-
The Perils of Intervention in Syria
May 7, 2013 | 37 comments
-
America on Welfare
April 25, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Thursday Is Tax Freedom Day
April 17, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Time for Real Federalism
April 8, 2013 | 23 comments
-
Stalin Died 60 Years Too Late
March 29, 2013 | 73 comments
Another Perspective
North Korea Is Not America’s Problem
Seoul, let us remember, can very well defend itself.
The so-called Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is impoverished and decrepit. Its people are starving and risk death to flee their tragic land. The country is virtually friendless and suffers under a bizarre system of monarchical communism. Pyongyang’s armed forces are dwarfed by those of the U.S., the globe’s premier military power.
Yet the DPRK has struck fear into the hearts of otherwise sober American policymakers and analysts. The administration announced plans to spend a billion dollars to add 14 interceptors to the missile defense in Alaska to guard against a North Korean attack. Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter rushed to Seoul to consult the South’s government.
The Washington Post’s David Ignatius worried: “Counting on North Korean restraint has been a bad bet. It may be wiser to assume the worst and plan accordingly.” The International Crisis Group observed that “North Korea has taken a number of recent steps that raise the risks of miscalculation, inadvertent escalation and deadly conflict on the Korean peninsula.”
The Associated Press’s Foster Klug warned: “Recent Korean history reveals a sobering possibility. It may only be a matter of time before North Korea launches a sudden, deadly attack on the South. And, perhaps more unsettling, Seoul has vowed that this time, it will respond with an even stronger blow.”
Worse, declared defense analyst Steven Metz: “Today, North Korea is the most dangerous country on earth and the greatest threat to U.S. security.” Indeed, the DPRK foreign ministry might be proved right when it “asserted that a second Korean War is inevitable.”
The Heritage Foundation’s Bruce Klingner argued that the U.S. needed “strong military forces to protect” itself from the North and denounced planned military budget cuts as undermining “U.S. military capabilities and credibility.” The ICG urged “U.S. officials, including the president,” to reaffirm “that the U.S. will fulfill its alliance commitments, including robustly against any North Korean military attacks.”
In Metz’s view this would be no minor affair. Rather, “The second Korean war would force military mobilization in the United States. This would initially involve the military’s existing reserve component, but it would probably ultimately require a major expansion of the U.S. military and hence a draft. The military’s training infrastructure and the defense industrial base would have to grow.”
It’s a frightening picture, and it seems almost as wildly overblown as the DPRK’s rhetoric. After all, though the North’s wild gesticulations are unsettling, this is the seventh time Pyongyang has renounced the 1953 ceasefire reached. War has yet to erupt. While one cannot take anything for granted, there’s no evidence that Kim Jong-un and those around him have turned suicidal after the death of his father.
The DPRK’s behavior almost certainly reflects other considerations. Almost alone is Sheila Miyoshi Jager of Oberlin College, who argued that the North’s “apocalyptic threats” are primarily intended for a domestic audience. She added: “it would be a mistake to read into them anything more than the noises of a dying regime that clearly recognizes the writing on the wall.”
However, there’s a more basic question. Why is any of this America’s problem?
One need not blame the U.S. for the DPRK’s behavior to recognize that America is involved in Korean affairs as a result of its own choosing. If Washington did not guarantee the ROK’s security and station troops in the South, the North’s behavior would be largely irrelevant for the U.S.
America’s involvement in the Korean peninsula dates to the end of World War II. Washington’s intervention in the Korean War grew out of the larger Cold War. The U.S. stayed for decades because the South remained vulnerable to a threatening North allied with both Maoist China and the Soviet Union.
None of these circumstances still apply.
The division of the Korean peninsula lies almost seven decades in the past. The circumstances which drew America into that region’s affairs are long over. The Cold War ended more than two decades ago; the struggle between the two Koreas is no longer tied to a global struggle with a dangerous hegemonic adversary. War on the peninsula would be a humanitarian tragedy, not a strategic disaster.
Washington’s ally has more than recovered from the Korean War. The ROK has sped past the North on most measures of national power. Indeed, South Korea has some 40 times the GDP and twice the population of the North. Thus, the South is capable of defending itself.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (35) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2013/03/20/north-korea-is-not-americas-pr
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- The Welfarians
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 3.20.13 @ 7:24AM
This is excellent commentary. Sell the South Koreans and Japanese 10 atomic weapons and all the other defense weapons they need and bring the troops home. It is decades over due.
alice921| 3.20.13 @ 12:24PM
Its definitely the most-financially rewarding I ve ever done. Make money with Google. On thursday I got a brand new Chevrolet Corvette since I been earnin $5269 this-past/4 weeks and-even more than, $10,000 this past month. I work through this link, http://tw.gs/YbVcey
vtwin| 3.20.13 @ 2:09PM
Jack, South Koreans and Japanese are both democracies, allies, and as far as I know neither has do anything to provoke trouble from North Koran so if war comes to the Korean Peninsula we should honor our mutual defense treaties. The big question is what China will do.
The Only Good Democrat| 3.20.13 @ 2:39PM
The old order has totally broken down. Nuclear weapons will be everywhere and South Korea and Japan are going to need them to deter both North Korea and China. It is time to pull out of these treaties and make sure that those that have common interests can protect themselves. Non proliferation was always going to be based on force. We haven't been willing on our end to keep it in place as a policy so it is time to abandon it and come to grips with the new world.
TLP| 3.20.13 @ 4:38PM
"North Koran"?
Idiot.
Occam's Tool| 3.22.13 @ 5:37PM
vtwin: your comment on the ROK army was a good point.
Dmitry: if the Russians had won the Cold war, no amount of sucking up would have saved Israel. Review: Soviet Jewry. That's a "if pigs have wings argument."
Vtwin: I also do believe in supporting allies and NOT being isolationist.
Finally, the Norks may very soon be capable of targetting North Hollywood, my former haunt for 4 years. That MAKES them our problem.
Cowardice is NOT a policy.
Uncle Joe| 3.21.13 @ 12:49PM
Selling nuclear weapons, even to close allies like Japan & South Korea, is the worst idea imaginable. That would give any other country that possesses nukes a fine excuse to sell a few of their own to rogue regimes. Japan & South Korea don't even want such weapons. Sell them missile defense systems.
Michele San Pietro| 3.20.13 @ 8:18AM
I agree with Mr. Bandow. My opinion about the North Korean regime is entirely negative, but its internatonal dangerousness is limited. I think it's wrong to underestimate an enemy, but it's also a mistake to overestimate it.
TLP| 3.20.13 @ 1:11PM
I also agree with Mr. Bandow.
Let's give the Sorks some Nukes, and get our 35,000 Human Shields outta there.
Harry the Horrible| 3.20.13 @ 8:44AM
Neither is Syria and we have idiots like McCain and Graham trying to drag us into it.
At least South Korea is an ally. We should negotiate a withdrawal from South Korea. And I think providing them some nukes and ABM capabilities would be a good idea, too.
Stormy| 3.20.13 @ 9:38AM
The time for America to intervene in Syria for effect is long past. Syria is a quagmire now with world powers aligned. We had a chance to have some influence over the outcome in Syria and stood by observing. Syria will ultimately fall into the grasp of either Al Qaeda or Iran/Russia, either of which is not good. The time for America to have any influence in affairs in the ME, and ultimately Europe, is past.
TLP| 3.20.13 @ 1:19PM
President Death to America is already supplying "The Opposition" with Weapons.
He'd a done it sooner, but he was waiting til Al Qaeda got there to recieve the Weapons.
True Story.
Uncle Joe| 3.21.13 @ 1:06PM
Iran's assistance has been the only thing keeping Assad in place for the last year. Shiite led Iran has had an uneasy relationship with the Sunni led Al Qaeda, but found some common ground in opposing the U.S. Al Qaeda is getting involved with the Syrian opposition, but that has been causing tensions with Iran, as seen by the recent expulsion of Bin Laden's son from Iran.
Unless you can find some source for your "true story", I have to assume you don't know what you're talking about.
c. j. acworth| 3.20.13 @ 8:55AM
I don't understand why the Chinese don't put a leash on the NORKs. How could a 2nd war in Korea (especially nuclear) be to their benefit? I wonder how much trade China does with the South? Do they want to see that disappear? With the North they don't really trade at all, do they? They send them food and fuel; the North is a drag on them, like any welfare bum.
Pecos Pete| 3.20.13 @ 9:05AM
NORK is China's buffer zone. Of course, CJ, you are correct that if and when the NORKs attack the south, or anywhere else for that matter, China will be drawn into the resulting war. Makes no sense to us, but then we don't have 10,000 years of warring in our history.
Ryan| 3.20.13 @ 9:19AM
From what I understand, China REALLY doesn't want NORK involved in a war with anyone. They would probably almost take a neutral or active stance against NK as soon as they would fight against SK.
TLP| 3.20.13 @ 1:25PM
The problem with the Chinese, and keeping the Norks under their wing as a Buffer Zone against The Sorks (And Pesco is absolutely right) is WHY do they need a Buffer Zone against someone who is NEVER gonna pose a threat to them?
If anything, this Fat little Psychopath is gonna end up being responsible for a Cloud of Nuclear Fallout wafting into China.
AllAmericanAmerican| 3.20.13 @ 9:02AM
Well, with the war in Iraq over and the one in Afghanistan supposed to end next year, the neocons need a new bogeyman to send our troops to and keep the ol' sheeple a-scared.
Wars and rumors of war, that's all this is.
North Korea can't keep the lights on, can't feed its own people, yet they're some kind of "global power?" Hahaha! Yeah.
Frekki| 3.20.13 @ 10:20AM
So you think being fat and happy will protect you from that skinny little guy with a knife. Just hold still for a little longer, heh, heh.
For American to abandon South Korea after 60 years of fighting for their freedom will be very good news for the World's Dictators.
Occam's Tool| 3.22.13 @ 5:39PM
AAA: can the Norks target Hollywood in less than 5 years with a nuke? If so, that's a problem. China still has people living in caves.
A. C. Santore| 3.20.13 @ 9:33AM
I have several times complimented Mr. Bandow on his excellent articles, but I'm sorry to say that he's all wrong on virtually every point in this article.
All he has to do is to look at the state of North Korea's non-economy and her starving people and the tale is told. With the exception of Kim the Un and his family, find me a North Korean who is not all skin and bones. Next time there is a photo or video of the NK army, look at them, and especially at their waistlines.
North Korea has problems of biblical proportions which they can solve [perhaps] only by incorporating the vast wealth of South Korea.
Starving animals - including humans - will eat their own when there is nothing left.
I hope I'm wrong and Mr. Bandow is right, but hope springs eternal and always lands in reality.
markenoff| 3.20.13 @ 10:56AM
If we pull our troops out of Korea where will the next generation of barbers for our military on post barber shops come from?
Kingofthenet| 3.20.13 @ 1:44PM
I wish this author would ask the same questions about ISRAEL.
Occam's Tool| 3.20.13 @ 2:01PM
King: I think it's a great idea to let a country with 400 Nukes think that it is friendless and alone, while being surrounded by enemies, don't you?
South Korean citizens attack our troops who protect them. Their singers sing anti-American songs. They're not very useful as an ally.
Israel, on the other hand, provides invaluable Human and Signals intelligence in an area of profound economic importance to us. Its military platforms serve as ports for our Navy and bases for our Airforce, when necessary. It battle tests and modifies our equipment, as well.
I know you want to fellate Jihadists, King, but that shouldn't affect your geopolitical thinking.
vtwin| 3.20.13 @ 2:25PM
The Army, the people, of the Republic of South Korean has served alongside the United States in EVERY one of our major post WW II conflicts including Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea. Don't judge loyalty of a nation by the actions of a few of its citizens.
The Only Good Democrat| 3.20.13 @ 2:44PM
We can't live up to our end in these treaties. We are a debtor nation that needs to get its own act straightened out. We are just kidding these nations when we tell them that we will be there for them. Obama will lead from behind. They need to be able to defend themselves.
vtwin| 3.20.13 @ 3:14PM
True, we are a "debtor nation" today because we elected a carnival barker President thirty years ago followed by the election of an idiot son of another President but you can relax because you will not see another Republican in the White House in your lifetime.
The Only Good Democrat| 3.20.13 @ 4:28PM
There is plenty of blame to go around but it can't be ignored that you want to do nothing except more of the same. Others in the world need to recognize what we are and that it is getting worse and act accordingly.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 3.20.13 @ 9:32PM
Come on Occam, you know that had the United States lost the Cold War that Israel would want the Soviet Union to be patronizing them the way the Americans currently do. It's smart politics and Jews aren't dumb. Had Americans not supported Israel and continued close relations with the emerging Arab nations after WWII, Israel would have been solidly in the Soviet camp.
cicero| 3.20.13 @ 3:19PM
North Korea is on the verge of collapse. The people are starving. The regime needs a bogeyman to distract its population for another little while - until it figures out what to do next. They are not going to launch a nuclear attack on anyone. However, they may make a useful target for practice by our missile screem guys. Everytime they threaten to launch a missile, they give advance warning. We need only wait for the launch, fire our interceptor, and wait for the next launch. If our shield works, we have made the message clear.
At that point, Kim and th boys will have nothing left, and will be ready for the barbeque spit. After all, the people have to eat.
The middle east is another ballgame. If we go in and overthrow Assad on behalf of the Brotherhood, whoever gives the order should be impeached. The fact that their civil war had cost 70,000 lives thus far is not very persuasive. Ours cost 600,000 to 750,000.
Kurt NY| 3.20.13 @ 4:06PM
Can South Korea defend itself? Probably. But the function of our forces there is to serve as a trip wire, putting the North on notice that any attack on South Korea would be an attack on us. They may think they can take SK but they have to know messing with us is suicidal. So they don't.
One school of thought says that the Korean War started because American diplomats specifically defined South Korea as being outside our strategic umbrella. Do we really wish to commit this act of strategic stupidity again?
And to say we have no real strategic interest in the Korean peninsula ignores the function of Japan in our calculations to get involved there in the first place. Should the Japanese be confronted with a unified and hostile Korea under the Kims, do we really think that is something to which we could be neutral?
South Korea and Japan are now integral parts of the democratic West. Of course defending them is in our interest. By all means, let's save money doing so, but let's not get carried away.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 3.20.13 @ 5:18PM
I agree with you Mr. Bandow however our reason for remaining on the Korean Peninsula probably has a lot less to do with North Korea and more to do with containing Chinese geopolitical goals in the region and the lucrative defense contracts (who's getting the billion probably Lockheed Martin or another defense giant?)
Bob K| 3.20.13 @ 9:53PM
Mr. Bandow,
Your "Defense Analyst" Steven Metz, who talks about bringing back the Draft if a war in Korea should occur, is a member of the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College.
Don't you think that we have to determine whether a Draft is politically possible before we decide whether will get into a possible war with China over Korea?
That is what Metz is ultimately talking about.
JohnTee| 3.20.13 @ 10:00PM
Good point!
What have our near bankrupting empire building policies reaped for us over the long term? In my eyes we have gotten NO THANKS, no moral support and no material benefit whatsoever. Every time I see a Hyundai or Kia, I think of the Plymouths, Mercurys, or Pontiacs that are no longer there. South Korea can take care of itself.
Uncle Joe| 3.21.13 @ 1:24PM
North Korea is probably the most dangerous state on Earth because the leadership is a very, very small elite without a deep history of influence, compared to the authority wielded by Iran's ayatollahs. Kim Jong Un and his backers are in a precarious position. Threatened with loss of power, who knows what they will do?
The backing of China and replacing real information about the surrounding world with propaganda are the only things that keep Jong Un in power. Jong Un is really China's problem, not ours. China however, is very much our problem. Without a strong American presence in the region, they would quickly dominate Japan, South Korea and the rest of the region.
Eventually China will have to fully embrace democracy and capitalism, or they will collapse as the USSR did. In the meantime, our interests are served by protecting freedom in the region. We reduced our presence in the Pacific during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our troop presence in South Korea shrank from 41,000 to 28,500. Japan and South Korea have been paying more of the costs of their defense, but they will need to pay more in the future.