And in Other News, The Korean War Is On Again

It would be too unfair to entitle this post, “Obama restarts Korean War,” even in jest, but on the other hand, we may now safely abandon all hope that his election would pleasure the world with a gentle warming sensation, release our tensions, and leave us in a state of affectionate post-coital afterglow.  The world does not work that way.  I knew we were in for something like this as soon as Obama threw Kim Jong Il below the fold of Page One by picking a Supreme Court justice:

North Korea announced Wednesday that it is no longer bound by the 1953 armistice that halted the Korean War, the latest and most profound diplomatic aftershock from the country’s latest nuclear test two days earlier. [Washington Post, Blaine Harden]

And because terrorism requires the object’s undivided attention, the North also made a veiled threat to attack ships off its western coastline, warned that any search of its ships by the South Korean Navy pursuant to the Proliferation Security Initiative will mean war, and restarted a plutonium reprocessing plant at its Yongbyon nuclear complex.  I was not able to confirm rumors of a third nuclear test, mentioned on Fox this morning. Say it with me:  thank God Christopher Hill disarmed these people in time!

My worst fear, at least aside from more North Korean nuclear proliferation, is for the fate of the two American journalists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, who are still prisoners of Kim Jong Il.

By itself, North Korea’s unilateral nullification of the 1953 Korean War Armistice means very little, and by the end of the trading day, South Korean share prices will prove me right.

There are two reasons for this; first, the Korean War didn’t begin with North Korea’s invasion.  Begin with the continuum of Korean politics and nationhood since 1945, functionally the Year Zero of modern Korea, and a year that I’ve sometimes compared to Spain in 1936.  Both nations were about to be transformed from feudal to industrial societies.  Both nations were politically immature and emotional, with dozens of vehement and mutually opposed factions shooting each other’s leaders.  In both cases, Communist groups proved better organized than their rivals and formed armed militias.  The comparison ends with the Spanish Republic’s inclusion of those Communist militias in their armed forces; in South Korea, Communists launched a guerrilla campaign against the government.  The guerrilla war was marked by widespread atrocities on both sides, and didn’t end completely until 1953.

Nor did the Korean War end with the 1953 Armistice.  The Armistice marked the end of the Soviet and Chinese commitments to conventional mechanized warfare, but as any American who served in Korea in 1968 can tell you, it certainly wasn’t the end of firefights along the DMZ or North Korean attacks.  That year, North Korea shot down an American surveillance plane, seized the U.S.S. Pueblo, and sent a team of commandos to kill South Korean dictator Park Chung Hee.  The commandos never got close to Park, but dozens of civilians were killed in their last stand, in a busy intersection in downtown Seoul.

North Korea is still believed to hold about 500 surviving prisoners or war it failed to repatriate after 1953, plus hundreds (or tens of thousans) of South Korean civilians, depending on when you start counting and whose figures you believe.  Periodically, those prisoners still manage to escape from the North.  This is to say nothing of North Korea’s infiltration of the South with an active Fifth Column of South Koreans who are loyal to its ideology.

This announcement almost certainly does not signal the beginning of large-scale hostilities.  North Korea’s conventional forces could do terrible damage to South Korea with artillery, missiles, and infiltrated special forces, but its air force is decrepit, and without air superiority, an invasion force would be slaughtered.

It may, however, mean that North Korea returns to the maintenance of a higher level of tension through the provocation of incidents along the DMZ, or along South Korea’s coasts.

5 comments

  1. David Woolley says:

    It appears to me that the nightmare scenario is as follows: North Korea buys three large houses in Seoul, Pusan and Taejon, which it fills with a few dozen fanatical supporters. It then smuggles three armed nuclear weapons through tunnels in the DMZ in smallish vans and lodges them in the three houses. It discloses the presence of the Seoul bomb, and demands the withdrawal of all US Forces. We comply, and so does North Korea. Likewise the second results in the disarming of the South Korean forces and the third in unification. Missiles are useful for export and for frightening Japan, but irrelevant to this scenario.

  2. David Woolley says:

    and another thing…remember the execution of the Foreign Ministry negotiator for being too soft, and Kim’s stroke. this was followed by the military intervention on State TV a few months ago, and the closing of the border, and then the longrange missile test. and now there is talk about succession. I think this is likely to be disinformative. Succession is window-dressing. it seems more probable to me that there is a slow-motion military coup taking place where the Party is becoming subordinate to the military, and the military is, as all its present statements propose, preparing for a real invasion, and not just sabre-rattling.

  3. Gene Rayburn says:

    Robert Gibbs claimed today that this was the “fifth time in 15 years that they’ve sought to nullify the armistice”. But is it? I don’t ever recall NK explicitly stating that they were ignoring the 1953 armistice before (i.e. ignoring those times where NK declared, generally, that all North-South agreements were void).

    I realise this is a moot point, but I’d still like to know from those who have been watching longer than I have. Has NK ever quite made a declaration like this before?

  4. KCJ says:

    Gibbs is wrong (big surprise!). This is the first time since 1953 the Armistice has been formally thrown under the bus by the DPRK. NK has basically declared war with the ROK and its allies (OK, they say that by signing the Non-Proliferation Initiative that Seoul declared war on the DPRK).

    Some people are treating this like routine Sabre rattling here in Korea but methinks that is whistling in the graveyard. David Wooley’s scenario is quite plausible.

    If any DPRK ships get interdicted in the West Sea, it’s game on.

  5. I had wondered that myself. I certainly didn’t remember any of those other nullifications of the armistice. How can we prove this negative?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *