A flurry of news dispatches from the Korean Peninsula over the last 10 days has provided fresh evidence that things are spiraling toward chaos at that end of President George W. Bush's "axis of evil."
US relations with South Korea continued to slide downhill with Seoul's publication of a strange "white paper" on defense.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
North Korea asserted that it has actually produced nuclear weapons and, by refusing to continue negotiations, showed that it has no intention of giving up its nuclear ambitions.
In the first case, South Korea's Ministry of National Defense alleged that, in the event of hostilities with North Korea, the US would deploy 690,000 troops, 2000 warplanes, and 160 warships to the defense of South Korea.
That statement was absurd on the face of it. The 690,000 troops would require sending the entire US Army and the entire US Marine Corps to Korea, leaving all other missions to the National Guard and Reserves. The 2000 warplanes would be more than three times the aircraft assigned to the Pacific Air Forces. The 160 ships would be about half of the US Navy.
This claim, which was presumptuous, not to say bizarre, implied that the government of President Roh Moo-hyun could not deal with the implications of the US decision to reduce its forces in South Korea and to revise the mission of those that remain. The primary task of the US forces will be to prepare for contingencies anywhere, not just to help defend South Korea.
The South Korean white paper indicated that Roh's defense ministry sought to assure South Koreans that the US would not abandon them. Ironically, that effort came atop rampant anti-Americanism in Seoul, an increasing tendency among young South Koreans to appease North Korea, and a growing South Korean preference for ties with China rather than the US.
As an Australian scholar and student of Northeast Asia put it, South Korean relations with the US are delicately poised between affirmation and severance.
An e-mail message to the defense ministry in Seoul seeking clarification was not answered by the time of this writing, which may have been because of a national holiday in South Korea. Even so, the defense ministry has not denied press reports that have been floating around for more than a week.
The ministry's English-language Web site announcing the release of its white paper did not mention the dispatch of US forces but focused on a change in terms. Instead of calling North Korea "the main enemy," the report noted North Korea's"conventional military power, weapons of mass destruction, and forward deployment of military forces." The headquarters of US Forces in South Korea professed to be unaware of the white paper despite articles in the South Korean press, the Associated Press, and on Chinese and Vietnamese TV news. "I have no information regarding this ROK document," said an officer speaking for the command. "However, as a matter of policy we do not discuss the contents or details of operational plans."
North Korea, along with Iraq and Iran, were included in the"axis of evil" by President Bush shortly after the terrorist assaults in New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001. By claiming that they have produced nuclear weapons, the North Koreans evidently sought to confirm what they had hinted at many times in the past. They also said they would not continue the six party talks intended to dissuade them from going nuclear. In those negotiations, the US, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, China, and Russia have held three previous meetings in Beijing.
Pyongyang claimed that North Korea has "manufactured nukes for self-defense to cope with the Bush administration's evermore undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK." The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is the official name of North Korea and "nukes" is slang for nuclear arms. The US has long contended that North Korea has nuclear weapons.
On negotiations, the North Koreans said: "We are compelled to suspend our participation in the talks for an indefinite period till we have recognized that there is justification for us to attend the talks and there are ample conditions and atmosphere to expect positive results from the talks." Whether that was a bargaining ploy remained to be seen.
Before its nuclear announcement, Pyongyang proclaimed: "If the US imperialists ignite flames of war, we will first of all strike all bases of US imperialist aggressors and turn them into a sea of fire." That thundering, too, repeated earlier belligerence.
Richard Halloran is a journalist based in Hawaii.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS