabilized or instantly westernized North Korea would represent an unfriendly border, and would likely wreak havok with internal control in that area (refugees from the south, etc.). As much as Kim Jong is a pain in their ass too, they would likely prefer to see the status quo – with a less insane leader.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Pride isn't quite the right word. I think it's their ability to play the long game, an insular one if need be, that we need to account for. I can't word the next idea very eloquently, but there's a serious disparity between the way we privilege the individual (though at the least cost to ourselves) and the way the Chinese privilege the collective (and I don't really mean communism – it's something deeper and more historical). But all that said, the concept of 'face' runs deep in that area of the world, and should not be discounted should one side misstep and provoke a pissing match.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Finally, while we tend to view these crises through the lens of global relationships and international ramifications, a lot of what drives China is highly internal in nature. The current power plays at work (which I've not been following of late), domestic pressures and that sort of thing could very well drive a more antagonistic response. Or not.

None of this is to suggest that the Chinese are stuck in some foggy ideology of history, face and parochialism. But that we can't assume they use the same criteria for logical assessment as we do. Tienamen Square wasn't all that long ago, and when push came to shove they did what they felt they had to. And I'm pretty sure the decision to not obliterate Taiwan has been all their choice – despite what the world community would like to think about 'our' efforts on that front.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Ah, thanks, this is all very interesting. As you say, so much of it must be the internal Chinese Zeitgeist, the Mandate of Heaven. To our eyes, the current regime seems to have it in spades, but given China's history of spontaneous uprising (Taiping Rebellion, Boxers, Sun Yat-sen's revolt, the Civil War) I doubt the dragon is sleeping very deeply, especially given the rate of change and the new class disparities. Nationalism is a potent tool of control, and the Chinese regime is delighted to employ it (e.g. in those demonstrations at the Japanese consulates a few years ago). So on Taiwan and North Korea their secret is to balance pragmatism (trade & prosperity) with nationalism (internal harmony). Still, as you say, if the gloves were dropped they would surely not abandon pragmatism completely.

You never know, maybe the new Kim will be a Philosopher King, dissolve the concentration camps, open up to the world, can the nukes, etc. That would be good for everybody, I think; but I wonder if, after 50 years of total thought control, the North Koreans themselves (esp. the establishment) could handle such a transition.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

If he'd just back off the bat-sh*t crazy Napoleonic posturing, it'd be a start. God knows what the social and cultural dynamics really are inside that country anymore.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Seriously. I saw Red Chapel at the Toronto Hot Docs fesival this spring and I'm still shivering.