ALERT The Winds of War Blow in Korea and The Far East
- Thread starter northern watch
- Start date
Posted for fair use.....
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/GPXURWA5TBO47FBU2OHIOFWIMY.jpg)
www.reuters.com
March 25, 20223:11 PM PDT
Last Updated 5 hours ago
N.Korea says new ICBM will curb 'dangerous' U.S.; Washington seeks new sanctions
By Josh Smith and Michelle Nichols
The United States responded by saying it would push the U.N. Security Council to "update and strengthen" sanctions on North Korea over its "increasingly dangerous provocations," a move Pyongyang's allies China and Russia are likely to oppose. read more
Thursday's launch was the first full ICBM test by nuclear-armed North Korea since 2017. Flight data indicated the missile flew higher and for a longer period than any of North Korea's previous tests before crashing into the sea west of Japan. read more
What North Korea calls the Hwasong-17 would be the largest liquid-fuelled missile ever launched by any country from a road-mobile launcher, analysts say.
Its range and size suggest North Korea plans to tip it with multiple warheads that could hit several targets or with decoys to confuse missile defences, they say. read more
The leaders of the Group of Seven industrialised nations and the European Union condemned the test as a "reckless" threat to peace and security and a danger to international civil aviation and maritime navigation. They said it demanded a united response.
North Korea's return to testing weapons experts believe are capable of striking the United States is an unwelcome additional challenge to President Joe Biden as he responds to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
North Korea's last ICBM launches and nuclear tests in 2017 prompted U.N. Security Council sanctions, but the United States and its allies are at odds with Russia and China over the Ukraine war, making such a response more difficult.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield nevertheless announced a new sanctions push at a meeting of the 15-member Security Council on Friday.
North Korea's nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches have long been banned by the Security Council and subjected to sanctions that have been strengthened over the years.
However, while they backed sanctions in 2017, China and Russia have since pushed for their easing to encourage North Korea to return to denuclearisation talks with the United States and others.
"Now is not the time to end our sanctions, now is the time to enforce them," Thomas-Greenfield said.
"Offering sanctions relief, without substantive diplomatic progress, would only funnel more revenue to the regime and accelerate the realization of its WMD (weapons of mass destruction) and ballistic-weapons goals."
China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun told the council "no party should take any action that would lead to greater tensions" and added, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name: "The U.S. must not continue to brush aside the DPRK's justified demands. It should offer an attractive proposal to pave the way for early resumed dialogue."
Russia's RIA news agency earlier quoted the Russian foreign ministry as saying that Russia and China had agreed to coordinate closely on the Korean situation. read more
"Concern was expressed over the latest developments in the sub-region" at a meeting between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov and China's representative for the Korean Peninsula, it said, adding that they emphasised the need to step up efforts towards fair political and diplomatic solutions.
North Korean state media said leader Kim Jong Un ordered the test because of "daily-escalating military tension in and around the Korean peninsula" and the "inevitability of the long-standing confrontation with the U.S. imperialists accompanied by the danger of a nuclear war".
"The strategic forces ... are fully ready to thoroughly curb and contain any dangerous military attempts of the U.S. imperialists," Kim said while overseeing the launch.
It came after the election of a new, conservative South Korean administration that has pledged a more muscular military strategy towards North Korea.
In a call with Chinese President Xi Jinping after the launch, South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol called for close coordination on North Korea's complete denuclearisation, his office said. Xi said Beijing and Seoul should bolster mutual political trust, Chinese state media said.
China urged restraint on "all sides" after the test. read more
'STRIKING DEMONSTRATION'
Washington announced its own sanctions on Thursday on two Russian companies, a Russian and a North Korean individual, and North Korea’s Second Academy of Natural Science Foreign Affairs Bureau for transferring sensitive items to North Korea’s missile programme. read more
Kim said the test would help convince the world of the power of his strategic forces.
"Any forces should be made to be well aware of the fact that they will have to pay a very dear price before daring to attempt to infringe upon the security of our country," he said.
North Korean state media showed a massive missile, painted black with a white nosecone, rising on a column of flame from a launch vehicle.
It said the Hwasong-17 flew for 1,090 km (680 miles) to an altitude of 6,248.5 km (3,905 miles) and hit a target in the sea. Similar numbers were reported by Japan and South Korea.
Seoul-based website NK Pro said discrepancies in the imagery and video on state media suggested it may have been shot on different dates, raising the possibility that North Korea was hiding details.
Pyongyang never acknowledged what South Korea said was a failed launch from the same airport last week, and on Thursday South Korea's Yonhap news agency cited unnamed officials who said they were examining whether the latest test may have been a smaller Hwasong-15 ICBM, which was test fired in November 2017.
Officials in Seoul and Washington previously said launches on Feb. 27 and March 5 involved parts of the Hwasong-17 ICBM system, likely in preparation for a full test.
North Korea called Thursday's test a "striking demonstration of great military muscle".
Kim, shown in video at the launch site dressed in a leather jacket and sunglasses, called it a "miraculous" and "priceless" victory for the Korean people. read more
Reporting by Josh Smith; Additional reporting by Ju-min Park in Seoul, David Brunnstrom in Washington and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Editing by Lincoln Feast, Robert Birsel, Philippa Fletcher and Daniel Wallis
N.Korea says new ICBM will curb 'dangerous' U.S.; Washington seeks new sanctions
North Korea said on Friday its launch of a big new intercontinental ballistic missile this week was designed to demonstrate the might of its nuclear force and deter any U.S. military moves.
www.reuters.com
March 25, 20223:11 PM PDT
Last Updated 5 hours ago
N.Korea says new ICBM will curb 'dangerous' U.S.; Washington seeks new sanctions
By Josh Smith and Michelle Nichols
- Summary
- N.Korea media confirms test was of huge Hwasong-17 missile
- First full test of ICBM by North Korea since 2017
- U.S. sanctions N.Korean, Russian individuals and entities
- Report says images cast doubts on N.Korea claims
The United States responded by saying it would push the U.N. Security Council to "update and strengthen" sanctions on North Korea over its "increasingly dangerous provocations," a move Pyongyang's allies China and Russia are likely to oppose. read more
Thursday's launch was the first full ICBM test by nuclear-armed North Korea since 2017. Flight data indicated the missile flew higher and for a longer period than any of North Korea's previous tests before crashing into the sea west of Japan. read more
What North Korea calls the Hwasong-17 would be the largest liquid-fuelled missile ever launched by any country from a road-mobile launcher, analysts say.
Its range and size suggest North Korea plans to tip it with multiple warheads that could hit several targets or with decoys to confuse missile defences, they say. read more
The leaders of the Group of Seven industrialised nations and the European Union condemned the test as a "reckless" threat to peace and security and a danger to international civil aviation and maritime navigation. They said it demanded a united response.
North Korea's return to testing weapons experts believe are capable of striking the United States is an unwelcome additional challenge to President Joe Biden as he responds to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
North Korea's last ICBM launches and nuclear tests in 2017 prompted U.N. Security Council sanctions, but the United States and its allies are at odds with Russia and China over the Ukraine war, making such a response more difficult.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield nevertheless announced a new sanctions push at a meeting of the 15-member Security Council on Friday.
North Korea's nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches have long been banned by the Security Council and subjected to sanctions that have been strengthened over the years.
However, while they backed sanctions in 2017, China and Russia have since pushed for their easing to encourage North Korea to return to denuclearisation talks with the United States and others.
"Now is not the time to end our sanctions, now is the time to enforce them," Thomas-Greenfield said.
"Offering sanctions relief, without substantive diplomatic progress, would only funnel more revenue to the regime and accelerate the realization of its WMD (weapons of mass destruction) and ballistic-weapons goals."
China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun told the council "no party should take any action that would lead to greater tensions" and added, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name: "The U.S. must not continue to brush aside the DPRK's justified demands. It should offer an attractive proposal to pave the way for early resumed dialogue."
Russia's RIA news agency earlier quoted the Russian foreign ministry as saying that Russia and China had agreed to coordinate closely on the Korean situation. read more
"Concern was expressed over the latest developments in the sub-region" at a meeting between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov and China's representative for the Korean Peninsula, it said, adding that they emphasised the need to step up efforts towards fair political and diplomatic solutions.
North Korean state media said leader Kim Jong Un ordered the test because of "daily-escalating military tension in and around the Korean peninsula" and the "inevitability of the long-standing confrontation with the U.S. imperialists accompanied by the danger of a nuclear war".
"The strategic forces ... are fully ready to thoroughly curb and contain any dangerous military attempts of the U.S. imperialists," Kim said while overseeing the launch.
It came after the election of a new, conservative South Korean administration that has pledged a more muscular military strategy towards North Korea.
In a call with Chinese President Xi Jinping after the launch, South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol called for close coordination on North Korea's complete denuclearisation, his office said. Xi said Beijing and Seoul should bolster mutual political trust, Chinese state media said.
China urged restraint on "all sides" after the test. read more
'STRIKING DEMONSTRATION'
Washington announced its own sanctions on Thursday on two Russian companies, a Russian and a North Korean individual, and North Korea’s Second Academy of Natural Science Foreign Affairs Bureau for transferring sensitive items to North Korea’s missile programme. read more
Kim said the test would help convince the world of the power of his strategic forces.
"Any forces should be made to be well aware of the fact that they will have to pay a very dear price before daring to attempt to infringe upon the security of our country," he said.
North Korean state media showed a massive missile, painted black with a white nosecone, rising on a column of flame from a launch vehicle.
It said the Hwasong-17 flew for 1,090 km (680 miles) to an altitude of 6,248.5 km (3,905 miles) and hit a target in the sea. Similar numbers were reported by Japan and South Korea.
Seoul-based website NK Pro said discrepancies in the imagery and video on state media suggested it may have been shot on different dates, raising the possibility that North Korea was hiding details.
Pyongyang never acknowledged what South Korea said was a failed launch from the same airport last week, and on Thursday South Korea's Yonhap news agency cited unnamed officials who said they were examining whether the latest test may have been a smaller Hwasong-15 ICBM, which was test fired in November 2017.
Officials in Seoul and Washington previously said launches on Feb. 27 and March 5 involved parts of the Hwasong-17 ICBM system, likely in preparation for a full test.
North Korea called Thursday's test a "striking demonstration of great military muscle".
Kim, shown in video at the launch site dressed in a leather jacket and sunglasses, called it a "miraculous" and "priceless" victory for the Korean people. read more
Reporting by Josh Smith; Additional reporting by Ju-min Park in Seoul, David Brunnstrom in Washington and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Editing by Lincoln Feast, Robert Birsel, Philippa Fletcher and Daniel Wallis
Posted for fair use.....
www.devdiscourse.com
G7 nations condemn launch of ICBM by North Korea
G7 nations have condemned the continued testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on Thursday (Local Time), said a US State Department joint statement.
ANI | Washington DC | Updated: 26-03-2022 06:36 IST | Created: 26-03-2022 06:36 IST
G7 nations have condemned the continued testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on Thursday (Local Time), said a US State Department joint statement. "We, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union strongly condemn the continued testing of ballistic missiles by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on March 24, 2022," the statement read.
The Foreign Ministers urged the DPRK to fully comply with all legal obligations arising from the relevant Security Council resolutions. They called on the DPRK to accept the repeated offers of dialogue put forward by all parties concerned, including the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan. The ministers while touching upon the risk of mass destruction weapons said, "We call on all States to fully and effectively implement all restrictive measures relating to the DPRK imposed by the UN Security Council and to address the risk of weapons of mass destruction proliferation from the DPRK as an urgent priority."
Notably, India and South Korea also condemned the test of a long-range ballistic missile by the DPRK. (ANI)
(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
G7 nations condemn launch of ICBM by North Korea | International
G7 nations have condemned the continued testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on Thursday (Local Time), said a US State Department joint statement.
www.devdiscourse.com
G7 nations condemn launch of ICBM by North Korea
G7 nations have condemned the continued testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on Thursday (Local Time), said a US State Department joint statement.
ANI | Washington DC | Updated: 26-03-2022 06:36 IST | Created: 26-03-2022 06:36 IST
G7 nations have condemned the continued testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on Thursday (Local Time), said a US State Department joint statement. "We, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union strongly condemn the continued testing of ballistic missiles by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on March 24, 2022," the statement read.
The Foreign Ministers urged the DPRK to fully comply with all legal obligations arising from the relevant Security Council resolutions. They called on the DPRK to accept the repeated offers of dialogue put forward by all parties concerned, including the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan. The ministers while touching upon the risk of mass destruction weapons said, "We call on all States to fully and effectively implement all restrictive measures relating to the DPRK imposed by the UN Security Council and to address the risk of weapons of mass destruction proliferation from the DPRK as an urgent priority."
Notably, India and South Korea also condemned the test of a long-range ballistic missile by the DPRK. (ANI)
(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
jward
passin' thru
Chinese Navy Ship Seen At Important African Base For First Time
Sat 26 March 2022 By H I Sutton
CLICK to enlarge.
Chinese Navy Ship Seen At Important African Base For First Time
The Chinese Navy is extending its reach to the world's oceans. A Chinese Navy warship has been observed calling at the new base in Djibouti. This location is strategic, and has been years in the building, but until now Chinese warships had not docked there.
China's overseas ambitions have become more tangible with the establishment of a navy base at Djibouti on the Horn of Africa. The strategic location extends China's conventional naval reach in the Indian Ocean and Middle East.
Now new intelligence shows that a Chinese Navy (PLAN) warship has called at the new base. This is a significant first for the controversial base.
Escort Task Force
The warship seen is the Type-903A replenishment ship Luomahu (907). This has been supporting China's overseas detachment operating in the region. These detachments, known as the "Escort Task Force", have become a permanent feature.
They conducts anti-piracy missions but also shows the flag, and sometimes monitors Western warships in the area. So far the detachment is made up of destroyers and frigates but larger combatants may follow in the future. Large amphibious warships have also been deployed on occasion.
The current detachment, the 40th Escort Task Force, consists of three ships. The Type-052D class guided-missile destroyer Hohhot (161), the Type-054A class frigate Yueyang (575) and Luomahu (907).
The pier at the new base is large enough for China's aircraft carriers, although none have ventured into the Indian Ocean yet.
China's facility is just down the road from a major U.S. base. And near to port facilities used by many navies including EU and NATO countries, South Korea and Japan. So as well as being China's first overseas base, it is particularly significant.
The facilities are heavily defended, almost having the appearance of a medieval fortress. But with modern materials and weapons. There are guard towers, a moat and walls, as well as bunkers and a heliport. It is garrisoned by Chinese marines with armored vehicles.
If China was hoping not to appear imperialist they may have chosen the wrong architects. Behind the fences, 'Hesco' barriers, walls and guard towers are a full range of buildings. There are barracks, training complexes, an armored vehicle depot and helipads.
China's Expanding Global Presence
The move is significant in a number of ways. Damien Symon, an independent defense analyst who has been monitoring developments underlined the importance. "Djibouti broadens China's footprint in the Indian Ocean as well as the Gulf of Aden and even the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. It will mean that the Chinese Navy can be permanently deployed there. It could even act as a staging post for deployments to the Mediterrean."
Symon added that "The PLAN has a close ally in Pakistan. But plans to develop the Pakistan port of Gwadar into a Chinese naval base appear to have stalled, or at least are progressing slowly. So Djibouti is currently the only Chinese naval base in the region."
China has been investing in a string of port and naval facilities around the world. Djibouti was the first overtly military one, but it probably won't be the last. Facilities in Pakistan, Cambodia and Equatorial Guinea have all drawn attention, and there are more potential tie-ups. Most recently there have been reports that China may set up a base in the Solomon Islands.
Related articles (Full index of popular Covert Shores articles)
Chinese Sailless Submarine
Chinese MS200 midget submarine
Chinese Navy's Advanced Submarine Type-039C Yuan Class. w/Cutaway
Chinese Navy's First Cruise Missile Submarine, Type-033G Wuhan Class. w/Cutaway
Sat 26 March 2022 By H I Sutton
CLICK to enlarge.
Chinese Navy Ship Seen At Important African Base For First Time
China's overseas ambitions have become more tangible with the establishment of a navy base at Djibouti on the Horn of Africa. The strategic location extends China's conventional naval reach in the Indian Ocean and Middle East.
Now new intelligence shows that a Chinese Navy (PLAN) warship has called at the new base. This is a significant first for the controversial base.
Escort Task Force
The warship seen is the Type-903A replenishment ship Luomahu (907). This has been supporting China's overseas detachment operating in the region. These detachments, known as the "Escort Task Force", have become a permanent feature.
They conducts anti-piracy missions but also shows the flag, and sometimes monitors Western warships in the area. So far the detachment is made up of destroyers and frigates but larger combatants may follow in the future. Large amphibious warships have also been deployed on occasion.
The current detachment, the 40th Escort Task Force, consists of three ships. The Type-052D class guided-missile destroyer Hohhot (161), the Type-054A class frigate Yueyang (575) and Luomahu (907).
The pier at the new base is large enough for China's aircraft carriers, although none have ventured into the Indian Ocean yet.
China's facility is just down the road from a major U.S. base. And near to port facilities used by many navies including EU and NATO countries, South Korea and Japan. So as well as being China's first overseas base, it is particularly significant.
The facilities are heavily defended, almost having the appearance of a medieval fortress. But with modern materials and weapons. There are guard towers, a moat and walls, as well as bunkers and a heliport. It is garrisoned by Chinese marines with armored vehicles.
If China was hoping not to appear imperialist they may have chosen the wrong architects. Behind the fences, 'Hesco' barriers, walls and guard towers are a full range of buildings. There are barracks, training complexes, an armored vehicle depot and helipads.
China's Expanding Global Presence
The move is significant in a number of ways. Damien Symon, an independent defense analyst who has been monitoring developments underlined the importance. "Djibouti broadens China's footprint in the Indian Ocean as well as the Gulf of Aden and even the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. It will mean that the Chinese Navy can be permanently deployed there. It could even act as a staging post for deployments to the Mediterrean."
Symon added that "The PLAN has a close ally in Pakistan. But plans to develop the Pakistan port of Gwadar into a Chinese naval base appear to have stalled, or at least are progressing slowly. So Djibouti is currently the only Chinese naval base in the region."
China has been investing in a string of port and naval facilities around the world. Djibouti was the first overtly military one, but it probably won't be the last. Facilities in Pakistan, Cambodia and Equatorial Guinea have all drawn attention, and there are more potential tie-ups. Most recently there have been reports that China may set up a base in the Solomon Islands.
Related articles (Full index of popular Covert Shores articles)
Chinese Sailless Submarine
Chinese MS200 midget submarine
Chinese Navy's Advanced Submarine Type-039C Yuan Class. w/Cutaway
Chinese Navy's First Cruise Missile Submarine, Type-033G Wuhan Class. w/CutawayH I Sutton - Covert Shores
www.hisutton.com
jward
passin' thru
Nessa
@IntelNessa
UPDATE: North Korea appears to be preparing for a nuclear test according to South Korea.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Politics
North Korea ‘preparing’ for nuclear test
Published
28 mins ago
on
March 27, 2022
By
BNO News
Location of the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in North Korea (Credit: Google)
Construction is underway at the partially demolished nuclear test site in North Korea, an indication that the country is preparing for its most provocative act in nearly five years, according to South Korean government sources.
Signs detected by military and intelligence agencies in South Korea indicate that North Korea is working to restore Tunnel 3 at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site, which was partially demolished in 2018, when diplomacy allowed tensions to ease on the Korean Peninsula.
“[The North] abruptly stopped its initial construction work to restore the entrance to Tunnel 3 and it’s [now] digging up the side [of the tunnel],” a South Korean government source told Yonhap. “In this way, it seems like it will be possible to restore [the facilities] in a month.”
Experts believe that North Korea could test a tactical nuclear weapon which is small enough to be loaded on ballistic missiles. Major events are often carried out around key holidays and Military Foundation Day, which falls on April 25, is seen as a possible date for the test.
Sunday’s report comes just days after a joint statement from the U.S., the UK, Japan, South Korea, and 11 other countries expressed “alarm” about construction at North Korea’s nuclear test site, which it said could suggest preparations for a nuclear test.
North Korea test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Thursday, its biggest missile test since 2017. This week’s test demonstrated an improved capacity with an estimated range of up to 15,000 kilometers, putting all of Asia, Europe and North America within reach, although the weight of a warhead would likely reduce its reach in practice.
North Korea has carried out six nuclear tests to date, all of which were carried out at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in North Hamgyong province. The most recent test happened in 2017 and was the country’s most advanced test yet with an estimated yield of 250 kilotons TNT, nearly 17 times as much as the bomb which was dropped on Hiroshima.
North Korea ‘preparing’ for nuclear test
@IntelNessa
UPDATE: North Korea appears to be preparing for a nuclear test according to South Korea.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Politics
North Korea ‘preparing’ for nuclear test
Published
28 mins ago
on
March 27, 2022
By
BNO News
Location of the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in North Korea (Credit: Google)
Construction is underway at the partially demolished nuclear test site in North Korea, an indication that the country is preparing for its most provocative act in nearly five years, according to South Korean government sources.
Signs detected by military and intelligence agencies in South Korea indicate that North Korea is working to restore Tunnel 3 at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site, which was partially demolished in 2018, when diplomacy allowed tensions to ease on the Korean Peninsula.
“[The North] abruptly stopped its initial construction work to restore the entrance to Tunnel 3 and it’s [now] digging up the side [of the tunnel],” a South Korean government source told Yonhap. “In this way, it seems like it will be possible to restore [the facilities] in a month.”
Experts believe that North Korea could test a tactical nuclear weapon which is small enough to be loaded on ballistic missiles. Major events are often carried out around key holidays and Military Foundation Day, which falls on April 25, is seen as a possible date for the test.
Sunday’s report comes just days after a joint statement from the U.S., the UK, Japan, South Korea, and 11 other countries expressed “alarm” about construction at North Korea’s nuclear test site, which it said could suggest preparations for a nuclear test.
North Korea test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Thursday, its biggest missile test since 2017. This week’s test demonstrated an improved capacity with an estimated range of up to 15,000 kilometers, putting all of Asia, Europe and North America within reach, although the weight of a warhead would likely reduce its reach in practice.
North Korea has carried out six nuclear tests to date, all of which were carried out at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in North Hamgyong province. The most recent test happened in 2017 and was the country’s most advanced test yet with an estimated yield of 250 kilotons TNT, nearly 17 times as much as the bomb which was dropped on Hiroshima.
North Korea ‘preparing’ for nuclear test
Last edited:
jward
passin' thru
Stephen Dziedzic
@stephendziedzic
Looks like Solomon Islands PM Manasseh Sogavare will make a public statement tomorrow morning in parliament on the security treaty with China
jward
passin' thru
Josh Smith
@joshjonsmith
South Korea says it has successfully tested its first solid-fuel space rocket today, the first such launch since bilateral restrictions on missile development were eased with the US last year, and part of a plan to be able to launch military and civilian satellites
Worth noting that compared to the liquid-fueled rocket South Korea tested last year, this type of rocket may b more useful if they ever wanted to stick a warhead on it. Space and military development has been closely intertwined in every country developing ballistic missiles
11:40 PM · Mar 29, 2022·TweetDeck
@joshjonsmith
South Korea says it has successfully tested its first solid-fuel space rocket today, the first such launch since bilateral restrictions on missile development were eased with the US last year, and part of a plan to be able to launch military and civilian satellites
Worth noting that compared to the liquid-fueled rocket South Korea tested last year, this type of rocket may b more useful if they ever wanted to stick a warhead on it. Space and military development has been closely intertwined in every country developing ballistic missiles
11:40 PM · Mar 29, 2022·TweetDeck
jward
passin' thru
Kim Jong Un Lied About Firing Newer Version of ICBM, Seoul Says
The South Korean defense ministry told lawmakers a missile launched last week by North Korea was likely a Hwasong-15.
Photographer: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
By
Jeong-Ho Lee
March 29, 2022, 5:06 AM CDTUpdated onMarch 29, 2022, 6:28 PM CDT
North Korea tried to deceive the world about the type of missile it fired last week, claiming that it successfully tested a “huge,” new ICBM while actually firing off a rocket first launched in 2017, South Korean defense officials said.
The intercontinental ballistic missile that North Korea launched last week was likely a Hwasong-15, which was successfully tested in November 2017 and designed to carry a single nuclear warhead, the South Korean defense ministry told lawmakers in a report Tuesday. That’s less advanced than the Hwasong-17, a multiple-warhead missile, which Pyongyang triumphantly declared a success with a slick, highly produced video.
South Korean officials said the shadows in the video of the Hwasong-17 launch fell in a direction indicating the footage was shot between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m., rather than Thursday afternoon, when and ICBM rocketed into space and fell in the sea off of Japan. The cloud cover shown in the video also didn’t match the weather on the day of the launch, the officials said.
The Firing Line
Ballistic missile tests under Kim Jong Un
Sources: South Korea Ministry of Defense and Center for Nonproliferation Studies
March 16, 2022 test of suspected ICBM ended in failure
Russia's War in Ukraine
Keep up with the latest news and the aftermath of one of the worst security crises in Europe since World War II.
Email
By submitting my information, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service and to receive offers and promotions from Bloomberg.
That suggests North Korea may have used video from a failed Hwasong-17 test on the morning of March 16 and launched an actual Hwasong-15 to sell it as a success, as previously reported by NK News. The Kim regime has long relied on weapons tests to bolster its image as a national protector, giving it an incentive to cover up missile that failed in an explosion that could be seen in the skies over Pyongyang.
South Korea’s defense ministry said eight days was “not enough time” to identify technical problems and carry out another test of the Hwasong-17. The ministry added that North Korea needed a tool for propaganda after its citizens witnessed the failure of the earlier launch.
North Korea’s state media said Friday that Kim called the successful launch of the new missile a “priceless victory won by the great Korean people,” adding his forces are “are fully ready to thoroughly curb and contain any dangerous military attempts of the U.S. imperialists.”
The U.S. was analyzing the test in coordination with its allies, Defense Department spokesman John Kirby told a news briefing. “I will just tell you that we assessed that that launch was a probable ICBM,” he said, adding “I don’t have an update for you beyond that.”
The ICBM fired Thursday reached an altitude of 6,200 kilometers (3,900 miles) and traveled 1,080 kilometers, according to South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, higher and farther than North Korea’s previous ICBM test. The Hwasong-15 has a range that could deliver a nuclear warhead to all of the U.S. mainland, weapons experts have said.
North Korea also altered video footage when it tried to pass off a January 2016 failed test of a submarine-launched ballistic missile as a success, NK News said at the time. It also tried to doctor out evidence of Kim’s presence at another SLBM test in October 2019, it added.
(Updates with comment from Pentagon spokesman.)
Up Next
Sunac, Shimao, Chinese Property Developers Halt Trading After Deadline Missed
- North Korea fired off missile tested in 2017, not new rocket
- Video shows discrepancies in lighting, weather, officials say
The South Korean defense ministry told lawmakers a missile launched last week by North Korea was likely a Hwasong-15.
Photographer: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
By
Jeong-Ho Lee
March 29, 2022, 5:06 AM CDTUpdated onMarch 29, 2022, 6:28 PM CDT
North Korea tried to deceive the world about the type of missile it fired last week, claiming that it successfully tested a “huge,” new ICBM while actually firing off a rocket first launched in 2017, South Korean defense officials said.
The intercontinental ballistic missile that North Korea launched last week was likely a Hwasong-15, which was successfully tested in November 2017 and designed to carry a single nuclear warhead, the South Korean defense ministry told lawmakers in a report Tuesday. That’s less advanced than the Hwasong-17, a multiple-warhead missile, which Pyongyang triumphantly declared a success with a slick, highly produced video.
South Korean officials said the shadows in the video of the Hwasong-17 launch fell in a direction indicating the footage was shot between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m., rather than Thursday afternoon, when and ICBM rocketed into space and fell in the sea off of Japan. The cloud cover shown in the video also didn’t match the weather on the day of the launch, the officials said.
The Firing Line
Ballistic missile tests under Kim Jong Un
Sources: South Korea Ministry of Defense and Center for Nonproliferation Studies
March 16, 2022 test of suspected ICBM ended in failure
Russia's War in Ukraine
Keep up with the latest news and the aftermath of one of the worst security crises in Europe since World War II.
By submitting my information, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service and to receive offers and promotions from Bloomberg.
That suggests North Korea may have used video from a failed Hwasong-17 test on the morning of March 16 and launched an actual Hwasong-15 to sell it as a success, as previously reported by NK News. The Kim regime has long relied on weapons tests to bolster its image as a national protector, giving it an incentive to cover up missile that failed in an explosion that could be seen in the skies over Pyongyang.
South Korea’s defense ministry said eight days was “not enough time” to identify technical problems and carry out another test of the Hwasong-17. The ministry added that North Korea needed a tool for propaganda after its citizens witnessed the failure of the earlier launch.
North Korea’s state media said Friday that Kim called the successful launch of the new missile a “priceless victory won by the great Korean people,” adding his forces are “are fully ready to thoroughly curb and contain any dangerous military attempts of the U.S. imperialists.”
The U.S. was analyzing the test in coordination with its allies, Defense Department spokesman John Kirby told a news briefing. “I will just tell you that we assessed that that launch was a probable ICBM,” he said, adding “I don’t have an update for you beyond that.”
| For more on North Korea: |
|---|
North Korea also altered video footage when it tried to pass off a January 2016 failed test of a submarine-launched ballistic missile as a success, NK News said at the time. It also tried to doctor out evidence of Kim’s presence at another SLBM test in October 2019, it added.
(Updates with comment from Pentagon spokesman.)
Up Next
Sunac, Shimao, Chinese Property Developers Halt Trading After Deadline Missed
jward
passin' thru
OSINTdefender
@sentdefender
Japan has Officially Stated after negotiation between the two Countries since the end of WW2 recently entirely collapsed that the entire Kuril Island Chain is Japanese Sovereign Territory and is being Illegally Occupied by Russian Forces.
View: https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1509577019754958859?s=20&t=ottcqHZQBH-jjKJy7_vBvQ
The Japanese Government over the last few decades has refrained from such statements due to the possibility of hurting Soviet/Russian Relations, but due to the Invasion of Ukraine and Japanese Sanctions on Russia, Diplomatic Relations between the two are at a Severe Low Point.
View: https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1509586046111129617?s=20&t=ottcqHZQBH-jjKJy7_vBvQ
@sentdefender
Japan has Officially Stated after negotiation between the two Countries since the end of WW2 recently entirely collapsed that the entire Kuril Island Chain is Japanese Sovereign Territory and is being Illegally Occupied by Russian Forces.
View: https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1509577019754958859?s=20&t=ottcqHZQBH-jjKJy7_vBvQ
The Japanese Government over the last few decades has refrained from such statements due to the possibility of hurting Soviet/Russian Relations, but due to the Invasion of Ukraine and Japanese Sanctions on Russia, Diplomatic Relations between the two are at a Severe Low Point.
View: https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1509586046111129617?s=20&t=ottcqHZQBH-jjKJy7_vBvQ
northern watch
TB Fanatic
jward
passin' thru
Sri Lanka imposes curfew amid food, fuel and power shortage protests
Published
8 hours ago
Image source, Getty Images
Image caption,
Soldiers usually support the police - but on this occasion they have the power to detain people
A 36-hour curfew has been announced in Sri Lanka as a state of emergency is enforced amid violent protests against food and fuel shortages.
The move is aimed at stopping new protests - two days after crowds were accused of setting vehicles ablaze near the president's private residence.
The military has since been deployed and now has the power to arrest suspects without warrants.
Sri Lanka is in the midst of a major economic crisis.
It is caused in part by a lack of foreign currency, which is used to pay for fuel imports.
Faced with power cuts lasting half a day or more, and a lack of fuel and essential food and medicines, public anger has reached a new high in the island nation of 22 million.
The protest outside President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's house on Thursday began peacefully, but participants said things turned violent after police fired tear gas, water cannons and also beat people present.
Protesters retaliated against the police by pelting them with stones.
At least two dozen police personnel were reportedly injured during the clashes, according to an official cited by Reuters news agency.
On Friday, 53 demonstrators were arrested, and local media reported that five news photographers were detained and tortured at a police station. The government said it would investigate the latter claim.
Despite the crackdown, protests continued, and spread to other parts of the country.
Demonstrators in the capital carried placards calling for the president's resignation.
Analysis: Ayeshea Perera, Asia Editor, BBC News
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's decision to impose a state of emergency has come as a shock to many.
One of the most draconian pieces of legislation in Sri Lanka, it is meant to be deployed in situations of "exceptional threat, danger or disaster".\
One of the last times it was invoked, for instance, was in the aftermath of the deadly Easter Sunday bombings in 2019.
The law allows for the detention of people without proof or the presumption of innocence, and severely restricts fundamental rights such as the freedom of movement and expression.
It also allows the police and military to arrest and detain people without warrants.
This has given rise to fears that the government is going to resort to a brutal crackdown on protesters, who are angry about the toll taken on their lives by the ongoing economic crisis.
Civil protesters and journalists have already reported being tortured by police for simply being present at the protests outside Mr Rajapaksa's home, and one of the organisers was taken in for questioning late on Friday night.
The imposition of the law cannot be challenged in the courts, although parliament will need to ratify it within 14 days of its declaration.
The government has the majority in parliament to pass it. Thereafter it will need to be extended on a monthly basis.
Image source, NurPhoto/Getty Images
Image caption,
Burnt-out vehicles outside Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's private residence in Colombo on Friday
President Rajapaksa said the decision to declare a state of emergency was taken in the interests of public security, the protection of public order, and to ensure the maintenance of supplies and essential services.
The demonstrations mark a massive turnaround in popularity for Mr Rajapaksa, who swept into power with a majority win in 2019, promising stability and a "strong hand" to rule the country.
Media caption,
Tear gas and water cannon fired at Sri Lanka protesters
Published
8 hours ago
Image caption,
Soldiers usually support the police - but on this occasion they have the power to detain people
A 36-hour curfew has been announced in Sri Lanka as a state of emergency is enforced amid violent protests against food and fuel shortages.
The move is aimed at stopping new protests - two days after crowds were accused of setting vehicles ablaze near the president's private residence.
The military has since been deployed and now has the power to arrest suspects without warrants.
Sri Lanka is in the midst of a major economic crisis.
It is caused in part by a lack of foreign currency, which is used to pay for fuel imports.
Faced with power cuts lasting half a day or more, and a lack of fuel and essential food and medicines, public anger has reached a new high in the island nation of 22 million.
The protest outside President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's house on Thursday began peacefully, but participants said things turned violent after police fired tear gas, water cannons and also beat people present.
Protesters retaliated against the police by pelting them with stones.
At least two dozen police personnel were reportedly injured during the clashes, according to an official cited by Reuters news agency.
On Friday, 53 demonstrators were arrested, and local media reported that five news photographers were detained and tortured at a police station. The government said it would investigate the latter claim.
Despite the crackdown, protests continued, and spread to other parts of the country.
Demonstrators in the capital carried placards calling for the president's resignation.
Analysis: Ayeshea Perera, Asia Editor, BBC News
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's decision to impose a state of emergency has come as a shock to many.
One of the most draconian pieces of legislation in Sri Lanka, it is meant to be deployed in situations of "exceptional threat, danger or disaster".\
One of the last times it was invoked, for instance, was in the aftermath of the deadly Easter Sunday bombings in 2019.
The law allows for the detention of people without proof or the presumption of innocence, and severely restricts fundamental rights such as the freedom of movement and expression.
It also allows the police and military to arrest and detain people without warrants.
This has given rise to fears that the government is going to resort to a brutal crackdown on protesters, who are angry about the toll taken on their lives by the ongoing economic crisis.
Civil protesters and journalists have already reported being tortured by police for simply being present at the protests outside Mr Rajapaksa's home, and one of the organisers was taken in for questioning late on Friday night.
The imposition of the law cannot be challenged in the courts, although parliament will need to ratify it within 14 days of its declaration.
The government has the majority in parliament to pass it. Thereafter it will need to be extended on a monthly basis.
Image caption,
Burnt-out vehicles outside Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's private residence in Colombo on Friday
President Rajapaksa said the decision to declare a state of emergency was taken in the interests of public security, the protection of public order, and to ensure the maintenance of supplies and essential services.
The demonstrations mark a massive turnaround in popularity for Mr Rajapaksa, who swept into power with a majority win in 2019, promising stability and a "strong hand" to rule the country.
Media caption,
Tear gas and water cannon fired at Sri Lanka protesters
Gotabaya Rajapaksa: Economic crisis protesters defy curfew in Sri Lanka
Demonstrators face off with police in Colombo while tear gas is fired at students in another town.
www.bbc.com
jward
passin' thru
NetBlocks
@netblocks
9m
Confirmed: Real-time network data show Sri Lanka has imposed a nationwide social media blackout, restricting access to platforms including Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, and Instagram as emergency is declared amid widespread protests. Report: https://netblocks.org/reports/social
@netblocks
9m
Confirmed: Real-time network data show Sri Lanka has imposed a nationwide social media blackout, restricting access to platforms including Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, and Instagram as emergency is declared amid widespread protests. Report: https://netblocks.org/reports/social
jward
passin' thru
April 3, 2022
Unlike Ukraine, An Invasion of Taiwan May Spur US Military Intervention
By Dean Chang
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in its second month. Pundits continue to debate the similarities and the differences between the Ukrainian incursion and a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
Rational thinking is prevailing as NATO and the US want to avoid escalating the conflict into a third World War and the Ukrainian issue has not risen to the level that threatens US national security interests.
However, if China apes Russia and invades Taiwan to return it “to the Motherland,” it is conceivable that direct Western military aid would descend upon Taiwan. No longer would the US hide behind its outdated (and shameful) “strategic ambiguity” policy of whether it would commit militarily to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack.
Unlike Ukraine, Taiwan is of great national security interest to both the US and the rest of the non-authoritarian and (mostly) democratic world. The long history of US supplying Taiwan with defensive arms (the Taiwan Relations Act) also indicates a robust US-Taiwan relationship that is lacking in the Ukrainian scenario.
Two factors portend US and the West possibly aiding Taiwan’s defense:
Geography favors Taiwan
Like Pennsylvania that served as the geographically central “Keystone State” that held together the first 13 states, Taiwan is the main and central cog of the First Island Chain that stretches from the Japanese archipelago to the Philippines.
First Island Chain Credit: Suid Afrikaanese CC BY-SA 3.0
To control Taiwan is to anchor the defense of the First Island Chain and, subsequently, dictate security operations in the western Pacific.
The US expanded its line of defense to the coast of continental Asia after its victory in the Pacific in World War II. In a then-top-secret June 14, 1950, memo, General Douglas MacArthur wrote:
MacArthur also saw the strategic significance of Taiwan:
And:
Would the US risk losing Taiwan to China so its People’s Liberation Army Navy could use the island to sail unimpeded to Honolulu and on to California? Would Asian countries tolerate being at the mercy of Chinese naval vessels that could either turn northward to Japan or southward toward the Philippines to link up with its fortified atolls in the South China Sea immediately after crossing the Taiwan Strait?
As the key linchpin in the First Island Chain, Taiwan’s strategic location and its historic significance will not and cannot be easily ceded by the US to any nation unfriendly to it without a significant amount of kinetic demonstrations of US firepower.
Taiwan’s strategic hold on global semiconductor chip capacity.
Semiconductor chips are a key to the 21st-century economy. Everyone needs them. Chips are ubiquitous and omnipresent in each person’s daily life and in nearly every industry and the military.
Chips make smartphones talk, cars run, air conditioners cool, aircraft fly, ATMs spit out cash, electrical grid systems run, weapons systems fire and kill. They are everywhere: an average automobile, circa 2022, has 1,000 semiconductor chips; a smartphone has 15-20 chips.
At ground zero of the global semiconductor chips industry stands Taiwan; its semiconductor chips makers account for 60% of the global chip market. Moreover, according to a January 2022 Center for a New American Security report, “Taiwan accounts for 92% of the world’s most advanced (below 10nm) semiconductor manufacturing capacity.”
No country exemplifies the need for updated and more powerful chips than America, especially as it continues to maintain and upgrade its defense and aerospace programs. The advanced 10nm chips, with their combination of performance, power, and delivery parameters, are essential to America’s national security, its economy, and its infrastructure. Unfortunately, nothing has changed for the US since a 2016 Congressional report that,
While Taiwanese semiconductor firms have deals to produce chips outside of Taiwan, i.e, to build a $12 billion plant in Arizona to be operational in 2024, a plant to supply Sony in Japan, and new facilities in Europe in an agreement with Germany, the majority of semiconductors will still originate from Taiwan in the near future.
The US will continue to depend on Taiwan until it can be a self-sufficient producer of chips…and Congress has yet to pass a bill to inject $52 billion into the US semiconductor industry. Thus, it is unrealistic for the US and the rest of the world to sit by idly and tolerate a potential attack by China on Taiwan and take control of the global supply of chips.
Conclusion
Similarities between Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan are few. If China invades Taiwan, the best and only course is for the US to officially shed the benign “paper tiger” policy known as “strategic ambiguity” and intervene and aid Taiwan militarily.
Taiwan’s position within the First Island Chain and its prominent source as the most prolific supplier of semiconductor chips make the island nation indispensable to be left to its own if China invaded.
General MacArthur was prescient and his words ring true today as they did post-World War II.
We know China is, at the very least, an “unfriendly power” to the US with the potential to be hostile. The only question is whether the current US administration has the willpower and the conviction to defend Taiwan if/when China invades and secure the First Island Chain and the global supply of semiconductor chips.
The author is a first generation Asian-American and a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York and Columbia University. He is a retired US Army colonel and a retired US Department of State foreign service officer.
www.americanthinker.com
Unlike Ukraine, An Invasion of Taiwan May Spur US Military Intervention
By Dean Chang
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in its second month. Pundits continue to debate the similarities and the differences between the Ukrainian incursion and a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
Rational thinking is prevailing as NATO and the US want to avoid escalating the conflict into a third World War and the Ukrainian issue has not risen to the level that threatens US national security interests.
However, if China apes Russia and invades Taiwan to return it “to the Motherland,” it is conceivable that direct Western military aid would descend upon Taiwan. No longer would the US hide behind its outdated (and shameful) “strategic ambiguity” policy of whether it would commit militarily to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack.
Unlike Ukraine, Taiwan is of great national security interest to both the US and the rest of the non-authoritarian and (mostly) democratic world. The long history of US supplying Taiwan with defensive arms (the Taiwan Relations Act) also indicates a robust US-Taiwan relationship that is lacking in the Ukrainian scenario.
Two factors portend US and the West possibly aiding Taiwan’s defense:
- Taiwan’s geographical location and
- Taiwan’s dominance of global semi-conductor chip manufacturing.
Geography favors Taiwan
Like Pennsylvania that served as the geographically central “Keystone State” that held together the first 13 states, Taiwan is the main and central cog of the First Island Chain that stretches from the Japanese archipelago to the Philippines.
First Island Chain Credit: Suid Afrikaanese CC BY-SA 3.0
To control Taiwan is to anchor the defense of the First Island Chain and, subsequently, dictate security operations in the western Pacific.
The US expanded its line of defense to the coast of continental Asia after its victory in the Pacific in World War II. In a then-top-secret June 14, 1950, memo, General Douglas MacArthur wrote:
MacArthur also saw the strategic significance of Taiwan:
And:
A 2014 US Naval Institute article by US Naval War College professor James R. Holmes echoed MacArthur’s sentiments when it re-affirmed that the First Island Chain is the most effective point to counter potential Chinese invasion of the western Pacific and beyond
Would the US risk losing Taiwan to China so its People’s Liberation Army Navy could use the island to sail unimpeded to Honolulu and on to California? Would Asian countries tolerate being at the mercy of Chinese naval vessels that could either turn northward to Japan or southward toward the Philippines to link up with its fortified atolls in the South China Sea immediately after crossing the Taiwan Strait?
As the key linchpin in the First Island Chain, Taiwan’s strategic location and its historic significance will not and cannot be easily ceded by the US to any nation unfriendly to it without a significant amount of kinetic demonstrations of US firepower.
Taiwan’s strategic hold on global semiconductor chip capacity.
Semiconductor chips are a key to the 21st-century economy. Everyone needs them. Chips are ubiquitous and omnipresent in each person’s daily life and in nearly every industry and the military.
Chips make smartphones talk, cars run, air conditioners cool, aircraft fly, ATMs spit out cash, electrical grid systems run, weapons systems fire and kill. They are everywhere: an average automobile, circa 2022, has 1,000 semiconductor chips; a smartphone has 15-20 chips.
At ground zero of the global semiconductor chips industry stands Taiwan; its semiconductor chips makers account for 60% of the global chip market. Moreover, according to a January 2022 Center for a New American Security report, “Taiwan accounts for 92% of the world’s most advanced (below 10nm) semiconductor manufacturing capacity.”
No country exemplifies the need for updated and more powerful chips than America, especially as it continues to maintain and upgrade its defense and aerospace programs. The advanced 10nm chips, with their combination of performance, power, and delivery parameters, are essential to America’s national security, its economy, and its infrastructure. Unfortunately, nothing has changed for the US since a 2016 Congressional report that,
Today, the list of chip suppliers for US consumption is short: Taiwan, South Korea, China, and Israel; China and Israel, the third- and fourth-largest suppliers, account for just 6% of the global needs.
While Taiwanese semiconductor firms have deals to produce chips outside of Taiwan, i.e, to build a $12 billion plant in Arizona to be operational in 2024, a plant to supply Sony in Japan, and new facilities in Europe in an agreement with Germany, the majority of semiconductors will still originate from Taiwan in the near future.
The US will continue to depend on Taiwan until it can be a self-sufficient producer of chips…and Congress has yet to pass a bill to inject $52 billion into the US semiconductor industry. Thus, it is unrealistic for the US and the rest of the world to sit by idly and tolerate a potential attack by China on Taiwan and take control of the global supply of chips.
Conclusion
Similarities between Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan are few. If China invades Taiwan, the best and only course is for the US to officially shed the benign “paper tiger” policy known as “strategic ambiguity” and intervene and aid Taiwan militarily.
Taiwan’s position within the First Island Chain and its prominent source as the most prolific supplier of semiconductor chips make the island nation indispensable to be left to its own if China invaded.
General MacArthur was prescient and his words ring true today as they did post-World War II.
We know China is, at the very least, an “unfriendly power” to the US with the potential to be hostile. The only question is whether the current US administration has the willpower and the conviction to defend Taiwan if/when China invades and secure the First Island Chain and the global supply of semiconductor chips.
The author is a first generation Asian-American and a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York and Columbia University. He is a retired US Army colonel and a retired US Department of State foreign service officer.
Unlike Ukraine, An Invasion of Taiwan May Spur US Military Intervention
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in its second month. Pundits continue to debate the similarities and the differences between the Ukrainian incursion and a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Rational thinking is prevailing as NATO an...
jward
passin' thru
North Korea warns of nuclear response if South provokes it
The sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un berated South Korea for touting preemptive strike capabilities against the North, saying her country’s nuclear forces would annihilate the South’s conventional forces if provoked
Via AP news wire
3 hours ago
South Korea Koreas Tensions
(Yonhap)
For the second time in three days, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un berated South Korea for touting its supposed preemptive strike capabilities against the North, saying her country’s nuclear forces would annihilate the South’s conventional forces if provoked.
In a statement carried Tuesday by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency, Kim Yo Jong called South Korea Defense Minister Suh Wook’s recent comments about preemptive strikes a “fantastic daydream” and the “hysteria of a lunatic.”
She stressed that North Korea doesn’t want another war on the Korean Peninsula but warned it would retaliate with its nuclear forces if the South opts for preemptive strikes or other attacks, which would leave the South’s military “little short of total destruction and ruin.”
In another statement directed toward Suh on Sunday, she called him a “scum-like guy” and warning that the South may face a “serious threat” because of his comments.
Her statements come amid tensions over North Korea’s accelerating weapons tests this year, including its first test of a long-range missile since 2017 on March 24, as her brother revives nuclear brinkmanship aimed at pressuring Washington to accept the North as a nuclear power and remove crippling sanctions.
Recommended
The renewed tensions have been a major setback for outgoing South Korean President Moon Jae-in, a dovish liberal who had staked his presidential term on his ambitions for inter-Korean rapprochement.
During a visit to the country’s strategic missile command last week, Suh said South Korea has the ability and readiness to launch precision strikes on North Korea if it detects the North intends to fire missiles at South Korea.
Seoul has long maintained such a preemptive attack strategy to cope with North Korea’s growing missile and nuclear threats, but it was highly unusual for a senior Seoul official under the Moon administration to publicly discuss it.
“In case (South Korea) opts for military confrontation with us, our nuclear combat force will have to inevitably carry out its duty … a dreadful attack will be launched and the (South Korean) army will have to face a miserable fate little short of total destruction and ruin,” Kim said in her latest statement. “‘Preemptive strike’ against a nuclear weapons state? … This is a fantastic daydream, and it is hysteria of a lunatic.”
Moon met Kim Jong Un three times in 2018 and lobbied hard to help set up his Kim’s first summit with then-President Donald Trump in June that year.
But the diplomacy never recovered from the collapse of the second Kim-Trump meeting in 2019 in Vietnam, where the Americans rejected North Korea’s demands for major sanctions relief in exchange for a limited surrender of its nuclear capabilities.
North Korea has also severed all cooperation with Moon’s government while expressing anger over U.S.-South Korea military exercises and Seoul’s inability to wrest concessions from Washington on its behalf.
Recommended
While the Biden administration has offered open-ended talks, North Korea as rejected the overture, demanding that Washington remove its “hostile” policy first, a term the North mainly users to refer to joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises and U.S.-led sanctions over its nuclear weapons program.
More about
North KoreaAPSouth KoreaKim Jong UnSeoulMoon Jae-inKorean Central News AgencyVietnamBidenWashingtonKorean Peninsula
www.independent.co.uk
The sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un berated South Korea for touting preemptive strike capabilities against the North, saying her country’s nuclear forces would annihilate the South’s conventional forces if provoked
Via AP news wire
3 hours ago
South Korea Koreas Tensions
(Yonhap)
For the second time in three days, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un berated South Korea for touting its supposed preemptive strike capabilities against the North, saying her country’s nuclear forces would annihilate the South’s conventional forces if provoked.
In a statement carried Tuesday by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency, Kim Yo Jong called South Korea Defense Minister Suh Wook’s recent comments about preemptive strikes a “fantastic daydream” and the “hysteria of a lunatic.”
She stressed that North Korea doesn’t want another war on the Korean Peninsula but warned it would retaliate with its nuclear forces if the South opts for preemptive strikes or other attacks, which would leave the South’s military “little short of total destruction and ruin.”
In another statement directed toward Suh on Sunday, she called him a “scum-like guy” and warning that the South may face a “serious threat” because of his comments.
Her statements come amid tensions over North Korea’s accelerating weapons tests this year, including its first test of a long-range missile since 2017 on March 24, as her brother revives nuclear brinkmanship aimed at pressuring Washington to accept the North as a nuclear power and remove crippling sanctions.
Recommended
-
Ukraine news live: Body of Olga Sohnenko found in shallow grave -
Why has Russia invaded Ukraine? The conflict simply explained
The renewed tensions have been a major setback for outgoing South Korean President Moon Jae-in, a dovish liberal who had staked his presidential term on his ambitions for inter-Korean rapprochement.
During a visit to the country’s strategic missile command last week, Suh said South Korea has the ability and readiness to launch precision strikes on North Korea if it detects the North intends to fire missiles at South Korea.
Seoul has long maintained such a preemptive attack strategy to cope with North Korea’s growing missile and nuclear threats, but it was highly unusual for a senior Seoul official under the Moon administration to publicly discuss it.
“In case (South Korea) opts for military confrontation with us, our nuclear combat force will have to inevitably carry out its duty … a dreadful attack will be launched and the (South Korean) army will have to face a miserable fate little short of total destruction and ruin,” Kim said in her latest statement. “‘Preemptive strike’ against a nuclear weapons state? … This is a fantastic daydream, and it is hysteria of a lunatic.”
Moon met Kim Jong Un three times in 2018 and lobbied hard to help set up his Kim’s first summit with then-President Donald Trump in June that year.
But the diplomacy never recovered from the collapse of the second Kim-Trump meeting in 2019 in Vietnam, where the Americans rejected North Korea’s demands for major sanctions relief in exchange for a limited surrender of its nuclear capabilities.
North Korea has also severed all cooperation with Moon’s government while expressing anger over U.S.-South Korea military exercises and Seoul’s inability to wrest concessions from Washington on its behalf.
Recommended
-
S. Korea's incoming president nominates his prime minister -
US sanctions North Korea firms over recent missile tests -
2 South Korean air force planes collide and crash, killing 3
While the Biden administration has offered open-ended talks, North Korea as rejected the overture, demanding that Washington remove its “hostile” policy first, a term the North mainly users to refer to joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises and U.S.-led sanctions over its nuclear weapons program.
More about
North KoreaAPSouth KoreaKim Jong UnSeoulMoon Jae-inKorean Central News AgencyVietnamBidenWashingtonKorean Peninsula
North Korea warns of nuclear response if South provokes it
The sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un berated South Korea for touting preemptive strike capabilities against the North, saying her country’s nuclear forces would annihilate the South’s conventional forces if provoked
www.independent.co.uk
jward
passin' thru
Chad O'Carroll
@chadocl
2h
Kim Yo Jong’s statements in last 48 hours are concerning. Looks like NK may have an inter-Korean escalation campaign to accompany anticipated future satellite launch and nuke test. This could be a lot more dangerous than similar eras in 2013 and 2015.
View: https://twitter.com/chadocl/status/1511154518100041731?s=20&t=3OUeh3jPX5mjMRd59OtWJQ
@chadocl
2h
Kim Yo Jong’s statements in last 48 hours are concerning. Looks like NK may have an inter-Korean escalation campaign to accompany anticipated future satellite launch and nuke test. This could be a lot more dangerous than similar eras in 2013 and 2015.
View: https://twitter.com/chadocl/status/1511154518100041731?s=20&t=3OUeh3jPX5mjMRd59OtWJQ
jward
passin' thru
Thomas Shugart
@tshugart3
To drive home the ongoing inadequacy of our response to the Chinese naval/maritime challenge, here's an updated ship count/estimate of the PLA Navy vs. USN, using data from this week's FY 23 budget request as well as the most recent CRS Report on Chinese naval modernization.
Hard to imagine now, but with these trends it's near-inevitable that someday we'll lose the ability to maintain sea control over a big chunk of the globe. Like someone who runs out of air, the absence of this thing we rarely think about will become almost all we can think about.
Ask and ye shall receive... Harder to do future projections, but with the PLA Navy outbuilding by tonnage by ~50% in recent years, the math says it's just a matter of time until they catch up by tonnage, too.
@tshugart3
To drive home the ongoing inadequacy of our response to the Chinese naval/maritime challenge, here's an updated ship count/estimate of the PLA Navy vs. USN, using data from this week's FY 23 budget request as well as the most recent CRS Report on Chinese naval modernization.
Hard to imagine now, but with these trends it's near-inevitable that someday we'll lose the ability to maintain sea control over a big chunk of the globe. Like someone who runs out of air, the absence of this thing we rarely think about will become almost all we can think about.
Ask and ye shall receive... Harder to do future projections, but with the PLA Navy outbuilding by tonnage by ~50% in recent years, the math says it's just a matter of time until they catch up by tonnage, too.
jward
passin' thru
Australia, US, UK to Collaborate on Hypersonic Weapon Development
By Daniel Y. Teng
April 5, 2022 Updated: April 5, 2022
The heads of Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom have vowed to cooperate on the development of hypersonic weapons as the three nations push to advance the trilateral AUKUS agreement amid increasing tensions in the Indo-Pacific region.
On April 6, U.S. President Joe Biden and Prime Ministers Scott Morrison (Australia) and Boris Johnson (UK) released a joint statement outlining the progress of the AUKUS agreement thus far, including cooperation on establishing a nuclear-powered submarine fleet in Australia.
“In light of Russia’s unprovoked, unjustified, and unlawful invasion of Ukraine, we reiterated our unwavering commitment to an international system that respects human rights, the rule of law, and the peaceful resolution of disputes free from coercion,” the leaders said in the statement.
“We also committed today to commence new trilateral cooperation on hypersonics and counter-hypersonics, and electronic warfare capabilities, as well as to expand information sharing and to deepen cooperation on defense innovation,” they added.
Hypersonic weapons fly at five times the speed of sound, are launched from sub-orbital platforms and are designed to overcome enemy defence systems through sheer speed.
China and Russia are currently ahead of Western nations in the development of these weapons, prompting U.S. leaders to expedite their own development. Russia has deployed the weapons in the current invasion of Ukraine.
The latest move follows an earlier partnership between the United States and Australia on hypersonic weapons development called SCIFiRE (Southern Cross Integrated Flight Research Experiment).
In documents released by the AUKUS leaders (pdf), working groups from the three nations are busy exchanging information on top-secret nuclear propulsion technology and on establishing the workforce and infrastructure for Australia to support a nuclear submarine fleet—including a new $10 billion (US$7.58 billion) naval base on Australia’s east coast.
The three nations will also develop cutting-edge technology in the fields of quantum technology, artificial intelligence, undersea capabilities (including drones), and advanced cyber.
“As we mature trilateral lines of effort within these and other critical defense and security capabilities, we will seek to engage allies and close partners as appropriate,” the document stated.
Meanwhile, the prime ministers of New Zealand and Canada, Jacinda Ardern and Justin Trudeau, have each received heavy criticism for their nations missing out on AUKUS—despite being part of the tight-knit Five Eyes’ intelligence-sharing group with Australia, the U.S. and the UK—with blame being directed at their soft stance on defence and Beijing relations.
AUKUS was established in September 2021 amid rising tensions with Beijing in the Indo-Pacific. The decision to arm Australia with nuclear-powered submarines would kick-start a major shift in the power balance in the region, with only six nations in the world currently carrying advanced weapons.
The signing of AUKUS was justified in light of the recent “security deal” between the Solomon Islands and Beijing—that will allow Chinese police, military personnel, weapons, and naval ships be stationed in the region—said Michael Shoebridge, defence director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. The Solomon Islands is located around 1,700 kilometres (1,56 miles) from Australia’s northern city of Cairns on the east coast.
“Its this growing spread of People’s Liberation Army power that is one of the reasons for AUKUS to come into being,” he previously told The Epoch Times. “All this will do is accelerate the efforts to implement the agreement.”
Meanwhile, Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said developing hypersonics was not a game of catch-up with Russia and China.
“These are the latest and high-tech missiles that we’re talking about. It’s not like they’ve been in operation for a decade or so,” he told the Nine Network.
China’s Ambassador to the United Nations Zhang Jun responded on April 4 warning against the latest moves saying the leaders should “refrain from doing things which may lead” to conflict, according to a statement to reporters.
Just a day earlier, the Australian defence minister announced a $3.5 billion plan to fast-track the arming of jet fighters and naval warships with new long-range missiles.
Under the new plan, 24 Super Hornet jets and the country’s F-35A Joint Strike Fighter fleet will be armed with Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM-ER) by 2024—three years ahead of schedule.
The JASSM-ER is an air-to-ground cruise missile manufactured by Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and has a range of 900 kilometres.
While Australian naval vessels, the Anzac-class frigate and Hobart-class destroyers, will be armed with Naval Strike Missiles (NSM) manufactured by Norwegian firm Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace.
The new anti-ship missiles will arrive five years ahead of schedule and will have a range of 185 kilometres, replacing the current Harpoon missiles.
Daniel Y. Teng
Australia, US, UK to Collaborate on Hypersonic Weapon Development
The heads of Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom have vowed to cooperate on the development of hypersonic weapons as the three nations push to advance the trilateral AUKUS agreement am...
www.theepochtimes.com
vector7
Dot Collector
China Threatens 'Forceful Measures' If Pelosi Visits Taiwan Amid Reports Speaker To Arrive Sunday
And just like that...she tests positive for COVID.
View: https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1512095946196369420?s=20&t=QSXFjOORCFCaqXPYuQmnAQ
www.timebomb2000.com
And just like that...she tests positive for COVID.
View: https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1512095946196369420?s=20&t=QSXFjOORCFCaqXPYuQmnAQ
CORONA - Pelosi tests positive for COVID-19
Fair Use https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-tests-positive-covid-19 Pelosi tests positive for COVID-19 Announcement made just before Pelosi's planned press conference Her spokesman made the announcement Thursday just as Pelosi, 82, was scheduled to hold her weekly news conference at the...
)
jward
passin' thru
North Korea could test nuclear device next week, US envoy warns
The country is celebrating Kim Il Sung's birthday April 15.
ByConor Finnegan
April 6, 2022, 5:43 PM
• 5 min read
0:38
ABC News breaks down North Korea missile launch
North Korea launched what could be its biggest ICBM yet.
KCNA via Reuters, FILE
With North Korea set to celebrate its most important holiday next week, the U.S. is concerned that Pyongyang "may be tempted to take another provocative action," including a possible nuclear test.
"We, in cooperation and coordination with our allies and partners, are prepared to deal with whatever they may undertake, and I want to emphasize that we obviously hope that they will refrain from further provocation," U.S. Special Envoy for North Korea Sung Kim said.
North Korea will celebrate the birth of the country's founder, Kim Il Sung, on April 15. Kim is the grandfather of current dictator Kim Jong Un.
The isolated country has not conducted a nuclear test since September 2017, its sixth on record.
As Russia's war in Ukraine exacerbates tensions between the Kremlin and the West, Kim said Russian and Chinese diplomats at the United Nations have obstructed any U.S. effort to condemn North Korea's recent spate of missile launches -- including the kind of long-range one that Russia and China used to condemn back in 2017.
MORE: North Korea did not launch 'monster' missile as they claimed, South Korean lawmakers say
"Unfortunately, I cannot report that we have had productive discussions with" China or Russia about a new U.N. Security Council resolution, Kim told reporters during a briefing Wednesday.
The two countries have blocked even a public statement from the U.N. Security Council condemning the 13 recent launches, per Kim, even though they violate multiple U.N. resolutions.
Still, the U.S. and its allies are pursuing a new resolution to condemn North Korea's launches because "the Security Council needs to respond to these blatant violations of multiple Security Council resolutions," Kim said. "This is about the credibility of the United Nations."
KCNA via Reuters, FILE
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un attends a meeting of the politburo of the ruling Worker...
Kim, who also serves as the U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, traveled to Washington this week, including to meet his Chinese counterpart Tuesday for a "very long and detailed discussion."
He said despite Chinese opposition, he remains "convinced that Beijing shares our goal of the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."
Part of the U.S. outreach to China on this issue is because North Korea has rejected all U.S. entreaties under the Biden administration.
"We have sent several messages, both public and private, inviting them to a dialogue without any conditions," Kim told reporters, but North Korea has yet to respond, which Kim called "very disappointing."
MORE: North Korea may have tested its biggest long-range missile yet in another foreign policy crisis for Biden
He declined to speculate on why, but said the COVID-19 pandemic could be one reason. North Korea "finds itself isolated in unprecedented ways and has shut itself off during the COVID pandemic. Only the resumption of diplomacy can break this isolation," he said.
Instead, the U.S. has heard more fiery rhetoric from Kim Jong Un's sister, Kim Yo Jong, who this week warned of a nuclear response if South Korea prepared to strike. Kim said the U.S. was "concerned" by the "provocative" comments.
With Biden's North Korea policy going nowhere fast, Kim argued it is still having an important effect. While Pyongyang remains committed to perfecting its nuclear weapons program, U.S. sanctions and pressure "are constraining their progress," he said.
abcnews.go.com
The country is celebrating Kim Il Sung's birthday April 15.
ByConor Finnegan
April 6, 2022, 5:43 PM
• 5 min read
0:38
ABC News breaks down North Korea missile launch
North Korea launched what could be its biggest ICBM yet.
KCNA via Reuters, FILE
With North Korea set to celebrate its most important holiday next week, the U.S. is concerned that Pyongyang "may be tempted to take another provocative action," including a possible nuclear test.
"We, in cooperation and coordination with our allies and partners, are prepared to deal with whatever they may undertake, and I want to emphasize that we obviously hope that they will refrain from further provocation," U.S. Special Envoy for North Korea Sung Kim said.
North Korea will celebrate the birth of the country's founder, Kim Il Sung, on April 15. Kim is the grandfather of current dictator Kim Jong Un.
The isolated country has not conducted a nuclear test since September 2017, its sixth on record.
As Russia's war in Ukraine exacerbates tensions between the Kremlin and the West, Kim said Russian and Chinese diplomats at the United Nations have obstructed any U.S. effort to condemn North Korea's recent spate of missile launches -- including the kind of long-range one that Russia and China used to condemn back in 2017.
MORE: North Korea did not launch 'monster' missile as they claimed, South Korean lawmakers say
"Unfortunately, I cannot report that we have had productive discussions with" China or Russia about a new U.N. Security Council resolution, Kim told reporters during a briefing Wednesday.
The two countries have blocked even a public statement from the U.N. Security Council condemning the 13 recent launches, per Kim, even though they violate multiple U.N. resolutions.
Still, the U.S. and its allies are pursuing a new resolution to condemn North Korea's launches because "the Security Council needs to respond to these blatant violations of multiple Security Council resolutions," Kim said. "This is about the credibility of the United Nations."
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un attends a meeting of the politburo of the ruling Worker...
Kim, who also serves as the U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, traveled to Washington this week, including to meet his Chinese counterpart Tuesday for a "very long and detailed discussion."
He said despite Chinese opposition, he remains "convinced that Beijing shares our goal of the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."
Part of the U.S. outreach to China on this issue is because North Korea has rejected all U.S. entreaties under the Biden administration.
"We have sent several messages, both public and private, inviting them to a dialogue without any conditions," Kim told reporters, but North Korea has yet to respond, which Kim called "very disappointing."
MORE: North Korea may have tested its biggest long-range missile yet in another foreign policy crisis for Biden
He declined to speculate on why, but said the COVID-19 pandemic could be one reason. North Korea "finds itself isolated in unprecedented ways and has shut itself off during the COVID pandemic. Only the resumption of diplomacy can break this isolation," he said.
Instead, the U.S. has heard more fiery rhetoric from Kim Jong Un's sister, Kim Yo Jong, who this week warned of a nuclear response if South Korea prepared to strike. Kim said the U.S. was "concerned" by the "provocative" comments.
With Biden's North Korea policy going nowhere fast, Kim argued it is still having an important effect. While Pyongyang remains committed to perfecting its nuclear weapons program, U.S. sanctions and pressure "are constraining their progress," he said.
North Korea could test nuclear device next week, US envoy warns
The country could do a nuclear test on the day it celebrates Kim Il Sung's birthday, April 15.
abcnews.go.com
jward
passin' thru
North Korea’s “Checkerboard” Threat: Obstacles and Opportunities for the US-ROK Alliance
By: Clint Work and Natalia Slavney
Executive Summary
Motivated by notable advancements displayed during the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) October 2020 and January 2021 military parades, as well as the ongoing stalemate in US-DPRK and inter-Korean relations, Stimson’s 38 North program convened a military working group to discuss and provide recommendations for the US and Republic of Korea (ROK) alliance to meet this evolving threat.
Over the summer and early fall of 2021, 38 North, with help from its partner, the Korea Defense Veterans Association, brought together experts, including former US and ROK military officers, civilian defense officials, analysts and academics. Gen. (Ret.) Vincent K. Brooks, Korea Defense Veterans Association (KDVA) Chairman and former commander of the United Nations Command, US-ROK Combined Forces Command, and US Forces Korea in the Republic of Korea, chaired the working group, which was organized and moderated by 38 North Fellow Dr. Clint Work, with the assistance of 38 North’s Research Associates Natalia Slavney and Iliana Ragnone.
Although North Korea’s rollout of new ballistic missiles during the parades dominated international headlines for weeks, the numerous improvements to conventional military hardware, communications and weaponry was the bigger story, given the standard narrative that its conventional capabilities are considered a depreciating asset. These developments indicate that North Korea’s defense and military capabilities have grown and evolved despite severe international sanctions and COVID-related restrictions. Simply put, North Korea continues to signal its intention to develop and modernize its nuclear and conventional capabilities, regardless of where US-DPRK or inter-Korean relations stand.
At the outset, the working group considered a range of low, medium and high-risk scenarios of how North Korea’s conventional capabilities may evolve in the near- to mid-term future as a baseline for discussion. However, the group quickly reached a consensus that, in practice, the threat could evolve in a “checkerboard” manner, with some capabilities remaining rather modest while others advance more quickly.
Over the course of several meetings, the group discussed steps the alliance should take now as well as how it might need to evolve based on changing North Korean capabilities and the checkerboard threat. The following recommendations emerged from the group’s discussions:
The Korean version of this special report is available here.
https://www.38north.org/wp-content/...Checkerboard-Threat-US-ROK-Alliance-FINAL.pdf
By: Clint Work and Natalia Slavney
Executive Summary
Over the summer and early fall of 2021, 38 North, with help from its partner, the Korea Defense Veterans Association, brought together experts, including former US and ROK military officers, civilian defense officials, analysts and academics. Gen. (Ret.) Vincent K. Brooks, Korea Defense Veterans Association (KDVA) Chairman and former commander of the United Nations Command, US-ROK Combined Forces Command, and US Forces Korea in the Republic of Korea, chaired the working group, which was organized and moderated by 38 North Fellow Dr. Clint Work, with the assistance of 38 North’s Research Associates Natalia Slavney and Iliana Ragnone.
Although North Korea’s rollout of new ballistic missiles during the parades dominated international headlines for weeks, the numerous improvements to conventional military hardware, communications and weaponry was the bigger story, given the standard narrative that its conventional capabilities are considered a depreciating asset. These developments indicate that North Korea’s defense and military capabilities have grown and evolved despite severe international sanctions and COVID-related restrictions. Simply put, North Korea continues to signal its intention to develop and modernize its nuclear and conventional capabilities, regardless of where US-DPRK or inter-Korean relations stand.
At the outset, the working group considered a range of low, medium and high-risk scenarios of how North Korea’s conventional capabilities may evolve in the near- to mid-term future as a baseline for discussion. However, the group quickly reached a consensus that, in practice, the threat could evolve in a “checkerboard” manner, with some capabilities remaining rather modest while others advance more quickly.
Over the course of several meetings, the group discussed steps the alliance should take now as well as how it might need to evolve based on changing North Korean capabilities and the checkerboard threat. The following recommendations emerged from the group’s discussions:
- Consider if the alliance is properly organized, equipped and trained against a North Korean checkerboard threat and how the changing security environment on and around the Korean Peninsula requires the alliance to rethink how it conducts operations.
- Think of key US-ROK alliance military and civilian infrastructure as strategic infrastructure; reduce reliance on fixed infrastructure where possible, and, otherwise, increase the defense and hardening of these sites.
- Take a whole-of-government approach that integrates defense planning with crisis management, running exercises that challenge different sectors of critical infrastructure on a rotating basis.
- Build greater “combinedness” at levels between the US-ROK infantry division and Combined Forces Command (CFC) Headquarters (HQ), aiming for the alliance to be in a continuous, coordinated and combined state on a day-to-day basis.
- Reorient military exercises to “train to failure”—designing scenarios that expose shortcomings—and report on those shortcomings in respective ROK and US systems, as well as up through the CFC’s bilateral national command authorities.
- Better coordinate and create layers of air and missile defense systems, rather than pushing for full integration of systems, and rehearse how they would operate together.
- Create a strategic communications plan that informs and educates the press, public and political leaders on key issues—such as, wartime operational control (OPCON) transition—involving US and ROK presidents as well as Cabinet-level officials.
- Continue to confront barriers to information sharing and integration, as well as differences in authority and jurisdiction between the US and ROK’s respective cyber operations, identifying key differences between South Korea’s national interests and authority and alliance interests and operations.
The Korean version of this special report is available here.
https://www.38north.org/wp-content/...Checkerboard-Threat-US-ROK-Alliance-FINAL.pdf
North Korea's "Checkerboard" Threat: Obstacles and Opportunities for the US-ROK Alliance - 38 North: Informed Analysis of North Korea
Executive Summary Motivated by notable advancements displayed during the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) October 2020 and January 2021…
www.38north.org
jward
passin' thru
South Korea wants US strategic weapons on its soil
Seoul seeks redeployment of US bombers, carriers and nuclear submarines to deter Pyongyang’s new nuke threats by Gabriel Honrada April 8, 2022
US Air Force B-1B bombers, F-35B fighters and South Korean F-15 jets flying over the Korean Peninsula. Photo: South Korean Defense Ministry
After a spate of North Korean missile tests in the first three months of this year – and fears of an impending nuclear test – South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-Yeol wants a redeployment of US strategic assets in South Korea to bolster the country’s deterrence.
After a conference between US and South Korean officials in Washington on Tuesday (April 5), South Korean lawmaker Park Jin stated that “deploying strategic assets is an important part of strengthening extended deterrence” and that both countries “discussed the issue today in that sense.”
Among the US strategic assets South Korea wants to be redeployed to its territory are nuclear-powered submarines, aircraft carriers and long-range bombers. Apart from the redeployment of such strategic assets, both countries are also seeking new defense technology partnerships.
In a conference in February, Kang Eun-Ho, the Minister of South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration, said that South Korea’s commercial industries have made significant advances and the US could tap into them for the development of its own industry, focusing on fields such as AI, quantum computing and autonomous technologies.
He also added that South Korea has several tech industry-leading firms, such as Samsung, Hanwha and LG, and that South Korea could fill a critical US semiconductor supply gap.
Emphasizing the complementary nature of South Korean technology and US defense interests, Robert Brown, president and CEO of the Association of the United States Army, said that “dominance in key technology fields, such as AI, 5G capabilities, robotics, biotechnology and leveraging data is key to ensuring stability in the Indo-Pacific.”
A North Korean ballistic missile emerges from the waves in 2021 in what Pyongyang claimed was a successful SLBM test. Photo: AFP / KCNA
These moves come after a spate of North Korean missile tests in January, February and March this year. On January 15, North Korea tested two short-range railway-mounted ballistic missiles which traveled 430 kilometers at a maximum altitude of 36 kilometers after being launched eastward from the northern coast of the country.
North Korea subsequently conducted more missile tests on the 25th, 27th and 30th of January, with the last one possibly its longest-range missile test since November 2017, with a suspected Hwasong-12 intermediate-range ballistic missile reaching an altitude of 2,000 kilometers and a range of 800 kilometers.
North Korea followed up these successive tests with another one on February 27. The missile was suspected to have been launched from Sunan, where Pyongyang’s international airport is located.
According to the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff, the missile flew to a maximum altitude of 620 kilometers, with a range of 300 kilometers, indicating a lofted launch trajectory. Subsequently, North Korea’s state news agency KCNA claimed the launch was for the development of a reconnaissance satellite system.
North Korea tested yet another ballistic missile off its east coast on March 24. The missile was launched from Sunan near Pyongyang, reached an altitude of 6,200 kilometers and had a range of 1,080 kilometers. In response to the test, South Korea conducted its own missile tests from land, sea and air-based launch platforms.
In addition to these missile tests, North Korea could possibly soon resume nuclear testing, perhaps even next week in commemoration of the 110th birthday of its founder Kim Il Sung on April 15.
North Korea has conducted six known nuclear tests since 2006, the most recent being in September 2017.
The Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center in North Korea in a 2012 file photo. Photo: AFP / GeoEye Satellite
Satellite imagery this month showed North Korea has allegedly resumed construction at its Punggye-ri nuclear test site, which was previously stopped in 2018 after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un pledged to halt nuclear weapons tests.
While the site was previously declared destroyed in 2018, with its test tunnels blown up and collapsed, it is believed the damage was only slight and could be easily reversible. While it is possible North Korea may be readying the site to resume nuclear testing, a full renovation of the test facility may take months or years, and the country may even build a new test site.
Yet another concerning development regarding North Korea’s nuclear program was reported in August last year when it allegedly restarted its Yongbyon nuclear reactor.
Yongbyon, a 5-megawatt nuclear reactor, is at the heart of North Korea’s nuclear program, producing the plutonium necessary for the country’s nuclear warheads. This was the first sign of activity at the nuclear reactor since December 2018, months after former US president Donald Trump met Kim Jong-Un in Singapore.
asiatimes.com
Seoul seeks redeployment of US bombers, carriers and nuclear submarines to deter Pyongyang’s new nuke threats by Gabriel Honrada April 8, 2022
After a spate of North Korean missile tests in the first three months of this year – and fears of an impending nuclear test – South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-Yeol wants a redeployment of US strategic assets in South Korea to bolster the country’s deterrence.
After a conference between US and South Korean officials in Washington on Tuesday (April 5), South Korean lawmaker Park Jin stated that “deploying strategic assets is an important part of strengthening extended deterrence” and that both countries “discussed the issue today in that sense.”
Among the US strategic assets South Korea wants to be redeployed to its territory are nuclear-powered submarines, aircraft carriers and long-range bombers. Apart from the redeployment of such strategic assets, both countries are also seeking new defense technology partnerships.
In a conference in February, Kang Eun-Ho, the Minister of South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration, said that South Korea’s commercial industries have made significant advances and the US could tap into them for the development of its own industry, focusing on fields such as AI, quantum computing and autonomous technologies.
He also added that South Korea has several tech industry-leading firms, such as Samsung, Hanwha and LG, and that South Korea could fill a critical US semiconductor supply gap.
Emphasizing the complementary nature of South Korean technology and US defense interests, Robert Brown, president and CEO of the Association of the United States Army, said that “dominance in key technology fields, such as AI, 5G capabilities, robotics, biotechnology and leveraging data is key to ensuring stability in the Indo-Pacific.”
A North Korean ballistic missile emerges from the waves in 2021 in what Pyongyang claimed was a successful SLBM test. Photo: AFP / KCNA
These moves come after a spate of North Korean missile tests in January, February and March this year. On January 15, North Korea tested two short-range railway-mounted ballistic missiles which traveled 430 kilometers at a maximum altitude of 36 kilometers after being launched eastward from the northern coast of the country.
North Korea subsequently conducted more missile tests on the 25th, 27th and 30th of January, with the last one possibly its longest-range missile test since November 2017, with a suspected Hwasong-12 intermediate-range ballistic missile reaching an altitude of 2,000 kilometers and a range of 800 kilometers.
North Korea followed up these successive tests with another one on February 27. The missile was suspected to have been launched from Sunan, where Pyongyang’s international airport is located.
According to the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff, the missile flew to a maximum altitude of 620 kilometers, with a range of 300 kilometers, indicating a lofted launch trajectory. Subsequently, North Korea’s state news agency KCNA claimed the launch was for the development of a reconnaissance satellite system.
North Korea tested yet another ballistic missile off its east coast on March 24. The missile was launched from Sunan near Pyongyang, reached an altitude of 6,200 kilometers and had a range of 1,080 kilometers. In response to the test, South Korea conducted its own missile tests from land, sea and air-based launch platforms.
In addition to these missile tests, North Korea could possibly soon resume nuclear testing, perhaps even next week in commemoration of the 110th birthday of its founder Kim Il Sung on April 15.
North Korea has conducted six known nuclear tests since 2006, the most recent being in September 2017.
Satellite imagery this month showed North Korea has allegedly resumed construction at its Punggye-ri nuclear test site, which was previously stopped in 2018 after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un pledged to halt nuclear weapons tests.
While the site was previously declared destroyed in 2018, with its test tunnels blown up and collapsed, it is believed the damage was only slight and could be easily reversible. While it is possible North Korea may be readying the site to resume nuclear testing, a full renovation of the test facility may take months or years, and the country may even build a new test site.
Yet another concerning development regarding North Korea’s nuclear program was reported in August last year when it allegedly restarted its Yongbyon nuclear reactor.
Yongbyon, a 5-megawatt nuclear reactor, is at the heart of North Korea’s nuclear program, producing the plutonium necessary for the country’s nuclear warheads. This was the first sign of activity at the nuclear reactor since December 2018, months after former US president Donald Trump met Kim Jong-Un in Singapore.
South Korea wants US strategic weapons on its soil
After a spate of North Korean missile tests in the first three months of this year – and fears of an impending nuclear test – South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-Yeol wants a redeployment of US s…
asiatimes.com
jward
passin' thru
thedrive.com
Half A Dozen Chinese Y-20 Cargo Jets Popped Up Over Europe Last Night
Stetson Payne and Tyler Rogoway
3 minutes
The Y-20s’ appearance raised eyebrows because they flew en masse as opposed to a series of single-aircraft flights. The Y-20's presence in Europe in any numbers is also still a fairly new development.
These cargo planes are relatively new to the PLAAF inventory, having only entered service in 2016. We wrote about their first use in a crisis as part of the response to the initial COVID-19 outbreaks in Wuhan back in early 2020. Since then, they have been spreading their operational footprint, including flying to Europe, but not in larger numbers like this operation. It’s quite probable that the PLAAF used this delivery as a sort of demonstration of its own airlift capability given NATO’s ongoing efforts to ferry supplies and materiel to Ukraine’s war effort.
Loosely similar in basic design and role to the U.S. Air Force’s C-17 Globemaster III, future production Y-20 aircraft will use the locally-produced WS-20 turbofan engine in lieu of Russian Oloviev D-30 jet engines. Going to this higher-bypass turbofan should also enhance the performance of the Y-20 overall.
The airframe and a notable aerial refueling variant made appearances in Malaysian airspace in the South China Sea and Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in 2021. The Y-20U tanker aircraft reportedly supported more than two dozen PLAAF aircraft in the November 28 flight through the Taiwan ADIZ we wrote about at the time. You can read our coverage of that incursion here.
According to Evergreen Intel, they have tracked 43 known Y-20A/U airframes, including at least 7 test airframes. This is just what has been observed using open sources, the actual fleet size is likely significantly larger. In late 2019, we counted 20 Y-20 airframes in Xi’an, where they are produced, alone.
Whether a convenient demonstration of global reach or not, the mission was not routine. This large-scale sortie to deliver military equipment to Belgrade is yet another confirmation of the strategic airlift capability the PLAAF has obtained via its burgeoning Y-20 fleet, as well as an expanding operational knowledge as to how to put it to use.
Aside from the Y-20's expanded presence over Europe, the fact that a higher-end Chinese air defense system will be operating in Europe is another issue that will likely come to the chagrin of Serbia's neighbors.
www.thedrive.com
Half A Dozen Chinese Y-20 Cargo Jets Popped Up Over Europe Last Night
Stetson Payne and Tyler Rogoway
3 minutes
The Y-20s’ appearance raised eyebrows because they flew en masse as opposed to a series of single-aircraft flights. The Y-20's presence in Europe in any numbers is also still a fairly new development.
These cargo planes are relatively new to the PLAAF inventory, having only entered service in 2016. We wrote about their first use in a crisis as part of the response to the initial COVID-19 outbreaks in Wuhan back in early 2020. Since then, they have been spreading their operational footprint, including flying to Europe, but not in larger numbers like this operation. It’s quite probable that the PLAAF used this delivery as a sort of demonstration of its own airlift capability given NATO’s ongoing efforts to ferry supplies and materiel to Ukraine’s war effort.
Loosely similar in basic design and role to the U.S. Air Force’s C-17 Globemaster III, future production Y-20 aircraft will use the locally-produced WS-20 turbofan engine in lieu of Russian Oloviev D-30 jet engines. Going to this higher-bypass turbofan should also enhance the performance of the Y-20 overall.
The airframe and a notable aerial refueling variant made appearances in Malaysian airspace in the South China Sea and Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in 2021. The Y-20U tanker aircraft reportedly supported more than two dozen PLAAF aircraft in the November 28 flight through the Taiwan ADIZ we wrote about at the time. You can read our coverage of that incursion here.
According to Evergreen Intel, they have tracked 43 known Y-20A/U airframes, including at least 7 test airframes. This is just what has been observed using open sources, the actual fleet size is likely significantly larger. In late 2019, we counted 20 Y-20 airframes in Xi’an, where they are produced, alone.
Whether a convenient demonstration of global reach or not, the mission was not routine. This large-scale sortie to deliver military equipment to Belgrade is yet another confirmation of the strategic airlift capability the PLAAF has obtained via its burgeoning Y-20 fleet, as well as an expanding operational knowledge as to how to put it to use.
Aside from the Y-20's expanded presence over Europe, the fact that a higher-end Chinese air defense system will be operating in Europe is another issue that will likely come to the chagrin of Serbia's neighbors.
Half A Dozen Chinese Y-20 Cargo Jets Popped Up Over Europe Last Night (Updated)
The flight of Y-20 transports reportedly delivered weaponry to Serbia but also served as a demonstration of China's growing global reach.
www.thedrive.com
I have to wonder about the price point of this system when compared to the rest of the global arms market, particularly in terms of availability to export.....
Posted for fair use.....(for images see article source. HC)
www.dailystar.co.uk
South Korea unveils new missile interception weapon amid nuclear tension with North
South Korea has unveiled a radar prototype that can detect, track and identify ballistic missiles as part of its L-SAM interception system as North Korea steps up its threats
ByZita Whalley
Hanwha Systems made the reveal to South Korean press on Wednesday, April 6 at the company's research centre in Yongin, a Seoul satellite city in the Gyeonggi province, reports Yonhap News Agency.
The radar plays a vital role in the Agency for Defense Development's long-range surface-to-air missile (L-SAM) interception system South Korea hopes to put into action by 2026.
Yonhap News Agency also reports the L-SAM interceptor will be able to shoot down incoming missiles as they soar through the stratosphere, at altitudes of about 50-60 kilometres.
The Multi Function Radar (MFR) is considered to be the "eyes" of the interception system.
It boasts the ability to rotate 150 degrees, to respond to "hundreds" of aircraft, and to multiple ballistic missiles at the same time. It can also detect, track and identify friends and foes.
The interception system will form a key part of South Korea's anti-missile programme, which includes the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missile and the Cheongung II, a medium-range surface-to-air missile.
The reveal is a clear sign South Korea is advancing its defense technology as the nation steps up efforts to combat North Korea's growing missile threats.
Daily Star reported that on March 24, North Korea launched what was believed to be an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) toward the East Sea, which was labelled a “breach of the suspension of intercontinental ballistic missile launches promised by Chairman Kim Jong-un to the international community," by South Korea's President Moon Jae-in.
In a chilling response, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of the North Korean despot Kim Jong-un, warned that the South should “discipline itself if it wants to stave off disaster".
In a second threat which followed South Korean Defence Minister Suh Wook's comments that Seoul had the ability and readiness to launch precision strikes on North Korea if missiles were fired at South Korea, Kim Yo-jong said that Pyongyang would retaliate on any preemptive strikes or attacks with nuclear force, reports the Independent.
She said: “In case [South Korea] opts for military confrontation with us, our nuclear combat force will have to inevitably carry out its duty… a dreadful attack will be launched and the [South Korean] army will have to face a miserable fate little short of total destruction and ruin.”
Posted for fair use.....(for images see article source. HC)
South Korea's new missile interception weapon amid nuclear tension with North
South Korea has unveiled a radar prototype that can detect, track and identify ballistic missiles as part of its L-SAM interception system as North Korea steps up its threats
www.dailystar.co.uk
South Korea unveils new missile interception weapon amid nuclear tension with North
South Korea has unveiled a radar prototype that can detect, track and identify ballistic missiles as part of its L-SAM interception system as North Korea steps up its threats
ByZita Whalley
- 13:52, 10 APR 2022
Hanwha Systems made the reveal to South Korean press on Wednesday, April 6 at the company's research centre in Yongin, a Seoul satellite city in the Gyeonggi province, reports Yonhap News Agency.
The radar plays a vital role in the Agency for Defense Development's long-range surface-to-air missile (L-SAM) interception system South Korea hopes to put into action by 2026.
Yonhap News Agency also reports the L-SAM interceptor will be able to shoot down incoming missiles as they soar through the stratosphere, at altitudes of about 50-60 kilometres.
The Multi Function Radar (MFR) is considered to be the "eyes" of the interception system.
It boasts the ability to rotate 150 degrees, to respond to "hundreds" of aircraft, and to multiple ballistic missiles at the same time. It can also detect, track and identify friends and foes.
The interception system will form a key part of South Korea's anti-missile programme, which includes the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missile and the Cheongung II, a medium-range surface-to-air missile.
The reveal is a clear sign South Korea is advancing its defense technology as the nation steps up efforts to combat North Korea's growing missile threats.
Daily Star reported that on March 24, North Korea launched what was believed to be an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) toward the East Sea, which was labelled a “breach of the suspension of intercontinental ballistic missile launches promised by Chairman Kim Jong-un to the international community," by South Korea's President Moon Jae-in.
In a chilling response, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of the North Korean despot Kim Jong-un, warned that the South should “discipline itself if it wants to stave off disaster".
In a second threat which followed South Korean Defence Minister Suh Wook's comments that Seoul had the ability and readiness to launch precision strikes on North Korea if missiles were fired at South Korea, Kim Yo-jong said that Pyongyang would retaliate on any preemptive strikes or attacks with nuclear force, reports the Independent.
She said: “In case [South Korea] opts for military confrontation with us, our nuclear combat force will have to inevitably carry out its duty… a dreadful attack will be launched and the [South Korean] army will have to face a miserable fate little short of total destruction and ruin.”
Posted for fair use.....
With Threats All Around, Japan Moves to Shed Its Pacifist Constraints
April 11, 2022
in News
TOKYO — Late in February, just days after the Russian invasion, Ukraine asked Japan to ship an assortment of military equipment, from antitank weapons and ammunition to electronic radar and bulletproof vests.
It seemed an all but futile request. Japan, which has forsworn combat since the end of World War II, had not sent military matériel to another country in the midst of fighting a war in more than 75 years.
But within a week, the Japanese government had modified its rules governing military exports. And in early March, the country’s Self-Defense Forces loaded up a Boeing KC-767 tanker aircraft with bulletproof vests and helmets, bound for the battlefields of Ukraine.
Although it could not compare with the airlift of arms sent by American and European officials, the military aid marked a decisive moment in Japan’s evolution away from the pacifist identity it has embraced since the United States pushed to insert a clause renouncing war into Japan’s postwar Constitution.
Not only has Japan moved swiftly to enact sanctions against Russia in near lock step with the United States and Europe — in contrast to its response to Moscow’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 — but it has also intensified broader security discussions as it confronts rising threats from China and North Korea.
It’s another example of how the war in Ukraine has reordered the world, swiftly changing the stance of nations once reluctant to invest in military power, most notably Germany. There are growing calls among Japanese lawmakers for a significant increase in the country’s defense budget and an intensifying debate about whether Japan should acquire weapons capable of striking missile launch sites in enemy territory.
The moves demonstrate Japan’s recognition that it must bolster its own deterrent power, rather than simply relying on its alliance with the United States to protect it or its interests in Asia.
In a news briefing on Friday announcing new sanctions and the expulsion of eight Russian diplomats, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said it was important to “thoroughly enhance defense with a sense of speed.”
For Mr. Kishida, the leader of a dovish wing of the governing Liberal Democratic Party, such assertive national security language is a departure from his previous focus on taming the pandemic and reforming economic policy.
“It’s very astonishing to see the developments in Ukraine,” said Ken Jimbo, a professor of international relations at Keio University in Tokyo. “And that might really impact how we look at our own defense posture.”
Japan’s sense of urgency stems in part from the fact that Russia’s eastern reaches lie only 25 miles from the tip of Japan’s northern island, Hokkaido. The Ukraine war has severed a diplomatic channel with Moscow that Japan had kept open in hopes of negotiating the status of disputed islands that are claimed by both countries and have prevented them from signing a treaty ending World War II.
Looming even larger is China, which Japan’s defense ministry now ranks as the country’s most serious long-term threat. Along with the United States, Tokyo is increasingly concerned that Beijing might try to use force to take control of Taiwan, a democratically governed island that China claims as its own.
Japan also worries about territory closer to home: It has mobilized Self-Defense Forces fighter jets to patrol the area around the Senkakus, islands administered by Japan but contested by China.
North Korea, too, remains a source of anxiety. Since the beginning of the year, Pyongyang has tested 12 ballistic missiles, some of which have landed near the country’s territorial waters.
Among politicians in Japan, there is a sense “that the ground has shifted,” the U.S. ambassador to Tokyo, Rahm Emanuel, said in an interview. “It’s both about what Russia just did unilaterally in Ukraine, but also about what North Korea’s doing and what China’s doing.”
While Germany — another country haunted by the legacy of World War II — responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with a nearly overnight about-face in its military-averse foreign policy, Japan had already been taking incremental steps to bolster its defense and fighting capacity as it faced the potential for hostilities nearby.
During the campaign for a parliamentary election in October, the Liberal Democrats issued a party platform that proposed an increase in Japan’s defense budget to 2 percent of the country’s economic output, in order to bring it into line with members of NATO.
This month, Japan’s defense minister, Nobuo Kishi, reiterated calls for drastically expanding military spending. Even the political opposition supports increased outlays.
“We do not oppose increasing the defense budget if necessary,” Kenta Izumi, head of the Constitutional Democratic Party, the largest opposition party in Japan’s Parliament, said in an interview in his office in Tokyo.
In recent years, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces have conducted more military exercises with troops from the United States, Australia, Britain and France. Last month, in a series of drills with U.S. Marines that had been planned long before the Ukraine war, Japanese troops flew MV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft for the first time in cooperation with American forces. Last year, Japan converted a naval destroyer ship into a carrier that could accommodate F-35 fighter jets. Japan has also recently acquired American-made military surveillance drones.
Japanese politicians have used the invasion of Ukraine to step up military rhetoric further. The more extreme ideas — most emphatically a proposal floated by Shinzo Abe, Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, that the country host American nuclear weapons — are likely to go nowhere. But in polls over the last five years, about two-thirds of the public has consistently supported enhancing the country’s defense capabilities.
In some ways, Mr. Kishida, a liberal-leaning member of a conservative party, may accomplish more to push Japan into its military future than did Mr. Abe, a right-wing ideologue who failed in his quest to revise the pacifist clause in Japan’s Constitution.
With the Kishida administration, said Yuichi Hosoya, a professor of international politics at Keio University, “we don’t expect that they will try to abuse this opportunity to radically change Japanese defense policy for their own ideological reasons.”
“As long as we work hard to enhance our capabilities, hopefully the North Koreans and Chinese will be convinced that the risk of possible intervention or involvement of the United States and Japan is high enough that they decide not to start a war in the first place,” said Narushige Michishita, a professor of international relations at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo.
Yet if conflict did arise in Taiwan or on the Korean Peninsula, the Japanese might well be called upon to join the fray.
With Japan’s status as a treaty ally of the United States, the inevitable question could be whether Tokyo “needs to do a little bit more if it looks like a situation that might affect Japan more strongly than the U.S. public on the mainland,” said Takako Hikotani, a professor at Gakushuin University International Center.
In 2015, Parliament passed security laws that authorized overseas combat missions for Japan’s military. In the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, the fight could even come to Japan itself. Beijing could order attacks on U.S. bases in Japan, where 55,000 American troops are stationed, and also on Japanese military installations in the southern archipelago of Okinawa.
But while the Japanese public backs a stronger military, it is far less supportive of situations that would send Japanese troops into combat. In a survey last year by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Japan Institute of International Affairs, six out of 10 Japanese polled said they did not want Japanese troops to fight alongside Americans in a conflict.
Polls also show that the public is split on whether Japan should acquire weapons that could attack missile launch sites in enemy territory. And unlike in South Korea, where the Ukraine invasion has revived discussions about whether the country should have nuclear weapons, the public in Japan remains opposed.
For the Japanese government, the turn toward more military language also has a diplomatic calculation.
It was Mr. Abe who coined the phrase “free and open Indo-Pacific,” and in conjunction with the U.S. government, Japan has frequently called for a “rules-based order” in relation to containing China.
To fulfill its international leadership role, said Lauren Richardson, director of the Japan Institute at the Australian National University, Japan needs to hold Russia to the same standards. If it didn’t, she said, “Japan would look like a hypocrite.”
The post With Threats All Around, Japan Moves to Shed Its Pacifist Constraints appeared first on New York Times.
DNyuz - Latest Breaking U.S. News
Latest Breaking News, U.S. and World Politics, Crime, Business, Science, Technology, Autos, Entertainment, Culture, Movie, Music, Sports.
dnyuz.com
With Threats All Around, Japan Moves to Shed Its Pacifist Constraints
April 11, 2022
in News
TOKYO — Late in February, just days after the Russian invasion, Ukraine asked Japan to ship an assortment of military equipment, from antitank weapons and ammunition to electronic radar and bulletproof vests.
It seemed an all but futile request. Japan, which has forsworn combat since the end of World War II, had not sent military matériel to another country in the midst of fighting a war in more than 75 years.
But within a week, the Japanese government had modified its rules governing military exports. And in early March, the country’s Self-Defense Forces loaded up a Boeing KC-767 tanker aircraft with bulletproof vests and helmets, bound for the battlefields of Ukraine.
Although it could not compare with the airlift of arms sent by American and European officials, the military aid marked a decisive moment in Japan’s evolution away from the pacifist identity it has embraced since the United States pushed to insert a clause renouncing war into Japan’s postwar Constitution.
Not only has Japan moved swiftly to enact sanctions against Russia in near lock step with the United States and Europe — in contrast to its response to Moscow’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 — but it has also intensified broader security discussions as it confronts rising threats from China and North Korea.
It’s another example of how the war in Ukraine has reordered the world, swiftly changing the stance of nations once reluctant to invest in military power, most notably Germany. There are growing calls among Japanese lawmakers for a significant increase in the country’s defense budget and an intensifying debate about whether Japan should acquire weapons capable of striking missile launch sites in enemy territory.
The moves demonstrate Japan’s recognition that it must bolster its own deterrent power, rather than simply relying on its alliance with the United States to protect it or its interests in Asia.
In a news briefing on Friday announcing new sanctions and the expulsion of eight Russian diplomats, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said it was important to “thoroughly enhance defense with a sense of speed.”
For Mr. Kishida, the leader of a dovish wing of the governing Liberal Democratic Party, such assertive national security language is a departure from his previous focus on taming the pandemic and reforming economic policy.
“It’s very astonishing to see the developments in Ukraine,” said Ken Jimbo, a professor of international relations at Keio University in Tokyo. “And that might really impact how we look at our own defense posture.”
Japan’s sense of urgency stems in part from the fact that Russia’s eastern reaches lie only 25 miles from the tip of Japan’s northern island, Hokkaido. The Ukraine war has severed a diplomatic channel with Moscow that Japan had kept open in hopes of negotiating the status of disputed islands that are claimed by both countries and have prevented them from signing a treaty ending World War II.
Looming even larger is China, which Japan’s defense ministry now ranks as the country’s most serious long-term threat. Along with the United States, Tokyo is increasingly concerned that Beijing might try to use force to take control of Taiwan, a democratically governed island that China claims as its own.
Japan also worries about territory closer to home: It has mobilized Self-Defense Forces fighter jets to patrol the area around the Senkakus, islands administered by Japan but contested by China.
North Korea, too, remains a source of anxiety. Since the beginning of the year, Pyongyang has tested 12 ballistic missiles, some of which have landed near the country’s territorial waters.
Among politicians in Japan, there is a sense “that the ground has shifted,” the U.S. ambassador to Tokyo, Rahm Emanuel, said in an interview. “It’s both about what Russia just did unilaterally in Ukraine, but also about what North Korea’s doing and what China’s doing.”
While Germany — another country haunted by the legacy of World War II — responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with a nearly overnight about-face in its military-averse foreign policy, Japan had already been taking incremental steps to bolster its defense and fighting capacity as it faced the potential for hostilities nearby.
During the campaign for a parliamentary election in October, the Liberal Democrats issued a party platform that proposed an increase in Japan’s defense budget to 2 percent of the country’s economic output, in order to bring it into line with members of NATO.
This month, Japan’s defense minister, Nobuo Kishi, reiterated calls for drastically expanding military spending. Even the political opposition supports increased outlays.
“We do not oppose increasing the defense budget if necessary,” Kenta Izumi, head of the Constitutional Democratic Party, the largest opposition party in Japan’s Parliament, said in an interview in his office in Tokyo.
In recent years, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces have conducted more military exercises with troops from the United States, Australia, Britain and France. Last month, in a series of drills with U.S. Marines that had been planned long before the Ukraine war, Japanese troops flew MV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft for the first time in cooperation with American forces. Last year, Japan converted a naval destroyer ship into a carrier that could accommodate F-35 fighter jets. Japan has also recently acquired American-made military surveillance drones.
Japanese politicians have used the invasion of Ukraine to step up military rhetoric further. The more extreme ideas — most emphatically a proposal floated by Shinzo Abe, Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, that the country host American nuclear weapons — are likely to go nowhere. But in polls over the last five years, about two-thirds of the public has consistently supported enhancing the country’s defense capabilities.
In some ways, Mr. Kishida, a liberal-leaning member of a conservative party, may accomplish more to push Japan into its military future than did Mr. Abe, a right-wing ideologue who failed in his quest to revise the pacifist clause in Japan’s Constitution.
With the Kishida administration, said Yuichi Hosoya, a professor of international politics at Keio University, “we don’t expect that they will try to abuse this opportunity to radically change Japanese defense policy for their own ideological reasons.”
“As long as we work hard to enhance our capabilities, hopefully the North Koreans and Chinese will be convinced that the risk of possible intervention or involvement of the United States and Japan is high enough that they decide not to start a war in the first place,” said Narushige Michishita, a professor of international relations at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo.
Yet if conflict did arise in Taiwan or on the Korean Peninsula, the Japanese might well be called upon to join the fray.
With Japan’s status as a treaty ally of the United States, the inevitable question could be whether Tokyo “needs to do a little bit more if it looks like a situation that might affect Japan more strongly than the U.S. public on the mainland,” said Takako Hikotani, a professor at Gakushuin University International Center.
In 2015, Parliament passed security laws that authorized overseas combat missions for Japan’s military. In the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, the fight could even come to Japan itself. Beijing could order attacks on U.S. bases in Japan, where 55,000 American troops are stationed, and also on Japanese military installations in the southern archipelago of Okinawa.
But while the Japanese public backs a stronger military, it is far less supportive of situations that would send Japanese troops into combat. In a survey last year by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Japan Institute of International Affairs, six out of 10 Japanese polled said they did not want Japanese troops to fight alongside Americans in a conflict.
Polls also show that the public is split on whether Japan should acquire weapons that could attack missile launch sites in enemy territory. And unlike in South Korea, where the Ukraine invasion has revived discussions about whether the country should have nuclear weapons, the public in Japan remains opposed.
For the Japanese government, the turn toward more military language also has a diplomatic calculation.
It was Mr. Abe who coined the phrase “free and open Indo-Pacific,” and in conjunction with the U.S. government, Japan has frequently called for a “rules-based order” in relation to containing China.
To fulfill its international leadership role, said Lauren Richardson, director of the Japan Institute at the Australian National University, Japan needs to hold Russia to the same standards. If it didn’t, she said, “Japan would look like a hypocrite.”
The post With Threats All Around, Japan Moves to Shed Its Pacifist Constraints appeared first on New York Times.
jward
passin' thru
Vietnamese girl’s 1940 birth certificate could support Paracels sovereignty claim
Special to BenarNews
2022.04.11
Members of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy patrol on Woody Island, Jan. 29, 2016.
New evidence has emerged that may help support Vietnam’s claims over the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea, currently occupied by China.
A copy of a birth certificate issued in June 1940 cited that Mai Kim Quy, a girl, was born at 3 p.m. Dec. 9, 1939, on Pattle Island to Mai Xuan Tap, a Vietnamese meteorologist and his wife, Nguyen Thi Thang.
The paper was witnessed by Nguyen Tang
Chuan, a medical doctor, and Do Duc Mui, head of the local radio communication station.
As such, it indicates that French Indochina, of which Vietnam was part, had administration of the island and Vietnamese people worked there. That could be significant evidence as claimants to disputed features in the South China Sea may seek to show they were the first to have an official presence there.
Pattle is a coral island, part of the Crescent Island group of the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. It served as the main base for the colonial-era French Indochinese and later, South Vietnamese occupation of the Paracels.
Vietnam, Taiwan and China all claim sovereignty over the entire Paracel archipelago but China has occupied it since 1974.
Peaceful life
During the 1930s, the French colonial government built infrastructure including a weather station, a medical facility and a post office on Pattle Island.
Mai Xuan Tap, father of Mai Kim Quy, was among the civilians sent there to man the weather station when it was set up in 1938. He brought with him his wife and two daughters, Mai Thi Phi, then 2 years old, and a new born baby, Mai Thi Phuong.
The eldest daughter, Mai Thi Phi, who is 86 and lives in Ho Chi Minh City, said: “Our family lived in Pattle four years, from 1938 to 1941. My sister Mai Kim Quy was born there.”
“Unfortunately Quy died in 1942 after we returned to the mainland.”
“Our life on Pattle Island was quiet and peaceful. The Vietnamese living there were mainly civil servants working at the weather station, the post office and the hospital,” Phi recalled.
“We had never seen any Chinese person on the island during the whole time we were there,” she said.
Mai Xuan Tap died in 1983, his wife died much earlier in 1954. After returning to Saigon, the couple had seven more children including three sons and four daughters.
The birth certificate of Mai Kim Quy was passed to the eldest son, Mai Xuan Phu, for safekeeping.
“My family has donated the birth certificate to the Vietnamese foreign ministry,” Mai Thi Phi said.
“The ministry said this is a valuable document that can play an important role in defending the country’s territorial claims in the South China Sea,” she said.
This birth certificate was issued in June 1940 by the French colonial authority on Pattle Island in the Paracels for Mai Kim Quy, daughter of a Vietnamese meteorologist and his wife. [Courtesy Mai Xuan Tap family]
‘Useful evidence’
The Paracel archipelago is occupied and fully controlled by China, with the biggest feature – Woody Island – being extensively developed. China has carried out land reclamations and substantial upgrades of its military infrastructure there, according to the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Yet disputes remain over the islands’ ownership.
Contested territorial claims are hard to verify, especially because until the 20th century, there was no permanent military nor civilian presence of any country there.
China, Vietnam and Taiwan all have ample historical documents to back up their claims, including maps, declarations and different materials.
Vietnam, which was part of French Indochina, said the troops of Annam (the then-name of colonial Vietnam), and after that, civilian administrators, set up base on the Paracels before anybody else.
Mai Kim Quy’s birth certificate may serve as a historical evidence of physical acts of administration on the Paracel islands, said Bill Hayton, associate fellow in the Asia-Pacific Program at Chatham House, an independent United Kingdom think tank.
“My argument would be that this [the birth certificate] doesn’t swing the argument decisively but it is very useful evidence that Annam was in effective occupation of some of the Paracels at that time,” Hayton said.
“If the case ever went to a tribunal of some kind, the Chinese would put forward their own evidence and the judges would decide which case was stronger.”
“Such cases aren’t decided by vague claims or printing names on maps but on proving that a state had administrative control over a feature – and registering a birth on the island to a civil servant is quite strong evidence of that,” the British analyst said.
His argument, however, is being rejected by some historians who point out that China’s stance would be to stick to historical claims.
“The French government stated at the time that they only occupied the Paracels ‘before any other Power did so’, meaning Japan. This was widely reported in the press,” said Mark Hoskin, an independent researcher and lecturer on China’s maritime history and law.
This action was taken because the Japanese had occupied Hainan and implemented a blockade of the Southern Chinese coastline. Japan was threatening France due to the transport of arms via Indochina to China.
“So the French occupation of the Paracel islands had strategic and military reasoning, but was not sovereignty related. The French statements themselves negate any potential for a sovereignty claim,” Hoskin said.
Vietnamese girl’s 1940 birth certificate could support Paracels sovereignty claim
Special to BenarNews
2022.04.11
Members of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy patrol on Woody Island, Jan. 29, 2016.
New evidence has emerged that may help support Vietnam’s claims over the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea, currently occupied by China.
A copy of a birth certificate issued in June 1940 cited that Mai Kim Quy, a girl, was born at 3 p.m. Dec. 9, 1939, on Pattle Island to Mai Xuan Tap, a Vietnamese meteorologist and his wife, Nguyen Thi Thang.
The paper was witnessed by Nguyen Tang
Chuan, a medical doctor, and Do Duc Mui, head of the local radio communication station.
As such, it indicates that French Indochina, of which Vietnam was part, had administration of the island and Vietnamese people worked there. That could be significant evidence as claimants to disputed features in the South China Sea may seek to show they were the first to have an official presence there.
Pattle is a coral island, part of the Crescent Island group of the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. It served as the main base for the colonial-era French Indochinese and later, South Vietnamese occupation of the Paracels.
Vietnam, Taiwan and China all claim sovereignty over the entire Paracel archipelago but China has occupied it since 1974.
Peaceful life
During the 1930s, the French colonial government built infrastructure including a weather station, a medical facility and a post office on Pattle Island.
Mai Xuan Tap, father of Mai Kim Quy, was among the civilians sent there to man the weather station when it was set up in 1938. He brought with him his wife and two daughters, Mai Thi Phi, then 2 years old, and a new born baby, Mai Thi Phuong.
The eldest daughter, Mai Thi Phi, who is 86 and lives in Ho Chi Minh City, said: “Our family lived in Pattle four years, from 1938 to 1941. My sister Mai Kim Quy was born there.”
“Unfortunately Quy died in 1942 after we returned to the mainland.”
“Our life on Pattle Island was quiet and peaceful. The Vietnamese living there were mainly civil servants working at the weather station, the post office and the hospital,” Phi recalled.
“We had never seen any Chinese person on the island during the whole time we were there,” she said.
Mai Xuan Tap died in 1983, his wife died much earlier in 1954. After returning to Saigon, the couple had seven more children including three sons and four daughters.
The birth certificate of Mai Kim Quy was passed to the eldest son, Mai Xuan Phu, for safekeeping.
“My family has donated the birth certificate to the Vietnamese foreign ministry,” Mai Thi Phi said.
“The ministry said this is a valuable document that can play an important role in defending the country’s territorial claims in the South China Sea,” she said.
‘Useful evidence’
The Paracel archipelago is occupied and fully controlled by China, with the biggest feature – Woody Island – being extensively developed. China has carried out land reclamations and substantial upgrades of its military infrastructure there, according to the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Yet disputes remain over the islands’ ownership.
Contested territorial claims are hard to verify, especially because until the 20th century, there was no permanent military nor civilian presence of any country there.
China, Vietnam and Taiwan all have ample historical documents to back up their claims, including maps, declarations and different materials.
Vietnam, which was part of French Indochina, said the troops of Annam (the then-name of colonial Vietnam), and after that, civilian administrators, set up base on the Paracels before anybody else.
Mai Kim Quy’s birth certificate may serve as a historical evidence of physical acts of administration on the Paracel islands, said Bill Hayton, associate fellow in the Asia-Pacific Program at Chatham House, an independent United Kingdom think tank.
“My argument would be that this [the birth certificate] doesn’t swing the argument decisively but it is very useful evidence that Annam was in effective occupation of some of the Paracels at that time,” Hayton said.
“If the case ever went to a tribunal of some kind, the Chinese would put forward their own evidence and the judges would decide which case was stronger.”
“Such cases aren’t decided by vague claims or printing names on maps but on proving that a state had administrative control over a feature – and registering a birth on the island to a civil servant is quite strong evidence of that,” the British analyst said.
His argument, however, is being rejected by some historians who point out that China’s stance would be to stick to historical claims.
“The French government stated at the time that they only occupied the Paracels ‘before any other Power did so’, meaning Japan. This was widely reported in the press,” said Mark Hoskin, an independent researcher and lecturer on China’s maritime history and law.
This action was taken because the Japanese had occupied Hainan and implemented a blockade of the Southern Chinese coastline. Japan was threatening France due to the transport of arms via Indochina to China.
“So the French occupation of the Paracel islands had strategic and military reasoning, but was not sovereignty related. The French statements themselves negate any potential for a sovereignty claim,” Hoskin said.
Vietnamese girl’s 1940 birth certificate could support Paracels sovereignty claim
jward
passin' thru
DEFCON1-WarWatch
@Defcon1W
8m
(Reuters) The USS Abraham Lincoln strike group is operating in waters off the Korean peninsula, the U.S. Navy said on Tuesday, amid tensions over North Korea's missile launches and concerns that it could soon resume testing nuclear weapons.
@Defcon1W
8m
(Reuters) The USS Abraham Lincoln strike group is operating in waters off the Korean peninsula, the U.S. Navy said on Tuesday, amid tensions over North Korea's missile launches and concerns that it could soon resume testing nuclear weapons.
jward
passin' thru
Australia
Campaign Promises to Replace Australia’s Chinese-Owned Port
By Caden Pearson
April 12, 2022 Updated: April 12, 2022
Australia’s governing Liberal-National Party—currently in caretaker mode due to an election—plans to build a new $1.5 billion port facility in the country’s far north city of Darwin to replace an existing China-leased port, the country’s incumbent deputy prime minister has announced.
On the campaign trail in Darwin on April 11, Australian Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce unveiled details of a new port facility at Middle Arm, which he said would bring in close to $16 billion worth of private investment and strengthen the country’s resilience in the face of geopolitical instability in the Indo-Pacific.
The new port would be built near Darwin Port at East Arm, which the Northern Territory government leases for 99 years to Landbridge, a Chinese company with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
“Our nation must become as strong as possible, as quickly as possible, and what we’re doing here at Middle Arm with $1.5 billion just in this announcement, $1.5 billion dollars is going to be transformative, bringing in close to $16 billion worth of private investment,” Joyce said, NT News reported.
“Assisting us in growing our gas exports, our critical mineral exports and development of hydrogen. It is making sure that this port becomes one of the premier ports in Australia.
“[We have] the greatest opportunity to be part of the massive wealth and the massive growth from Indonesia that is racing ahead to be one of the biggest economies in the world,” he said.
The new port investment would make it a world-leading industrial hub for gas processing and high-value minerals processing and refinement, Joyce said.
“Our investment will deliver this, supporting port infrastructure, including a wharf and offloading facility, and dredging of the shipping channel,” he said.
The plan includes $440 million to build new logistics hubs at Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek, and $300 million for low-emissions LNG and clean hydrogen production at Middle Arm, together with associated carbon capture and storage infrastructure.
Additionally, there is $200 million to further develop the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct, delivering a rail spur and new road network and $110 million to continue to upgrade and further seal the Tanami Road.
The Nationals plan to invest $7.1 billion in key regions as part of their Energy Security and Regional Development Plan to transform them into next-generation export hubs, the party outlined in a campaign document (pdf).
Speaking to the anticipation of a defence presence at the Middle Arm facility, Joyce noted that Darwin was “at the front” and had already “had experience of what it’s like to be at the front,” referring to when Japanese troops bombed the city in 1942.
“You don’t have to be Nostradamus to realise that defence is a large part of our budget, the massive increase in defence expenditure, taking it over two percent of GDP,” Joyce said.
0:003:07
FeedbackShare
Caden Pearson
Writer and Editor
Follow
Caden Pearson is a writer and editor based Cairns, Australia. He writes mostly on national politics, geopolitics in the Indo-Pacific, and COVID-19 measures and pushback. He has a background in screenwriting and documentary. Contact him on caden.pearson@epochtimes.com.au
Campaign Promises to Replace Australia's Chinese-Owned Port
Campaign Promises to Replace Australia’s Chinese-Owned Port
By Caden Pearson
April 12, 2022 Updated: April 12, 2022
Australia’s governing Liberal-National Party—currently in caretaker mode due to an election—plans to build a new $1.5 billion port facility in the country’s far north city of Darwin to replace an existing China-leased port, the country’s incumbent deputy prime minister has announced.
On the campaign trail in Darwin on April 11, Australian Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce unveiled details of a new port facility at Middle Arm, which he said would bring in close to $16 billion worth of private investment and strengthen the country’s resilience in the face of geopolitical instability in the Indo-Pacific.
The new port would be built near Darwin Port at East Arm, which the Northern Territory government leases for 99 years to Landbridge, a Chinese company with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
“Our nation must become as strong as possible, as quickly as possible, and what we’re doing here at Middle Arm with $1.5 billion just in this announcement, $1.5 billion dollars is going to be transformative, bringing in close to $16 billion worth of private investment,” Joyce said, NT News reported.
“Assisting us in growing our gas exports, our critical mineral exports and development of hydrogen. It is making sure that this port becomes one of the premier ports in Australia.
“[We have] the greatest opportunity to be part of the massive wealth and the massive growth from Indonesia that is racing ahead to be one of the biggest economies in the world,” he said.
The new port investment would make it a world-leading industrial hub for gas processing and high-value minerals processing and refinement, Joyce said.
“Our investment will deliver this, supporting port infrastructure, including a wharf and offloading facility, and dredging of the shipping channel,” he said.
The plan includes $440 million to build new logistics hubs at Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek, and $300 million for low-emissions LNG and clean hydrogen production at Middle Arm, together with associated carbon capture and storage infrastructure.
Additionally, there is $200 million to further develop the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct, delivering a rail spur and new road network and $110 million to continue to upgrade and further seal the Tanami Road.
The Nationals plan to invest $7.1 billion in key regions as part of their Energy Security and Regional Development Plan to transform them into next-generation export hubs, the party outlined in a campaign document (pdf).
Speaking to the anticipation of a defence presence at the Middle Arm facility, Joyce noted that Darwin was “at the front” and had already “had experience of what it’s like to be at the front,” referring to when Japanese troops bombed the city in 1942.
“You don’t have to be Nostradamus to realise that defence is a large part of our budget, the massive increase in defence expenditure, taking it over two percent of GDP,” Joyce said.
0:003:07
FeedbackShare
Caden Pearson
Writer and Editor
Follow
Caden Pearson is a writer and editor based Cairns, Australia. He writes mostly on national politics, geopolitics in the Indo-Pacific, and COVID-19 measures and pushback. He has a background in screenwriting and documentary. Contact him on caden.pearson@epochtimes.com.au
Campaign Promises to Replace Australia's Chinese-Owned Port
jward
passin' thru
Joseph Dempsey
@JosephHDempsey
17m
#NorthKorea claim successful test-fire of a new tactical guided weapon
View: https://twitter.com/JosephHDempsey/status/1515441267647434755?s=20&t=a8ejiB9Gxxa1NHkzhOyp1A
While the #NorthKorea's 'new tactical guided weapon' outwardly resembles their KN-23 and KN-23 SRBMs the use of a wheeled quad launcher indicates a smaller, lighter and likely shorter range missile
View: https://twitter.com/JosephHDempsey/status/1515443139913396231?s=20&t=a8ejiB9Gxxa1NHkzhOyp1A
Geolocation of #NorthKorea's 'new tactical guided weapon' launch
@JosephHDempsey
17m
#NorthKorea claim successful test-fire of a new tactical guided weapon
View: https://twitter.com/JosephHDempsey/status/1515441267647434755?s=20&t=a8ejiB9Gxxa1NHkzhOyp1A
While the #NorthKorea's 'new tactical guided weapon' outwardly resembles their KN-23 and KN-23 SRBMs the use of a wheeled quad launcher indicates a smaller, lighter and likely shorter range missile
View: https://twitter.com/JosephHDempsey/status/1515443139913396231?s=20&t=a8ejiB9Gxxa1NHkzhOyp1A
Geolocation of #NorthKorea's 'new tactical guided weapon' launch
to same private Majon beach location as 27 Jan 2022 KN-23 launch
jward
passin' thru
Time to Shelve Denuclearization and Negotiate a Halt to North Korea’s ICBM Program
Mayumi Fukushima
April 14, 2022
With the entire world’s attention riveted on Ukraine, Kim Jong-Un is doubling down on his nuclear and missile programs and has recently tested what he claims to be a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). According to early estimates the Hwasong-17 (a.k.a. KN-27) missile could have reached the U.S. East Coast if launched on a normal trajectory. Despite South Korean doubts over the claim, the test results clearly suggest the North’s steady technological progress. Pyongyang is expected to carry out more provocations in the coming months, especially on April 15th on the occasion of the 110th anniversary of its founder Kim Il-Sung’s birth. To reassure U.S. allies in the region, some U.S. analysts advocate a high-profile announcement of new deterrence initiatives with allies such as joint exercises, and South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol seems to agree and seek more frequent drills. Talks to reiterate U.S. alliance commitments are certainly important, but such showy military exercises — which Kim typically views as a major aggression toward the North — would be a primrose path. They would only partially meet allied demands for stronger security assurances in the near term while driving Kim to further his ICBM technologies, which already “present a real danger to the U.S. homeland,” as Gen. Mark Milley said, and thus undermine the credibility of U.S. nuclear umbrellas in the region. One should not miss the forest for the trees. North Korean issues are a distraction from a more serious issue in East Asia: the strategic competition with China. To repair the umbrellas over the allies that Washington needs on its side, it is time to negotiate with Kim to limit his ICBMs before he perfects them, to officially end the Korean War, and to wean him off Beijing’s economic assistance and political influence.
After Ukraine, North Korea Isn’t Giving Up Its Nuclear Weapons
The United States needs to set a more realistic policy rather than insisting on North Korea’s complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization, which virtually every expert thinks is an unattainable goal. To many observers, the war in Ukraine and the West’s responses so far have weakened the international nuclear nonproliferation regime. This war has unfortunately raised the perceived deterrent value of nuclear weapons. Were it not for Russian nuclear forces, the arguments go, U.S. and NATO forces would likely already be in Ukraine to defeat Russia. As North Koreans also see their nuclear weapons as a defensive means to deter U.S. military attacks, one should expect that this war — as well as the advocated joint deterrence exercises — will give Pyongyang a stronger reason to hold on to its nuclear forces at all costs.
Meanwhile, the war has also shaken allied confidence in U.S. extended deterrence, and revived the nuclear question both in Seoul and Tokyo. Whereas the war may have helped unite NATO allies under U.S. leadership to some extent, a parallel unity should not be expected in Asia. Japan and South Korea, two of the world’s most technologically advanced states, have delicate relations with each other, and both possess latent nuclear capabilities, with which they could threaten nuclear breakout to resist U.S. pressures. Moreover, while there are many good reasons why states want to stay non-nuclear, powerful popular sentiments may very well drive state decisions in a different direction: a recent survey conducted in December 2021 shows that 71 percent of South Koreans are in favor of their country developing its own nuclear weapons.
The Longer We Wait, the Stronger Kim’s Position
Pyongyang’s latest ICBM test, the first since 2017, rubbed salt in the allied wounds of the concerns over extended deterrence caused by measured U.S. responses to Ukraine’s requests for help. Yet the United States and its allies’ responses to North Korea’s missile test hardly go beyond familiar diplomatic condemnation. Their calls for more biting sanctions quickly fizzle out because they know China and Russia would veto such attempts anyway. The Biden administration says it is open to talks without preconditions but shows little interest in actively enticing North Korea into negotiations and refuses to ease sanctions unless the North takes concrete steps toward its denuclearization. This approach is failing, because it is premised on the unrealistic assumption that Kim Jong-Un will one day desperately come to a negotiating table to beg for economic assistance at the expense of his nuclear weapons. Every time Korea experts predict Pyongyang’s economic collapse, they are later proven wrong. Despite reports of food shortages last year, the North Korean military remains unscathed and has been steadfastly augmenting its nuclear arsenal, testing a submarine-launched ballistic missile, and even resuming operations at the Yongbyon Nuclear Science and Weapons Research Center. The more time that elapses, the more sophisticated Pyongyang will be in evading the effects of economic sanctions and the stronger its negotiating position will be as its nuclear arsenal grows. On the other hand, launching a preventive strike on North Korea, as Donald Trump was reportedly considering in 2017, is a terrible idea, as it would be not only very unlikely to destroy all the nuclear facilities but would be almost certain to trigger a Korean War 2.0 — potentially a nuclear one. Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of Kim Jong-Un, recently threatened to use nuclear weapons if attacked.
Time to Negotiate with a Focus on ICBMs and Neutrality Vis-à-Vis China
Thus, anyone claiming to be seriously working on the North’s denuclearization looks like an emperor with no clothes. It is time to tell North Korea that the United States is willing to ease economic sanctions and provide food assistance before the North denuclearizes, if Kim meets certain conditions including halting his long-range missile activities and remaining neutral in East Asian contingencies involving China, in particular. He may well be interested in accepting limits on ICBM activities. Analysts agree that his missile tests so far have yet to demonstrate mastery of ICBM reentry vehicle technologies to protect a warhead. And yet, he declared in 2017 that he now possessed “complete” nuclear forces, and added in 2018 that he needed no further testing on his nuclear or long-range missiles programs. While technological limitations may shape his incentive to negotiate on ICBMs, Kim could still save face with the argument that no more tests are needed since his past successful tests brought the world’s most powerful nation to heel, forcing it to abandon its hostile policy toward his country. Moreover, his nuclear weapons delivered by shorter-range missiles are already more than enough to deter U.S. attempts to invade his country.
A deepening rift in Chinese-North Korean ties worries Pyongyang as it grows more dependent on Beijing’s assistance. A pandemic lockdown in North Korea resulted in a substantial fall in its imports of food, fertilizer and other agricultural items and caused malnutrition in more than forty percent of its population – situation so dire that China sneaked food aid into North Korea through their officially “closed” border. Pyongyang’s desire to reduce its reliance on Chinese food stamps presents a great opportunity for the Biden administration to negotiate neutrality in case of contingencies involving China. For example, if North Korea, upon U.S. requests, cancels a Chinese lease of North Korean ports such as Rajin (Rason), this may help reduce operational uncertainties. It is certainly unlikely that China would enjoy full military support from North Korea anyway, but the North’s neutrality pledge in exchange for economic benefits would lower the likelihood of North Korean provocations that could distract the U.S. military from fighting the Chinese.
The Biden administration should initiate negotiations immediately to add to its (now limited) diplomatic achievements before the mid-term elections in November. North Koreans are also eager to claim a high-profile diplomatic success this year, which is of particular importance to their regime as a few anniversaries converge: the 110th anniversary of Kim Il-Sung’s birth, the 80th anniversary of Kim Jong-Il’s birth, and the 10th year of Kim Jong-Un’s tenure.
A predictable counter-argument would be that the tacit U.S. acknowledgement of a nuclear-armed North Korea would prompt Seoul to seek its own nuclear arsenal. However, let’s not forget that Seoul will still be protected by U.S. forces in Korea and in Japan. In addition, continued U.S. engagement with the two Koreas going forward would allow an opportunity to nudge them toward denuclearization in the event of unification.
Reaching a deal successfully may require a few rounds of tit-for-tat negotiations — a method more suitable than a Trump-style grand bargain when mutual trust is lacking — and simultaneous close consultations with Tokyo and Seoul throughout the process. First, Washington could promise a partial relief of unilateral economic sanctions conditional on a halt of all North Korean ICBM activities such as development, testing, manufacturing, and deployment for a certain period — say 12 months. Second, the United States could promise an official end to the Korean War to normalize diplomatic relations, if North Korea continues to halt ICBM activities and refrains from testing shorter-range missiles without prior notice for, say, another 12 months. In the third stage, the United States and its allies could offer a removal of all remaining sanctions with a “snapback” mechanism, if Pyongyang meets all of the conditions above, engages in a regular high-level dialogue with South Korea, and keeps its neutrality vis-à-vis China.
In the early 2000s, President George W. Bush made strategic decisions to accommodate nuclear-armed India and Pakistan in the international community when America needed their help in combating larger security threats from al-Qaeda and then from China. In the face of Beijing’s relentless challenges to U.S. interests today, why does America put off negotiations with the North all together, while letting the North’s missile program grow in the meantime to such an extent that it would distract the United States and its allies from confronting the larger Chinese threat?
Mayumi Fukushima
April 14, 2022
With the entire world’s attention riveted on Ukraine, Kim Jong-Un is doubling down on his nuclear and missile programs and has recently tested what he claims to be a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). According to early estimates the Hwasong-17 (a.k.a. KN-27) missile could have reached the U.S. East Coast if launched on a normal trajectory. Despite South Korean doubts over the claim, the test results clearly suggest the North’s steady technological progress. Pyongyang is expected to carry out more provocations in the coming months, especially on April 15th on the occasion of the 110th anniversary of its founder Kim Il-Sung’s birth. To reassure U.S. allies in the region, some U.S. analysts advocate a high-profile announcement of new deterrence initiatives with allies such as joint exercises, and South Korean President-elect Yoon Suk-yeol seems to agree and seek more frequent drills. Talks to reiterate U.S. alliance commitments are certainly important, but such showy military exercises — which Kim typically views as a major aggression toward the North — would be a primrose path. They would only partially meet allied demands for stronger security assurances in the near term while driving Kim to further his ICBM technologies, which already “present a real danger to the U.S. homeland,” as Gen. Mark Milley said, and thus undermine the credibility of U.S. nuclear umbrellas in the region. One should not miss the forest for the trees. North Korean issues are a distraction from a more serious issue in East Asia: the strategic competition with China. To repair the umbrellas over the allies that Washington needs on its side, it is time to negotiate with Kim to limit his ICBMs before he perfects them, to officially end the Korean War, and to wean him off Beijing’s economic assistance and political influence.
After Ukraine, North Korea Isn’t Giving Up Its Nuclear Weapons
The United States needs to set a more realistic policy rather than insisting on North Korea’s complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization, which virtually every expert thinks is an unattainable goal. To many observers, the war in Ukraine and the West’s responses so far have weakened the international nuclear nonproliferation regime. This war has unfortunately raised the perceived deterrent value of nuclear weapons. Were it not for Russian nuclear forces, the arguments go, U.S. and NATO forces would likely already be in Ukraine to defeat Russia. As North Koreans also see their nuclear weapons as a defensive means to deter U.S. military attacks, one should expect that this war — as well as the advocated joint deterrence exercises — will give Pyongyang a stronger reason to hold on to its nuclear forces at all costs.
Meanwhile, the war has also shaken allied confidence in U.S. extended deterrence, and revived the nuclear question both in Seoul and Tokyo. Whereas the war may have helped unite NATO allies under U.S. leadership to some extent, a parallel unity should not be expected in Asia. Japan and South Korea, two of the world’s most technologically advanced states, have delicate relations with each other, and both possess latent nuclear capabilities, with which they could threaten nuclear breakout to resist U.S. pressures. Moreover, while there are many good reasons why states want to stay non-nuclear, powerful popular sentiments may very well drive state decisions in a different direction: a recent survey conducted in December 2021 shows that 71 percent of South Koreans are in favor of their country developing its own nuclear weapons.
The Longer We Wait, the Stronger Kim’s Position
Pyongyang’s latest ICBM test, the first since 2017, rubbed salt in the allied wounds of the concerns over extended deterrence caused by measured U.S. responses to Ukraine’s requests for help. Yet the United States and its allies’ responses to North Korea’s missile test hardly go beyond familiar diplomatic condemnation. Their calls for more biting sanctions quickly fizzle out because they know China and Russia would veto such attempts anyway. The Biden administration says it is open to talks without preconditions but shows little interest in actively enticing North Korea into negotiations and refuses to ease sanctions unless the North takes concrete steps toward its denuclearization. This approach is failing, because it is premised on the unrealistic assumption that Kim Jong-Un will one day desperately come to a negotiating table to beg for economic assistance at the expense of his nuclear weapons. Every time Korea experts predict Pyongyang’s economic collapse, they are later proven wrong. Despite reports of food shortages last year, the North Korean military remains unscathed and has been steadfastly augmenting its nuclear arsenal, testing a submarine-launched ballistic missile, and even resuming operations at the Yongbyon Nuclear Science and Weapons Research Center. The more time that elapses, the more sophisticated Pyongyang will be in evading the effects of economic sanctions and the stronger its negotiating position will be as its nuclear arsenal grows. On the other hand, launching a preventive strike on North Korea, as Donald Trump was reportedly considering in 2017, is a terrible idea, as it would be not only very unlikely to destroy all the nuclear facilities but would be almost certain to trigger a Korean War 2.0 — potentially a nuclear one. Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of Kim Jong-Un, recently threatened to use nuclear weapons if attacked.
Time to Negotiate with a Focus on ICBMs and Neutrality Vis-à-Vis China
Thus, anyone claiming to be seriously working on the North’s denuclearization looks like an emperor with no clothes. It is time to tell North Korea that the United States is willing to ease economic sanctions and provide food assistance before the North denuclearizes, if Kim meets certain conditions including halting his long-range missile activities and remaining neutral in East Asian contingencies involving China, in particular. He may well be interested in accepting limits on ICBM activities. Analysts agree that his missile tests so far have yet to demonstrate mastery of ICBM reentry vehicle technologies to protect a warhead. And yet, he declared in 2017 that he now possessed “complete” nuclear forces, and added in 2018 that he needed no further testing on his nuclear or long-range missiles programs. While technological limitations may shape his incentive to negotiate on ICBMs, Kim could still save face with the argument that no more tests are needed since his past successful tests brought the world’s most powerful nation to heel, forcing it to abandon its hostile policy toward his country. Moreover, his nuclear weapons delivered by shorter-range missiles are already more than enough to deter U.S. attempts to invade his country.
A deepening rift in Chinese-North Korean ties worries Pyongyang as it grows more dependent on Beijing’s assistance. A pandemic lockdown in North Korea resulted in a substantial fall in its imports of food, fertilizer and other agricultural items and caused malnutrition in more than forty percent of its population – situation so dire that China sneaked food aid into North Korea through their officially “closed” border. Pyongyang’s desire to reduce its reliance on Chinese food stamps presents a great opportunity for the Biden administration to negotiate neutrality in case of contingencies involving China. For example, if North Korea, upon U.S. requests, cancels a Chinese lease of North Korean ports such as Rajin (Rason), this may help reduce operational uncertainties. It is certainly unlikely that China would enjoy full military support from North Korea anyway, but the North’s neutrality pledge in exchange for economic benefits would lower the likelihood of North Korean provocations that could distract the U.S. military from fighting the Chinese.
The Biden administration should initiate negotiations immediately to add to its (now limited) diplomatic achievements before the mid-term elections in November. North Koreans are also eager to claim a high-profile diplomatic success this year, which is of particular importance to their regime as a few anniversaries converge: the 110th anniversary of Kim Il-Sung’s birth, the 80th anniversary of Kim Jong-Il’s birth, and the 10th year of Kim Jong-Un’s tenure.
A predictable counter-argument would be that the tacit U.S. acknowledgement of a nuclear-armed North Korea would prompt Seoul to seek its own nuclear arsenal. However, let’s not forget that Seoul will still be protected by U.S. forces in Korea and in Japan. In addition, continued U.S. engagement with the two Koreas going forward would allow an opportunity to nudge them toward denuclearization in the event of unification.
Reaching a deal successfully may require a few rounds of tit-for-tat negotiations — a method more suitable than a Trump-style grand bargain when mutual trust is lacking — and simultaneous close consultations with Tokyo and Seoul throughout the process. First, Washington could promise a partial relief of unilateral economic sanctions conditional on a halt of all North Korean ICBM activities such as development, testing, manufacturing, and deployment for a certain period — say 12 months. Second, the United States could promise an official end to the Korean War to normalize diplomatic relations, if North Korea continues to halt ICBM activities and refrains from testing shorter-range missiles without prior notice for, say, another 12 months. In the third stage, the United States and its allies could offer a removal of all remaining sanctions with a “snapback” mechanism, if Pyongyang meets all of the conditions above, engages in a regular high-level dialogue with South Korea, and keeps its neutrality vis-à-vis China.
In the early 2000s, President George W. Bush made strategic decisions to accommodate nuclear-armed India and Pakistan in the international community when America needed their help in combating larger security threats from al-Qaeda and then from China. In the face of Beijing’s relentless challenges to U.S. interests today, why does America put off negotiations with the North all together, while letting the North’s missile program grow in the meantime to such an extent that it would distract the United States and its allies from confronting the larger Chinese threat?
Time to Shelve Denuclearization and Negotiate a Halt to North Korea’s ICBM Program - War on the Rocks
With the entire world’s attention riveted on Ukraine, Kim Jong-Un is doubling down on his nuclear and missile programs and has recently tested what he
warontherocks.com
jward
passin' thru
North Korean leader shown observing weapons test as country fires projectiles into eastern waters
CNN Expansion Hong Kong July 2020 795169, Jessie Yeung
By Yoonjung Seo and Jessie Yeung, CNN
Updated 11:30 PM ET, Sat April 16, 2022
An image published by North Korean state media purporting to show a weapons test on April 16.
An image published by North Korean state media purporting to show a weapons test on April 16.
(CNN)North Korea fired two projectiles into waters off the east of the Korean Peninsula Saturday evening, according to the South Korean military, the country's 12th such test this year.
Images published Sunday by North Korea state-owned newspaper Rodong Sinmun showed the country's leader, Kim Jong Un, smiling and clapping as he observed the test-firing of what the newspaper called a "new tactical weapon."
The projectiles were fired from North Korea's Hamhung area around 6 p.m., South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement on Sunday. The projectiles flew about 110 kilometers (about 68.3 miles) at an altitude of 25 kilometers (15.5 miles), with a maximum speed of Mach 4.0 or lower, said the statement.
On Sunday, North Korean state media KCNA reported Kim had observed the test firing of a "new-type tactical guided weapon," which was "carried out successfully."
KCNA claimed the new weapon boosted the country's "frontline long-range artillery units," and increased efficiency "in the operation of tactical nukes of (North Korea) and diversification of their firepower missions."
An image purporting to show a missile test by North Korea on April 16, as published by state media.
An image purporting to show a missile test by North Korea on April 16, as published by state media.
Immediately after the launch, South Korea's military, intelligence agencies and National Security Office held an emergency meeting to assess the situation and discuss countermeasures, according to the Joint Chiefs of Staff statement.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in is receiving real-time reports from the National Security Office, and has ordered the relevant government ministries to inspect North Korea's movements, Moon's spokeswoman Park Kyung-mee said in a statement Sunday.
"We are aware of the North Korean statement that they conducted a test of a long range artillery system. We analyze all activities in close coordination with our allies and partners," said a spokesperson for the US Department of Defense in a statement, adding that the US is "very clear on our commitment to the defense of (South Korea), Japan, and the US homeland."
Duyeon Kim, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said North Korea had been aiming to make missiles that can evade defense systems, with "features that can fly them under the US and South Korea's radars."
"These types of missiles are especially threatening to South Korea and Japan and they're weapons that can be used in or even start a conflict," she said.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un purportedly observing a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un purportedly observing a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media.
Ankit Panda, Stanton Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, added that this was the first time North Korea has "specifically ascribed a tactical nuclear weapons' role for a missile at a test."
North Korea has increased its missile tests this year, including its first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in more than four years on March 24, in defiance of international law.
In just the first four months of 2022, the North has conducted 12 tests; by comparison, it only conducted four tests in 2020, and eight in 2021.
The ICBM was reported to be its most formidable yet -- though missile experts and a South Korean military official later said it may have been a less advanced weapon than previously believed.
Duyeon Kim said the tests could have several purposes: one being a message to the North Korean people that "their country is strong despite their apparent economic difficulties."
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un watching a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media KCNA.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un watching a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media KCNA.
North Korea also has "a domestic imperative to make and perfect the types of advanced weapons that Kim Jong Un ordered last year," she said. This year is an important one for the country because of several major dates -- including the 10-year anniversary of Kim Jong Un's rule and the 110th anniversary of the birth of its founder Kim Il Sung -- one of the most important events in the North Korean calendar.
Lee Sang-hyun, president of the South Korean think tank Sejong Institute, said Kim may be under pressure "to show off his achievements." April holds many of those important dates, providing an opportunity "to show off to the world about their country's missile and nuclear capabilities."
Another reason for the recent tests could be to protest the US-South Korea joint military drills set to take place this month, experts said.
North Korea has long condemned these joint drills as posing a grave threat to its security, accusing the US of a "hostile policy" toward the country.https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/16/asia/north-korea-weapon-test-intl-hnk/index.html
CNN Expansion Hong Kong July 2020 795169, Jessie Yeung
By Yoonjung Seo and Jessie Yeung, CNN
Updated 11:30 PM ET, Sat April 16, 2022
An image published by North Korean state media purporting to show a weapons test on April 16.
An image published by North Korean state media purporting to show a weapons test on April 16.
(CNN)North Korea fired two projectiles into waters off the east of the Korean Peninsula Saturday evening, according to the South Korean military, the country's 12th such test this year.
Images published Sunday by North Korea state-owned newspaper Rodong Sinmun showed the country's leader, Kim Jong Un, smiling and clapping as he observed the test-firing of what the newspaper called a "new tactical weapon."
The projectiles were fired from North Korea's Hamhung area around 6 p.m., South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement on Sunday. The projectiles flew about 110 kilometers (about 68.3 miles) at an altitude of 25 kilometers (15.5 miles), with a maximum speed of Mach 4.0 or lower, said the statement.
On Sunday, North Korean state media KCNA reported Kim had observed the test firing of a "new-type tactical guided weapon," which was "carried out successfully."
KCNA claimed the new weapon boosted the country's "frontline long-range artillery units," and increased efficiency "in the operation of tactical nukes of (North Korea) and diversification of their firepower missions."
An image purporting to show a missile test by North Korea on April 16, as published by state media.
An image purporting to show a missile test by North Korea on April 16, as published by state media.
Immediately after the launch, South Korea's military, intelligence agencies and National Security Office held an emergency meeting to assess the situation and discuss countermeasures, according to the Joint Chiefs of Staff statement.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in is receiving real-time reports from the National Security Office, and has ordered the relevant government ministries to inspect North Korea's movements, Moon's spokeswoman Park Kyung-mee said in a statement Sunday.
"We are aware of the North Korean statement that they conducted a test of a long range artillery system. We analyze all activities in close coordination with our allies and partners," said a spokesperson for the US Department of Defense in a statement, adding that the US is "very clear on our commitment to the defense of (South Korea), Japan, and the US homeland."
Duyeon Kim, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said North Korea had been aiming to make missiles that can evade defense systems, with "features that can fly them under the US and South Korea's radars."
"These types of missiles are especially threatening to South Korea and Japan and they're weapons that can be used in or even start a conflict," she said.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un purportedly observing a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un purportedly observing a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media.
Ankit Panda, Stanton Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, added that this was the first time North Korea has "specifically ascribed a tactical nuclear weapons' role for a missile at a test."
North Korea has increased its missile tests this year, including its first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in more than four years on March 24, in defiance of international law.
In just the first four months of 2022, the North has conducted 12 tests; by comparison, it only conducted four tests in 2020, and eight in 2021.
The ICBM was reported to be its most formidable yet -- though missile experts and a South Korean military official later said it may have been a less advanced weapon than previously believed.
Duyeon Kim said the tests could have several purposes: one being a message to the North Korean people that "their country is strong despite their apparent economic difficulties."
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un watching a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media KCNA.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un watching a missile test on April 16, according to North Korean state media KCNA.
North Korea also has "a domestic imperative to make and perfect the types of advanced weapons that Kim Jong Un ordered last year," she said. This year is an important one for the country because of several major dates -- including the 10-year anniversary of Kim Jong Un's rule and the 110th anniversary of the birth of its founder Kim Il Sung -- one of the most important events in the North Korean calendar.
Lee Sang-hyun, president of the South Korean think tank Sejong Institute, said Kim may be under pressure "to show off his achievements." April holds many of those important dates, providing an opportunity "to show off to the world about their country's missile and nuclear capabilities."
Another reason for the recent tests could be to protest the US-South Korea joint military drills set to take place this month, experts said.
North Korea has long condemned these joint drills as posing a grave threat to its security, accusing the US of a "hostile policy" toward the country.https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/16/asia/north-korea-weapon-test-intl-hnk/index.html
Posted for fair use.....
www.rfa.org
North Korea's weapons system test seen as boosting short-range nuclear capabilities
Experts said the new missile's military impact was blunted by Pyongyang's inability to miniaturize a warhead.
By RFA’s Korean Service
2022.04.18
North Korea said it tested a new “tactical-guided weapon” on Saturday designed to bolster its nuclear capabilities, although experts questioned how big of a military advance the launch represents when Pyongyang has no miniature warheads.
The state-run Korea Central News Agency said the test was successful and the new weapons system “is of great significance in drastically improving the firepower of the frontline long-range artillery units and enhancing the efficiency in the operation of tactical nukes of the DPRK and diversification of their firepower missions.”
The launch came days before the U.S. and South Korea on Monday began annual joint military exercises, which the North says threatens its sovereignty.
The new weapons system, though classified as long-range artillery by North Korea, is not different from guided missiles, Jeffery Lewis of the California-based Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ East Asia Nonproliferation Project, told RFA’s Korean Service Monday.
“North Korea uses the phrase ‘Hwasong artillery’ to refer to its long-range ballistic missiles. This is probably what the U.S. government calls a ‘close-range ballistic missile’ that is apparently capable of delivering a nuclear warhead about 100 km,” Lewis said.
Photos of the tested weapon appear to show “some kind of heavy rocket artillery or close-range ballistic missile,” Ian Williams of the Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS) in Washington told RFA.
Williams likened the projectile to the KN-25, a tactical ballistic missile North Korea first tested in July 2019.
“The rhetoric about nuclear fighting capability could be North Korea signaling this rocket is meant to deliver a tactical nuclear weapon. However, we have not seen evidence that North Korea has been able to miniaturize its nuclear weapons to this extent,” he said.
The Pentagon’s description of the new weapon as a “long-range artillery system” was one of many choices, said Ankit Panda of the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“Tactical-ballistic missile, close-range ballistic missile, and even long-range artillery system are all reasonable ways of defining this new ‘tactical-guided weapon,’” he told RFA by email
“The main significance of this weapon is its presumptive nuclear weapons delivery role,” said Panda.
The Rand Corporation’s Bruce Benet said having built-in guidance makes a rocket a missile, “so these apparently guided artillery rockets are actually guided artillery missiles.”
Benet also expressed doubts North Korea’s claim that the new missile could carry a nuclear weapon.
“Even if the new missiles did, the North could always have used its KN-23 and other larger missiles to deliver nuclear weapons close to the battlefield, so this new type of missile appears to have more political impact than military impact,” he said.
Though he didn’t know what type of weapon was actually fired, David Maxwell of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington said the weapon was a means for Pyongyang to further its geopolitical strategy.
“This is likely in support of the regime’s political warfare strategy and blackmail diplomacy to use threats, increased tensions and provocations to gain political and economic concessions,” he told RFA.
“In the context of the regime’s objective to dominate the peninsula, this weapons test supports the development of advanced military capabilities to support warfighting to eventually use force to achieve unification under the rule of the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State. This test serves two purposes: support to blackmail diplomacy and support to warfighting,” Maxwell said.
The U.S. remains open to engagement with North Korea, U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said at a news briefing.
“We have … sought to make very clear to the DPRK that the door to diplomacy is not closed, that it does remain open, but that the DPRK needs to cease its destabilizing actions and instead choose the path of engagement, something it has not yet done,” said Price.
“Unfortunately, it is the DPRK that has failed to respond to our invitations, and instead they've engaged in this series of provocations, including the ICBM launches in recent weeks,” he said.
The U.S. Department of Defense declined to release intelligence assessments but confirmed the weapons test and reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to the defense of its allies in the region.
North Korea's weapons system test seen as boosting short-range nuclear capabilities
Experts said the new missile's military impact was blunted by Pyongyang's inability to miniaturize a warhead.
www.rfa.org
North Korea's weapons system test seen as boosting short-range nuclear capabilities
Experts said the new missile's military impact was blunted by Pyongyang's inability to miniaturize a warhead.
By RFA’s Korean Service
2022.04.18
North Korea said it tested a new “tactical-guided weapon” on Saturday designed to bolster its nuclear capabilities, although experts questioned how big of a military advance the launch represents when Pyongyang has no miniature warheads.
The state-run Korea Central News Agency said the test was successful and the new weapons system “is of great significance in drastically improving the firepower of the frontline long-range artillery units and enhancing the efficiency in the operation of tactical nukes of the DPRK and diversification of their firepower missions.”
The launch came days before the U.S. and South Korea on Monday began annual joint military exercises, which the North says threatens its sovereignty.
The new weapons system, though classified as long-range artillery by North Korea, is not different from guided missiles, Jeffery Lewis of the California-based Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ East Asia Nonproliferation Project, told RFA’s Korean Service Monday.
“North Korea uses the phrase ‘Hwasong artillery’ to refer to its long-range ballistic missiles. This is probably what the U.S. government calls a ‘close-range ballistic missile’ that is apparently capable of delivering a nuclear warhead about 100 km,” Lewis said.
Photos of the tested weapon appear to show “some kind of heavy rocket artillery or close-range ballistic missile,” Ian Williams of the Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS) in Washington told RFA.
Williams likened the projectile to the KN-25, a tactical ballistic missile North Korea first tested in July 2019.
“The rhetoric about nuclear fighting capability could be North Korea signaling this rocket is meant to deliver a tactical nuclear weapon. However, we have not seen evidence that North Korea has been able to miniaturize its nuclear weapons to this extent,” he said.
The Pentagon’s description of the new weapon as a “long-range artillery system” was one of many choices, said Ankit Panda of the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“Tactical-ballistic missile, close-range ballistic missile, and even long-range artillery system are all reasonable ways of defining this new ‘tactical-guided weapon,’” he told RFA by email
“The main significance of this weapon is its presumptive nuclear weapons delivery role,” said Panda.
The Rand Corporation’s Bruce Benet said having built-in guidance makes a rocket a missile, “so these apparently guided artillery rockets are actually guided artillery missiles.”
Benet also expressed doubts North Korea’s claim that the new missile could carry a nuclear weapon.
“Even if the new missiles did, the North could always have used its KN-23 and other larger missiles to deliver nuclear weapons close to the battlefield, so this new type of missile appears to have more political impact than military impact,” he said.
Though he didn’t know what type of weapon was actually fired, David Maxwell of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington said the weapon was a means for Pyongyang to further its geopolitical strategy.
“This is likely in support of the regime’s political warfare strategy and blackmail diplomacy to use threats, increased tensions and provocations to gain political and economic concessions,” he told RFA.
“In the context of the regime’s objective to dominate the peninsula, this weapons test supports the development of advanced military capabilities to support warfighting to eventually use force to achieve unification under the rule of the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State. This test serves two purposes: support to blackmail diplomacy and support to warfighting,” Maxwell said.
The U.S. remains open to engagement with North Korea, U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said at a news briefing.
“We have … sought to make very clear to the DPRK that the door to diplomacy is not closed, that it does remain open, but that the DPRK needs to cease its destabilizing actions and instead choose the path of engagement, something it has not yet done,” said Price.
“Unfortunately, it is the DPRK that has failed to respond to our invitations, and instead they've engaged in this series of provocations, including the ICBM launches in recent weeks,” he said.
The U.S. Department of Defense declined to release intelligence assessments but confirmed the weapons test and reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to the defense of its allies in the region.
jward
passin' thru
dafeng cao
@dafengcao
Newly released PLAN promo video reveals the hypersonic AShM cold launched by 055 Destroyer.
View: https://twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1516415872608485389?s=20&t=9pFai_KZPORNToYqVpfUYw
@dafengcao
Newly released PLAN promo video reveals the hypersonic AShM cold launched by 055 Destroyer.
View: https://twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1516415872608485389?s=20&t=9pFai_KZPORNToYqVpfUYw
jward
passin' thru
Stephen Dziedzic
@stephendziedzic
BREAKING: Chinese state media - citing Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin - says the China Solomon Islands security pact ***has*** now been signed by the Foreign Ministers of both countries
@stephendziedzic
BREAKING: Chinese state media - citing Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin - says the China Solomon Islands security pact ***has*** now been signed by the Foreign Ministers of both countries
jward
passin' thru
abc.net.au
China and Solomon Islands sign security pact, Beijing says it is 'not directed at any third party' amid Pacific influence fears
Bill Birtles, Stephen Dziedzic, Evan Wasuka
8-10 minutes
The federal government has declared it is "deeply disappointed" that Solomon Islands has pressed ahead and signed a security pact with China – a deal Australia, New Zealand and the US fear could open the door to a Chinese naval base in the South Pacific.
Key points:
Solomon Islands Foreign Affairs Minister Jeremiah Manele confirmed the signing of the pact to the ABC in a text message.
He said Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare would make a formal announcement in the coming days.
The announcement comes just days after Australia's Minister for the Pacific Zed Seselja travelled to Honiara and met the country's Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare in a last-ditch effort to dissuade him from going ahead with the China security deal.
Senator Seselja and Foreign Minister Marise Payne said the government was "disappointed" by the agreement and that it was not reached in a transparent way.
"Ultimately, this is a sovereign decision of the government of Solomon Islands and we absolutely recognised that, but … declarations and these engagements on security issues have been dealt with in a Pacific-wide manner," she said.
"That is the traditional approach for these issues and it's why some Pacific partners have also raised concerns."
Senator Payne said the government's position was still that Pacific neighbours were the best to delivery security in the region and said it was an "unfair characterisation" to say the region had become less secure while Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been in power.
Royal Solomon Islands Police Force officers train with replica guns supplied by the Chinese government last year. (RSIPF)
The ministers said while Solomon Islands had the right to make sovereign decisions about national security, Australia still believed the "Pacific family" was best placed to provide security guarantees.
They also flagged that Australia would continue to press Solomon Islands not to turn to China in the event of a security crisis.
When Honiara was rocked by violent riots in November, Australia responded rapidly to a request for help from Mr Sogavare, sending police and ADF personnel to the city to restore order.
China has also repeatedly insisted that it has no intention of displacing other countries in Solomon Islands, although both Canberra and Washington are deeply sceptical of that claim.
'Promoting social stability and long-term peace'
Youtube Australia 'deeply disappointed' by China and Solomon Islands controversial security pact.
Mr Wang said the cooperation would be transparent and would not target any third party.
"The purpose of China-Solomon security cooperation is to promote social stability and long-term peace and security in Solomon Islands, which is in line with the common interests of Solomon Islands and the South Pacific region," he told a briefing on Tuesday.
"China-Solomon Islands security cooperation is public, transparent, open and inclusive, not directed at any third party, and is parallel to and complementary to the existing bilateral and multilateral security cooperation mechanisms in Solomon Islands.
Earlier on Tuesday, the Solomon Islands parliament was told China would send officials to the Pacific nation next month to sign cooperation agreements.
"The PRC [People's Republic of China] foreign affairs is heading to Honiara in the middle of May to sign multilateral agreements and cooperations with the Solomon Islands government," Douglas Ete, chairman of the public accounts committee, said.
The announcement came only a few days before senior White House official Kurt Campbell was due to visit Honiara as part of a concerted effort by both Australia and the US to dissuade Solomon Islands from pressing ahead with the pact.
On Monday, the US State Department warned that the pact "leaves open the door for the deployment of PRC military forces to the Solomon Islands" and set a "concerning precedent for the wider Pacific island region".
One diplomatic source told the ABC that the announcement was "clearly pushed through" by both countries ahead of Mr Campbell's visit.
Mr Wang questioned why the US was now interested in visiting the region, and said Pacific island nations were not "chess pieces in a geopolitical contest".
"Sensationalising an atmosphere of tension and stoking bloc confrontation will get no support in the region," he said.
"Attempts to meddle with and obstruct Pacific island countries' cooperation with China will be in vain."
'Door open' for China to send troops to Solomon Islands
The pact could see Australian influence wane in Solomon Islands as China asserts theirs.(ABC News: Evan Wasuka)
While Mr Sogavare has declared that his country will not allow China to build a military base there, the broadly worded draft text leaked last month leaves the door open for Beijing to send troops to Solomon Islands to protect Chinese built infrastructure.
It also says China can “carry out ship visits to, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands".
New Zealand academic and Pacific security expert Anna Powles told the ABC that the final text was “unlikely” to be made public, “consistent with other PRC security agreements”.
“We are also unlikely to know, unless the agreement is leaked again, whether the signed version varies substantially from the leaked draft,” Dr Powles said.
“This means critical questions remain unanswered about the nature and scope of a potential deployment of Chinese security personnel to Solomon Islands, what exactly is meant by a logistical supply base in Solomon Islands, and how will mission creep be prevented?”
The Opposition in Solomon Islands is also pushing for more transparency.
Leading Opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr told the ABC he would use his position as Chairman of the parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee to hold hearings with foreign affairs officials to “explain the terms of the agreement".
“This issue is not just a sovereign one for Solomon Islands. It impacts the Indo-Pacific region,” he said.
“I would like the text to be made public. Australia’s and Solomon Islands’ security treaty is accessible in the public domain, so why should this treaty with China be secret?”
'Our region has become less secure'
The announcement is also expected to have domestic political ramifications in Australia in the lead up to the federal election next month.
Labor slammed the Coalition's handling of the issue in the wake of the announcement, with Shadow Foreign Minister Penny Wong accusing the Prime Minister of bungling a key relationship.
“Despite all of his tough talk, on Scott Morrison’s watch our region has become less secure,” she said on Twitter.
“His government was warned of this security pact in August and he hasn’t even bothered to send the Foreign Minister to the Solomon Islands to raise concerns on behalf of all Australians."
United States worried about 'lack of transparency'
The United States also says it is has concerns over the deal and will raise them later in the week.
A spokesperson for the National Security Council said a US delegation would speak with Solomon Islands about the prospect of China building a military presence in the country.
"We are concerned by the lack of transparency and unspecified nature of this agreement, which follows a pattern of China offering shadowy, vague deals with little regional consultation in fishing, resource management, development assistance and now security practices," the spokesperson said.
"The reported signing does not change our concerns, and that of regional allies and partners, and it does not change our commitment to a strong relationship with the region.
"Although Solomon Islands has said it will not allow China to build a military base, we will still raise our concerns as part of our broader efforts to reinforce our longstanding ties with the Solomon Islands."
Youtube Solomon Islands opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr on the security pact with China.
Posted 16 hours agoTue 19 Apr 2022 at 3:38am, updated 2 hours agoTue 19 Apr 2022 at 6:08pm
Posted for fair use
www.abc.net.au
China and Solomon Islands sign security pact, Beijing says it is 'not directed at any third party' amid Pacific influence fears
Bill Birtles, Stephen Dziedzic, Evan Wasuka
8-10 minutes
The federal government has declared it is "deeply disappointed" that Solomon Islands has pressed ahead and signed a security pact with China – a deal Australia, New Zealand and the US fear could open the door to a Chinese naval base in the South Pacific.
Key points:
- The agreement will see Beijing help Honiara with issues, including social order and national security
- However, the US has warned the pact could lead to a Chinese military presence in Solomon Islands
- Australia's Minister for the Pacific travelled to Honiara last week in an unsuccessful bid to stop the deal
Solomon Islands Foreign Affairs Minister Jeremiah Manele confirmed the signing of the pact to the ABC in a text message.
He said Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare would make a formal announcement in the coming days.
The announcement comes just days after Australia's Minister for the Pacific Zed Seselja travelled to Honiara and met the country's Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare in a last-ditch effort to dissuade him from going ahead with the China security deal.
Senator Seselja and Foreign Minister Marise Payne said the government was "disappointed" by the agreement and that it was not reached in a transparent way.
"Ultimately, this is a sovereign decision of the government of Solomon Islands and we absolutely recognised that, but … declarations and these engagements on security issues have been dealt with in a Pacific-wide manner," she said.
"That is the traditional approach for these issues and it's why some Pacific partners have also raised concerns."
Senator Payne said the government's position was still that Pacific neighbours were the best to delivery security in the region and said it was an "unfair characterisation" to say the region had become less secure while Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been in power.
Royal Solomon Islands Police Force officers train with replica guns supplied by the Chinese government last year. (RSIPF)
The ministers said while Solomon Islands had the right to make sovereign decisions about national security, Australia still believed the "Pacific family" was best placed to provide security guarantees.
They also flagged that Australia would continue to press Solomon Islands not to turn to China in the event of a security crisis.
When Honiara was rocked by violent riots in November, Australia responded rapidly to a request for help from Mr Sogavare, sending police and ADF personnel to the city to restore order.
China has also repeatedly insisted that it has no intention of displacing other countries in Solomon Islands, although both Canberra and Washington are deeply sceptical of that claim.
'Promoting social stability and long-term peace'
Youtube Australia 'deeply disappointed' by China and Solomon Islands controversial security pact.
Mr Wang said the cooperation would be transparent and would not target any third party.
"The purpose of China-Solomon security cooperation is to promote social stability and long-term peace and security in Solomon Islands, which is in line with the common interests of Solomon Islands and the South Pacific region," he told a briefing on Tuesday.
"China-Solomon Islands security cooperation is public, transparent, open and inclusive, not directed at any third party, and is parallel to and complementary to the existing bilateral and multilateral security cooperation mechanisms in Solomon Islands.
Earlier on Tuesday, the Solomon Islands parliament was told China would send officials to the Pacific nation next month to sign cooperation agreements.
"The PRC [People's Republic of China] foreign affairs is heading to Honiara in the middle of May to sign multilateral agreements and cooperations with the Solomon Islands government," Douglas Ete, chairman of the public accounts committee, said.
The announcement came only a few days before senior White House official Kurt Campbell was due to visit Honiara as part of a concerted effort by both Australia and the US to dissuade Solomon Islands from pressing ahead with the pact.
On Monday, the US State Department warned that the pact "leaves open the door for the deployment of PRC military forces to the Solomon Islands" and set a "concerning precedent for the wider Pacific island region".
One diplomatic source told the ABC that the announcement was "clearly pushed through" by both countries ahead of Mr Campbell's visit.
Mr Wang questioned why the US was now interested in visiting the region, and said Pacific island nations were not "chess pieces in a geopolitical contest".
"Sensationalising an atmosphere of tension and stoking bloc confrontation will get no support in the region," he said.
"Attempts to meddle with and obstruct Pacific island countries' cooperation with China will be in vain."
'Door open' for China to send troops to Solomon Islands
The pact could see Australian influence wane in Solomon Islands as China asserts theirs.(ABC News: Evan Wasuka)
While Mr Sogavare has declared that his country will not allow China to build a military base there, the broadly worded draft text leaked last month leaves the door open for Beijing to send troops to Solomon Islands to protect Chinese built infrastructure.
It also says China can “carry out ship visits to, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands".
New Zealand academic and Pacific security expert Anna Powles told the ABC that the final text was “unlikely” to be made public, “consistent with other PRC security agreements”.
“We are also unlikely to know, unless the agreement is leaked again, whether the signed version varies substantially from the leaked draft,” Dr Powles said.
“This means critical questions remain unanswered about the nature and scope of a potential deployment of Chinese security personnel to Solomon Islands, what exactly is meant by a logistical supply base in Solomon Islands, and how will mission creep be prevented?”
The Opposition in Solomon Islands is also pushing for more transparency.
Leading Opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr told the ABC he would use his position as Chairman of the parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee to hold hearings with foreign affairs officials to “explain the terms of the agreement".
“This issue is not just a sovereign one for Solomon Islands. It impacts the Indo-Pacific region,” he said.
“I would like the text to be made public. Australia’s and Solomon Islands’ security treaty is accessible in the public domain, so why should this treaty with China be secret?”
'Our region has become less secure'
The announcement is also expected to have domestic political ramifications in Australia in the lead up to the federal election next month.
Labor slammed the Coalition's handling of the issue in the wake of the announcement, with Shadow Foreign Minister Penny Wong accusing the Prime Minister of bungling a key relationship.
“Despite all of his tough talk, on Scott Morrison’s watch our region has become less secure,” she said on Twitter.
“His government was warned of this security pact in August and he hasn’t even bothered to send the Foreign Minister to the Solomon Islands to raise concerns on behalf of all Australians."
United States worried about 'lack of transparency'
The United States also says it is has concerns over the deal and will raise them later in the week.
A spokesperson for the National Security Council said a US delegation would speak with Solomon Islands about the prospect of China building a military presence in the country.
"We are concerned by the lack of transparency and unspecified nature of this agreement, which follows a pattern of China offering shadowy, vague deals with little regional consultation in fishing, resource management, development assistance and now security practices," the spokesperson said.
"The reported signing does not change our concerns, and that of regional allies and partners, and it does not change our commitment to a strong relationship with the region.
"Although Solomon Islands has said it will not allow China to build a military base, we will still raise our concerns as part of our broader efforts to reinforce our longstanding ties with the Solomon Islands."
Youtube Solomon Islands opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr on the security pact with China.
Posted 16 hours agoTue 19 Apr 2022 at 3:38am, updated 2 hours agoTue 19 Apr 2022 at 6:08pm
Posted for fair use
Australia 'deeply disappointed' by controversial security pact between China and Solomon Islands
China and Solomon Islands have signed a framework agreement on security cooperation — a deal Australia, New Zealand and the US fear could open the door to a Chinese naval base in the South Pacific.
www.abc.net.au
jward
passin' thru
China to increase coordination with Russia, says senior Chinese diplomat
April 19, 20222:47 AM CDTLast Updated 21 hours ago
1 minute
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng speaks during a dialogue event on democracy in Beijing, China December 2, 2021. REUTERS/Yew Lun Tian
BEIJING, April 19 (Reuters) - China told Russia it will continue to increase "strategic coordination" with it regardless of international volatility, the foreign ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng gave this assurance to Russian ambassador to China, Andrey Denisov, on Monday, the statement said.
Reporting by Yew Lun Tian; editing by Jason Neely
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
April 19, 20222:47 AM CDTLast Updated 21 hours ago
1 minute
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng speaks during a dialogue event on democracy in Beijing, China December 2, 2021. REUTERS/Yew Lun Tian
BEIJING, April 19 (Reuters) - China told Russia it will continue to increase "strategic coordination" with it regardless of international volatility, the foreign ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng gave this assurance to Russian ambassador to China, Andrey Denisov, on Monday, the statement said.
Reporting by Yew Lun Tian; editing by Jason Neely
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Posted for fair use.....
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/QEALTMHXCRDALG27S2UHOZTG7I.jpg)
www.defensenews.com
Asia Pacific
New Chinese radar looks toward Japan, satellite image shows
By Mike Yeo
Apr 18, 12:12 PM
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mco/QEALTMHXCRDALG27S2UHOZTG7I.jpg)
The February 2022 image shows a new radar panel added to an existing early-warning sensor in China's eastern Shandong province. (Maxar Technologies/Google Earth)
MELBOURNE, Australia — A satellite photo has revealed that China has built a new long-range, early-warning radar that can be used to detect ballistic missiles from thousands of miles away, likely giving it coverage of all of Japan.
The image, taken on February 2022 by commercial satellite imagery company Maxar Technologies and published on Google Earth, show that a new Large Phased Array Radar, or LPAR, has been built at an existing mountaintop site in Yiyuan County, Shandong Province, some 70 miles southeast of the provincial capital Jinan.
The new array is pointed in a northeasterly direction and was built sometime after November 2019. Its completion can potentially give China early warning of ballistic missile launches from North and South Korea, most of Japan and even parts of Russia’s Far East.
The first LPAR at the site, located at 36°01′30″ N, 118°05′31″ E, is some 2,300 feet above sea level. It was finished sometime in 2013-2014 according to Google Earth’s historical imagery and is oriented toward the south-southeast, almost certainly to provide radar coverage of Taiwan.
China is also known to operate additional LPAR sites at Lin’an in Zhejiang Province and Heilongjiang Province. These sites enable early warning coverage of Japan, the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan from multiple angles.
Another site at Korla in Xinjiang Province provides early warning coverage of India. In addition to providing warning against ballistic missile launches, LPARs can also be used for satellite tracking and general space surveillance.
The capabilities of the Chinese LPARs are not known, although the beam of the similar AN/FPS-115 radar found in the U.S. Pave Paws network can be deflected up to 60 degrees from the array’s central boresight axis, allowing each array to cover an azimuth angle of 120 degrees.
Previously released photos of China’s LPARs show that the array is also sloped, similar to that of the AN/FPS-115 which is sloped at an angle of 20 degrees, allowing the beam to be directed at any elevation angle between 3 degrees and 85 degrees.
The range of the Pave Paws radar network has not been officially published, although Encyclopedia Britannica says that the system “is supposed to detect targets with a radar cross section of 10 square meters at a range of 3,000 nautical miles (5,600 km)”.
China has invested considerably in advancing its capabilities for strategic situational awareness as part of its sweeping overall military modernization program. The country’s LPARs are an integral part of China’s early-warning, missile-defense and space-tracking network, which also includes a growing number of space-based sensors and a network of over-the-horizon radars.
About Mike Yeo
Mike Yeo is the Asia correspondent for Defense News. He wrote his first defense-related magazine article in 1998 before pursuing an aerospace engineering degree at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia. Following a stint in engineering, he became a freelance defense reporter in 2013 and has written for several media outlets.
New Chinese radar looks toward Japan, satellite image shows
The sensor could give China early warning of ballistic missile launches from North and South Korea, most of Japan and even parts of Russia’s Far East.
www.defensenews.com
Asia Pacific
New Chinese radar looks toward Japan, satellite image shows
By Mike Yeo
Apr 18, 12:12 PM
The February 2022 image shows a new radar panel added to an existing early-warning sensor in China's eastern Shandong province. (Maxar Technologies/Google Earth)
MELBOURNE, Australia — A satellite photo has revealed that China has built a new long-range, early-warning radar that can be used to detect ballistic missiles from thousands of miles away, likely giving it coverage of all of Japan.
The image, taken on February 2022 by commercial satellite imagery company Maxar Technologies and published on Google Earth, show that a new Large Phased Array Radar, or LPAR, has been built at an existing mountaintop site in Yiyuan County, Shandong Province, some 70 miles southeast of the provincial capital Jinan.
The new array is pointed in a northeasterly direction and was built sometime after November 2019. Its completion can potentially give China early warning of ballistic missile launches from North and South Korea, most of Japan and even parts of Russia’s Far East.
The first LPAR at the site, located at 36°01′30″ N, 118°05′31″ E, is some 2,300 feet above sea level. It was finished sometime in 2013-2014 according to Google Earth’s historical imagery and is oriented toward the south-southeast, almost certainly to provide radar coverage of Taiwan.
China is also known to operate additional LPAR sites at Lin’an in Zhejiang Province and Heilongjiang Province. These sites enable early warning coverage of Japan, the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan from multiple angles.
Another site at Korla in Xinjiang Province provides early warning coverage of India. In addition to providing warning against ballistic missile launches, LPARs can also be used for satellite tracking and general space surveillance.
The capabilities of the Chinese LPARs are not known, although the beam of the similar AN/FPS-115 radar found in the U.S. Pave Paws network can be deflected up to 60 degrees from the array’s central boresight axis, allowing each array to cover an azimuth angle of 120 degrees.
Previously released photos of China’s LPARs show that the array is also sloped, similar to that of the AN/FPS-115 which is sloped at an angle of 20 degrees, allowing the beam to be directed at any elevation angle between 3 degrees and 85 degrees.
The range of the Pave Paws radar network has not been officially published, although Encyclopedia Britannica says that the system “is supposed to detect targets with a radar cross section of 10 square meters at a range of 3,000 nautical miles (5,600 km)”.
China has invested considerably in advancing its capabilities for strategic situational awareness as part of its sweeping overall military modernization program. The country’s LPARs are an integral part of China’s early-warning, missile-defense and space-tracking network, which also includes a growing number of space-based sensors and a network of over-the-horizon radars.
About Mike Yeo
Mike Yeo is the Asia correspondent for Defense News. He wrote his first defense-related magazine article in 1998 before pursuing an aerospace engineering degree at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia. Following a stint in engineering, he became a freelance defense reporter in 2013 and has written for several media outlets.