North Korea Attacking Hawaii?

The war in Afghanistan is ugly. The conflict in Iraq is still seething. The prospect of Pakistan's collapse is terrifying.

But the real nightmare scenario, or so the media headlines suggest, involves North Korea. Its leader is wacko. It's adding to its nuclear arsenal. It's making preparations for a missile launch aimed at Hawaii.

The Japanese attacked us 68 years ago. The Pentagon is bracing for Pearl Harbor, part II. This is serious stuff. The Taliban might be crazy, but they don't have nukes and we don't expect them to bomb Waikiki any time soon.

Never fear: the Obama administration has crafted a robust response to North Korea. We pushed through a UN resolution, with Chinese and Russian support, that ups the sanctions against Pyongyang and authorizes the naval interdiction of North Korean vessels suspected of delivering weapons or other suspicious materials. We sat down with South Korean leader Lee Myung-bak and reaffirmed our willingness to retaliate with nuclear weapons if the South is attacked. We've beefed up our defenses in Hawaii. We're currently tailing a North Korean ship as it heads toward Burma.

In his eagerness to show that he has the strength of will to confront a nuclear bully, President Barack Obama hopes to dispel any illusions -- among conservatives here, among the leadership in North Korea -- that he's a "cut-and-run" kind of guy. He can multitask. He can talk and prepare for war at the same time. This guy can take care of pesky flies like North Korea.

I'm not sure who's giving the president his advice on North Korea. But it's all wrong. His show of "resolve" has only made matters worse.

Myth 1: North Korea is about to attack Hawaii: North Korea has two long-range missiles, the Taepodong-1 and the Taepodong-2. The first, likely used only for satellite launches, can maybe go 2,500 miles. But it's never been successfully tested. The Taepondong-2 maybe could go about 3,700 miles. But it too has failed in its two tests: a quick fizzle in 2006 and a failure in the third stage this last April. Even if Pyongyang gets everything right for a possible July 4 test, it's 4,500 miles between Pyongyang and Honolulu. As for putting a nuclear warhead on the top of it, North Korea has shown no evidence that it has the necessary miniaturization technology.

Myth #2: North Korea is a military threat: North Korea has a lot of people in uniform, and its artillery can cause horrific damage to Seoul. But North Korea spends about half a billion dollars a year on its military. South Korea alone spends 40 times that amount. And the United States spends 1,000 times more. Neither China nor Russia would support any North Korean military action. Militarily speaking, North Korea is a kamikaze country. It can inflict damage, but only in a suicide attack and only close to home.

Myth 3: We really showed them at the UN: The Security Council statement in April and the resolution in June certainly communicated international anger at North Korea's rocket and nuclear tests. But we overreacted to the April launch. We should have treated it as a satellite launch and pressed forward with negotiations. Instead, North Korea responded to our fierce words by upping the ante and conducting a second nuclear test. The UN statement was as satisfying as hitting a problem with a baseball bat -- except that the problem in this case was a hornet's nest. The more recent resolution, meanwhile, represents a dangerous escalation: a confrontation at sea might trigger a much larger conflict.

Myth 4: Kim Jong Il is crazy, and North Korea is an unpredictable rogue state: Actually, North Korean reactions have been quite predictable and, at least within the North Korean context, rational. Pyongyang was unhappy with the course of negotiations and its relative lack of priority on Obama's to-do list. Rocket launches and nuclear tests have yielded both attention and concessions in the past, so they went with what works. And they telegraphed their moves well in advance. The leader of North Korea runs a brutal state and a mind-numbing personality cult. And North Korea's official statements often sound like the scripts from bad horror movies. But Kim Jong Il worked out shrewd deals in the past -- with the Clinton and Bush administrations, with the Kim Dae-Jung and Roh-Moo Hyun governments in South Korea, and even with Junichiro Koizumi in Japan back in 2002. If he's mad, there's a method in his madness.

We are retracing the same steps as 1993-1994, a path of escalation that nearly led to war. As I write in The Obama-Lee Summit: Dangerous Consensus?, "North Korea, with so little to lose, is the master of brinkmanship. It is not wise to enter into a tit-for-tat match with such a country. At this point, more important than finding common ground between the United States and South Korea is establishing common ground between North Korea and the rest of the world. By all means, Washington and Seoul should coordinate policy. But they should also keep their eyes on the prize: resolving the current crisis with North Korea without resorting to force."

The United States should focus on nuclear nonproliferation, urges Foreign Policy In Focus contributor Wade Huntley, and make sure North Korea doesn't cross that red line. In the meantime, Washington should continue taking steps toward nuclear abolition. "Complete nuclear abolition need not be fully achieved in order to realize the constitution of a global security order that eliminates all threats of nuclear conflict," he writes in Dealing with North Korea's Tests. "And as the rest of this community becomes warmer, it will become increasingly tempting for North Korea to come in out of the cold."

It's definitely frustrating to negotiate with North Korea. And many respected analysts have serious doubts as to whether Pyongyang will ever give up its nuclear weapons. But when we were talking seriously with North Korea, it kept its plutonium program frozen (Clinton) or began dismantling it (Bush), and its long-range missile program was still rudimentary. That beats war every time. In 1994, former President Jimmy Carter helped avert confrontation by visiting Pyongyang and working out a compromise. Maybe the Man from Plains can get on the plane again. The escalation must stop: It's time to talk.

Crossposted from Foreign Policy In Focus, where you can read the full post.

To subscribe to FPIF's e-zine World Beat, click here.

Comments

[kimno3]

At last, a sane person among a lot of neo-con wanna-bes here.

Too bad that mr. Obama and ms. Clinton have sounded like neo-con with respect to North Korea.
Maybe mr. Obama also need a external enemy to manipulate internal politics.

South Korean experts in this matter in recent days started to say that nuclear weapons were not a bargain chip anymore for North Korea. They say that North Korea really wants to have them now. Experts in South Korea used to think that nuclear weapons were used to achieve peace treaty with the U.S. and regime security. Not anymore. Those experts noticed that the control and decision making power over nuclear weapon program in North Korea recently shifted from political agencies to mility.

I predict that if mr. Obama does not seriously talk with North Korea, there will be a new nuclear power in North Korea, and he will be look stupid.

[noneIn2008]

Korea is another distraction in the war shell game. We must single mindedlly keep the pressure on Obama to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Blaming Bush is a worn out excuse for inaction. We must increase the accountability and pressure on the current administration. No more excuses, no more distractions, get us out, NOW.

[jfor]

Until we get all our troops out of South Korea The United States will always be the focus of lil Kim and his crazy regime. Our power and ability to negotiate any kind of reasonable outcome is severely hampered by the constant threat our soldiers are under on the dmz. It is time for us to pull out and allow the regional players to work this out. Kim knows full well our arsenal can destroy him from anywhere so any troops on the ground only make him stronger and force us to recognize his craziness.

[SgtMac]

A few points:
1) Kim Jong Il is neither suicidal nor insane. The North Koreans have learned that deterrence works. No nation can afford to receive a nuclear strike. The only time nuclear weapons were used, they were used by a nation that had them (USA) on a nation that didn't (Japan).
2) The North Koreans understand the balance of power. They have perhaps a dozen 10-15 KT atomic bombs and no means to deliver them across the Pacific. The US Navy has 8 Trident submarines based in Puget Sound WA. Each carries 24 Trident D-5 missiles. Each missile has a range of over 5000 miles and is loaded with 6-10 450 KT W-88 thermonuclear warheads. One Trident submarine can destroy every city, major town and military facility in North Korea without leaving its base.
3) The North Korean agenda is focused on regime survival. They want recognition, respect and direct negotiations with the US. However, (see # 1) they will not relinquish their nuclear arsenal to achieve this.
North Korea is now a nuclear state, they will not give this up as they believe that the survival of their regime depends on credible deterrence. However, North Korea is not about to attack Hawaii, South Korea, Japan, Guam or Seattle. It would be national suicide and they know this.
Relax folks, we may not like North Korea becoming a nuclear state, but there is little we can do about it and the threat is minimal.

[dan-o]

"No way to deliver nuclear weapons" How aboutin the cargo hold of a freighter? The North Koreans have used threats against us before and the has got what they wanted. It is now like a little kid using a temper tantrum to get what he wants. As long as the parents keep giving in then the problem will never be solved. We need to make them understand that their words have consequences. They cannot say they are going to destroy us or attack us without severe economic and/or physical consequences. BTW- I am no NK expert but I spent three weeks on the DMZ as a National Guardsmen in the 80's. What a scarey place that is.

[SgtMac]

You can't just sail a freighter into an American port without an inspection and clearance by the US Coast Guard. I live in a Pacific coast port city and I'm familiar with what they do before a freighter sails into Portland. I expect that every NK cargo ship that leaves home is tracked pretty closely, note the freighter that is currently being tailed by the destroyer John S McCain and it's on it's way to Burma. A short range missile launched from a freighter a few hundred miles offshore is a more plausible threat. Still, the NK's agenda is survival and provoking an American nuclear attack doesn't further that goal.
What physical consequences would you encourage? Going to war isn't going to be in anyone's best interest, particularly for South Korea and Japan. As I said deterrence works for both sides and the North Koreans understand this. They have been talking smack for decades and it never really amounts to much.
You're right about the DMZ, I was there in 1983 as an Army infantryman.

[thedustang]

What I am still unsure of is wether or not Obama will be willing to retaliate with nuclear arms when there could be a lot less collateral damage with precision strikes and even use of infantry, but to minimize loss of life, probably not with infantry. Although, I am sure it would be pretty hard not to press the pretty red NUKE button if a North Korean thermonuclear warhead detonates in Seattle or Portland, or even San Francisco. If anything, I do agree that NK just wants attention, but we still shouldn't fail to recognize them as a threat, no matter how big our military is compared to theirs.

[Diana Molino]

North Korea is a lot of talk and a lot of insanity. Ol' Kim Jong Il orders a huge lot of liquor and his younger son is said to drink heavily. The big question is do we want nuclear arms in the hands of a drunk? I say no. Now we have a sick man, Kim Jong Il, (a hawk) going up against another hawk (President Barack Obama). Barack Obama is still a young man and he is going to show off. He is going to holler and strut his stuff. The trouble is that Kim Jong Il is not going to live that much longer and then his youngest son takes over. That is the son that is a heavy drinker. Two young studs will often fight. We in the meantime, are left to pick up the pieces. This is the scenario as I see it. Love, Peace and Wisdom.

[Buddy Jones]

Avoiding confrontation with NK is just consenting to the continuation of NK's behavior. A "State" (if you want to call it that) that starves its own people to death so KJI can live in his own fantasy world. I find it hard to understand people who keep arguing against ending KJI's reign of oppression. Its kind of like how we avoided confrontation with Germany 70 years ago until they grew too powerful to stop easily, which led to WWII and the holocaust... I for one am sick of the world trying to negotiate with mass murderers in order to not provoke a reaction from them.

Lets just wait until they actually can vaporize Seoul, maybe by then they will have starved another million people in NK, but hey, at least we will be able to say that we tried diplomacy... for 60 years! while they built nuclear bombs and killed 3 million people.

[dprkforum]

Kim could care less who is in office as long as he knows he will get his goodies. He will see how an administration reacts then adjusts accordingly be it a Republican or Democrat in office. This is one of the main aces in his sleeve to gain concessions, and he needs the money more than he needs the war. Furthermore, he is all about regime survival. While I cannot say what he will do because his state is so secretive, I cannot see him committing regime suicide. However, this may require some circumstances to be true if in fact he cares about the regime. Maybe he does not, and wants to try a hail mary like rushing over the DMZ. This is unlikely in my opinion.

There are no simple answers when it comes to North Korea, and sooner or later, the state the way it is run in its current path cannot sustain itself. The economy is at a standstill, an unintended and unplanned bottom-up marketization of the economy is taking place despite the regime staying where it is at. While in some other countries that fell because of bottom-up reforms, in North Korea, the relief valve for dissent is very difficult, especially when it comes to China.

[dynwitch]

First of all, NK's missiles don't NEED to go any more than a few hundred miles, if they're going to be firing them from a ship, which it appears they are currently planning to do. Second of all, Obama is NOT going to be the one firing the first missile here. It's all up to NK. If they fire at a U.S. target, they will be fired upon. They know this. Hence, they sent their nukes onto a ship, where their homeland won't be in danger. Those poor, poor NK sailors. They are the Supreme Leader's sacrificial victims.

[bdaved]

Wow!