It’s highly implausible that any other state or, for that matter, any non-state actor believes it has good cause to attack a South Korean warship. So suspicion over last month’s sinking of the navy corvette Cheonan, with the loss of 46 crew, has inevitably fallen on the country with which Seoul is technically still at war — its bellicose and unpredictable neighbor, North Korea.
The questions that matter now are: Why did the North do it, and how to respond?
Pyongyang’s denials of responsibility are not persuasive. Analysis of the incident by US and Australian experts increasingly points to an attack with a high-explosive torpedo, rather than a random collision with a mine or an accident. There is a history of naval clashes around the maritime border. And the North regularly threatens the South as a US “puppet regime.”
North Korea watchers, who like the Kremlinologists of old struggle to read the runes of the Hermit Kingdom, are buzzing with theories about why the attack was launched. Christian Caryl, writing in Foreign Policy, suggested Kim Jong-il, the North Korean dictator, was under pressure from his all-powerful military. On April 14, Kim promoted 100 generals, ostensibly marking the birthday of his late father, Kim Il-sung, the country’s “eternal leader.”
But coddling the elite cadres of North Korea’s million-man military could equally be a sign that Kim has been weakened by his mishandling of the economy, last year’s disastrous currency “reform,” and his failure to regain aid and assistance withdrawn by South Korea and the US.
When he came to power after his father’s death in 1994, Kim faced an army mutiny and an attempt on his life, Caryl said.
“Ever since then, the Dear Leader has made a priority of keeping the generals happy, showering them with favors, promotions and perks,” he said. “At about the same time, Kim enshrined the ‘military first’ policy as North Korea’s dominant ideology, raising the armed forces to the dominant position once held by the Communist Party.”
Now history may be repeating itself as the 69-year-old Kim, his health declining, apparently encounters resistance to plans to install his youngest son, Kim Jong-un, as his successor. In this scenario, a hawkish military, opposed to cooperation with the South and dismissive of a distracted Washington’s willingness to intervene, provokes an international incident, thereby increasing its own leverage at home and abroad. Such tactics have worked in the past, after all, with demonstrations of military might repeatedly used to grab attention and win concessions.
Other North Korean actions reinforce the impression of a weakened leadership under pressure and hawks jostling for position. The alleged attempted infiltration into South Korea of two agents tasked with assassinating a senior North Korean defector, rumors of preparations for a third nuclear test and last week’s demand that North Korea be recognized as a “nuclear weapons state” all suggest a more aggressive stance.
Yet, as seen from Pyongyang, a similarly hardening position is evident among its adversaries. The UN’s imposition of tough new sanctions after last year’s nuclear test and missile launches over the Sea of Japan, Washington’s refusal to resume the six-party disarmament talks without significant prior concessions by the North and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak’s suspension of food and agricultural assistance are deepening the regime’s isolation and feeding its paranoia.
An alternative nightmare for Kim is that sabre-rattling no longer works. Little wonder, then, that he is expected to visit China soon. Beijing is Kim’s only powerful friend — and it has a stake in propping him up, if only to avoid an implosion and a dangerous regional security and refugee crisis.
South Korea’s Lee has won praise abroad for his prudent response to the Cheonan affair. So far, at least, he has avoided directly accusing Pyongyang, has eschewed retaliatory military strikes and has sought international support. But Lee is under political pressure at home to get tough, with leading newspapers demanding that he not rule out military action. Today’s memorial services for the dead will inflame emotions. If the inquiry into the sinking formally fingers the North, Lee may be obliged to act.
Writing in JoongAng Daily, Kim Hyun-soo, professor of international law at Inha University, said Lee has three options if he wishes to avoid risking all-out war on the peninsula. He could demand concerted action by the UN security council; he could take his case to the international court of justice; or, failing that, he could impose a maritime blockade, as the US did against Cuba in 1962.
Whatever he does, Lee must make clear the North’s menacing behavior will no longer be tolerated, the professor suggested.
“When will Koreans be confident that the nation will protect them?” he said. “When will young Koreans no longer have to sacrifice their lives?”
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS